Trump 2016

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

An Open Letter to Trump Supporters: The Principles and Person of Ted Cruz, and the Political Realities for Donald Trump

It does my heart good to see millions of Americans rising up and boldly proclaiming that we are DONE with Washington politics as usual.

To all of those who want to take America back, who want to restore the greatness of our country, and who see Donald Trump as the one who shares their rage – I get it. I understand.

I’ve spent most of my adult life in the policy arena fighting both the liberals and those in the GOP whose policies are nothing more than “liberal lite”.

After eight years of Barak Obama, America is on the brink of destruction and in grave danger of no longer being that Shining City on the Hill that is a beacon of hope for the world. Basic freedoms like the ability to say what we please, to openly live out our faiths, and to raise our children as we see fit are disappearing before our very eyes. If we do not get this election right, our children and grandchildren will live under the strong fist of government and their opportunity to thrive will be diminished. Our very Constitution is in peril. Please hear me: if we do not elect someone who both understands the Constitution and has a proven record of working to restore and preserve the Bill of Rights, WE WILL LOSE THOSE RIGHTS.

And without first having the protections that the Constitution provides each of us as citizens, America can never be great again.

We can build a wall as high as you want and renegotiate all the trade agreements you can dream of, but if we do not get the Supreme Court right, while simultaneously slicing and dicing government agencies, programs, and departments in order to restore the limited government the Constitution portrays, we will each become a person of servitude to a corrupt and stifling system.

Ted Cruz has spent his entire adult life fighting to restore the Constitution. He has argued nine cases before the United States Supreme Court. He has fought for the First Amendment, The Second Amendment, The Tenth Amendment and more as both a Senator and a Constitutional expert. He has always been pro-life and has successfully fought to protect the right to life as well as parental rights. A lifetime of studying the Constitution and American history developed Ted Cruz’s thinking and approach to governing, and provides the basis for his public policy prescriptions. The Constitution is Ted Cruz’s compass, his North Star.

See more: http://theresurgent.com/an-open-lett...-donald-trump/

What a bunch of baloney. Cruz spent his adult working life in the Bush administration as a policy advisor. So did his wife.

More neocon lies. They guy has all his records sealed, just like Ozero. Only renounced his Canadian citizenship a few years ago. His campaign is swirling with dirty "business as usual" political tricks, just like the rest of them. He gave almost 1,000,000 dollars to Fiorini's campaign PAC while campaigning against her, his biggest donors are sodomites from NYC and people like Mitch McConnel - THAT ALONE ought to make any true conservative run from him like the plague. His wife helped draft the SPP (roadmap to NAU), he can't or won't answer a simple question "have you always been faithful to your wife", Roger Stone publicly says he knows "for a fact" Cruz: is an adulterer and Cruz never threatens a lawsuit against him or the NE. Why? Discovery, that's why.

This whole election is a sham and its sad so many have been hoodwinked, yet again.

The good news is more and more people are waking up to the scam, and soon the scambots won't matter, the party apologists will be irrelevant.

Though I guess the Eloi will always be with us, they are becoming less significant every passing year.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

he can't or won't answer a simple question "have you always been faithful to your wife",

Except he did answer that question: when asked by FoxNews he stated, " I have always been faithful to my wife."

If proof comes out he did have an affair, then he's an adulterer and liar and I will not support him further.

Until then, I will accept his answer.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

He gave almost 1,000,000 dollars to Fiorini's campaign PAC while campaigning against her

No, Cruz didn't give anything to Fiorina's campaign, certainly not close to $1,000,000.

The PAC, which isn't controlled by Cruz or his campaign gave another PAC supporting Fiorina $500,000. The FEC investigated it. End of story.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Roger Stone publicly says he knows "for a fact" Cruz: is an adulterer and Cruz never threatens a lawsuit against him or the NE. Why? Discovery, that's why.

1) Roger Stone? Seriously? The ex Trump lobbyist and guy who placed ads for he and his wife in swinger mags? The same Stone who was fired after a recording was released of him threatening the 83-year old father of a political rival? That Roger Stone?

2) Discovery isn't the issue, the issue is a politician has a very high bar in a slander/libel case. They're already in the public's eye and unless he can prove malice and that Stone knew they were false, it wouldn't go anywhere.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

What a bunch of baloney. Cruz spent his adult working life in the Bush administration as a policy advisor. So did his wife.

I am going to respond to your ridiculous post this one time, for the reader's sake. We have already had this discussion, which apparently you have ignored - again and again. I've come to expect that from you.

1. How do you account for GWB saying, "I just don't like the guy", referring to Ted Cruz? Why doesn't GWB like Ted Cruz?

2. When Ted Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas, a case came up - Medellin v. Texas. It was a case of an illegal immigrant, Jose Ernesto Medillin who among other assailants repeatedly raped and strangled two young girls with a belt and a shoe string. 10 years after being on death row, the case took a turn. The International Court of Justice - the judicial arm of the UN, also known as the World Court issued a decision to reopen the murder conviction - issued the United States of America to reopen the murder convictions of Medellin and 50 other Mexican nationals.

Condi Rice and the Bush Administration "wanted" the United States to accede to the World Court. She was Heidi's boss at the time. The State Department wanted President Bush to oppose the final judgment of the Texas criminal justice system, supporting the World Court - subjecting state and federal courts to the authority of the judicial arm of the UNITED NATIONS. GWB's solicitor general, Paul Clement, even though he was also not in agreement, called Ted giving him the news that GWB was going to sign a two paragraph order compelling the state court to OBEY the World Court under the guise of international good will.

Ted's response: "Paul, as Scripture says, 'There came a Pharaoh who knew not Joseph and his children.' GWB is not going to be the last president of the United States, and if he has this power, what about the next president, or the next president, or the next president?"

After consulting Greg Abbott, who is now our Governor of Texas, they decided to stand up for the principle that no president - not even a friend and fellow Republican - can defy the Constitution. Ted Cruz went before the Supreme Court, argued the case and won the case with "6" votes. Cruz made the case into a "separation of powers case".

The case sets the precedent that the United Nations has NO AUTHORITY whatsoever to bind the United States of American.

More neocon lies. They guy has all his records sealed, just like Ozero. Only renounced his Canadian citizenship a few years ago.

Current and controlling law on Ted Cruz's citizenship is thus:

8 U.S. Code § 1401 – Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

5 cases, thus far, have sided with Ted Cruz as a Citizen and eligible. Here is one of the cases deciding in Cruz's favor:

In the Commonwealth Court of Pennsyvania

1. As for it being his mother who was the American, that was settled in 1934.
U.S. Citizenship Acquired by Birth Abroad
2. As for being born to one American parent on foreign soil and that making you a natural-born citizen at birth, that has been settled since, at least, 1971. See: Rogers v Bellei, 401 U.S. 815
Cruz didn’t have a duty to resolve an issue that was resolved by Congress in 1934 and the Supreme Court in 1971.
Actually, the idea that you can be a natural-born American citizen even if not born on American soil is as old as this country. In fact, the First Congress passed and President George Washington signed this Act into law only one year after the Constitution was ratified:
‘And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens…’

– Naturalization Act of 1790
And, before you bring up the Naturalisation Act of 1795, it was repealed by the Naturalisation Act of 1798, which, itself, was repealed by the Nationalisation Law of 1802. The 1802 Act itself was amended over the years, including, without limitation, the 1855 law that automatically conferred citizenship on the alien wives of American citizens, the Slavery Amendments and corresponding legislation, the Immigration Act of 1891, the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, the Passport Act of 1926, the Act of May 24, 1934, the Nationalisation Act of 1940, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, the Immigration Act of 1990, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, and the REAL ID Act of 2005, among other Federal laws and SCOTUS decisions.


https://www.scribd.com/doc/305408749...on-PA-March-10

His campaign is swirling with dirty "business as usual" political tricks, just like the rest of them. He gave almost 1,000,000 dollars to Fiorini's campaign PAC while campaigning against her,

You know very well that a PAC works independently from a candidate and can place their money where ever they feel it is most beneficial. At the beginning of the debates, Fiorina was the best candidate poised to attack Hillary and bring out points that the other men on the stage would not have been as effective in doing. So, the PAC gave her money to stay in for a while and are on record saying why they gave her the money. That's old news.

his biggest donors are sodomites from NYC and people like Mitch McConnel - THAT ALONE ought to make any true conservative run from him like the plague.

Ted Cruz met with these people in NYC to talk about the Constitution and about foreign affairs concerning Israel. Gay people have questions too, Esaias.

His wife helped draft the SPP (roadmap to NAU),

The facts remain, regardless of you CONTINUING to try and smear Heidi is that she served a brief term as a conservative advisory member on the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations). Her sole input or contribution, among a huge panel of readers, was to review the paper, Building a North American Community, and to write the dissenting view.

So, I would appreciate it if you would stop with your paranoia and ill informed junk you read at irrelevant conspiracy theory websites.

he can't or won't answer a simple question "have you always been faithful to your wife", Roger Stone publicly says he knows "for a fact" Cruz: is an adulterer and Cruz never threatens a lawsuit against him or the NE. Why? Discovery, that's why.

Cruz has answered those questions, but you can hear him address them tonight with Megyn Kelly. He has said he has been faithful to his wife and has also answered regarding a lawsuit - Donald Trump would like for Ted to enter into a lawsuit over the false allegations in order to tie up the campaign on this one issue. Donald doesn't want to focus on the real issues, because he is weak. So, he tries to cause a distraction. It's pretty much a no-brainer as we have seen Donald do this very thing over and over and over again.

You quote Roger Stone who Trump says he fired in 2015, yet Stone says he quit. LOL! If you want to bring out a source, try one that isn't an idiot.

This whole election is a sham and its sad so many have been hoodwinked, yet again.

The good news is more and more people are waking up to the scam, and soon the scambots won't matter, the party apologists will be irrelevant.

Though I guess the Eloi will always be with us, they are becoming less significant every passing year.

Eloi? What is this meaning for you today? Good grief. His name is Jesus. Stop acting ridiculous. I discuss policy with intelligent people during the day. This conspiracy junk you keep bringing up over and over, even when debunked is embarrassing. Just stop.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

1) Roger Stone? Seriously? The ex Trump lobbyist and guy who placed ads for he and his wife in swinger mags? The same Stone who was fired after a recording was released of him threatening the 83-year old father of a political rival? That Roger Stone?

2) Discovery isn't the issue, the issue is a politician has a very high bar in a slander/libel case. They're already in the public's eye and unless he can prove malice and that Stone knew they were false, it wouldn't go anywhere.

[Pressing-On]

BTW, just a little revisit from August 2015:

During the debate, Fox News moderator Chris Wallace asked Trump why he donated to Clinton, who is likely to be the Democrats’ nominee in 2016. Trump, who has said his billions make him independent and immune to influence-peddling, said he wanted to curry favor with the Clintons and received special favors.

“I’ll tell you what, with Hillary Clinton, I said, ‘Be at my wedding,’ and she came to my wedding,” Trump replied. “You know why? She had no choice, because I gave.”

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/trump-hil...-had-no-choice

Donald Trump is not going to change one thing - HE IS THE SYSTEM!

[n david]

Trump: "It's very unfair" having to get 1,237 delegates to win the nomination.

Poor the Donald. The mean GOP is making him win 1,237 delegates or face a contested convention.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump...s-very-unfair/

[Pressing-On]

Something else that the Trump supporters need to keep in mind. Donald Trump has received quite a number of votes, but he has NEVER RECEIVED THE MAJORITY.

So, at Trump's rally last night he declared that he "Didn't care about the rules". He believes that he has gotten enough votes that he doesn't have to win the 1237. He wants to single handily change the rules that have been in place. That is something a person who knows they are losing will say. By that statement he is ginning up riots for Cleveland. We have had enough division without Donald Trump adding to it. It's pretty indicative what kind of president he could make - a totalitarian. Haven't we had enough of that already?

Donald Trump’s victories in the Republican primaries may make him seem like a sure winner. But those victories have been achieved by receiving either somewhat less than 40 percent of the votes or somewhat more than 40 percent, but never a majority.

The fragmenting of the Republican vote among many candidates in the primaries made this possible. But victory in the general election for president of the United States in November is going to require a lot more than 40 percent of the votes. And polls consistently show Mr. Trump to be the most negatively regarded of any of the candidates in either party.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/dangerous...8b7qTgTxqvR.99

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Something else that the Trump supporters need to keep in mind. Donald Trump has received quite a number of votes, but he has NEVER RECEIVED THE MAJORITY.

So, at Trump's rally last night he declared that he "Didn't care about the rules". He believes that he has gotten enough votes that he doesn't have to win the 1237. He wants to single handily change the rules that have been in place. That is something a person who knows they are losing will say. By that statement he is ginning up riots for Cleveland. We have had enough division without Donald Trump adding to it. It's pretty indicative what kind of president he could make - a totalitarian. Haven't we had enough of that already?

Po - have to correct you, again.
Trump won 73% of the Northern Mariana Islands primary.
link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Result...rimaries,_2016