Cruz is "Toast"

DGS49

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2012
15,906
13,464
2,415
Pittsburgh
Cruz is my guy. In a field of what-I-Consider-to-be-All-stars, I think he is the best suited, best positioned, most likely to kick HRC's ass in a debate, and so on.

But Article II of the Constitution says, "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..." (NOTE: Ted Cruz is not 227 years old).

Amid the recent brouhaha over his eligibility, I have wondered why Cruz' campaign has not published a short "White Paper," explaining the legal and Constitutional bases on which he claims to be eligible; but no such White Paper has been published. Maybe now I know why.

Because today I must humbly and sadly report that NONE OTHER THAN ANN COULTER has looked at the case and concluded that Ted is not eligible to be president, due to the fact that he is not a "natural born citizen." And keep in mind that Coulter is an ardent and vociferous American nativist and concludes that only Cruz and Trump can be trusted to protect American sovereignty in the face of the invasion of illegal aliens. So she has no personal or political reason to come to this conclusion.

Ann Coulter - We're All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now

She goes through the legal history of the term "natural born citizen," concludes that Congress has the power to define it, but concedes that all things considered Congress has never expanded that term to include people born outside the U.S. with one parent being a U.S. citizen.

Sorry Ted. Adios.

Does my #2 choice, Chris Christie have a chance?
 
Because today I must humbly and sadly report that NONE OTHER THAN ANN COULTER has looked at the case and concluded that Ted is not eligible to be president
Wow, you're going to jump ship on your boy based on what that sophist Ann Coulter says? With friends like you Texas Ted doesn't need enemies.

I have wondered why Cruz' campaign has not published a short "White Paper," explaining the legal and Constitutional bases on which he claims to be eligible; but no such White Paper has been published.
Why answer accusations that have no legal basis in such a fashion? Not only would such a white paper keep this non-story/story alive in the media it would also lend it credence. I'm no particular fan of Ted Cruz but I give the guy credit for being extremely intelligent and strategic in his thinking.
 
Get over it. Or don't. Either way, Cruz is eligible to be President. Time to move on.
 
This is no small issue. Even if Ted were to win the nomination and the election, there is no doubt that his election would be challenged in court, and even with an expedited hearing the presidency would be under a cloud for months. And there is no guarantee that the court would rule in his favor.
IT IS INCUMBENT ON HIM TO PROVE that he is eligible, with a cogent and convincing legal argument. The fact that his campaign has not done so is proof that no such argument can be made.
As Coulter points out, if this is not a major stumbling block, why was there so much angst about the claim that Barry was born in Kenya? If he would have been eligible by virtue of having an American mother, then it would not have affected his eligibility one way or another.
Unless you are an ambassador or a U.S. government employee on official business outside the U.S., you MUST BE BORN ON U.S. SOIL to be a “natural born citizen.”
 
it's going to be a big thing, but the lag time was about typical with obama. we'll see if any courts will look at it this cycle..

i think the constitution might be melting a little, due to climate change and socialism, both are based on sharing.
 
Last edited:
Cruz could have been born on the steps of the White House and he'd still lose to Hillary. Plus, he first gets beat by Trump. Moot point.
 
A man has to prove he is legal to run for President but not to vote....copy. Interesting.
 
Cruz is my guy. In a field of what-I-Consider-to-be-All-stars, I think he is the best suited, best positioned, most likely to kick HRC's ass in a debate, and so on.

But Article II of the Constitution says, "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..." (NOTE: Ted Cruz is not 227 years old).

Amid the recent brouhaha over his eligibility, I have wondered why Cruz' campaign has not published a short "White Paper," explaining the legal and Constitutional bases on which he claims to be eligible; but no such White Paper has been published. Maybe now I know why.

Because today I must humbly and sadly report that NONE OTHER THAN ANN COULTER has looked at the case and concluded that Ted is not eligible to be president, due to the fact that he is not a "natural born citizen." And keep in mind that Coulter is an ardent and vociferous American nativist and concludes that only Cruz and Trump can be trusted to protect American sovereignty in the face of the invasion of illegal aliens. So she has no personal or political reason to come to this conclusion.

Ann Coulter - We're All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now

She goes through the legal history of the term "natural born citizen," concludes that Congress has the power to define it, but concedes that all things considered Congress has never expanded that term to include people born outside the U.S. with one parent being a U.S. citizen.

Sorry Ted. Adios.

Does my #2 choice, Chris Christie have a chance?

The question is, was he born an American? The answer is yes, because he has an American parent.
 
Legal scholars far above Ann Coulter have answered this question already that he is. In fact, take out Ann Coulter for a second, and post a judge who has answered that question in the negative! Now you would create a debate, with links between judges proclaiming one way or the other, but Ann Coulter? Not so much.
 
Cruz is my guy. In a field of what-I-Consider-to-be-All-stars, I think he is the best suited, best positioned, most likely to kick HRC's ass in a debate, and so on.

But Article II of the Constitution says, "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..." (NOTE: Ted Cruz is not 227 years old).

Amid the recent brouhaha over his eligibility, I have wondered why Cruz' campaign has not published a short "White Paper," explaining the legal and Constitutional bases on which he claims to be eligible; but no such White Paper has been published. Maybe now I know why.

Because today I must humbly and sadly report that NONE OTHER THAN ANN COULTER has looked at the case and concluded that Ted is not eligible to be president, due to the fact that he is not a "natural born citizen." And keep in mind that Coulter is an ardent and vociferous American nativist and concludes that only Cruz and Trump can be trusted to protect American sovereignty in the face of the invasion of illegal aliens. So she has no personal or political reason to come to this conclusion.

Ann Coulter - We're All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now

She goes through the legal history of the term "natural born citizen," concludes that Congress has the power to define it, but concedes that all things considered Congress has never expanded that term to include people born outside the U.S. with one parent being a U.S. citizen.

Sorry Ted. Adios.

Does my #2 choice, Chris Christie have a chance?

I am afraid you and Ann may be right. I can see Cruz winning and then losing in our liberal court system and liberal media and liberal whatever. I say liberal because all these donkeys in the room laugh when someone brings up Barry and his dubious birth claims. He is as phony as a three dollar bill. There is so much evidence against that creep about his birth records but there is no one who has the authority to challenge him except all those who are in bed with him (especially the media). Why did he put the American public through an agonizing 2 1/2 years before he released his forged birth certificate? What an honorable president he is. Every time I hear him talk he reminds me of some high school punk with that level of aplomb. What a national embarrassment. But I digress. I can see this nation and this world collapsing utterly in the next decade and a hostile election where the democrat hildebeast prevails because cruz ruled ineligible would not surprise me.
 
My opinion is, the answer should be no. That closes a can of worms and makes it cut and dry. But then again I am not a constitutional lawyer just practical.
+


What does it mean to be a "natural born citizen"?

[VIDEO]Is Ted Cruz, born in Canada, eligible to run for president? (Updated)

Most legal experts contend it means someone is a citizen from birth and doesn’t have to go through a naturalization process to become a citizen.
If that’s the definition, then Cruz is a natural born citizen by being born to an American mother and having her citizenship at birth. The Congressional Research Service, the agency tasked with providing authoritative research to all members of Congress, published a report after the 2008 election supporting the thinking that "natural born" citizenship means citizenship held "at birth."

There are many legal and historical precedents to strongly back up this argument, experts have said.
 
If you read the paper closely, it essentially agrees with Coulter in that the question of whether persons born abroad to American parents are Natural Born Citizens is up to Congress – and Congress has not done it. Therefore, the current state of the law is that unless your parents are U.S. diplomats or you are a government employee on official business overseas (e.g., military), you must be born in the U.S. to be a “natural born citizen.”
I love Ted, but I think his candidacy is problematic and this issue is going to be cloud on his chances.
 
Cruz is my guy. In a field of what-I-Consider-to-be-All-stars, I think he is the best suited, best positioned, most likely to kick HRC's ass in a debate, and so on.

But Article II of the Constitution says, "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..." (NOTE: Ted Cruz is not 227 years old).

Amid the recent brouhaha over his eligibility, I have wondered why Cruz' campaign has not published a short "White Paper," explaining the legal and Constitutional bases on which he claims to be eligible; but no such White Paper has been published. Maybe now I know why.

Because today I must humbly and sadly report that NONE OTHER THAN ANN COULTER has looked at the case and concluded that Ted is not eligible to be president, due to the fact that he is not a "natural born citizen." And keep in mind that Coulter is an ardent and vociferous American nativist and concludes that only Cruz and Trump can be trusted to protect American sovereignty in the face of the invasion of illegal aliens. So she has no personal or political reason to come to this conclusion.

Ann Coulter - We're All Ruth Bader Ginsburg Now

She goes through the legal history of the term "natural born citizen," concludes that Congress has the power to define it, but concedes that all things considered Congress has never expanded that term to include people born outside the U.S. with one parent being a U.S. citizen.

Sorry Ted. Adios.

Does my #2 choice, Chris Christie have a chance?
Since he's Canadian shouldn't this be "Ted is pain grille?"
 

Forum List

Back
Top