Source: http://pieczenik.boards.net/thread/312/cruz-used-hypnosis-techniques-march
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 13:58:14+00:00

Document:
When Ted Cruz went to Liberty University, he was expected to speak, not make a speech that would surpass Obama's employment of mass hypnosis techniques, and be on the same command threshold as that found in the speeches of Adolf Hitler. The speech from last week is as follows.
God bless Liberty University. I am thrilled to join you today at the largest Christian University in the world. Today I want to talk to you about the promise of America. Imagine your parents when they were children. Imagine a little girl growing up in Wilmington, Delaware. It’s during World War II, the daughter of an Irish-Italian Catholic family. Working class–her uncle ran numbers in Wilmington. She grew up with dozens of cousins, because her mom was the second youngest of 17 kids. She had a difficult father, a man who drank far too much, and frankly, didn’t think that women should be educated. Yet, this young girl, pretty and shy, was driven, was bright, was inquisitive, and she became the first person in her family ever to go to college. In 1956, my mom, Eleanor, graduated from Rice University with a degree in Math, and became a pioneering computer programmer in the 1950s and 1960s.
Imagine a teenage boy, not much younger than many of you here today, growing up in Cuba. Jet-black hair, skinny as a rail, involved in Student Council, and yet Cuba was not at a peaceful time. The dictator, Batista, was corrupt. He was oppressive, and this teenaged boy joins a revolution. He joins a revolution against Batista, he begins fighting, with other teenagers to free Cuba from the dictator. This boy, at 17, finds himself thrown in prison. Finds himself tortured, beaten, and then at age 18, he flees Cuba. He comes to America. Imagine for a second the hope that was in his heart as he rode that ferry-boat across the Key West and got on a Greyhound bus to head to Austin, Texas, to begin washing dishes, making 50 cents an hour, coming to the one land on earth that has welcomed so many millions. When my dad came to America in 1957, he could not have imagined what lay in store for him.
Imagine a young married couple, living together in the 1970s. Neither one of them had a personal relationship with Jesus. They have a little boy, and they are both drinking far too much. They are living a fast life. When I was three, my father decided to leave my mother and me. We were living in Calgary at the time. He got on a plane, and he flew back to Texas, and he decided he didn’t want to be married anymore, and he didn’t want to be a father to his three-year-old son. And yet, when he was in Houston, a friend, a colleague in the oil and gas business, invited him to a Bible Study, invited him to Clay Road Baptist Church, and there my father gave his life to Jesus Christ. And God transformed his heart. And he drove to the airport. He bought a plane ticket and he flew back to be with my mother and me.
There are people who wonder if faith is real. I can tell you that, in my family, there is not a second of doubt, because were it not for the transformative love of Jesus Christ, I would have been saved, and I would have been raised by a single mom without my father in the household.
Imagine another little girl, living in Africa, in Kenya and Nigeria, playing with kids–they spoke Swahili, she spoke English, coming back to California–where her parents had been missionaries in Africa–raised her in the Central Coast. She starts a small business when she’s in grade school, baking bread. She calls it Heidi’s Bakery. She and her brother compete baking bread. They bake thousands of loaves of bread, and go to the local apple orchard, where they sell the bread to people coming to pick apples. She goes on to a career in business, excelling and rising to the highest pinnacles, and then Heidi becomes my wife, and my very best friend in the world. Heidi becomes an incredible mom to our two precious little girls, Caroline and Catherine.
Imagine another teenage boy, being raised in Houston, hearing stories from his dad about prison and torture in Cuba. Hearing stories about how fragile liberty is, beginning to study the United States Constitution, learning about the incredible protections we have in this country that protect the God-given liberty of every American–experiencing challenges at home. In the mid-1980s, oil prices cratered, and his parent’s business goes bankrupt. Heading off to school, more than a 1,000 miles from home, to a place where he knew nobody, where he was alone and scared, and his parents going through bankruptcy, meant there was no financial support from home, so at the age of 17, he went to get two jobs to help pay his way through school. He took over $100,000.00 in school loans–loans I suspect a lot of y’all can relate to–loans that I’ll point out, I just paid off a few years ago.
These are all of our stories. These are who we are as Americans, and yet for so many Americans, the promise of America seems more and more distant. What is the promise or America? The idea that–the revolutionary idea that this country was founded upon, that our rights–they don’t come from man. They come from God Almighty, and that the purpose of the Constitution that as Thomas Jefferson put it, is to serve as chains to bind the mischief of government. The incredible opportunity of the American dream, what has enabled millions of people from all over the world to come to America with nothing, and to achieve anything. And then the American exceptionalism that has made this nation a clarion voice for freedom in the world, a shining city on a hill. That’s the promise of America. That’s what makes this nation, an indispensable nation, a unique nation in the history of the world. And yet, so many today fear that that promise is unattainable. So many fear that it is slipping away from our hands.
I want to talk to you this morning about reigniting the promise of America: 240 years ago on this very day, a 38-year-old lawyer named Patrick Henry, stood up just a hundred miles from here in Richmond, Virginia and said, “Give me liberty or give me death.” I want to ask each of you to imagine, imagine millions of courageous conservatives, all across America, rising up together to say in unison “we demand our liberty.
Think just how different the world would be. Imagine instead of economic stagnation, booming economic growth. Instead of small businesses going out of business in record numbers, imagine small businesses growing and prospering. Imagine young people coming out of school with four, five, six job offers.
Five years ago today, the president signed Obamacare into law. Within hours, Liberty University went to court filing a lawsuit to stop that failed law. Instead of the joblessness, instead of the millions forced into part-time work, instead of the millions who’ve lost their health insurance, lost their doctors, have faced skyrocketing health insurance premiums, imagine in 2017 a new president signing legislation repealing every word of Obamacare.
Imagine health care reform that keeps government out of the way between you and your doctor. and that makes health insurance personal and portable and affordable. that lets every American fill out his or her taxes on a postcard. Imagine abolishing the IRS.
Instead of the lawlessness and the president’s unconstitutional executive amnesty, imagine a president that finally, finally, finally secures the borders. And imagine a legal immigration system that welcomes and celebrates those who come to achieve the American dream.
Instead of a federal government that works to undermine our values, imagine a federal government that works to defend the sanctity of human life and to uphold the sacrament of marriage. Instead of a government that works to undermine our Second Amendment rights, that seeks to ban our ammunition imagine a federal government that protects the right to keep and bear arms of all law-abiding Americans.
Instead of a federal government that seeks to dictate school curriculum through Common Core, imagine repealing every word of Common Core.
Imagine embracing school choice as the civil rights issue of the next generation that every single child, regardless of race, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth or ZIP Code, every child in America has the right to a quality education. And that’s true from all of the above, whether is public schools, or charter schools, or private schools, or Christian schools, or parochial schools, or home schools, every child.
Instead of a president who seeks to go to the United Nations to end-run Congress and the American people, imagine a president who says “I will honor the Constitution, and under no circumstances will Iran be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon.
Imagine a president who says “We will stand up and defeat radical Islamic terrorism, and we will call it by its name. We will defend the United States of America.
Imagine it’s 1979 and you and I were listening to Ronald Reagan. And he was telling us that we would cut the top marginal tax rates from 70 percent all the way down to 28 percent, that we would go from crushing stagnation to booming economic growth, to millions being lifted out of poverty and into prosperity abundance. That the very day that he was sworn in, our hostages who were languishing in Iran would be released. And that within a decade we would win the Cold War and tear the Berlin Wall to the ground.
That would have seemed unimaginable, and yet, with the grace of God, that’s exactly what happened. From the dawn of this country, at every stage America has enjoyed God’s providential blessing. Over and over again, when we face impossible odds, the American people rose to the challenge. You know, compared to that, repealing Obamacare and abolishing the IRS ain’t all that tough.
The power of the American people when we rise up and stand for liberty knows no bounds. If you’re ready to join a grassroots army across this nation, coming together and standing for liberty, I’m going to ask you to break a rule here today and to take out your cell phones, and to text the word constitution to the number 33733. You can also text imagine. We’re versatile.
It is a time for truth. It is a time for liberty. It is a time to reclaim the Constitution of the United States. I am honored to stand with each and every one of you courageous conservatives as we come together to reclaim the promise of America, to reclaim the mandate, the hope and opportunity for our children and our children’s children. We stand together for liberty.
This is our fight. The answer will not come from Washington. It will come only from the men and women across this country, from men and women, from people of faith, from lovers of liberty, from people who respect the Constitution.
There needs to be an expose' on Ted Cruz using intentional mass hypnosis techniques at his Presidential announcement speech.
As a Constitutionalist, I have issue with his unConstitutional candidacy as well as especially that of Barack Obama. But even were we leaving that aside, I urge an input by Mr. Pieczenik on this, and if need be for him to have hypnosis experts look at the transcript and video of Ted Cruz, and judge for themselves.
When Ted Cruz illegally announced that he would run for President of the United States, he used a psy-op mass hypnosis gimmick in order to get his speech across, and the trip word used was "Imagine".
Imagine a young married couple, living together in the 1970s.
...rise up and stand for liberty ...standing for liberty, I’m going to ask you to break a rule here today and to take out your cell phones, and to text the word constitution to the number ..... You can also text imagine. We’re versatile.
And what is truth to Ted? Imagine and Constitution are interchangeable, and he wants $$$$ or cold hard cash. The Constitution (in this very obvious mass hypnosis speech) thus becomes subconsciously implanted with the suggestion or command that it is a work of fiction and as a dream passing in the night, as if the Constitution is fake and something that is bypassed by time, the next day, and discarded, as something to be forgotten and cast behind.
Do you really think Americans would want to CONSCIOUSLY give up our rights of free speech, of freedom of religion, of the right to jury trial, of the right to bear arms, of the right to not have to house troops against our will and feed them at our own expense, of the right to an attorney, if arrested et cetera? It is quite clear to me personally that Ted's mass hypnosis (illegal announcement that he can run for President) speech demands we discard our Bill of Rights.
When Ted States: imagine, imagine millions of courageous conservatives, all across America, rising up together to say in unison “we demand our liberty. ... Imagine millions of young people coming together and standing together, saying “we will stand for liberty.” It followed the hypnotist's suggestion that " the purpose of the Constitution ...is to serve as chains...."
In other words, his goal is to throw off the chains and shackles of the Constitution through those he hypnotizes, and push for what his wife Heidi Nelson Cruz sat on a Council on Foreign Relations Board for: a North American Union, where Canada and the USA and Mexico merge into 1 regional Government of a 10 region one world Government that will be the New World Order.
This is not much different from the 2009 Carbon Taxing Schemes by one of the world's leading think-tanks.
for anyone wishing and wanting to believe a lie as a matter of "faith" or what have you, will.
techniques used by mass hypnotists.
Again, these 31 times Ted Cruz specifically uses "Imagine" in his illegal Presidential announcement, these 31 "imagines" are an intentional and willful abuse that Ted Cruz is employing at a greater mass hypnosis intensity in the same way Obama employed mass hypnosis techniques as well.
Is Obama Using Hypnosis in His Speech?
B. TED CRUZ is CONSTITUTIONALLY ILLEGAL TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT. THAT IS A LEGAL FACT!!!
We do not need a Presidential candidate or President so badly, that we have to go outside the pool of two citizen parents at their birth on US Soil for a President, regardless of the candidate's ethnicity.
So just what makes Ted Cruz, a jus soli born CANADIAN NATIONAL who retained his BIRTH citizenship (and for all we know STILL POSSESSES it despite claiming only months ago he would junk it) as being in any way eligible to the U.S. Presidency? Nothing.
In fact, by example, we have the ineligibility of F.D.R. Jr. to guide us on the matter. The N. Y. Times, May 26, 1949, p. 26, columns 3 - 4, by legal example demonstrated that legally Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., third son of the late President, “never can carry that great name back into the White House” since his birth on August 17, 1914, was at Campobello Island, New Brunswick, Canada, home of a Roosevelt Canadian summer estate.
In 1787 and then in March of 1791, when the Constitution went into effect, the voting citizenry were males 21 and above. Hence citizen fathers age 21 and above were a requirement for any child to be a "Natural Born Citizen" at the time the Constitution was written and passed. Black Revolutionary War soldiers and free black land owners in small numbers, as well as Jews, and some Latins were were part of that voting citizenry, some being exclusively citizens of port cities like Philadelphia (though not all renounced foreign citizenships as a famous Supreme Court Case Decision in 1797, U.S. v. Villato 2 U.S. 370 supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/2/370/case.html proved).
A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN is then defined for us as being that of a Son of his Citizen Father, born to the same soil and legience of his father, and reared up and taught in the land-legience-governance of his father naturally to join that same Government on the soil of his native birth as that of his father's, until he effectually takes his place as an extension of his father as a citizen in the land of his father...so that when the father dies, the citizenship of the nation is naturally extended, and does NOT die off.
What do we mean by "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States"?
Not owing alliance to anybody else. That is what it means.
...It cannot be said of any...who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States."
If Ted Cruz was never subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at birth, then he was NEVER a Citizen who was Naturally Born exclusively as our citizen or in any way a United States Natural Born Citizen, which again is defined as or must at least encompass the definition of not owing allegiance to anybody else and completely under the jurisdiction of the United States of America only, at birth.
At Birth Ted Cruz is Canadian first, a Cuban national through is father secondly, and in a distant third, by operation of law (INA 1952) an U.S. citizen whose internationally recognized natural born citizenship rests in Cuba through his father, NOT the United States.
Question: Should the citizens of the United States have a Government and Governance that conforms to the Constitution of the United States, which in Article 6 of that document, says it is the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, or not?
Since Obama is NOT President of the United States by Operation of the Constitution of the United States, we currently have no de facto President by operation of the Constitution of the United States, but are as if on auto-pilot some kind of alien usurper and oligarchy (through him) in place, which is probably why we operate annually without orderly Congressional Budgets, and it follows that Cruz would operate under the same lawlessness and non-binding compliance to the U.S. Constitution as well as Obama operates under. Worse than that, as a second major party illegal to be POTUS under the Constitution designate (not being a U.S. Natural Born Citizen), an elected Cruz (or Rubio, or Jindal, by examples also) could be the excuse to DISSOLVE the Republic and that Constitution (with its Bill of Rights) we now have!
The Constitution expresses 5 citizen terms, of which Natural Born Citizen is the most exclusive and stringent.
In debating the Natural Born Citizen issue, very few, and I mean very few, are cognizant and mature enough to dare try to consider these legal questions, and I have yet to find one who will answer them rather than practicing libelous name-calling and temper tantrums in response.
1. Is the burden of establishing a delegation of power to the United States, or the prohibition of power to the States, upon those making the claim, (such as the President of the United States, or those aspiring to such office) as stated by 333 US 640 @ 653 Bute v. Illinois (1948), a requirement under Supreme Court ruling and the Law (that can be affirmed as so by an example of those having Article III standing and suing them) or not?
2 Is there a requirement in the Constitutional Article specified as 2.1.5 in which a Natural Born Citizen, and those seeking the Presidency of the United States, have sole allegiance to the United States at birth?
3. Does a United States Natural Born allegiance also under a Constitution where the paternal citizenship governed the nationality of the child was in effect when it was written, does follow the condition of the nationality and citizenship of the child’s father at birth or not? And if the claim if no longer, where is the Constitutional Amendment that alters or denies what the founders intended, as there is NO Amendment that states anywhere that a Citizen Mother can give birth to a Natural Born Citizen of the United States in or out of the United States with an alien father, and alter what the Constitution clearly under the laws in effect clearly forbad?
4. Is the US Constitution to be understood in the natural sense per South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S. 437 (1905) @ 448 – 450, Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U. S. 1 (1824) @ 188-189, taking also into account the influence of Vattel — even as cited in The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253(1814) @ 289-290 -on the definitions of the framers in using “natural born citizen” in place of indigenes (indigenous) as used by Vattel?
5. Does every word of the US Constitution have its due force, as stated by Holmes v. Jennison, 39 U.S. (14 Peters) 540 (1840) @ 570-71; and is the precept of interpretation of the US Constitution to this effect, where “every word [of the US Constitution] must have its due force” active in the Rule of Law in the Supreme Court of the United States as it regards the Constitutional Article 2.1.5 “natural born citizen” clause or not?
and the debate regarding the meaning behind the 14th Amendment was clearly specified in The Congressional Globe, 1st session, May 30, 1866 where Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan and Senator Trumbull of Illinois, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee concurred that “The provision is, ‘that all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof’… What do we mean by ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States’? Not owing alliance to anybody else. That is what it means.
…It cannot be said of any…who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.’ "
Ted Cruz was born in CANADA, and has a father who was a Cuban National at the time of his birth there...and was reared as a Canadian birth citizen at least 3 years in Canada, and REFUSED to renounce his Canadian citizenship before 18 and before age 21. How can an alien born alien citizen claim to be Naturally part of the United States when the 90% of the world's nations recognize paternal power governing foreign births, and a Treaty with Canada places limitations and restrictions upon the child? Further, Cruz fails the Wong Kim Ark test of sole birth and sole claim of citizenship to the U.S. only as well as fails even the most basic 14th Amendment Section 1 intent at the time that was passed AFTER the Civil War. It would be like saying any animal or plant which is indigenous to an alien country (pick any country around the world by example here), and then magically it is no longer alien but natural born and indigenous to the US, even if it doesn't naturally grow there, so long as you added USA produced Miracle Gro to the seedling, and then claim the soil the seed was found in gave it rights to be called indigenous to a country it was not natural for the seed to be a part of.
“ It is indispensible too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States; or a citizen at the adoption of the constitution, and for 14 years before his election. This permission of a naturalized citizen [to speak of those to who fought the Revolutionary War] to become President is an exception from the great fundamental policy of all governments, to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils and duties."
And what was Cruz until allegedly last summer, if at all he ever gave it up? A foreign Citizen, a Canadian, who is NOT allowed to have foreign birth citizenship into his 40s et cetera and be able to run for President, because such a one is NOT a United States Natural Born Citizen but one who by definition will have foreign influence weaved into executive councils and duties. If his father was a World War II Austrian Nazi who served in the SS for 8 years of distinguished service, and his mother was an American Citizen, though born in Canada, I seriously doubt any in America's Media and Conservative Right would be so blindly defending a Heinrich Mayer who operated under the same citizenship circumstances as a Ted Cruz as having the right to announce his candidacy to run for POTUS (President of the United States). In such a circumstance, you think such a comparison was a no brainer and a slam dunk. For almost ALL Cruz supporters, that is NOT the case...and short of mass hypnosis, why the mass stubborn stupidity?
The term Natural Born Citizen isn't just a term thrown out there, it has a purpose that was intensely debated and worded so as to protect us from foreign influence, be they British, Papal, or anything else foreign born and having foreign favor to first over that of the PEOPLE of the United States of America.
"It is never to be forgotten that in the construction of the language of the Constitution here relied on, as indeed in all other instances where construction becomes necessary, we are to place ourselves as nearly as possible in the condition of the men who framed that instrument."
" ...the enlightened patriots who framed our Constitution, and the people who adopted it, must be understood to have employed words in their natural sense, and to have intended what they have said. If, from the imperfection of human language, there should be serious doubts respecting the extent of any given power, it is a well settled rule that the objects for which it was given, especially when those objects are expressed in the instrument itself, should have great influence in the construction."
Ted Cruz was NOT born in the United States of parents who were its citizens, and therefore is NOT a United States Natural Born Citizen.
and whose birth in Kenya was repeated as affirmed especially when Obama was first elected to the U.S. Senate web.archive.org/web/20040627142700/eastandard.net/headlines/news26060403.htm ...then since the Dems have their own illegal and usurper in open defiance of the U.S. Constitution in office under color of the "race card" as their "authority", the Republicans might as well have their own Bilderburger spouse controlled illegal up next to hand away this Republic and finalize its destruction into international obscurity as a world power "that once was" and will be no more? Hell NO! Let's stop illegals from aspiring to the Presidency regardless of race or skin color NOW! Obama needs to be voided, and Cruz needs to have his U.S. Citizenship claims revoked and have his treasonous ( ) kicked back to Canada where his birth citizenship rests and where he belongs.
Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 U.S. 266 (1973) @ 272 "It is clear, of course, that no Act of Congress can authorize a violation of the Constitution."
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) @ 180 "... in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank.
U.S. Constitution, Article. VI. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution...."
The Law is equal for all, regardless of race, color, creed, or what have you. Rubio and Jindal are also unqualified for POTUS, just so you know. No U.S. Citizen Father at the time of birth, no U.S. soil birth also, no Constitutionality to run for POTUS...this is for everybody. But I would sure appreciate it if Steve can either evaluate and make America aware of Cruz's mass hypnosis tactics at the very least. Thanks.
You bring up mass hypnosis techniques and I fail to see why anyone should concentrate or focus on Ted Cruz's use of the technique when every evening on the news and every politician on the national level, and every advertisement uses some variation of the same techniques.
Next, since nothing was done about Obama and the precedent is set, I fail to see why Cruz should be held to a standard that for nearly 8 years has been ignored by our Congress, courts and public.
And lastly, you're obviously working for one of the other candidates or you would not be posting such a comprehensive review. I suggest it would be more beneficial to extol the virtue of your candidate and uncloak yourself rather than to post this boorish review. Are we really supposed to be offended or shocked that Cruz used well tested and often used political techniques in a political speech?
Thanks for posting excerpts of the speech. I had not heard it, and from reading what you have posted, I can only say that Cruz gave a hell of a speech. You have all the earmarks of a Bush supporter. Am I wrong?
I used to verbally support both George Bush's. I have since come to realize George W. BETRAYED the U.S. and committed treason during his second term, especially in his purposeful failure to vet Obama while taking a heavy gold necklace from Saudi Arabia. Could there be a Masonic Cultic connection where those above the 33rd degree are commanded, that "even if a brother commit murder or treason, you will shelter them, aid them, and protect them...you will use all influences and powers in your possession in the world of men...you will not submit to actions of dullcare in the defense of your brother though he has committed treason or killed not one of our own...you will not let any capture or kill them" or words to this effect? For revealing such language, that's supposed to be a death sentence...but since I am not a member, oh well. I view Jeb with the same disdain as his brother George W.. So the answer is no, I am NOT a Jeb Bush supporter. To say I work for a candidate of any kind has no grounds, and absolutely FALSE on your part to so accuse me of. If you find an open conspiracy by members of both parties boorish, then by all means, DON"T read Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton's favorite author, who reveals how that both parties are becoming undistinguished from one another. Edmund Burke once wrote that such a merger to where major parties are indistinguishable would doom any republic within a century. Perhaps we are on a much faster track than that.
Let me reply with an article that Devvy Kidd put out on News with the Views as to why people want Cruz to get a likewise pass, and what a Cruz disqualification might aid us in doing.
Once again another battle rages that should have been addressed in 2008 when the criminal impostor in the White House, Barack Obama (Known aliases: Barry Soetoro, Barry Dunham, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham), who also lied on his Illinois Bar Application when he said he has never used another name was allegedly elected. The usurper was/is using Barack Obama then but his friends at Occidental College knew him only as Barry Soetoro. Barack Obama was simply made up by the pathological liar at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Instead of addressing Barry's ineligibility back then, the criminal enterprise went all the way to submission of the electoral college vote to the Outlaw Congress on January 9, 2009. Every member of that body of politicians sat mute - Ron Paul - all of them - and allowed the electoral college vote to stand. When the usurper ran again in 2012 and allegedly won (which would not have been possible without all the vote fraud in both elections), once again all of them - both parties- allowed Barry Soetoro to steal the office of president.
On January 14, 2009, Chief Justice Roberts had cases on the docket where Barry Soetoro was the defendant or was the subject of the litigation. Roberts and the other eight justices had already held two 'Distribution for Conferences' on the Donofrio and Wrotnoski cases on Obama's citizenship ineligibility; there were others also ignored by the 'high' court.
On the date above Roberts meets with the man at the heart of that case, Soetoro, in private. Two days later,Roberts sat down to discuss the case with the other justices after having a closed door meeting with the defendant! There was still the Lightfoot v Bowen case to be heard in conference, January 23, 2009. Again, Chief Justice Roberts was to sit in that private meeting to discuss whether the case should go to oral arguments. In my lifetime I have never seen such in your face shenanigans by a member of the U.S. 'Supreme' Court.
“We're evading that one,” answered Thomas, referring to questions of presidential eligibility and prompting laughter in the chamber."
Yeah, that's real funny, Clarence. The U.S. Supreme Court is evading the eligibility issue. So, Clarence, why didn't you just come out in 2008 with Leo's case and the others and say: "Hey - we're going to evade the eligibility issue so don't waste your time and money."?
The reason why Ted Cruz must be declared eligible is because if he isn't eligible then neither is the criminal impostor in the White House.
Barry Soetoro's father was a foreign national on U.S. soil. He had not applied for citizenship and in fact, there was question as to whether or not he should be allowed to stay in the U.S., as his personal behavior was in the slutty category. Soetoro's mother was a natural born citizen. Soetoro was born with dual citizenship and no amount of political high jinx and lies can change that fact. He was and always will be constitutionally ineligible to be president of this country.
Ted Cruz's mother is a natural born citizen. His father was a foreign national in the U.S. with Cuban citizenship; he finally became a U.S. citizen in 2005. Ted Cruz was born with dual citizenship: Cuban and American. No different than Soetoro.
But, Cruz has taken the position that 'natural born' means he can change his citizenship at age 44 (he will be 45 in December) and magically turn himself into a natural born citizen. Well, Ted, it doesn't work that way. Natural born means when you're born. This doesn't seem to matter to Cruz or some of his ardent supporters. I tried to find the interview conducted at one of Cruz's events a couple of years ago, but was unsuccessful. The reporter ask one of Cruz's supporters about his eligibility. The woman replied, "We don't care. We want him as president." Does that make her any different than the ethically bankrupt who have supported the fraudulent stealing of the office of president by Soetoro? It does not. That Cruz supporter is just as willing to crap on the Constitution as Barry's supporters.
Gov. Bobby Jindal is not a natural born citizen as proclaimed in this piece: "They arrived Feb 1, 1971, and a bit over four months later, on June 10, 1971, Piyush Jindal was born at Woman's Hospital in Baton Rouge, a natural-born U.S. citizen, who like every other child born in America, could, constitutionally, grow up to be president."
Jindal's mother was five months pregnant when they arrived on U.S. soil and obtained green cards. Neither of his parents were either natural born or U.S. citizens at the time of his birth. I believe Jindal became a U.S. citizen via the fraudulent 'anchor baby' bastardization of the Fourteenth Amendment. His parents were not illegals since they obtained green cards, but they were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.
The same situation exists for Marco Rubio who is rumored to announce throwing his hat into the ring on April 13th. Rubio also doesn't give a damn about the constitution. He has simply brushed off the legal fact that he is constitutionally ineligible. Rubio was born in May 1971 in Miami, Florida. His parents did not become U.S. citizens until November 1975 - four years after his birth. Rubio's parents were naturalized in 1975, so neither of his parents were U.S. citizens at the time of his birth. I believe Rubio, like Jindal, became a U.S. citizen via the fraudulent 'anchor baby' myth.
The stealing of the presidency beginning in 2008 was breathtaking in scope. I doubt the majority of adult aged Americans in this country have any idea of just what went on to get Barry and McCain declared constitutionally eligible. This piece is a must read because it factually lays out how an ineligible candidate was able to usurp the office of president. This piece is long, but read it over lunch, coffee in the morning or on the weekend: A Congressional Natural Born Citizen Parts I, II & III: Who Knew What & For How Long?
There are dozens more which all chirp the same story line: one parent a U.S. citizen. However, that is not the definition of a natural born citizen. In some of the pieces above you'll see reliance on the Fourteenth Amendment and the 1790 Naturalization Act which are covered in the next set of links below. We know the nearly 100 eligibility cases filed to stop Barry/Obama from stealing the White House were dismissed and never heard on the merits of the argument: who is a natural born citizen? The Outlaw Congress, every damn one of them unleashed the horror of Barack Obama on this country because of their cowardice or in the case of the ethically bankrupt Democratic/Commnist Party minions - they knew they could use the race card to get that waste of oxygen in the White House on the ballot.
Historical and legal analysis: Natural Born at Birth (Dec 2008) - This is a lengthy piece by Leo, but the research is impeccable and the only way we are going to stop ineligible candidates is with hard facts.
The articles below are not filled with speculation or the "my candidate" syndrome meaning I don't care what the U.S. Constitution says. They all deal with historical facts. They are by no means the only ones, but I feel clearly cover in-depth why Cruz, Rubio and Jindal are not constitutionally eligible. Since this is a problem not likely to go away (Cruz is running despite knowing he will be in the same fight as Barry Soetoro over his eligibility and is counting on media like FOX to give him cover) it is imperative Americans and that means big shot anchors like Hannity, O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly and the rest of them that crushed Obama's ineligibility learn the real definition of natural born citizen. Ted Cruz's children can run for president because Cruz is a U.S. citizen. I do not believe Rubio or Jindal's children can since both of them were born to parents holding only green cards and no flavor of citizenship. I could be wrong; I'm sure my email box will fill up.
I know everyone has time issues, but unless Cruz and Rubio are stopped and if one of them should get elected, we might as well just burn the U.S. Constitution. The reason the framers grand fathered in the natural born citizen clause was to ensure a president's first loyalty would be to our constitutional republic. One can see just where Barry/Obama stands on that issue. No president in the history of this country has hated America more than the current occupant of the White House and done so much to destroy her. I have no doubt whatsoever that Cruz and Rubio do love America, but if they get away with becoming president it will mean anyone can hold that office just like the unvetted criminal in the White House. Do we want another Barry/Obama down the road?
We need to focus on the states right now getting them to stand firm against the Outlaw Congress and the usurper in the White House. When the time comes - if and it's a big if - any of those three were to get the GOP nomination, I hope lawsuits are brought in as many states as possible to keep them off the ballot. As we know from the nearly 100 lawsuits to keep the criminal impostor in the WH off the ballot, suing the Secretary of State is a waste of time and money because all the judges involved were and are cowards. Almost all of the cases were filed after the habitual liar in the White House took office. The judges weren't going to touch throwing the impostor president out of office.
No, the target would be the Republican National Committee for putting forth a candidate on state ballots who is constitutionally ineligible. It's fraud - just like the Democratic/Communist Party USA did in 2008. Maybe even a RICO lawsuit. In the meantime, Cruz and his mouth pieces are trying to deflect away from the issue and I suspect Rubio will do the same. You might send each of them a short letter: You're not constitutionally eligible; both parents must be U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth and we will file lawsuits to keep you off the ballot. Just maybe they will drop out of the race. Can't raise enough money, don't want to lose their powerful seats in the Senate, some excuse to evade the real issue.
I must mention Donald Trump here because he's stuck his foot in his mouth, again. He's on the eligibility issue going after Cruz being born in Canada instead of the meat of the issue: both parents being U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth. I wish he'd shut his trap because all he's doing is distracting people instead of educating them on what natural born really means.
And so the big lie, one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated against the people of this country stays in place because (1) Republicans want the White House in 2016 and (2) as I said, to declare Cruz ineligible would cause a massive constitutional crisis: a usurper is sitting in the Oval Office and any laws, EO, treaties or other legal documents he signed are null and void - and they are - every last one of them.
2 - Text of A resolution recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
In 1789, if you read David Ramsay, you will note that VOTING CITIZENS, or men above the age of 21, gave their children the right to be Natural Born Citizens. Without a U.S. Citizen Father, it is impossible to have any child born as a United States Natural Born Citizen. The 14th Amendment debates specifically tell us that the MINIMAL INTENT of a 14th Amendment Section 1 citizen, which is not as stringent as a United States Natural Born Citizen, is that there was to be one sole nationality and jurisdiction upon the child born in the way specified to reach its threshold, and that is something that both Cruz and Obama have in common of violating. Without a U.S. Citizen father at the time of birth, as is the case with Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal, there can be NO CLAIM of U.S. Natural Born Citizenship under the Constitution of the United States. A claim of co-citizenship or dual-citizenship under current immigration and naturalization laws governing anchor-babies, yes; but NOT natural born citizenship as the father could just as easily pack it up as a resident and move back to the country where they belong. Further, both Cruz and Obama violated U.S. Laws in not denouncing foreign citizenship by the age of 21.
The level of mass hypnosis techniques to direct people to mindlessly follow along, rather than behavioral advertising techniques, has never been used on the scale it is being used currently. Most people, like in George Orwell's "1984" go thumpa-thump-thump moving to the rhythm, not caring what they are being fed to believe. The same is with so many today. So many will not care about the lyrics, they want a certain primitive beat as if dumb natives working themselves into a state of altered consciousness. And it is in that state, that they can be manipulated, molded, directed, controlled in ways they have no idea of and probably never will. And why should we continue to do right?
Edmund Burke, Speech at a County Meeting of Buckinghamshire (1784).
And in stating a summary of much of what Burke writes about, an 1867 lecture once famously may be the starting point as to attributing this summary of Edmund Burke's work as if it were a single quote: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Again, regarding Ted Cruz's illegitimacy to run.
Vattel states what amounts to be a rebuke of Ted Cruz's and Obama's birth conditions, making the claim of their illegitimacy open.
Interviewer: “At that point, Cruz reiterated his main concern, so it was obvious the conversation was over as far as Cruz was concerned. I thanked him for his time and wished him success in the runoff.” "
“Two citizen parents and born on the soil.” That is, two citizen parents of the country you are born in, and being born on that same soil your parents are citizens of, so that it is only NATURAL (not by operation of law or any means of decision on your part) that you are its born citizen as if a citizen of and only of and forever in that one nation as having only that one citizenship. Period.
And now, what? His wife Heidi and the Council on Foreign Relations gave him an interview and told him, what, "Ah...the Constitution constismuushion. The hell with it. Ah, skip that. You want to run? We'll make it happen. Just know you are beholden to us, and you know what we want after we get you in, or else." Was that it?
I'll tell ya...when it comes to Cruz, some of you guys put the blinders on, refuse to do your homework, and then call others crazy for being more intelligent and rational. Maybe attacking the rational and intelligent is just one more outward symptom which shows how decadent and fallen our society has become, let alone shows by example what damage our intentionally poor and purposely misguided public education system has for fruition to claim as its own.
Does it bother anyone that all these politicians are Zionists? And if it does strike concern, why do you think it is this way?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.