Posted on 02/25/2016 7:17:51 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
I called it - as soon as Rubio rose to second place, Trump would cast doubt
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
About a month ago, when Donald Trump was claiming that Ted Cruz probably was not eligible to be president, Trump was questioned by Jake Tapper about whether Marco Rubio was eligible.
Trump exhibited some legal understanding of the issue, citing an op-ed written by Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe. Trump's conclusion was that he had no doubts Rubio was eligible:
"It's a different [than Ted Cruz], very different thing because he was born here. He was born on the land."
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
As the attacks on Cruz's eligibility rose in intensity and Trump threatened suit, I predicted that Trump would have a hard time holding that line if Rubio rose in the polls and became Trump's main challenger:
Will The Donald also sue to keep Marco Rubio off the ballot if Marco gains momentum again and runs attack ads? After all, many of the people who claim Cruz is ineligible also claim Rubio is ineligible because his parents were not citizens at the time of his birth in the United States. (Yes, I address that claim also in my prior post.)
I think Trump should sue. I'm not just saying that. I don't know that Trump has standing, but he's probably closer to it than most people out there. So go ahead, Donald, file the lawsuit, don't just threaten it. And do it against Rubio too. I'm sick of hearing the threat. Just do it.
After the South Carolina primary, Rubio arguably is Trump's main challenger.
And as I predicted, Trump didn't hold the line on Rubio being eligible.
Today Trump was interviewed by George Stephanopoulous. When asked the same question Jake Tapper had asked a month ago, but now said he was not not familiar with Rubio's situation, and had never looked at it. Despite having told Tapper he looked at it. And unlike his lack of prior concern, now he was not certain:
"I'm not sure, let people make their own determination ... I don't know. I've never looked at it, George, honestly, I've never looked at it. Somebody said he's not and I retweeted it."
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Nothing has changed in the Constitution. Only in the political landscape.
For my August 2013 analysis of why both Cruz and Rubio are eligible, regardless of where they stand in the polls, see natural born Citizens: Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Ted Cruz
It isn’t clear. There are conflicting theories of what it means to be a NBC.
Hey, you do what you have to do. Politics is rough.
I don’t really care if he’s eligible. All I know is that he’s the son of Cubans who didn’t bother to apply for citizenship until after his birth even though they had years to do so. For all we know rubio also has Cuban citizenship.
His parents lived here and were here legally. Gee, by the definition some would use, I wonder how many of your ancestors were ‘anchor’ babies.
So what if they didn’t bother to apply for citizenship immediately. That does not mean they did not love this country. Applying for citizenship is a tedious process, I know, I did it, it takes money and time to do it.
I agree totally. If anchor babies can become President (Rubio being one...born here to two foreigners) who’s to say any two foreigners who perhaps hate America can arrive here, give birth to a baby, and at some time in the future that child could come here and live the requisite years in the U.S. and run for President. It is ludicrous. Cruz position is the same, it appears he was 100% Canadian as his CRBA wasn’t instigated until he was 16-17 and needed a U.S. passport to go abroad on a school trip. Thereafter, he was a dual national (American and Canadian) until 2014. I know I will take heat for this, but the Constitution is the law of the land and can only be altered by Amendment.
There is no doubt Trump, Carson, and Kasich are all natural born Americans. Cruz was born in another country and perhaps both his parents were Canadian citizens at the time. Both of Rubio's parents were Cuban citizens when Marco was born but he was born on US soil.
Then the first presidents of this country were no legal. I am tired of this BS. You folks are nuts.
Same thing he tried with Cruz. it was a lie then and it’s a lie now. Further, Tramp knows it.
Rubio could very well have Cuban citizenship.
His first wife was not a citizen when Trump's first three children were born.
His third wife gave birth to his fifth child in March of the same year she became naturalized, but I've never read just when in that year she became a citizen.
The only child of Trump's who we know is an NBC (according to the birth era) is the illegitimate one he had with his mistress at the time.
The Constitution has wording that covered our first presidents.
Then, Natural Born Citizen was updated by a law around 1790.
Only someone with a complete ignorance of the world could make that statement. It is highly doubtful that the Castro regime would be granting citizenship to the offspring of emigre’s from the Communist regime. A little logic and knowledge can go a long way before opening one’s mouth. But don’t worry, your guy loves the uneducated.
Were his parents US citizens?
Not so. Research so far has indicated ONLY those who fled the Castro regime were not citizens. Rubio’s parents left Cuba before Castro’s revolution.
But, logic or anything else is not the issue. The issue is that you don’t really know and neither do I.
So, the statement stands. It’s possible that Rubio is a dual citizen.
And it is FACT that neither of his parents sought citizenship before his birth. He was born to two Cuban. IOW, BOTH of Rubio’s parents were Cubans and were NOT Americans.
His older kids have Czech citizenship from the mom so unless you think dual citizens can be natural born citizens, they aren’t. If he had married a Russian I don’t think it would be complicated at all to understand why the person shouldn’t be president. That was pretty much the point of John Jay’s qualifier.
I did not say that, today his older children would be NBC. What I said was, had those children been born between the years of 1790-1950, US law would have considered those children to be NBC because upon marriage to Donald, his wife would have automatically become a US citizen.
Plus one. Good post.
What was the specific law that changed it in 1950? If they can pass legislation that changes how constitutional language is interpreted, then it’s worthless. I’d say it’s unconstitutional legislation if it changes how the Constitution operates.
And so we see, from the ratification of the 19th Amendment, there has been a slow but gradual destruction of the family as one cohesive body, in faith, in ethics & in law. And this especially speaks to the usurpation of the 14th Amendment and the “anchor baby” syndrome. US citizenship is derived by consent of the person receiving it. Children do not have the intellect to consent, their parents consent for them and one cannot consent to pass to their children what they themselves do not possess. And thus the reason for the takeover of the education system, the government becoming the parent ... it is a very dangerous world for our children & grandchildren today!!!
And the fact that we have an “anchor baby” being allowed to run for the presidency, being supported by so-called constitutionalists who deny that the nationality of the parents at the birth of the child has anything to do with ones nationality at birth, well, it just proves that this nation is no longer a constitutional one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.