Birther Sheriff Declares Canadian Born Ted Cruz Ineligible For White House

[Skylar]

And authoritative investigators from the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office found the birth certificate to be a 100% forgery backed by a independent Hawaii court recognized handwriting and computer-generated forensic document professional.

And yet the State of Hawaii has 3 different times affirmed that the information on the Birth Certificate is accurate and matches their original records. What did the State of Hawaii say when Sheriff Joe checked to see if the LFBC that Obama presented was accurate?

I mean, that's the first thing that any credible investigator would do if checking the validity of a given document: check with the issuing agency. Sheriff Joe *did* ask Hawaii if Obama's LFBC was valid, right?

No?

What possible reason would Sheriff Joe have for such a blundering, incompetent, rookie oversight? Its almost like Sheriff Joe didn't want to hear the answer to that question.

And Sheriff Joes investigation does include all 3 of the State of Hawaii's validation of the information on Obama's birth certificate, right? They were made, in writing, from the Registrar of Hawaii Alvin Onaka and sent to Secretaries of State and Courts alike. They'd be immediately relevant to the validity of the Birth Certificate. So of course, Sheriff Joe included them all.

So, um.......where are they in Sheriff Joe's official report?

 

[Skylar]

Citizen and natural born-Citizen are not the same.

A natural born citizen is anyone who is a citizen when they are born. As Cruz and Obama are.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Donald Trump says he is not eligible

The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution says he is.

14th Amendment is seperate from Article 2 Section1 of the Constitution where it is the only place that has the term 'natural born Citizen' that applies only to the presidency. The 14th Amendment only deals with Citizen and is absent of the term 'natural born Citizen'.

 

[Skylar]

14th Amendment is seperate from Article 2 Section1 of the Constitution where it is the only place that has the term 'natural born Citizen' that applies only to the presidency. The 14th Amendment only deals with Citizen and is absent of the term 'natural born Citizen'.

The 14th said anyone born in the US is a citizen at birth. There's citizens at birth (natural born) and citizens after birth (naturalized).

There is no third type.

Remember, Steve.......you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

And authoritative investigators from the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office found the birth certificate to be a 100% forgery backed by a independent Hawaii court recognized handwriting and computer-generated forensic document professional.

And yet the State of Hawaii has 3 different times affirmed that the information on the Birth Certificate is accurate and matches their original records. What did the State of Hawaii say when Sheriff Joe checked to see if the LFBC that Obama presented was accurate?

I mean, that's the first thing that any credible investigator would do if checking the validity of a given document: check with the issuing agency. Sheriff Joe *did* ask Hawaii if Obama's LFBC was valid, right?

No?

What possible reason would Sheriff Joe have for such a blundering, incompetent, rookie oversight? Its almost like Sheriff Joe didn't want to hear the answer to that question.

And Sheriff Joes investigation does include all 3 of the State of Hawaii's validation of the information on Obama's birth certificate, right? They were made, in writing, from the Registrar of Hawaii Alvin Onaka and sent to Secretaries of State and Courts alike. They'd be immediately relevant to the validity of the Birth Certificate. So of course, Sheriff Joe included them all.

So, um.......where are they in Sheriff Joe's official report?

Sheriff Arpiao has asked Hawaii Dept of Health to show the microfilm and they refuse. They are hiding behind state attorney general Jill Nagamine who is running interference for them.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

14th Amendment is seperate from Article 2 Section1 of the Constitution where it is the only place that has the term 'natural born Citizen' that applies only to the presidency. The 14th Amendment only deals with Citizen and is absent of the term 'natural born Citizen'.

The 14th said anyone born in the US is a citizen at birth. There's citizens at birth (natural born) and citizens after birth (naturalized).

There is no third type.

Remember, Steve.......you don't know what you're talking about.

Oh I know exactly what I'm talking about. Citizen and Natural Born Citizen are not the same.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

[QUO.

Donald Trump says he is not eligible

The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution says he is.

="rightwinger, post: 10043052, member: 20321"]Donald Trump says he is not eligible

The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution says he is.[/QUOTE]
Wrong. 14th Amendment does't apply to the qualifications to be president. Article 2 Section 1 does.

 

[Skylar]

\
Oh I know exactly what I'm talking about. Citizen and Natural Born Citizen are not the same.

Save of course, you don't have a clue. Wong Kim Arc never found that natural born citizens were only those with 2 US parents who were born on the mainland US. Instead, it found that natural born status followed place of birth....even if both parents were foreigners.

There is no common law of the United States, in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several States each for itself, applied as its local law, and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes. . . . There is, however, one clear exception to the statement that there is no national common law. The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history....

....I. The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual -- as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem -- and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
United States v. Wong Kim Ark LII Legal Information Institute

They made the same finding about a dozen more times as applying to England and the colonies immediately before the revolution: natural born status follows place of birth. Which, of course, you'd know if you'd ever read the ruling. Instead of just posting pictures about a topic you clearly don't know the first thing about.


And I'm still waiting for you to tell me why Sheriff Joe never bothered to ask the State of Hawaii if Obama's birth certificate was valid. Or why we would ignore the State of Hawaii when it affirmed in writing 3 times that Obama was born in Hawaii and the information on his birth certificate matches his original records in Hawaii.

Explain it to us, birther.

 

[The Rabbi]

OK, you still havent bothered to read it. Typical.

Uh-huh. And Rabbi switches into vague denials when his claims have been utterly obliterated.

Rabbi.....you really are a one trick pony, bud. I mean, your response to being proven laughably wrong is always the same. Deny it ever happened.....even while anyone can read that you have no idea what you're talking about.

More of your credibility burned in exchange for nothing. A trade you seem unable to stop from making.

He obviously didnt bother to read his own post. Neither have you. Your rantings about my "credibility" are funny. Like what you think carries any weight whatsoever on this forum.

 

[The Rabbi]

Birther sheriff declares Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz ineligible to run for president

Oh the justice of it all.

Right Wing Radio Host and former Sheriff Richard Mack has stated that Ted Cruz is not eligible to run for President.

Cruz is a Canadian born National with a Cuba Father.

Cruz has said that he has renounced his Canadian Citizenship, but that does not change the fact he was NOT born in the U.S.

Who?

What country was Cruz a citizen of when he was born? Yeah, US. Next.
I guess this means Cruz is gaining traction in the polls so it's time for the brain dead here to make up shit.

Cruz was a citizen of both the United States and Canada when he was born- and possibly Cuba also.

However, the only one of those that matters is that he was born a citizen of the United States and is therefore a Natural born citizen.

Citizen and natural born-Citizen are not the same.

true. You can either be a natural born citizen or you can be a naturalized citizen. Since Cruz was never naturalized but holds US citizenship he is a natural born citizen.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

\
Oh I know exactly what I'm talking about. Citizen and Natural Born Citizen are not the same.

Save of course, you don't have a clue. Wong Kim Arc never found that natural born citizens were only those with 2 US parents who were born on the mainland US. Instead, it found that natural born status followed place of birth....even if both parents were foreigners.

There is no common law of the United States, in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several States each for itself, applied as its local law, and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes. . . . There is, however, one clear exception to the statement that there is no national common law. The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history....

....I. The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual -- as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem -- and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
United States v. Wong Kim Ark LII Legal Information Institute

They made the same finding about a dozen more times as applying to England and the colonies immediately before the revolution: natural born status follows place of birth. Which, of course, you'd know if you'd ever read the ruling. Instead of just posting pictures about a topic you clearly don't know the first thing about.


And I'm still waiting for you to tell me why Sheriff Joe never bothered to ask the State of Hawaii if Obama's birth certificate was valid. Or why we would ignore the State of Hawaii when it affirmed in writing 3 times that Obama was born in Hawaii and the information on his birth certificate matches his original records in Hawaii.

Explain it to us, birther.

\
Oh I know exactly what I'm talking about. Citizen and Natural Born Citizen are not the same.

Save of course, you don't have a clue. Wong Kim Arc never found that natural born citizens were only those with 2 US parents who were born on the mainland US. Instead, it found that natural born status followed place of birth....even if both parents were foreigners.

There is no common law of the United States, in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several States each for itself, applied as its local law, and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes. . . . There is, however, one clear exception to the statement that there is no national common law. The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history....

....I. The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual -- as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem -- and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
United States v. Wong Kim Ark LII Legal Information Institute

They made the same finding about a dozen more times as applying to England and the colonies immediately before the revolution: natural born status follows place of birth. Which, of course, you'd know if you'd ever read the ruling. Instead of just posting pictures about a topic you clearly don't know the first thing about.


And I'm still waiting for you to tell me why Sheriff Joe never bothered to ask the State of Hawaii if Obama's birth certificate was valid. Or why we would ignore the State of Hawaii when it affirmed in writing 3 times that Obama was born in Hawaii and the information on his birth certificate matches his original records in Hawaii.

Explain it to us, birther.

Sheriff Joe publically asked Hawaii to show the microfilm. Why won't Hawaii comply?

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Birther sheriff declares Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz ineligible to run for president

Oh the justice of it all.

Right Wing Radio Host and former Sheriff Richard Mack has stated that Ted Cruz is not eligible to run for President.

Cruz is a Canadian born National with a Cuba Father.

Cruz has said that he has renounced his Canadian Citizenship, but that does not change the fact he was NOT born in the U.S.

Who?

What country was Cruz a citizen of when he was born? Yeah, US. Next.
I guess this means Cruz is gaining traction in the polls so it's time for the brain dead here to make up shit.

Cruz was a citizen of both the United States and Canada when he was born- and possibly Cuba also.

However, the only one of those that matters is that he was born a citizen of the United States and is therefore a Natural born citizen.

Citizen and natural born-Citizen are not the same.

true. You can either be a natural born citizen or you can be a naturalized citizen. Since Cruz was never naturalized but holds US citizenship he is a natural born citizen.

How many presidents do you know of that have held a foreign birth certificate post grandfather clause?

 

[Skylar]

He obviously didnt bother to read his own post. Neither have you. Your rantings about my "credibility" are funny. Like what you think carries any weight whatsoever on this forum.

And how is it 'obvious that he didn't bother to read his own post'? Quote the relevant passages from his post that make your case.

Laughing.....you can't, of course. As you're running. The worse your argument, the vaguer you get. Insinuating arguments you don't have. Alluding to evidence you can't present.

Syrius was remarkably specific, giving you quote after quote from Hawaiian State officials that explicitly affirm his claims. You.......have nothing.

Try again. This time without your tail between your legs.

 

[Skylar]

Sheriff Joe publically asked Hawaii to show the microfilm. Why won't Hawaii comply?

Did Sheriff Joe ask Hawaii if the Birth Certificate was legitimate?

If so, show me in his report. If no....why? Its the very first thing any legitimate investigator would do. In a credible investigation, he'd check with the issuing agency and ask if the document in question was valid.

But Sheriff Joe never did. And still refuses to. How do you explain this stunning incompetence on the part of Sheriff Joe?

And why did Sheriff Joe explicitly omit any mention of the 3 different written affirmations given by the State of Hawaii that Obama was born in Hawaii and that the information on his birth certificate matched the original documents held by Hawaii? This is IMMEDIATELY relevant to his investigation, as its the State of Hawaii officially, publicly, and definitively taking a side on the accuracy of Obama's birth certificate.

And yet Sheriff Joe ignores this completely. How do you explain this inexcusable lapse in basic investigative procedure?

 

[Skylar]

How many presidents do you know of that have held a foreign birth certificate post grandfather clause?

What 'grandfather clause'? If you're talking about Hawaii's willingness to provide birth certificates for those born outside Hawaii, how is it relevant? None of those birth certificates would say that the person in question was born in Hawaii. But would instead would list their place of birth outside Hawaii.

Yet Obama's birth certificate says he was born in Hawaii. Killing your latest attempt at ignorant insinuation of arguments you clearly can't back up factually.

Remember Steve....and this is important: you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't read the cases you've claimed are the basis of your beliefs, You don't know the laws you're talking about. And you have no rational reason for ignoring the State of Hawaii when it contradicts you again and again.

 

[The Rabbi]

Birther sheriff declares Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz ineligible to run for president

Oh the justice of it all.

Right Wing Radio Host and former Sheriff Richard Mack has stated that Ted Cruz is not eligible to run for President.

Cruz is a Canadian born National with a Cuba Father.

Cruz has said that he has renounced his Canadian Citizenship, but that does not change the fact he was NOT born in the U.S.

Who?

What country was Cruz a citizen of when he was born? Yeah, US. Next.
I guess this means Cruz is gaining traction in the polls so it's time for the brain dead here to make up shit.

Cruz was a citizen of both the United States and Canada when he was born- and possibly Cuba also.

However, the only one of those that matters is that he was born a citizen of the United States and is therefore a Natural born citizen.

Citizen and natural born-Citizen are not the same.

true. You can either be a natural born citizen or you can be a naturalized citizen. Since Cruz was never naturalized but holds US citizenship he is a natural born citizen.

How many presidents do you know of that have held a foreign birth certificate post grandfather clause?

Relevant? No, I think not.
If Cruz was not naturalized, he is a natural born citizen. There is no third category here.

 

[TooTall]

[QUO.

Donald Trump says he is not eligible

The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution says he is.

="rightwinger, post: 10043052, member: 20321"]Donald Trump says he is not eligible

The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution says he is.

Wrong. 14th Amendment does't apply to the qualifications to be president. Article 2 Section 1 does.[/QUOTE]

One of the qualifications to be President is to be a citizen of the United States. Here is what is part of the the 14th Amendment.
You do understand that an Amendment to the Constitution actually amends the Constitution.

Citizenship in the United States is a matter of federal law, governed by the United States constitution.

Key Clauses of the 14th Amendment

1. State and federal citizenship for all persons regardless of race both born or naturalized in the United States was reaffirmed.

Citizenship in the United States is a matter of federal law, governed by the United States constitution.

This definition of citizenship contains a twofold test. To be a citizen you have to be “born or naturalized in the United States” and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Let’s see how that pans out in practice:

· The children of U.S. citizens are automatically citizens if they are born in the United States.

· Laws passed by Congress have also given automatic U.S. citizenship to children born outside the United States, provided at least one of their parents is a U.S. citizen — even if they are born out of wedlock.

The last sentence applies to Ted Cruz.

 

[Mojo2]

Cruz is eligible to be President, it's time people came to terms with that fact. Luckily none of this will matter considering Cruz is very unlikely to ever be President.

Years ago they said another unlikely contender could never make it to the Oval Office.

But Reagan did okay, I think.

Cruz is eligible to be President, it's time people came to terms with that fact. Luckily none of this will matter considering Cruz is very unlikely to ever be President.

Years ago they said another unlikely contender could never make it to the Oval Office.

But Reagan did okay, I think.

Reagan was a compelling, inspiring, and wonderful speaker. Cruz's speeches do not come across that way to me.

You know how my stereotyping of Liberals is eerily accurate? Well, I certainly can't prove it but I was proclaiming this observation months before Savage's book came out, "Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions". and I have always felt a sense of self congratulation whenever I see the cover or the title.

Anyway, just as I say Liberals are a certain way, I want you to know that Conservatives also have our own sort of identifiable traits and characteristics and tendencies.

One of those traits is actually a deficiency.

Conservatives are generally deficient in showmanship and flair. Style and FLASH!

Conservatives aren't usually good entertainers or actors. The few who can do it worth a damn are usually assured a job in Hollywood if they look half way decent and are strighter, truer and more adult than most others a Conservative can enjoy employment in film or tv I'd guess, because they are in such, relatively, short supply.

Look at Sen. Fred Thompson. He was Jack Ryan's boss in a film or two. He pushed Clint Eastwood's character around in one film. Not that great an actor as much as he was believably Conservative on screen.

That, he was and still is.

Well, I have long believed Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama because Mitt Romney wasn't as good a liar.

In fact, I don't know that he lied at all in his campaign.

And as much as I wish he'd have won, I agree he is better off without compromising his values, once again, to play the politics "game." He didn't have to sink to the Obama level to run a decent campaign.

Anyway, I have already set the record straight (in another recent thread) about the many bullshit myths which still rest in the minds of too many Romney bashers. And unless it becomes necessary to pull out that explanation I won't.

Let's just say that the 2012 election has at least one more lesson for Americans and our political campaigners for the highest office.

Did we finally learn our lesson about NOT voting for the best looking or the best voice or the best hair as a basis for hiring the next person to do this country's work from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.?

Or will we tend to ignore the lesson of 2012 which we will be paying a price for for the foreseeable future? Just as we are paying for LBJ's Great Society even 50 years after it was enacted?

You say Ted Cruz doesn't move you the way Reagan moved you. I suggest maybe we need to FEEL LESS and THINK MORE about our next choice of POTUS.

Cruz may be short on FLASH!

But that means he's probably less adept at lying.

And if you don't know it, that's a GOOD THING!

Unless you'd prefer someone who can look us square in the eye and CONVINCINGLY lie to us?



We really do get the government we deserve.

Do whatever you can and convince yourself you deserve more of a POSITIVE change than you've been getting from your presidents.

Cruz.

 

[Skylar]

Conservatives are generally deficient in showmanship and flair. Style and FLASH!

Conservatives aren't usually good entertainers or actors. The few who can do it worth a damn are usually assured a job in Hollywood if they look half way decent and are strighter, truer and more adult than most others a Conservative can enjoy employment in film or tv I'd guess, because they are in such, relatively, short supply.

I'd also say that conservatives aren't terribly innovative either. Nor are they adaptive to needs that arise. I'd even go so far as to say that many conservatives are more idealistic than their liberal counter parts. I've seen conservatives look right at negative consequences and shrug them off....because the resolution of those consequences would be in conflict with their ideals.

Where liberals have tended to be more pragmatic, adaptable and innovative in their approaches. New, however, doesn't necessarily mean better.

 

[Faun]

No...that only has to do with gay marriage

The following conditions affect children born outside the U.S. and its outlying possessions to married parents (special conditions affect children born out of wedlock: see below)

· If both parents are U.S. citizens, the child is a citizen if either of the parents has ever had a residence in the U.S. prior to the child's birth

· If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is a U.S. national, the child is a citizen if the U.S. citizen parent has lived in the U.S. for a continuous period of at least one year prior to the child's birth

· If one parent is a U.S. citizen and the other parent is not, the child is a citizen if

· the U.S. citizen parent has been "physically present"[9] in the U.S. before the child's birth for a total period of at least five years, and

· at least two of those five years were after the U.S. citizen parent's fourteenth birthday.[

The bolded one applies to Kruz.

Makes them a citizen not natural born

Cruz was a Canadian until a few months ago. We still know his loyalties don't lay with this country

Was he born a citizen? Yes. That makes him a natural born citizen.
Unlike Obama, who was born who knows where and probably renounced his citizenship if he ever had it.

LOL- why do you accept where Cruz was born- but refuse to accept the word of the State of Hawaii about Obama being born in the U.S.?
That is just Birther hypocrisy in action.

Cruz- I believe he is eligible- but we have no actual evidence he is- and I am okay with that.
Obama- the only President to have ever shown proof of his eligiblity. The only President to have ever had his state of Birther confirm he was born there.

The anti-cruz Birthers could just as easily say that Cruz 'probably renounced his citizenship'- but that would make them as crazy as the Obama Birthers.

Tjere is no controversy on where Cruz was born. Everyone agrees on that point.
The state of Hawaii has yet to release an official long form birth certificate. Explanations range from "we lost it" to "it burned in a fire" to "my dog ate it."
I wouldn't care particularly but it is troubling that the administration has taken extensive and vigorous action not to release any info. When McCain's birth was an issue his campaign released every relevant document. Obama has nothing like that. Why not?

Yet more insanity from the forum jester

Of course the state of Hawaii released Obama's long form birth certificate ... of particular interest, you'll note the verifiable certification at the bottom by Dr. Onaka, Hawaii's state registrar...