Category Archives: Americans

April housing starts, Media lies and reports anything but truth to prop up Obama, Housing report dismal to correlate with horrible jobs and economic data, Single family starts 61 percent of 2007 levels, 41 percent of Bush presidency best

April housing starts, Media lies and reports anything but truth to prop up Obama, Housing report dismal to correlate with horrible jobs and economic data, Single family starts 61 percent of 2007 levels, 41 percent of Bush presidency best

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

 

“Why does the mainstream media continue to protect Obama and lie to the American people?”…Citizen Wells

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

You have to believe that the folks producing the reports in the mainstream media about the economy and in this case housing starts, are not as stupid as they appear.

It is all about protecting Obama and the hell with the facts.

You have probably read or heard the exciting news, which further stimulated the financial markets, about the big jump in housing starts in April. The so called 20 percent increase.

Here is the truth.

First from Zero Hedge.

“Following two ugly months of dramatically missed expectations, Housing Starts exploded to ‘recovery’ highs (highest since Nov 2007) jumping 20.2% MoM to 1.135million (against 1.015 exp.).”

“Well these huge mal-investment spikes make perfect sense in light of the collapse in lumber prices (and thus demand).”

HousingStartsLumber

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-19/housing-starts-surge-highest-nov-2007-permits-7-year-highs

Hold that thought.

Here is the report.

“NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IN APRIL 2015
The U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development jointly announced the following new residential
construction statistics for April 2015:”

“HOUSING STARTS
Privately-owned housing starts in April were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,135,000. This is 20.2 percent (±14.4%) above the
revised March estimate of 944,000 and is 9.2 percent (±10.6%)* above the April 2014 rate of 1,039,000.
Single-family housing starts in April were at a rate of 733,000; this is 16.7 percent (±10.6%) above the revised March figure of 628,000.
The April rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 389,000.”

http://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/pdf/newresconst.pdf

Let’s examine it.

First, the 20 percent increase was for privately owned which includes single and multi family. We all know that rentals are where the action is since fewer people are able to afford homes, especially millenials.

The single family increase was 16.7 percent, but hold on:

A. The increase was over March which had dropped significantly.
B. There is a statistical sampling error of +- 10.6 percent.
C. The single family starts was 733,000.
D. That is 61 percent of the April 2007 figure of 1,197,000.
E. That is 41 percent of the best number for the Bush presidency in Nov. 2005 of 1,808,000.

HousingStarts

The thought I asked you to hold above.

Revealed by Zero Hedge about lumber prices and futures.

Supply and demand.

Lumber prices.

LumberPrices

From Reuters May 18, 2015.

“U.S. home builder sentiment slips in May: NAHB”

“Consumers are exhibiting caution, and want to be on more stable financial footing before purchasing a home,” NAHB Chief Economist David Crowe said in a statement.”

“The single-family home sales component fell to 59 from 61 in April. The gauge of single-family sales expectations for the next six months rose to 64 from a revised 63, while prospective buyer traffic fell to 39 from a revised 40.”

Read more:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/18/us-usa-economy-housing-nahb-idUSKBN0O31EY20150518

 

 

US Constitution subordinated to outdated historical document and irrelevance, Constitution negated by highest levels of government media and apathy, Vast majority of people just don’t give a damn

US Constitution subordinated to outdated historical document and irrelevance, Constitution negated by highest levels of government media and apathy, Vast majority of people just don’t give a damn

“Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise
that it will last; but nothing in this world is certain but death and
taxes.”…Benjamin Franklin

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patroits to prevent its ruin”…Samuel Adams, 1776

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

 

At the end of the day, all we have to protect us from tyranny is the US Constitution and our resolve.

How many of us realize that?

From the First Rebuttal May 4, 2015.

“I find it shocking how often I have people tell me the Constitution is out of date and is no longer relevant or necessary. Then there are the vast majority of people that think about the Constitution the same way they think about religion; it makes us feel good to believe in it and we’ll even worship it on a holiday or two The reality is that those who seem to get very worked up to the point that they are willing to act in defense of the Constitution even against the highest levels of government make up a very small minority of Americans. This is a real problem.

You see if people gave a damn the government couldn’t get away with negating the Constitution. But the vast majority of people just don’t give a damn and so the government very easily provides ridiculous and false legal sounding arguments to explain away why they have become a higher law than the Constitution. Now I’ve tried to understand why it is that we Americans are so damn apathetic about everything the government and government officials do.

Let me give a couple examples for which our apathy just boggles my mind. We know they took us into wars on false pretenses resulting in the wrongful deaths of thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and yet we’ve prosecuted no one. Hell they’ve admitted to hacking into millions of our home webcams and downloading videos and pictures of us in our most private moments and maintaining those downloads on government servers and then sharing these files with foreign governments.

But because today’s American is simply a shell of a citizen none of the criminal atrocities creates even a stir from us. Sure we all read about these atrocities and we are angered in the moment but it passes rather quickly and we fall back into our self induced ignorant bliss. Only two things can get Americans to formidably rise up. The first is a very direct and immediate impediment to our comfort. For example try cutting back on the monthly social welfare checks. You’ll have riots. The second way is if the mainstream media relentlessly instructs us to be upset about a particular issue. Outside of that there is absolutely nothing the new American won’t move past like water off a duck’s back.

What we’re finding out is that, and it sounds slightly over-dramatic but isn’t at all, unless we are wiling to fight and die to win back the freedom our forefather’s fought and died to secure for us and all future generations we will continue to feel our chains grow heavier and shorter. The simple reason is because our government is very much willing to kill to keep its ever encroaching control. A free population is the antithesis to a political class. And make no mistake the American federal government is the largest and most powerful group of aristocrats the world has known.

This group of traitors (and I mean that in the very technical sense of the word) not only behave according to a separate set of laws they have actually gone so far as to legislate a separate set of laws. This in itself is a direct breach of the very Constitution they swear to defend. Their intent is clear and that my friends is treason. They are directly negating the very basis of the American concept for their own personal self interest and they are doing so by defrauding American citizens into believing their intent is to represent the will of their constituents. Treason, Treason, Treason! What else would you call it?

Now are you ready to fight and die to win the freedoms back for your children and grandchildren? Hell No! No, not at all! And that’s kinda the problem because again the government is willing to kill to ensure your kids and grandkids don’t have the freedoms Americans were guaranteed. The fuck of it is Americans have become so damn brainwashed that despite the founding fathers telling us explicitly our government would end up enslaving the rest of us to solidify their own power and wealth we ignore it. These were the guys that figured out the British were effectively enslaving us and decided to rise against it and create the greatest damn nation the world has ever known. They literally created fucking America!!! I mean holy shit, imagine having that on your CV. And we pay them no mind, like they’re bat shit crazy and not relevant in our intellectual new world.

Today’s legislators rarely discuss the founding fathers or the Constitution beyond the very thin idea that they know we expect them to defend it. That is, like freedom and apple pie, they love it during the campaign cycle. However, ask them why then they continue to legislate against the Constitution and well they don’t want to talk about the Constitution anymore. And we the people ,like apathetic morons, buy into the bullshit they feed us because we simply don’t care. It’s to the point they can pretty much do anything knowing they can bullshit us with any damn nonsense that pops into their swollen heads. And so they do things like hack into our webcams, take nude pictures of us and send them to foreign governments and tell us it’s for our own good. We don’t give a shit because 1. it doesn’t impede our immediate comfort and 2. the press isn’t telling us it’s something to be concerned about.

The danger of being apathetic until it impacts our immediate day to day is that we allow the government to take away all the freedoms we are not currently using. What I mean by that is we so far have not had to face what it means to be powerless and in chains. But only because we haven’t yet ventured out far enough so as to reach the end of our chains. Like a sleeping dog that isn’t aware he’s been shackled until he wakes and tries to chase a bird, we are asleep and unaware of the shackles placed around our ankles.

Some will say “wait, it isn’t apathy it is a trade off between safety and freedom”. But the truth is freedom and safety are not conflictual we’ve only been led to believe so. Fear has replaced freedom here in America and that is not by chance but by strategy of a government that has its own agenda, separate from its oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. So while we should have prosecuted these recent governments for treason we’ve instead rewarded them the rights of dictatorship.

The Constitution is our freedom keeper but once the Constitution is made subordinate the precedent is set and in our legal system precedence is king. The strength in the Constitution is just that, it’s strength. Once we allow an exception to the Constitution’s superseding authority it no longer has any authority. Unfortunately that exception has already been made. With it, the destruction of the Constitution and the end to a guaranty of freedom. Our corrupt government has created ‘legislation’ providing them a legal basis to imprison us without due process. This is a fact.”

Read more:

http://www.firstrebuttal.com/2015/05/04/frankly-my-dear-i-dont-give-a-damn/

 

Hat tip to Zero Hedge.

 

Downward spiral of US economy accelerates, Box stores closing correlates with consumer spending drop caused by horrible jobs situation, Internet sales factor, 30 percent of millenials living with family, Record food stamp usage and hunger

Downward spiral of US economy accelerates, Box stores closing correlates with consumer spending drop caused by horrible jobs situation, Internet sales factor, 30 percent of millenials living with family, Record food stamp usage and hunger

“There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.”…Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“In today’s labor market, there are nearly 1 million “missing” young workers—potential workers who are neither employed nor actively seeking work (and are thus not counted in the unemployment rate) because job opportunities remain so scarce. If these missing workers were in the labor market looking for work, the unemployment rate of workers under age 25 would be 18.1 percent instead of 14.5 percent.”…Economic Policy Institute May 1, 2014

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

 

Imagine a leaky toilet, a flow and ebb of water and then a flush.

That spiral of water going down the toilet is the picture I get of the US economy.

Scary.

I have been doing my best to warn of the real jobs situation, the real economy.

I know that internet sales are increasing and putting pressure on box stores, but the biggest problem now is on Main Street America and sooner or later it is going to impact Wall Street.

The real jobs situation in this country is scary and getting scarrier. Most of the jobs have been going to immigrants and many of the jobs are part time and/or lower wage.

That is why consumer spending is down, 30 percent of millenials live with family, there is record food stamp use and hunger levels are starting to be reminiscent of the Great Depression.

From Zero Hedge May 3, 2015.

“Major U.S. Retailers Are Closing More Than 6,000 Stores”

“If the U.S. economy really is improving, then why are big U.S. retailers permanently shutting down thousands of stores?  The “retail apocalypse” that I have written about so frequently appears to be accelerating.  As you will see below, major U.S. retailers have announced that they are closing more than 6,000 locations, but economic conditions in this country are still fairly stable.  So if this is happening already, what are things going to look like once the next recession strikes?  For a long time, I have been pointing to 2015 as a major “turning point” for the U.S. economy, and I still feel that way.  And since I started The Economic Collapse Blog at the end of 2009, I have never seen as many indications that we are headed into another major economic downturn as I do right now.  If retailers are closing this many stores already, what are our malls and shopping centers going to look like a few years from now?

The list below comes from information compiled by About.com, but I have only included major retailers that have announced plans to close at least 10 stores.  Most of these closures will take place this year, but in some instances the closures are scheduled to be phased in over a number of years.  As you can see, the number of stores that are being permanently shut down is absolutely staggering…

180 Abercrombie & Fitch (by 2015)

75 Aeropostale (through January 2015)

150 American Eagle Outfitters (through 2017)

223 Barnes & Noble (through 2023)

265 Body Central / Body Shop

66 Bottom Dollar Food

25 Build-A-Bear (through 2015)

32 C. Wonder

21 Cache

120 Chico’s (through 2017)

200 Children’s Place (through 2017)

17 Christopher & Banks

70 Coach (fiscal 2015)

70 Coco’s /Carrows

300 Deb Shops

92 Delia’s

340 Dollar Tree/Family Dollar

39 Einstein Bros. Bagels

50 Express (through 2015)

31 Frederick’s of Hollywood

50 Fresh & Easy Grocey Stores

14 Friendly’s

65 Future Shop (Best Buy Canada)

54 Golf Galaxy (by 2016)

50 Guess (through 2015)

26 Gymboree

40 JCPenney

127 Jones New York Outlet

10 Just Baked

28 Kate Spade Saturday & Jack Spade

14 Macy’s

400 Office Depot/Office Max (by 2016)

63 Pep Boys (“in the coming years”)

100 Pier One (by 2017)

20 Pick ’n Save (by 2017)

1,784 Radio Shack

13 Ruby Tuesday

77 Sears

10 SpartanNash Grocery Stores

55 Staples (2015)

133 Target, Canada (bankruptcy)

31 Tiger Direct

200 Walgreens (by 2017)

10 West Marine

338 Wet Seal

80 Wolverine World Wide (2015 – Stride Rite & Keds)

So why is this happening?”

“The truth is that middle class U.S. consumers are tapped out.  Most families are just scraping by financially from month to month.  For most Americans, there simply is not a whole lot of extra money left over to go shopping with these days.

In fact, at this point approximately one out of every four Americans spend at least half of their incomesjust on rent

More than one in four Americans are spending at least half of their family income on rent – leaving little money left to purchase groceries, buy clothing or put gas in the car, new figures have revealed.

 

A staggering 11.25 million households consume 50 percent or more of their income on housing and utilities, according to an analysis of Census data by nonprofit firm, Enterprise Community Partners.

 

And 1.8 million of these households spend at least 70 percent of their paychecks on rent.

 

The surging cost of rental housing has affected a rising number of families since the Great Recession hit in 2007. Officials define housing costs in excess of 30 percent of income as burdensome.”

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-02/major-us-retailers-are-closing-more-6000-stores

 

 

Ted Cruz by law not US citizen at birth, Not natural born citizen, Cruz lied, US Citizenship and Immigration Services, 1 US citizen parent and not born after November 14, 1986

Ted Cruz by law not US citizen at birth, Not natural born citizen, Cruz lied, US Citizenship and Immigration Services, 1 US citizen parent and not born after November 14, 1986

“According to the  US Citizenship and Immigration Services Ted Cruz was not a US citizen at birth and consequently not a natural born citizen.”…Citizen Wells

“no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”…US Constitution

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Ted Cruz is a graduate of Harvard Law School.

He must have known the truth.

I, like Donald Trump, had good teachers.

Therefore I have good reading comprehension skills.

But this is really simple. The law has 2 parts connected by “and.”

Why did Byron York of the Washington Examiner write this?

“Then there are the people who are born outside the United States to parents who are both American citizens, provided one of them has lived in the U.S. for any period of time. And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at least five years, at least two of them after age 14.”

“That last category covers Cruz, making him a citizen at birth. Last year, Theodore Olson, the former Bush solicitor general who successfully defended John McCain in a 2008 lawsuit alleging McCain was ineligible to be president, told me, “My conclusion would be that if you are a citizen as a consequence of your birth, that’s a natural-born citizen.”  That would likely be the conclusion of any challenge to Cruz’s eligibility, as well.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/spokesman-senator-cruz-is-a-u.s.-citizen-by-birth/article/2523832

REALLY??

From Citizen News March 30, 2015.

From the US Government.

US Citizenship and Immigration Services

Citizenship Through Parents

There are two general ways to obtain citizenship through U.S. citizen parents, one at birth and one after birth but before the age of 18.  The term “parents” includes:  the genetic father, the genetic mother, and the non-genetic gestational mother, if she is the legal parent at the time of birth under the law of the relevant jurisdiction.  For more information, seeUSCIS Policy Manual guidance on Children of U.S. Citizens.

There are two general ways to obtain citizenship through parents, one at birth and one after birth but before the age of 18. For more information, see USCIS Policy Manual guidance on Children of U.S. Citizens.

Citizenship at Birth for Children Born Outside the U.S. and its Territories

For information on who qualifies as a “child” for citizenship purposes, see USCIS Policy Manual guidance on Children of U.S. Citizens.

In a general, a Child Born Outside the U.S. is a Citizen at Birth when the Child’s Parents Are Married to each other at the Time of Birth IF… AND…
Both parents are U.S. citizens at the time of birth, At least one parent lived in the U.S. or its territories prior to the birth.
One parent is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth and the birthdate is on or after November 14, 1986 The U.S. citizen parent had been physically present in the U.S. or its territories for a period of at least five years at some time in his or her life prior to the birth, of which at least two years were after his or her 14thbirthday.If the U.S. citizen parent spent time abroad in any of the following three capacities, this can also be counted towards the physical presence requirement:

  • Serving honorably in the U.S. armed forces;
  • Employed with the U.S. government; or
  • Employed with certain international organizations.

Additionally, time spent abroad by the U.S. citizen parent while the U.S. citizen parent was the unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person who meets any of the three conditions listed above can also be counted.

 

http://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-parents

 

Ted Cruz had 1 US citizen parent but was not born after November 14, 1986.

Cruz became a citizen after birth.

Cornell Law School.

“Natural born citizen

A phrase denoting one of the requirements for becoming President or Vice-President of the United States. Anyone born after the adoption of the U.S. Constitution in 1787 must be a “natural born Citizen” of the United States to constitutionally fill the office of President or Vice-President. See U.S. Const. art. II, § 1; id. at amend. XII.

Some debate exists as to the meaning of this phrase. Consensus exists that anyone born on U.S. soil is a “natural born Citizen.” One may also be a “natural born Citizen” if, despite a birth on foreign soil, U.S. citizenship immediately passes from the person’s parents.”

Ted Cruz did not immediately receive citizenship on birth from parents and is NOT a natural born citizen.

Case closed!

http://citizenwells.net/2015/03/30/ted-cruz-not-us-citizen-at-birth-cruz-lied-not-natural-born-citizen-us-citizenship-and-immigration-services-1-us-citizen-parent-and-not-born-after-november-14-1986/

Once again, that’s an “and” 

 

 

 

Ted Cruz Obama eligibility, Natural born citizens?, Cruz approval protects Obama, 1 US citizen parent, Language of constitution citizen parents, Cruz born in Canada, Obama born ???

Ted Cruz Obama eligibility, Natural born citizens?, Cruz approval protects Obama, 1 US citizen parent, Language of constitution citizen parents, Cruz born in Canada, Obama born ???

“The Founding Fathers wouldn’t recognize America today….The Constitution has been tossed on the same trash pile as the Bible.”…Amazon description of Cheryl Chumley book “Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare is Becoming our Reality”

“no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”…US Constitution

“‘It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words. Of course the great wastage is in the verbs and adjectives, but there are hundreds of nouns that can be got rid of as well…..In the end the whole notion of goodness and badness will be covered by only six words — in reality, only one word. Don’t you see the beauty of that, Winston? It was B.B.’s idea originally, of course,’ he added as an afterthought.”…George Orwell “1984”

 

 

Ted Cruz was born in Canada.

We do not know where Obama was born.

There is zero proof that Obama was born in the US.

Cruz and Obama had 1 US citizen parent. That creates a problem with the natural born citizen requirement of the US Constitution.

Many of the Obama eligibilty challenges beginning in 2008 were based on a lack of a authentic birth certificate proving birth in the US. The image presented on WhiteHouse.gov, even if it came from Hawaii does not prove US birth.

Some of the eligibility challenges were based on the requirement of 2 US citizen parents and birth on US soil.

CDR Charles F. Kerchner filed a lawsuit against Obama on January 21, 2009.

“47. Hence, at the time of his birth on August 4, 1961, Obama was born to a U.S.
citizen mother but not a U.S. citizen father.
48. Under the definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen,” Obama therefore
cannot be a “natural born Citizen.” Endnote 9.”

“9. The origins of the term “natural born Citizen’ and inclusion in the Constitution can be traced to a 1787 letter from John Jay to George Washington. This specifically speaks about the reason for requiring the President to be a “natural born Citizen.” It was believed that there would be less of a chance to have foreign influences put upon the President and Commander in Chief of our Army (military forces) if the person serving as the President is a “natural born citizen”, i.e., being born on U.S. soil and being second generation via both his parents also being U.S. citizens. There thus would be no claim on the President from any foreign power and he would have no relatively recent allegiance
and influence via family to a foreign power or from family living in a foreign country.
Being a “natural born citizen” dramatically reduces the likelihood of such foreign
influence. That is why John Jay, who was a major writer in The Federalist Papers which were critical in the ratification process of getting the Constitution approved, requested that the term be inserted into our Constitution. He was one of the founders who was very concerned about foreign influences being exerted on our new nation, especially on the President and Commander in Chief of the Army. He was not concerned about the loyalties of existing “original citizens” of the new country because they had openly fought for independence. And that is why the Article II grandfather clause is in there for them. But John Jay was very concerned about foreign influences on future Presidents and Commander in Chiefs. Thus he wrote the letter to General Washington. Washington
agreed and had the clause put in the Constitution and the delegates agreed and approved it and the “We the People” of those days voted for it and ratified it. And it can only be changed now by a new amendment by today’s “We the People.” Jay would have obtained the term “natural born Citizen” from the leading legal treatise of those times, The Law of Nations (1758), E. Vattel, Book 1, Chapter 19, Section 212. This work was read not only by the Founding Fathers but was also well-known throughout the colonies among the general population. Jay frequently cited this treatise in his writings.
Additionally, the term “Law of Nations” is mentioned in the Constitution itself in Article I, Section 8 (defining piracy). There are also many references to The Law of Nations in The Federalist Papers, for the writers relied upon authors such as Vattel, among others.
The Journal of Legal History, Volume 23, Issue 2, August 2002, pages 107 – 128.”

H. Brooke Paige challenged Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen in the Vermont Supreme Court.

“Mr. Paige, for example was aware of the Venus Cranch case of 1814 in which Justice Livingstone quoted the entire 212nd paragraph of Vattel and stated:

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…”

This contradicts the Vermont state attorney who attempted to marginalize Vattel’s description of natural born citizen and portray it as antiquated.”

https://citizenwells.com/2013/05/19/vermont-obama-eligibility-challenge-update-may-19-2013-h-brooke-paige-appeal-in-vt-supreme-court-awaiting-decisions-on-multiple-issues-obama-not-natural-born-citizen/

There are 2 important concepts from the above cases.

1. It was clearly understood at the time the Constitution was written that in this country natural born citizen meant a child born on US soil to 2 US citizen parents.

2. That the requirement of natural born citizen has not been changed by an amendment. You are being bombarded by misinformation about this law and that law affecting the natural born citizen requirement but nothing has changed it since the Constitution was ratified. This was noted in Hassan v FEC;

 “Because the natural born citizen requirement has not been explicitly or implicitly repealed, Hassan’s challenge to that provision, and the Fund Act’s incorporation thereof, must fail.”

From Mario Apuzzo:

“Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines a Natural Born Citizen in 1789″
“In defining an Article II “natural born Citizen,” it is important to find any authority from the Founding period who may inform us how the Founders and Framers themselves defined the clause. Who else but a highly respected historian from the Founding period itself would be highly persuasive in telling us how the Founders and Framers defined a “natural born Citizen. ” Such an important person is David Ramsay, who in 1789 wrote, A Dissertation on the Manners of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of a Citizen (1789), a very important and influential essay on defining a “natural born Citizen.”

https://citizenwells.com/2015/03/25/glenn-beck-comedy-show-wnd-media-lie-about-natural-born-citizen-and-constitution-citizens-not-eligible-ted-cruz-eligibilty-in-question-founder-and-historian-david-ramsay-defines-natural-born-citize/

You are being led to believe that “legal experts” are in agreement on the definition of natural born citizen (refer to numerous orwellian references at Citizen Wells)

That is simply not so!

John McCain had 2 US citizen parents.

However,

From the Michigan Law Review August 13, 2008.

Gabriel J. Chin, U of California, Davis, School of Law.

“Although he is now a U.S. citizen, the law in effect in 1936 did not grant him citizenship at birth. Because he was not born a citizen, he is not eligible to the office of president.”

“II. Natural Born Citizenship as a Child of Citizens”

“According to the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the
Constitution “contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth
and naturalization.” Unless born in the United States, a person “can only
become a citizen by being naturalized . . . by authority of congress, exercised
either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the
enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or
by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens . . . .” A person
granted citizenship by birth outside the United States to citizen parents is
naturalized at birth; he or she is both a citizen by birth and a naturalized
citizen. This last point is discussed thoroughly in Jill A. Pryor’s 1988 note in
the Yale Law Journal, The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential
Eligibility: An Approach for Resolving Two Hundred Years of Uncertainty.”

“Since Senator McCain became a citizen in his eleventh month of life, he does not satisfy this criterion, is not a natural born citizen, and thus is not “eligible to the Office of President.”

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1157621

Media reports.

Here are 2 of the more honest reports:

From Time June 23, 2011.

“It’s equally strange to me that a nation that was forged through immigration — and is still formed by immigration — is also a nation that makes it constitutionally impossible for someone who was not physically born here to run for President. (Yes, the framers had their reasons for that, but those
reasons have long since vanished.)”

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2079445,00.html

Honest but stupid: “but those reasons have long since vanished.”

Wrong!

From PolitiFact May 9, 2013.

“Is Ted Cruz eligible under the Constitution to become president?”

“When discussing McCain, the CRS report draws on immigration law and says: “The uncertainty concerning the meaning of the natural-born qualification in the Constitution has provoked discussion from time to time, particularly when the possible presidential candidacy of citizens born abroad was under consideration. There has never been any authoritative adjudication.”

“So legally, the question is unsettled. Perhaps it will be if Cruz ever becomes a presidential contender.”

http://www.politifact.com/ohio/article/2013/may/09/ted-cruz-eligible-under-constitution-become-presid/

Something happened from 2013 to 2015.

Now Ted Cruz can be legally challenged on his natural born citizen status.

On  August 12, 2013 Cheryl Chumley wrote the following:

“Donald Trump, staunch birther: ‘Nobody knows’ yet where Obama was born”

“The two then discussed the birthplace of Sen. Ted Cruz, who’s been talked about as a potential GOP frontrunner for the White House in 2016. Mr. Cruz was born in Canada, which would make him ineligible for the office under the provisions of the Constitution.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/12/donald-trump-nobody-knows-yet-where-obama-was-born/

On March 24, 2015, Cheryl Chumley, writing for WND, wrote the following:

“DONALD TRUMP GOES BIRTHER ON TED CRUZ”
“Section One, Article Two of the Constitution states “no person except a natural born citizen, or citizen of the United States … shall be eligible to the office of president.””
Read more:
Why did she leave out:
“at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution”
which is crucial to the statement and to differentiate between citizen and natural born citizen?
She left out 9 words.
9 very important words.
I can only think of one plausible answer.
The same conclusion you are arriving at.
 We are being bombarded with article after article stating that Ted Cruz is eligible to be president.

Why?

TO

PROTECT

OBAMA

 

 

 

 
media reports 2013 v now

Glenn Beck comedy show WND media lie about natural born citizen and Constitution, Citizens not eligible, Ted Cruz eligibilty in question, Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines Natural Born Citizen in 1789

Glenn Beck comedy show WND media lie about natural born citizen and Constitution, Citizens not eligible, Ted Cruz eligibilty in question, Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines Natural Born Citizen in 1789

“In his 1789 article, Ramsay first explained who the “original citizens” were and then defined the “natural born citizens” as the children born in the country to citizen parents.”…Attorney Mario Apuzzo

“no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”…US Constitution

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

 

At the time the US Constitution was drafted and ratified there were 2 classifications of citizens, natural born citizens and everyone else.

That is why non natural born citizens, just citizens, had to be grandfathered in to run for president.

The US Constitution states:

“no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”

There was no naturalization law and no naturalized citizens by law.

Natural born citizen was understood at the time and needed no further explanation.

However, a prominent historian and founding father, David Ramsay did, in the same year the Constitution was ratified, 1789, define natural born citizen.

From Citizen News March 25, 2015.

“Yes, the Glenn Beck Radio Show is mostly comedy. Occasionally they inject facts and outrage.
Glenn Beck once again insulted legal scholars and concerned Americans with his entertainment culture low information media use of “citizen” interchangeably with “natural born citizen.”
 “One of his parents is American. That’s all it takes. For the love of heaven, if illegal aliens can come to the America and give birth, and that birth child is a citizen, then so is Ted Cruz, for the love of heaven. Stop it!” Pat said. The Immigration and Nationality Act states that a person is a citizen by birth if they are born to a parent with U.S. citizenship, ”
Perhaps the explanation for Beck and his lackeys doing so comes from commenter JayJay.
Submitted on 2015/03/25 at 3:18 am
““no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President . . . .”
Sadly, Americans are so lacking in grammar, they don’t get the significance of the comma after ‘states’.”
Yesterday on WND, writer Cheryl Chumley omitted a crucial sentence of the US Constitution that states who is eligible to be president.
Words matter.
Especially in the US Constitution.
Especially when they define the eligibility for president of the US.
So the question is, why did Cheryl Chumley omit them?
From WND March 24, 2015.
“DONALD TRUMP GOES BIRTHER ON TED CRUZ”
“Section One, Article Two of the Constitution states “no person except a natural born citizen, or citizen of the United States … shall be eligible to the office of president.””
Read more:
Why did she leave out:
“at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution”
which is crucial to the statement and to differentiate between citizen and natural born citizen?
Much of the tone of this article is atypical for a WND article.
It resembles work from the left or “1984.”
Read the full article and let me know.
She left out 9 words.
9 very important words.
I can only think of one plausible answer.
The same conclusion you are arriving at.”
“Patriot and legal scholar Mario Apuzzo has provided some of the best information on the definition of natural born citizen from  the year the Constitution was ratified.

From Mario Apuzzo:

 

“Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines a Natural Born Citizen in 1789″
“In defining an Article II “natural born Citizen,” it is important to find any authority from the Founding period who may inform us how the Founders and Framers themselves defined the clause. Who else but a highly respected historian from the Founding period itself would be highly persuasive in telling us how the Founders and Framers defined a “natural born Citizen. ” Such an important person is David Ramsay, who in 1789 wrote, A Dissertation on the Manners of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of a Citizen (1789), a very important and influential essay on defining a “natural born Citizen.” David Ramsay (April 2, 1749 to May 8, 1815) was an American physician, patriot, and historian from South Carolina and a delegate from that state to the Continental Congress in 1782-1783 and 1785-1786. He was the Acting President of the United States in Congress Assembled. He was one of the American Revolution’s first major historians. A contemporary of Washington, Ramsay writes with the knowledge and insights one acquires only by being personally involved in the events of the Founding period. In 1785 he published History of the Revolution of South Carolina (two volumes), in 1789 History of the American Revolution (two volumes), in 1807 a Life of Washington, and in 1809 a History of South Carolina (two volumes). Ramsay “was a major intellectual figure in the early republic, known and respected in America and abroad for his medical and historical writings, especially for The History of the American Revolution (1789)…” Arthur H. Shaffer, Between Two Worlds: David Ramsay and the Politics of Slavery, J.S.Hist., Vol. L, No. 2 (May 1984). “During the progress of the Revolution, Doctor Ramsay collected materials for its history, and his great impartiality, his fine memory, and his acquaintance with many of the actors in the contest, eminently qualified him for the task….” http://www.famousamericans.net/davidramsay/.

In 1965 Professor Page Smith of the University of California at Los Angeles published an extensive study of Ramsay’s History of the American Revolution in which he stressed the advantage that Ramsay had because of being involved in the events of which he wrote and the wisdom he exercised in taking advantage of this opportunity. “The generosity of mind and spirit which marks his pages, his critical sense, his balanced judgment and compassion,” Professor Smith concluded, “are gifts that were uniquely his own and that clearly entitle him to an honorable position in the front rank of American historians.” In his 1789 article, Ramsay first explained who the “original citizens” were and then defined the “natural born citizens” as the children born in the country to citizen parents. He said concerning the children born after the declaration of independence, “[c]itizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens….” Id. at 6. He added that “citizenship by inheritance belongs to none but the children of those Americans, who, having survived the declaration of independence, acquired that adventitious character in their own right, and transmitted it to their offspring….” Id. at 7. He continued that citizenship “as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776….” Id. at 6. Here we have direct and convincing evidence of how a very influential Founder defined a “natural born citizen.” ”

http://citizenwells.net/2015/03/25/glenn-beck-wnd-media-lies-about-natural-born-citizen-and-constitution-citizens-not-eligible-ted-cruz-eligibilty-in-question-founder-and-historian-david-ramsay-defines-natural-born-citizen-in-1789/

 

Thanks to CDR Charles Kerchner for his ongoing assistance and dedication to this country.

 

 

 

Putin deposed in Russian coup?, Israeli former ambassador to Russia signs of coup, Stroke health issues dead?, Security chief general Viktor Zolotov killed?, Putin not seen in public in 10 days

Putin deposed in Russian coup?, Israeli former ambassador to Russia signs of coup, Stroke health issues dead?, Security chief general Viktor Zolotov killed?, Putin not seen in public in 10 days

 

 

From Haaretz March 15, 2015.

“Israel’s former ambassador to Russia: ‘There are signs of a coup’

Zvi Magen believes army factions or wealthy businessmen could be behind President Vladimir Putin’s disappearance.”

“Russian President Vladimir Putin was last seen in public on March 5, and in Russia there are increased fears he is the victim of an attempted coup by security organizations and the Russian army.

Israel’s former ambassador to Russia, Zvi Magen, told Haaretz he believes “there are many signs of a coup. The movement of the army around the Kremlin indicates that there is a change in government, or that an attempt at a change in government is being carried out.”

Magen believes those responsible for the potential coup are “branches or factions in the army who are working together or against one another, or wealthy businessmen, many of whom worked in these organizations. They could only be people who are free to walk around the corridors of the Kremlin.”

He says possible reasons include the ongoing sanctions imposed by the West on those close to the Kremlin, sanctions “that harm them personally. I don’t believe there’s a controversy there surrounding policy. They’re protecting their own interests.””

Read more:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/.premium-1.647001

From the Russian Monitor March 11, 2015.

(translated into English)

“Putin stroke?”

“Mail “Russian Monitor” received a letter signed by an anonymous employee of the Central Clinical Hospital of President Administration (CDB) in Moscow, in which he reported that the staff of this elite Moscow hospital to which “attributed to” the top management of the Russian Federation, circulate rumors that Vladimir Putin a few days ago was diagnosed with ischemic stroke. The source said that directly to the CDB President not hospitalized.”

http://rusmonitor.com/u-putina-insult.html

From Radio Free Europe March 15, 2015.

“News Analysis: Three Scenarios For A Succession In Russia”

“For a decade and a half, Vladimir Putin has sat at the top of a closed, hierarchical, and personality-based political system that allows for no competition.

As a result, opinion polls in Russia routinely show the public sees “no alternative” to Putin’s leadership.

So what would happen in Russia if Putin suddenly and without warning left the political stage? Over the last few days, we have seen the anxiety that even the rumor of such an event can produce in Russia and around the world. If Putin is the guarantor of stability in Russia, then does a scenario without Putin automatically imply instability — even violent instability?”

“The Constitutional Scenario”

“So if Putin unexpectedly left the scene and the constitution were followed to the letter, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev would return to the Kremlin and a competitive election would take place in three months.”

“The Consensus Scenario

Of course, such a smooth and legal transition of power is unlikely in Russia.

In Soviet times, political heavyweights wrestled behind the scenes until a successor emerged through some unfathomable communist alchemy.

More recently, when President Boris Yeltsin decided to retire, political insiders reached a consensus and produced the unimaginable candidacy of Vladimir Putin as his successor. They then used a combination of their financial, administrative, and media resources to get him elected.”

“The Conflict Scenario

But what if consensus can’t be reached?

Under Putin, the political system has become more personalized and centered around the president himself, who has balanced conflicting parties. And he has almost certainly stifled all discussion of what could or should happen in a post-Putin era.

But the divisions in Putin’s inner circle, always latent, have become more manifest with the Ukraine crisis and have intensified since the February 27 assassination of opposition figure Boris Nemtsov.

“Now the conflict between the clans has become very seriously intense,” says journalist and analyst Raf Shakirov. “It is obvious that different groups are pushing for different paths.”

The main fault line, he says, is between “hawks” who have become ascendant due to the Ukraine crisis and Russia’s showdown with the West and a “liberal group” responsible for the economy who would prefer a thaw at home and a rapprochement abroad.”

Read more:

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-succession-scenarios/26899859.html