Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
[Editor: Caution - this article is only for those seeking the true answer.]
1. Neither Obama, Marco Rubio, or Ted Cruz are natural born citizens. At the times they were born, their Fathers were not citizens. Location of birth is irrelevant. Those who insist that a person must be born within the US point to Section 212 of Vattel. But one must read all that Vattel wrote on the subject and which is contained in Sections 213-217.
A “natural born” citizen inherits his citizenship from his parents. Just as he inherits his eye and hair color from them, so he inherits his citizenship status. He is “born” with the hair and eye color his parents gave him, and he is “born” with the citizenship status they gave him. No provision in the Constitution made him a Citizen – no Act of Congress made him a Citizen – just as no provision in the Constitution or Act of Congress determined his eye or hair color. His citizenship, eye color, and hair color are all inherited from his parents. THAT’s what a natural born citizen is. READ all of the sections on this which Vattel wrote: By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers; the place of birth produces no change in this particular. In my first paper, you can find the links to Vattel and other original source documents illustrating the original intent of “natural born citizen”.
2. Our first generation of Presidents were all born as subjects of the British King. There were no US citizens until July 4, 1776 when we proclaimed our Independence. Art. II, Sec. 1, clause 5 contains a grandfather clause which permitted our first batch of Presidents to qualify. They were citizens at the time of the Adoption of our Constitution.
3. It appears that both of Donald Trump’s Parents were Citizens at the time he was born. It is irrelevant that his Mother was an immigrant: She came here from Scotland; and later became a US Citizen during 1942 – several years before Donald was born. Donald is a natural born citizen eligible to be President. [But because of the doctrine of coverture which prevailed at the time of our Framing, the status of Donald’s Mother is probably irrelevant.]
4. I found another article on this topic which is excellent: http://www.latimes.com/…/la-oe-lee-is-ted-cruz-eligible-to-…
5. Our Country would be so much better off if people would stop spouting off about this subject until after they become well-informed. And they can’t become well-informed until they have studied this carefully using original source documents and read all the original source documents I cite in my first paper.
And you must detach the result you want from your thinking when you are studying. TRUTH sheds its own Light – and you will NEVER get that Light until you love TRUTH above all things including the outcome you want. I am well aware of the disgraceful cases where peoples’ views on this issue are determined by whom THEY want for President.
Read more on Publius-Huldah's Blog
For another view, see Horse Sense:
If Ted truly understood leadership and integrity he'd have been proactive on this issue. When it came up he would have made a public statement saying something like: "While I believe I am a natural born citizen and therefore eligible to be president, to put everyone's mind at ease I am going to seek a declaratory judgment from the court to settle this once and for all and put people's minds at ease. I love America and the Constitution and I am willing to abide by the decision of the court, even if it ultimately means I would have to drop out of the race."
That's what a leader and person of integrity does. They are proactive and do what's right regardless of the cost to themselves.
If he believes he's right, he should have nothing to fear. If he prevailed with the court it would preclude anyone from bringing the issue up any longer. But by not getting that from the court, it simply allows his attackers to continue to raise the issue and even litigate it. And if he's the nominee, it takes credibility away from him during the general election, which is the worst time it could happen.
But when Cruz doesn't do that, he's raising questions about his integrity no matter how this comes out. To double down and try to belittle a competitor (in this case Trump) with Alinsky-like responses designed to put doubt on the questioner, not answer the question, simply reduces his credibility.
One minor quibble: Without exonerating ZerObama from his crimes against the Constitutional principles of our nation, which I consider to be impossible; he is not the sole perpetrator by any stretch. We have been suffering a Marxist Mafia insurgency since the administration of Woodrow Wilson, with virtually every presidency advancing the leftist agenda either overtly or covertly. The remarkable thing is the double-down acceleration toward the leftist objectives shown by every administration since Reagan, with every Republican Administration ramming through laws that give subsequent Marxist Administration the tools they need to advance their agenda by the application of fascist laws. (Patriot Act is a fine example.) Those powerful individuals in world finance cannot tolerate liberty; it chafes their a$$ to have some damned hick peasant (their view) stop them by claiming private rights over which they have no authority. They intend to regain control of what amounts to (and once did) "their colonies", and then payback for 238 years of "Up Yours!" will commence in earnest. Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin, Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot, etc., etc., were pikers by comparison. Frankly, not to diminish the value of public forums such as this, but this debate is irrelevant.
Re: on 1/19/2016 by Donald L. Cline
There you go again - right on with good facts and common sense. Super rich conspiracy has been on going for over a thousand years, see founders of Federal Reserve for a list of the super rich.
I do disagree on one point; as I see these debates as relevant but only if we take our message outside to additional audiences. That takes work and dedication. I am a FREDDOM FIGHTER and I hope others join that effort.
Hello Donald L. Cline - right on with the observation of the gutless politicians.
And federal law, "Title 18. Section 2071" can be Googled and it states exactly "shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States." Hilary has achieved this distinction with her private server.
Bruce that which you state by referencing Title 18. Section 2071 ... deals with the stealing of government documents ... which would apply to Hillary and her e-mails .... but will never be enforced by a weak-kneed GOPe.
John - I know she will not be brought to justice. I plan on her use of the private email and violations such as Title 18. Section 2071 against her if she is the Dem nominee.
And I hope others like you will also as the media including FOX will not.
Dear Arizona Freedom Alliance.
Your analysis and use of original documents as references is absolutely correct and in keeping in the way that such questions of historical significance and value are researched and understood. What is also troubling.is the fact that most people of this day don't understand the way that words were used in 1776 - and that the vernacular, diction, spelling and even the definition varied to the extent that we today could barely read and understand what it is they were speaking of. By example, get an Irishman and an Englishman and an American in the same room and chaos will ensue. Of all the proper and correct references to use, Vattel's 1757 Treatise on the Law of Nations was the source upon which many nations of the world based their evolving concept of self governance. In our case, most of our Founders also leaned toward the "roman" model and used the best parts of both. In that respect, the common law application of Great Britain were retained and the "republican" aspects of Roman law were ideologically embraced. Thus we have a Constitution that serves as the foundation of our nation built upon NATURAL LAW and the ever evolving idea that allows for the evolution of our society. Of course you are correct when you say that Natural Law is the Law of Divine Providence and its construct cannot be given or taken from men by other men. It is therefore, important for people to realize that it is the concept of a Republic that can be undermined, so long as we allow agents of communism, socialism and every other "ism" to dilute the Natural Law by human means.
In all of this "rant", the point to be made is that Natural Born Citizenship is an inherited blessing via our parents, via theirs, etc. To be an NBC, one must have been born of PARENTS of the country - who were "of the country", prior to the birth of the child. And, as noted, there are serious errors in the claims made by Obama, Cruz, Rubio and Jindal, as all of them fail the Article 2 constitutional test of eligibility as it was understood, meant and intended by our Founders - who were there at the time the great documents of our nation were composed. Far be it for us to submit millions of personal opinions on the subject when indeed, the correct one has been in use for some 229 years. Furthermore, TRUMP is eligible as he meets every aspect of being an NBC that was demanded by the Founders. There is NO gray area in his resume' and there is no doubt that his credentials are valid in every respect. One must also remember that TRUMPS older sister is a Senior Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. I'm guessing that he might just be the lucky recipient of some good legal advise from time-to-time via sister to brother and brother to sister.
Thank you for your fine article and overview of what it means to be a participant in this great Constitutional Republic.
Everyone who claims Cruz and Rubio are not eligible to be President can keep arguing just like they did for Obama and see where it gets you!
You are right, if the main stream media does not make our facts known, this is all for not.
That is why you must tweet this to the main stream media.
Let them know We the People know what they are doing; whether out of ignorance or on purpose.
@Joy So you are saying since Obama has the courts on his side as well as the media, we just become the same cheaters they are? We shouldn't stand up for truth?
Consensus Reality comes to mind.
we just become the same cheaters they are? NO! NO! NO!
We are fighting for Truth (that is a big word), but being ignored. And even splat upon sometimes.
Joy you probably are correct in that the argument will not eliminate Cruz or Rubio from the race to be the GOP nominee. The debate needs to take place to educate as many Americans as possible. The constitution is being interpreted to suit the needs of the politicians. The media is stupid and does not the truth. Cruz and Rubio should be given the courtesy of the U.S. Senate passing an eligibility resolution just as they did for McCain. The senate will not do that anymore than they did for Obama - 8 attempts and 8 failures to declare Obama a natural born citizen. The our senators know the definition of a natural born citizen. They ignore it as it does not suit their ambitions or other needs.
Only a citizen driven series of amendments through our state legislators will restore America.
MICHAEL J BRUNING - excellent rant as you so noted in the beginning of the second paragraph. Yes we have a founding document - a constitution - based on natural law and the law of nations. Problem is the federal government does not follow the original founder's version but instead are following their interpretation and the courts opinion of the intent and meaning.