If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
ARE THEY AFRAID OF HISTORY?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jan. 25, 2015) — On Friday, Dallas Morning News Washington Bureau Chief Todd Gillman reported on remarks which prominent businessman Donald Trump made prior to the Iowa Freedom Summit, where a number of potential 2016 presidential candidates and current public servants assembled on Saturday.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin also attended.
Noticeably absent were former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, both of whom appear to be framing presidential campaigns and engaged in a private meeting in Utah on Thursday.
While Bush has suggested he would run for several months and resigned from all boards of directors on which he was serving, Romney had stated last year that he would not seek the presidency for a third time in 2016. Earlier this month, however, Romney appeared to reverse himself.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Sen. Marco Rubio have also been mentioned as possible presidential candidates. Both were born in the United States to non-U.S.-citizen parents. A straw poll taken by Townhall.com on January 3 showed Cruz in first place and Rubio in third place for presidential contenders.
According to media reports, Cruz appears to be seriously considering a run for the presidency. During an October interview with CNBC, he stated that Republicans must “run a candidate who runs as a strong conservative” or risk losing the White House to Hillary Clinton.
“We need to look to history,” Cruz said, in determining who would make the best candidate for the GOP.
History, however, also requires that the president and commander-in-chief be a “natural born Citizen.” In Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the Framers wrote:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The clause was included at the urging of John Jay, who later became the first chief justice of the United States Supreme Court and wrote in a letter to George Washington as the Constitution was under construction:
Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.
While Gillman asserted that “the popular understanding” is that “natural born Citizen” means “being born on American soil,” he omitted the fact that historically, the citizenship of the parents was also taken into consideration when determining the status of the child. Further, the media has not delved into the historical reason and context for the difference in terms. Many constitutional scholars believe that when the Framers added the words “natural born” to the requirements of the presidency, it indicated a higher level of citizenship and allegiance.
The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada on December 22, 1970 to a U.S.-citizen mother and Cuban-citizen father. He was automatically considered a Canadian citizen, a fact which Cruz denied knowing in August 2013, when The Dallas Morning News displayed his Canadian birth certificate and reported that he was born a dual Canadian-U.S. citizen. Gillman was also the author of that article and reported that Cruz’s mother registered him as a U.S. citizen with the U.S. consulate, according to Cruz’s spokeswoman.
Gillman reported that Trump has taken issue with Cruz’s eligibility based on his birth in Canada, although Gillman stated that because “Cruz was entitled to American citizenship at birth,…a strong legal consensus has emerged that Cruz is, in fact, eligible, and the senator has insisted as much.” Gillman did not cite the sources of the “strong legal consensus.”
Discussions have surfaced in the media about Cruz’s eligibility, and Trump believes that Cruz may require a court decision to settle the matter.
In December 2013, Cruz was sent a letter by the North American Law Center (NALC), a legal firm seeking to reinstitute the individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The letter, entitled “A Call to Honor,” reads, in part:
Senator Cruz, you have been placed in the position to end the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the United States of America, and to stop the systematic destruction of our Country. The action required is simple – but not easy, for it requires a selfless act of love and concern for others, and calls upon you to do the right thing. Yes, some will call it a true act of heroism.
Senator Ted Cruz, as a true Christian, you must say to the nation and the world…
“It has been the delight and honor of my life that so many Americans have found me worthy of their respect and admiration, and have wanted me to run for president or vice president. But the truth is, I am not eligible for either office according to the United States Constitution Article II, Section I, Clause V wherein only a Natural Born Citizen of the United States, born of an American Citizen Father, can seek or hold these offices. I know that the Founders, in their brilliance, set this standard based on the Biblical principles of Natural Law, wherein the name, citizenship and birthright of a child was always passed by the blood of the father. Knowing this beyond question, a proud son of my Cuban father, I am not now, nor can I ever be, a Natural Born Citizen of the United States. Therefore, based upon unquestionable and prima facie evidence, I state for the record that Barack Hussein Obama, the son of a Kenyan Citizen father, is not now, nor has he ever been, nor will he ever be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States. I call for the immediate resignation of Barack Hussein Obama and the legitimate investigation into all who are involved in the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the United States and the world, as well as all who have engaged in the greatest political cover-up in the history of politics.”
Cruz did not respond to the letter to this writer’s knowledge.
In October, The Post & Email attempted to obtain a certified copy of a certificate possibly filed with the U.S. State Department upon Cruz’s birth indicating a U.S.-citizen birth abroad. However, a State Department staffer informed us several weeks later that only the subject of the certificate, or a close relative or guardian having a tangible interest in it, could be granted access.
Cruz’s press office did not respond to The Post & Email’s request for comment on any proof Cruz might provide that he was born with U.S. citizenship. He officially renounced his Canadian citizenship in June of last year.
One of the constitutional requirements for U.S. Senators and Representatives is “a Citizen” for a given number of years: seven for representatives and nine for senators. Candidates for those offices are not required to be “natural born Citizens.”
Gillman reminded his audience that Trump had raised concerns about Obama’s eligibility in 2011 when he called for Obama to release his “long-form” birth certificate proving that he was born on U.S. soil.
Obama claims a birth in Hawaii to a foreign-citizen father and U.S.-citizen mother. Prior to Trump’s public call for Obama’s bona fides, the matter of Obama’s eligibility was stifled by the media, with some outlets reportedly threatened if they were to discuss it on air.
In July 2011, former attorney Leo Donofrio found that at the website Justia.com’s section on Supreme Court cases, 25 references to the case of Minor v. Happersett “which cited the vital Supreme Court decision which classifies those born in the country to parents who are citizens as ‘natural-born citizens’, such classification excluding Obama from eligibility,” had undergone “surgical scrubbing.”
Donofrio also discovered that in 1896, The New York Tribune published debate within the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. John Bingham, the author of the 14th Amendment, who described a person “born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States” as a “natural-born citizen.”
Following Trump’s urging, on April 27, 2011, the White House unveiled an image on its website touted to be a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s long-form birth certificate from Hawaii. Within 24 hours, several experts declared the birth certificate image a forgery. However, the media suppressed those reports and was quick to accept the image as authentic.
In August 2011, a group of 250 Surprise, AZ Tea Party members approached their local law enforcement officer, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, to request an investigation into the image so that they could be assured that their votes would not be disenfranchised in the 2012 election. Arpaio complied, believing that a cursory examination of the image would “clear the president” and delegated his “Cold Case Posse” to the task.
Within 72 hours, the posse found that the image could not have originated with a paper document. On March 1, 2012, a joint press conference held by lead investigator Mike Zullo and Arpaio declared the birth certificate image, along with Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, a “computer-generated forgery.”
Like many mainstream media writers, Gillman did not include those facts in his article.
Members of the Kenyan Parliament have claimed that Obama was born in their country, while the former Kenyan ambassador to the U.S. stated in 2008 that “his birthplace [in Kenya] is well-known.”
From 1991 to April 2007, Obama’s literary agent declared that Obama was born in Kenya, and a Hawaii newspaper reported him in 2006 to have been born in Indonesia.
Four U.S. Supreme Court cases which define various circumstances of citizenship appear to support the claim that a person born in the United States to two U.S.-citizen parents is a “natural born Citizen.”
In 1916, former Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long asserted that Charles Evans Hughes was not a natural born Citizen and therefore ineligible to run for the presidency because he had been born to a father who was a British citizen. In an essay published in the now-defunct Chicago Law Journal, Long differentiated between “citizen,” which he asserted Hughes was, and the higher standard of “natural born Citizen.”
Atty. Mario Apuzzo, who has studied the issue extensively and authored one of the many lawsuits challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president, will be speaking about Cruz’s questionable eligibility on the Patriot Radio Network at 9:00 p.m. EST on Monday evening.
Despite Obama’s claims of a birth and upbringing in Hawaii, Rep. Steve King has opined that Obama “was not raised with an American experience.”
Gillman asserts that even if Obama had been born outside of the United States, he would still have qualified with one U.S.-citizen parent.
The Republican Party has not responded to The Post & Email’s letter raising the “natural born Citizen” issue as it relates to any presidential candidates it might proffer.
As noted by Joseph DeMaio exclusively for The Post & Email, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) went to great lengths to obliterate language from Supreme Court cases which would have rendered Obama ineligible for the presidency in its reports to Congress on the issue. In March 2012, DeMaio noted that the mainstream media had “forfeited any claim to independence and objectivity” in regard to Obama’s eligibility for the presidency.