Sen. Ted Cruz was a legal citizen of Canada when he ran for and became a U.S. Senator, without ever having disclosed his Canadian citizenship to Texas voters, which under both Texas and U.S. Election law, is an act of fraud. Ted Cruz had committed election fraud by failing to disclose to Texas voters that he was a Canadian citizen in 2012.
Ted’s Real Name Is Rafael & Obama’s Real Name Is Barry.
On October 31, 2014, MinuteManNews.com published an article by Greg Conterio, titled, “Yes, Ted Cruz is Eligible to Serve as President,” Over the past seven years, since the day Barack Obama crawled out of the political cesspools of South Chicago, I have written numerous articles on the question of his eligibility to serve as president… the longest of which is a comprehensive 13-page analysis of the term “natural born Citizen” titled, “The Obama Eligibility Question .”
Now, as we enter the 2016 campaign season, with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), mentioned as potential presidential candidates, a great many Americans remain confused about the definition of the term “natural born Citizen.”
Although each of these men are eligible to serve as governors, as U.S. Senators, as members of the U.S. House of Representatives, or even justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, none are eligible to serve as president or vice president because they are not “natural born Citizens,” as required by Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
- Cruz was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father;
- Jindal was born in the U.S. to a father and mother, both of whom were citizens of India;
- Rubio was born in the U.S to parents, both of whom were citizens of Cuba; and
- Santorum was born in the U.S. to an American mother and an Italian father.
Under provisions of the 14th Amendment, all are “citizens at birth,” but none are “natural born” citizens because of their non-citizen parentage.
Aware that Senator Cruz was born in Canada to a Cuban father, Conterio relies on language contained in 8 USC §1401 to support his contention that Cruz is a “natural born” citizen.
That statutory language defines a “citizen at birth” as “a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is… not a citizen of the United States.”
At no point does the statute mention the term “natural born Citizen,” nor does it attempt to show that the terms “natural born Citizen” and “citizen at birth” are synonymous.
To the contrary, when the Founders inserted the words “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, as a principal qualification for those who wished to serve as president of the United States, it was their intention that all those born with any taint of foreign allegiance should be barred from the presidency and the vice presidency. Hence, the term “natural born Citizen.”
Under the 14th Amendment, all those born in the United States to American citizen parents, as well as those born to foreign nationals or parents of mixed nationality, are “citizens at birth.”
In other words, all “natural born” citizens are “citizens at birth,” but not all “citizens at birth” are “natural born.”
However, Conterio contends that the terms “natural born Citizen” and “Citizen at birth” are synonymous, just as the terms “dog” and “domestic canine” are synonymous. That simply is not true.
Those terms are no more synonymous than the terms “apple” and “orange.” But then, Conterio goes on to argue that, “Based on U.S. law, the terms ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘Citizen at birth’ are synonymous.”
However, in the next breath he reverses course, saying, “The Founders said ‘Natural Born Citizen,’ and the U.S. Code says ‘Citizen at Birth,’ which mean two completely different things.”
So which is it? Either the terms are “synonymous,” or are they “two completely different things?” They can’t be both.
What many who support the eligibility of Cruz, Jindal, Rubio, and Santorum refuse to consider is that there are only two jobs in all of America that require the incumbents to be “natural born” citizens.
Those jobs are president and vice president of the United States.
Every other job in America, in government or in the private sector, can be filled by natural born citizens, by citizens at birth, by naturalized citizens, or, in some cases, by non-citizens with work visas.
Ted Cruz never even set foot in the U.S. until he was four years old.
Ted Cruz’s father, by the way, was a communist revolutionary, from Castro’s dictatorship. He fought with Castro as a teenager. He left Cuba on a student visa, not as a refugee.
- Senator Ted Cruz Is Not a “Natural Born Citizen” and Therefore Not Eligible to Be President
- North American Union Ploy 1
- North American Union Ploy 2
Those who agree that there are several categories of citizenship, but then argue that the Constitution puts no unique requirements on candidates for president and vice president, have an obligation to explain what they see as the difference between a “natural born” citizen and any other kind of citizen.
In his analysis, Conterio relies heavily on an April 3, 2009 memorandum prepared by attorney Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
The Maskell memorandum, which has been widely discredited, was produced for one reason and one reason alone: to give political cover to members of Congress who voted to certify Obama’s Electoral College votes, knowing or strongly suspecting that he was not eligible for that office.
The gist of Maskell’s argument is that “…there is no federal law, regulation, rule, guideline, or requirement that a candidate for federal office produce his or her original birth certificate, or a certified copy of the record of live birth, to any official of the United States government…
Furthermore, there is no specific federal agency or office that ‘vets’ candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility… ”
No specific federal agency or office that “vets” candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility?
Upon being sworn into office in early January, following each biennial General Election, all members of Congress are required to swear the following oath:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
The congressional oath of office clearly requires all members of Congress to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” That includes all those who would seek to gain access to the presidency without the necessary qualifications.
The presidential selection process provides three vetting opportunities for president and vice president. Unfortunately, all three vetting opportunities failed miserably in 2008-09. The first occurred at the close of the Democratic national convention, in Denver, when the convention chairman, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and the convention secretary, Alice Travis Germond, certified Barack Obama and Joe Biden to the 50 state election boards so that ballots could be printed.
- Father Of Communist China ‘Sun Yat-Sen’ & Obama, Received Hawaii’s COLB.
- Anita Dunn’s Husband & Council For Obama’s $2.8 Million COLB Legal Fees: Bob Bauer Resigns From Obama Administration!
Because Hawaii has specific certification requirements under Hawaii Revised Statutes §11-113, Pelosi and Germond certified to the State of Hawaii, as follows:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado, on August 25 though (sic) 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively, and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.”
The certifications sent to the other 49 states read, simply: “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado, on August 25 though (sic) 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States, respectively.”
Affixed were the names and home addresses of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
The phrase, “… and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution” was purposely omitted.
Other than that, all of the documents were identical… even to the misspelling of the word “through” in the second line of the certifications.
The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that Democrats knew when they nominated him that Obama was not a “natural born” citizen and, therefore, ineligible to serve. Pelosi was aware that certifying falsely to Obama’s eligibility was a criminal offense, so the question arises, what did she know, and when did she know it?
The second vetting opportunity occurred on December 15, 2008, when the Democratic members of the Electoral College met to elect Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Even though most electors had been warned in advance that Obama did not meet the constitutional requirements to serve as president, all 365 Democratic electors, anxious to have another Democrat in the White House, violated their electoral oaths and cast their ballots for Obama.
The third and final vetting opportunity occurred on January 8, 2009, when the Congress met in joint session to certify the votes of the Electoral College. Prior to that date, essentially every member of Congress had been advised that Obama’s citizenship status was seriously in doubt.
So, if a member of Congress suspected that the Electoral College had erred, it was his/her solemn obligation to make those suspicions known and to object to the certification of the Electoral College vote. Yet, all 535 members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, purposely violated their oath of office by failing to demand an examination of Obama’s qualifications.
Why did they do so? Although we can’t read the minds of 535 members of Congress, we can “bet the farm” that most failed to question Obama’s eligibility because they were terrified at what would happen in the streets of America if the first black man ever elected by the Electoral College was turned away at the last moment on a constitutional “technicality.”
Instead, the double-redundant “fail safe” system envisioned by the Founders suffered catastrophic failure.
Here, Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi was murdered because he decoupled from the Kissinger petrodollar.
NWO Lost In Egypt, now The Bank Cartel wants Syria. Since being removed from Egypt the NWO Muslim Brotherhood [monikers ISIS, al-Nusra, al-Qaeda, KLA, Hamas] has now infiltrated Turkey & Jordan in the Cartel’s attempt to control the Middle East.
- Rubio wants to keep fighting in Libya ~ To make Libya pro petrodollar.
- However ~ Egyptian & Libyan Governments Retaliate Against Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood aka; ISIS In Libya. Free their governments from U.S. petrodollar.
- The Relationship Between Obama And ISIS: The Evidence! ISIS is used to cause a Nation State to be subservient to the U.S. petrodollar. ISIS was organized and financed by U.S. in Jordan after they were kicked out of Egypt as the Muslim Brotherhood.
We will see whether Republicans, who, unlike Democrats, believe in the strict construction of the Constitution and the rule of law, will have sufficient reverence for the words of the Constitution to deny the nomination to a candidate who does not meet the necessary qualifications.
Knowing Republicans as I do, I feel certain that they will distinguish themselves by refusing to nominate an unqualified candidate.
Ten Inconvenient Truths That Ted Cruz Doesn’t Want You to Know.
1.
Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz was born in Canada.
Although one of the requirements laid out by the US Constitution for being president is that the candidate must be a US “natural born citizen,” the common interpretation is that it means that at least one of the candidate’s parents must be a US citizen by birth. In the case of Ted Cruz, his mother, Eleanor Elizabeth Wilson who was born in Wilmington Delaware which makes her a US citizen. It is important to note that the US Supreme Court has not yet rendered an opinion on the definition of “natural born citizen.”
Ted Cruz has used his father’s immigration experience when arguing against immigration reform in the news media. His father has also frequently campaigned for Ted Cruz, therefore I believe it is fair to understand what influence Ted Cruz’ father has had upon him.
2.
Ted Cruz’ father fought alongside Fidel Castro.
Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, born in Matanzas Cuba, fought alongside Fidel Castro in order to overthrow U.S. backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista. Batista was overthrown by Fidel Castro’s Cuban Revolution in 1959. The US government had supported the Batista regime since 1952.
3.
Ted Cruz’ father fought against the interests of the United States by taking up arms against the Batista dictatorship, who was supported by the United States government. Today, Ted Cruz’ father would be considered a terrorist for taking up arms against US interests.
Ted Cruz has argued that immigration reform would be “profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who follow the rules.” Let us look at how Ted Cruz’s father came to the United States.
4.
Bribe: Rafael Bienvenido Cruz arrived in the United States on a four-year student visa in 1957. A lawyer friend of the father bribed a Cuban official for an “exit permit” stamp on the father’s passport. In other words, the father used bribery to circumvent the immigration rules.
5.
Overstayed his visa: In addition to using bribery for an exit stamp, Cruz’ father obtained “political asylum” in the US when his student visa expired.
6.
Gaming the immigration process: Not only did Cruz’ father overstay his student visa to the United States, he acquired “political asylum” and then left for Canada.
The change in immigration designation, while in the United States, shows the duplicity of gaming the system to enter the United States under one status and converting to another when it became convenient. Some would argue that it is not “following the rules” but rather gaming the “rules” for a preferred outcome, when the status is changed from one to another while in the country.
7.
Jumps to the front of the immigration line: While under the status of “political asylum” in the United States, Ted Cruz’ father married a US citizen and thus was automatically moved to the front of the line for a green card. Those who apply for a green card under the traditional rules are required to remain in the US for a period of five years, to establish continuity in the US before moving on to another country. Yet, the father abandoned the United States soon after acquiring Permanent Resident status and moved to Canada where Ted Cruz was born.
8.
Abandons the US and acquires another citizenship: While in Canada, Ted Cruz’ father acquired Canadian citizenship.
9.
Forty-eight years and two citizenships later, father finally applies for US citizenship: After living eight years in Canada, the Cruz family returned to the United States with Ted Cruz. It was not until 2005, almost 48 years after leaving Cuba that the father finally acquired US citizenship.
As a recap, Ted Cruz’ father, Rafael Bienvenido Cruz left Cuba, after bribing a Cuban official, entered the US on a four year student visa that he then converted to a political asylum visa.
The elder Cruz then marries a US citizen that grants him an automatic jump to the front of the line for a green card. He then leaves the US and becomes a Canadian citizen only to return to the US and apply for citizenship 48 years after leaving Cuba.
Can Ted Cruz convincingly argue that his father followed the immigration rules? More importantly, what does the three citizenships held by Cruz’ father say about his father’s love for the country his son wishes to govern?
10.
Ted Cruz did not follow immigration rules: Ted Cruz, himself, did not even know he was a Canadian citizen for most of his life until someone pointed it out to him. Ted Cruz argues that immigrants should follow the rules yet Ted Cruz did not even know enough to understand that he held Canadian citizenship until it was pointed out to him. Did Ted Cruz follow the rules he admonishes others to follow? On May 14, 2014, Ted Cruz formally renounced his Canadian citizenship.
Sources:
1. Welna, David; “How Ted Cruz’ Father Shaped His Views On Immigration”; NPR; June 30, 2013
2. Brennan, Patrick; “Cruz: Path to Citizenship ‘Profoundly Unfair’”; National Review; July 21, 2013
3. Welna, David; “NPR Radio Show Transcript with Steve Inskeep; How Ted Cruz’s Father Shaped His Views on Immigration”; June 20, 2013
To the contrary, when the Founders inserted the words “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, as a principal qualification for those who wished to serve as president of the United States, it was their intention that all those born with any taint of foreign allegiance should be barred from the presidency and the vice presidency. Hence, the term “natural born Citizen.”
Related Articles:
- Ted Cruz Still Not Eligible To Be President
- Zionist Ted Cruz Praises Rothschild’s “State” Of Israel: Gets Booed Off Stage At D.C. Conference.
- Rafael ‘Ted’ Cruz Ignores Obama’s Increased Military Assaults In Iraq: While Drafting Legislation That Increases Obama’s Illegal Act Of War Sanctions Upon Iran. Yes During January 2014 Obama was pro sanctions.
- Genocide Iraq ~ 17,073 Muslim Sunnis Have Been Murdered By Muslim Brotherhood’s ISIS In 2014
Political Vel Craft 