Ted Cruz And The Never Ending Argument Of Citizenship

Why Is “Natural Born” Status So Important?

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – “Let’s first establish that the clause natural-born citizen is inserted into the Constitution for a specific purpose.  If you read the letter that John Jay, future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, wrote to George Washington at the time the Federal Convention of 1787 was in full swing, Jay wrote to Washington and said it must be a prudent thing to do to insert into the Constitution a natural-born citizen clause so as to prevent foreign intrigue from getting into our government.”  Check out today’s transcript for the rest….

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  Let’s go over this again in case you don’t know.  I’ve tried to explain it in a different manner today so that people that don’t get this – I got another question mark on the Twitter feed: Mike, I don’t understand.  It’s almost like the people are going: You’re wrong!  It’s like Adam Sandler in The Waterboy.  You’re wrong, Colonel Sanders!  All of you are a bunch of Adam Sandlers.  [mocking] “But Momma said that Ted Cruz is eligible because he got a tooth and he brushes it with a teethbrush.  Ted Cruz eligible.”  As Colonel Sanders says in the movie: Well, I’m sure your mother does say that, but that doesn’t make it true.

Let’s go over this again.  I’m going to explain this.  You say because Cruz is born of an American mother – we don’t know whether or not she was an American citizen at the time.  Even that claim is dubious.  You say that because – again, I tried to tell this to our listener friend Lucas who’s called this show a couple times.  He and I have had a couple conversations about this.  He sent me a follow-up email on it.  Lucas, this is for you, and for those of you who are good, patriotic people and trying to think about this correctly.  I understand what’s going on here.  I’m going to try to help everybody along here.

Let’s first establish that the clause natural-born citizen is inserted into the Constitution for a specific purpose.  If you read the letter that John Jay, future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, wrote to George Washington at the time the Federal Convention of 1787 was in full swing, Jay wrote to Washington and said it must be a prudent thing to do to insert into the Constitution a natural-born citizen clause so as to prevent foreign intrigue from getting into our government.  There’s a reason why the clause is in there, to prevent foreign intrigue in the presidency, in the executive office.  That’s the reason.

Why were they worried about that?  They just finished fighting a war with England, and then there was a war that would come up that we almost fought against the French.  Of course, the English would come back and would cause another war in 1810, ’11, ’12, ’13, and ’14.  This would continue on.  We were surrounded.  We had the French and the English to the north in Canada.  We had the Mexicans and Spanish to the south.  There was a concern that they did not want foreign intrigue getting into the highest orders and offices of the new government.  The natural-born citizen clause is something that was prudent.  It was prudently inserted for a prudent purpose.

[private FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76]

When we acknowledge that it’s prudently inserted and we can define what is prudent to do, then that gives us a little bit of a better indication – then we’re a little bit better educated from the start.  In order to prevent this, they inserted the natural-born citizen clause.  Okay, fine.  Mike, can you tell me how that works?  This is easy to explain.  Let’s make this a 2016 “conservative,” neocon, war-lusting, war-hawking, warmongering argument.  Let’s pretend for a moment –

We must operate in very simple yet universally-defined terms.  I’m going to try this again one more time, and then we’re going to get to distributism.  Let’s define the terms as they must have been defined at the time of the ratification of the Constitution.  Natural-born citizen I’m about to explain to you.  Naturalized citizen – by the way, I don’t deny, I don’t say that Cruz, even though this is even dubious, that Cruz is a naturalized citizen.  I think that’s a dubious assertion.  Prove it.  Rubio, yes, he was naturalized by process because of his parents.  Let’s use some universal terms here.  The universal terms that we’re going to use are the following.

Universal terms are “citizen,” “parent(s),” and “place of birth.”  All three have to be combined in the affirmative in order for the statement, kind of like a logical statement, a logical syllogism.  This is a universal affirmative on all three parts of the syllogism.  You make the argument.  You have the mediating term, minor term, major term, and then you get the universal conclusion.  All three conditions have to be met, not one or two, all three.  Let’s use the three terms and let’s see how it applies using modern, not 1788 countries, modern countries.

Mrs. Cruz is an American citizen.  You with me so far?  She’s Ms. McGillicuddy first.  Then she meets Mr. Cruz, citizen of Iran.  [mocking] “Mike, that’s not fair.”  It most certainly is.  We’re going to use universal terms.  We can insert any country we want.  The framers of the Constitution did not specify any country that was to be eliminated or any country that was to be ignored.  We must say all countries, all states.  Mr. Cruz now has just gotten hitched with who is now Mrs. Cruz.  Mr. Cruz has never denounced, never denied at this time his citizenship in Iran.  He’s an Iranian, citizen of the mullahs.  With me so far?

Mr. Cruz takes Mrs. Cruz now from America and now moves right smack dab in the middle of Afghanistan.  He’s born in a city that features Al Qaeda and Taliban jihadists.  Mr. Cruz is a citizen of Iran.  He’s married Mrs. Cruz, an American citizen.  Young Tedly has now been born in some terrorist haven village in Afghanistan.  Is he now still a natural-born citizen, Glenn Beck?  Ted Cruz?  Drunk with the quest and the lust for political power, is he still eligible?  Are you still ready to micturate on the Constitution?  Are you still ready to quote to me the 14^th Amendment or the Naturalization Act of 1790?  By the by, the term “natural-born citizen” was repealed from that act by virtue of the act of 1795.  It’s as if it never happened.  We’re stuck with natural-born citizen in the Constitution as it was understood at the time.  This is not at issue here.

[/private]

There’s still the natural-born citizen clause.  Do you now see the virtue and the wisdom of the natural-born citizen for the office of presidency clause?  You may say today, [mocking] “We live in a global economy now, Mike.  We live in a global world now.  Things are different now.”  Fine, get an amendment.  Be a real constitutionalist, be a real man.  Put your big-boy underwear or your big-girl panties on and get an amendment.  If you can’t get an amendment to alter the clause then it is as it was frickin’ ratified.  End of story.  Stop calling yourself a constitutionalist or an originalist.  You’re not.  You’re a power-lusting unconstitutional promoter.  You’re no better than the libs that you love to make fun of and tell the entire planet that they are the gravest threat to humanity.

All three qualifications must be met.  He must be of natural-born parent.  That meant, in 1788, your father.  Plain and simple, it came from your father.  It did not come from your mother.  No one can argue this historical point of view.  Children who were born and before they became adults, if their father died, they were orphans.  They lost the connection to their natural-born status.  Women’s rights had not yet reared their head.  Get this through your noggins.

FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Project 76 features, Church Doctrine videos and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7,  here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Thanks for 17 years of mike church.com! – Mike

Rafael Edward Cruz was not born on the soil and not born of American citizen, naturalized parents.  He comes from Mr. Cruz not Mrs. Cruz.  It doesn’t matter what citizenship she was.  As I just demonstrated to you, Mr. Cruz born an Iranian and little Tedly born in a terror village in Afghanistan, you know that if I was describing a dumbocrat candidate, you people would be lined up around the block here for tickets to get in here and watch me talk about this.  Because it’s allegedly one of yours, not so much.

The case of Marco Rubio is the exact same.  There is no difference.  The only difference is he has one of the qualifications.  He was born on the soil.  Like an anchor baby, he’s not born of a naturalized American citizen.  If Mr. Rubio, who at the time was a Cuban nationalist at the time of little Marco’s birth, if Mr. Rubio had been a naturalized citizen, and then if young Marco was born in Florida, then yes, he would be a natural-born citizen.  Because Mr. Rubio was not naturalized, little Marco cannot be a natural-born citizen.  He’s a naturalized citizen.

End Mike Church Show Transcript