Category Archives: Citizen

Illegal aliens are voting, Trump is right, Number is irrelevant, Podesta email reveals Democrat concern, Washington Post 2014 article, “08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters”

Illegal aliens are voting, Trump is right, Number is irrelevant, Podesta email reveals Democrat concern, Washington Post 2014 article, “08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters”

“What is your threshold for acceptable voter fraud since 1 vote can win most elections?”…Citizen Wells

“In December 2014 there were 18 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country who had arrived since January 2000. But job growth over this period was just 9.3 million — half of new immigration.”…Center for Immigration Studies February 2015

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

The Democrats continue to lie about voter fraud as being a problem and illegal aliens voting.

But they were caught expressing concern about it in a Podesta email from Wikileaks.

They believed that Obama had ineligible voters in Colorado in 2008.

“On Thursday, May 14, 2015, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com> wrote:

High importance. I met with Jim and Mike in Denver. They are both old friends of the Clintons and have lots of experience. Mike hosted our Boulder Road Show event. They are reliving the 08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters. They want to organize lawyers for caucus protection, election protection and to raise hard $.”

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3563

From the Washington Post October 24, 2014.

“Could non-citizens decide the November election?”

“In a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies, we bring real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections. Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.

Our data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, we also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that we could verify whether they actually voted.

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Estimated Voter Turnout by Non-Citizens
2008 2010
Self reported and/or verified 38 (11.3%) 13 (3.5%)
Self reported and verified 5 (1.5%) N.A.
Adjusted estimate 21 (6.4%) 8 (2.2%)

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/?utm_term=.c0f99f9d191c

1 illegal vote is too many.

Whatever the number, this must end and we must keep them out of our country.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Lester Holt perpetuates media lie about birthers Donald Trump Hillary Clinton, Holt ignorant biased and media schill, No proof Obama natural born citizen, Obama has not provided certified copy of original birth certificate, Trump telling truth

Lester Holt perpetuates media lie about birthers Donald Trump Hillary Clinton, Holt ignorant biased and media schill, No proof Obama natural born citizen, Obama has not provided certified copy of original birth certificate, Trump telling truth

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“#CNN says #Hillary team in 2008 never raised #birther issue. #SidBlumenthal, long-time #HRC buddy, told me in person #Obama born in #kenya”…James Asher, Twitter

“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″

 

First of all, Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen and the “birther” issue was an inappropriate topic for inclusion in race relations in America in the debate last night.

Obama is not the first black president of the US. He is mixed race and his ethnicity, if we can believe anything about the narrative of his life, is 50 % white, the rest black and Arab.

Obama has used Justice Dept. attorneys at taxpayer expense, in multiple cases, for years to help keep his records hidden. This includes original birth certificate, college records, Selective Service application and other records.

Once Obama began hiding his records, and this happened well before the 2008 election, he became fair game for being challenged.

The document released on WhiteHouse.gov in 2011 is not a certified copy of an original birth certificate. Read the bottom.

Obama may have a document that Hawaii considers a birth certificate but it does not prove birth there.

From the debate:

“HOLT: Mr. Trump, for five years, you perpetuated a false claim that the nation’s first black president was not a natural-born citizen. You questioned his legitimacy. In the last couple of weeks, you acknowledged what most Americans have accepted for years: The president was born in the United States. Can you tell us what took you so long?

TRUMP: I’ll tell you very — well, just very simple to say. Sidney Blumenthal works for the campaign and close — very close friend of Secretary Clinton. And her campaign manager, Patti Doyle, went to — during the campaign, her campaign against President Obama, fought very hard. And you can go look it up, and you can check it out. TRUMP: And if you look at CNN this past week, Patti Solis Doyle was on Wolf Blitzer saying that this happened. Blumenthal sent McClatchy, highly respected reporter at McClatchy, to Kenya to find out about it. They were pressing it very hard. She failed to get the birth certificate.

When I got involved, I didn’t fail. I got him to give the birth certificate. So I’m satisfied with it. And I’ll tell you why I’m satisfied with it.

HOLT: That was…

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Because I want to get on to defeating ISIS, because I want to get on to creating jobs, because I want to get on to having a strong border, because I want to get on to things that are very important to me and that are very important to the country.

HOLT: I will let you respond. It’s important. But I just want to get the answer here. The birth certificate was produced in 2011. You’ve continued to tell the story and question the president’s legitimacy in 2012, ’13, ’14, ’15…

TRUMP: Yeah.

HOLT: …. as recently as January. So the question is, what changed your mind?

TRUMP: Well, nobody was pressing it, nobody was caring much about it. I figured you’d ask the question tonight, of course. But nobody was caring much about it. But I was the one that got him to produce the birth certificate. And I think I did a good job.

Secretary Clinton also fought it. I mean, you know — now, everybody in mainstream is going to say, oh, that’s not true. Look, it’s true. Sidney Blumenthal sent a reporter — you just have to take a look at CNN, the last week, the interview with your former campaign manager. And she was involved. But just like she can’t bring back jobs, she can’t produce.

HOLT: I’m sorry. I’m just going to follow up — and I will let you respond to that, because there’s a lot there. But we’re talking about racial healing in this segment. What do you say to Americans, people of color who…

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Well, it was very — I say nothing. I say nothing, because I was able to get him to produce it. He should have produced it a long time before. I say nothing.

But let me just tell you. When you talk about healing, I think that I’ve developed very, very good relationships over the last little while with the African-American community. I think you can see that.

And I feel that they really wanted me to come to that conclusion. And I think I did a great job and a great service not only for the country, but even for the president, in getting him to produce his birth certificate.

HOLT: Secretary Clinton?

CLINTON: Well, just listen to what you heard.

(LAUGHTER)

And clearly, as Donald just admitted, he knew he was going to stand on this debate stage, and Lester Holt was going to be asking us questions, so he tried to put the whole racist birther lie to bed.

But it can’t be dismissed that easily. He has really started his political activity based on this racist lie that our first black president was not an American citizen. There was absolutely no evidence for it, but he persisted, he persisted year after year, because some of his supporters, people that he was trying to bring into his fold, apparently believed it or wanted to believe it.

But, remember, Donald started his career back in 1973 being sued by the Justice Department for racial discrimination because he would not rent apartments in one of his developments to African-Americans, and he made sure that the people who worked for him understood that was the policy. He actually was sued twice by the Justice Department.

So he has a long record of engaging in racist behavior. And the birther lie was a very hurtful one. You know, Barack Obama is a man of great dignity. And I could tell how much it bothered him and annoyed him that this was being touted and used against him.

But I like to remember what Michelle Obama said in her amazing speech at our Democratic National Convention: When they go low, we go high. And Barack Obama went high, despite Donald Trump’s best efforts to bring him down.

HOLT: Mr. Trump, you can respond and we’re going to move on to the next segment.

TRUMP: I would love to respond. First of all, I got to watch in preparing for this some of your debates against Barack Obama. You treated him with terrible disrespect. And I watched the way you talk now about how lovely everything is and how wonderful you are. It doesn’t work that way. You were after him, you were trying to — you even sent out or your campaign sent out pictures of him in a certain garb, very famous pictures. I don’t think you can deny that.

But just last week, your campaign manager said it was true. So when you tried to act holier than thou, it really doesn’t work. It really doesn’t.”

My response:

HOLT: “Mr. Trump, for five years, you perpetuated a false claim that the nation’s first black president was not a natural-born citizen. You questioned his legitimacy. In the last couple of weeks, you acknowledged what most Americans have accepted for years: The president was born in the United States. Can you tell us what took you so long?”

Holt, in step with the mainstream media is lying. There is zero proof that Obama was born in the US.

TRUMP: “I’ll tell you very — well, just very simple to say. Sidney Blumenthal works for the campaign and close — very close friend of Secretary Clinton. And her campaign manager, Patti Doyle, went to — during the campaign, her campaign against President Obama, fought very hard. And you can go look it up, and you can check it out. TRUMP: And if you look at CNN this past week, Patti Solis Doyle was on Wolf Blitzer saying that this happened. Blumenthal sent McClatchy, highly respected reporter at McClatchy, to Kenya to find out about it. They were pressing it very hard. She failed to get the birth certificate.”

“Secretary Clinton also fought it. I mean, you know — now, everybody in mainstream is going to say, oh, that’s not true. Look, it’s true. Sidney Blumenthal sent a reporter — you just have to take a look at CNN, the last week, the interview with your former campaign manager. And she was involved. But just like she can’t bring back jobs, she can’t produce.”

CLINTON: “And clearly, as Donald just admitted, he knew he was going to stand on this debate stage, and Lester Holt was going to be asking us questions, so he tried to put the whole racist birther lie to bed.

But it can’t be dismissed that easily. He has really started his political activity based on this racist lie that our first black president was not an American citizen. There was absolutely no evidence for it, but he persisted, he persisted year after year, because some of his supporters, people that he was trying to bring into his fold, apparently believed it or wanted to believe it.”

Hillary goes on to try to paint Trump as a racist but notice that she never denies her birther position.

Furthermore, if anyone is a racist it is Hillary.

“Patterson said Hillary was no stranger to the “N” word either.

HANNITY: How many times did you hear Hillary use the “N” word?

PATTERSON: Probably six, eight, ten times. She would be upset with someone in the black community and she would use the “N” word, like, you heard they’ve got the president’s brother on tape using the “N” word. So, yeah it was used.

The former Clinton bodyguard said he knew four or five others once close to the Clintons who would be willing to corroborate claims about Bill and Hillary’s bigoted language on the record.”

Hillary Slurred Jews 10 to 20 Times, Used ‘N’ word Too: Bodyguard, NewsMax July 17, 2000, Real Hillary and Bill Clinton used nigger when upset with someone in the black community

Holt continues to push the inappropriate issue with Trump.

“I’m sorry. I’m just going to follow up — and I will let you respond to that, because there’s a lot there. But we’re talking about racial healing in this segment. What do you say to Americans, people of color who…”

This is one of many examples during the debate where Holt is demanding answers from Trump and not Hillary.

Trump nails it in another segment:

“I will. Look, the African-American community has been let down by our politicians. They talk good around election time, like right now, and after the election, they said, see ya later, I’ll see you in four years.

The African-American community — because — look, the community within the inner cities has been so badly treated. They’ve been abused and used in order to get votes by Democrat politicians, because that’s what it is. They’ve controlled these communities for up to 100 years.”

Hillary, Democrats and the mainstream media continue to lie to and use people of color.

The real racists in the country demand special treatment for Obama due to his skin color.

Lester Holt and anyone else in the media, quit covering for Obama and Hillary and lying to the American people.

The truth about Obama’s birth certificate and the Clintons being the first birthers.

https://citizenwells.com/2016/09/17/greensboro-news-record-lies-about-obama-birth-certificate-clinton-birther-role-and-trump-statements-repeats-lies-of-washington-post-citizen-wells-challenge-to-media-news-record-and-post-awarded-5-o/

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

Assange outs Hillary Clinton part two, We out Hillary at polls, Citizen journalism requires mass participation, Spread the word and inform the citizenry, We can’t sit around and let others like Wikileaks do all the work, Assange has more to reveal

Assange outs Hillary Clinton part two, We out Hillary at polls, Citizen journalism requires mass participation, Spread the word and inform the citizenry, We can’t sit around and let others like Wikileaks do all the work, Assange has more to reveal

“So Hillary’s doctor —who says Hillary’s Health is “excellent”— just claimed Hillary had an imaging study that doesn’t exist. Oops.”…Dr. Milton Wolf

“As I stated earlier, this is not about sex or private conduct, it is about multiple obstructions of justice, perjury, false and misleading statements, witness tamperings and abuses of power, all committed or orchestrated by the President of the United States.”…David Schippers report to House Judiciary Committee

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

Just as in the American Revolution, we are part of a new revolution, citizen journalism.

Just as in the American Revolution, this will require ordinary citizens to step up, take risks, participate to defeat the common enemy, evil and ignorance.

I had not planned on writing the article yesterday about Assange outing Hillary Clinton by the debate yesterday, September 26, 2016. It is being widely read and I want to clarify what Julian Assange has stated and what his role is.

I am reminded of an exerpt from the debate last night.

Trump criticized Obama and Hillary for the vacuum created by pulling our troops out of Iraq.

I wish that he would have reminded her that part of the job of the President and Secretary of State is responding to changing conditions and not blaming the former president for decisions made earlier under different circumstances.

So it is with Assange.

He has chosen his words carefully and as he stated already provided enough information to out Clinton under a reasonable Justice Department.

This more recent interview more closely reflects the latest circumstances.

Now for the most important part.

We ultimately can defeat Hillary Clinton at the polls.

That will require educating our citizenry.

The great middle of the country, most of whom will listen to reason.

Wikileaks provides a great service but Julian Assange can not do this task alone.

I never would have envisioned years ago that I would be writing an article like this to so many people.

I do this because I care, so do you.

We have so many avenues of sharing information on the internet.

Use them.

Share what you learn on the internet in everyday life as you interact with family, friends and total strangers.

With appropriate humility and false modesty aside, I present some of my larger efforts to expose the real Hillary Clinton.

Scrubbed articles resurrected.

Many articles, scrubbed from the internet and not found doing searches, have been placed on Citizen News and referred to in Citizen Wells articles. This includes most of the Bill and Hillary “gate” controversies and criminal activities. One you may not be familiar with is Commercegate where Hillary devised the plan to sell Commerce seats for campaign contributions. This ultimately led to the death of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown.

Hillary “birther” involvement and truth behind Obama records and eligibility.

Multiple witnesses prove that the Clintons were challenging Obama’s eligibility by 2008. I am actually part of this story due to recording witness Bettina Viviano testimony to me in early 2009. I have also provided conclusive proof that Obama has provided zero proof of US birth and used many Justice Dept. attorneys at taxpayer expense to keep his records hidden. One of those attorneys, Tony West, was rewarded with the number 3 position in the Justice Dept.

Hillary health and “health records.”

Citizen Wells has challenged the authenticity of alleged health records provided by the Hillary Campaign. The latest “Dr. letter” was analyzed with the conclusion that it was probably forged.

https://citizenwells.com/2016/09/25/hillary-doctor-letter-author-ashley-neff-marketing-social-media-rebranding-specialist-did-neff-rebrand-clintons-health-hillary-september-2016-health-statement-fraudulent-procedures-dont-exist/

We can’t sit around waiting for someone else to out Hillary.

Each and every one of use can play a role.

One person can make a difference.

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”…Thomas Paine

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charlotte Bathroom ordinance NC HB2 fact vs fiction, North Carolina laws derived from established science not feelings, Charlotte ordinance number 7056 allowed transgenders to use bathroom of choice, Convicted sex offender proponent of LGBT access

Charlotte Bathroom ordinance NC HB2 fact vs fiction, North Carolina laws derived from established science not feelings, Charlotte ordinance number 7056 allowed transgenders to use bathroom of choice, Convicted sex offender proponent of LGBT accessCharlotte

“Any biological man – regardless of whether he “identifies” or “expresses” himself as a man OR as a woman – now has the legal right under the City’s amended ordinance to access the most intimate of women’s facilities (and vice versa). Under the ordinance, Charlotte businesses may no longer offer or enforce sex-specific facilities and face penalties if they do.”…NC House Member Dan Bishop

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

I looked for quite some time to find an article that linked to the Charlotte, NC ordinance allowing transgender folks to access the bathroom of choice, ignoring the safety of women and children.

Safety of women and children threatened?

One of the proponents of the ordinance was a documented sex offender. A man convicted of molesting underage boys.

Here he is with the mayor of Charlotte, Jennifer Roberts.

SeveranceMayorRoberts-Turner-1024x683

As Sean Hannity stated in 2008, “journalism is dead in this country.”

The articles I found in numerous searches, quoted or paraphrased the ordinance or quoted other articles doing so.

So I will begin by presenting access to Charlotte Ordinance Number 7056, passed on February 22, 2016 and intended to become effective April 1, 2016.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/307542321/Charlotte-Bathroom-ordinance-April-1-2016-Number-7056-allows-transgender-people-to-use-bathroom-of-their-choice

The ordinance can also be found here:

http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/CityClerk/Ordinances/February%2022,%202016.pdf

Dan Bishop is a current member of the NC State House, District 104 and a lifelong citizen of Charlotte. His educational and professional background includes:

  • 25 years experience litigating complex business and local government controversies.
  • Ten times voted to Business North Carolina “Legal Elite.” Seven times selected by “Super Lawyers.” 2013-14 Best Lawyers.
  • Erwin, Bishop, Capitano & Moss, 1996-present.
  • Robinson, Bradshaw & Hinson, 1990-96.
  • University of North Carolina, J.D., high honors, 1990. Member, North Carolina Law Review.
  • B.S. Business Administration, highest distinction, 1986.

From Dan Bishop February 24, 2016.

“All Men Now Have a Legal Right to Access Women’s Facilities and Vice Versa

This past Monday night, Charlotte City Councilmembers thumbed their noses at the Governor and state law by adopting an illegal and state-preempted ordinance which creates special rights for persons who “identify” or choose to “express” themselves as the opposite sex, including the right to access bathrooms and showers contrary to their biological sex.

But it’s even worse than I have outlined previously – and it’s even worse than has so far been reported in the press. Let me explain…

Numerous commenters at Monday’s City Council meeting expressed their valid concern that males can pose as transgenders to gain access to women’s and girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, etc. In reality, the amended ordinance, as adopted, outlaws sex-specific facilities completely.

In other words, just as it would be illegal for a business to discriminate by saying “whites only,” it is now illegal within Charlotte city limits to have “male only” or “female only” bathrooms, showers, etc.

Any biological man – regardless of whether he “identifies” or “expresses” himself as a man OR as a woman – now has the legal right under the City’s amended ordinance to access the most intimate of women’s facilities (and vice versa). Under the ordinance, Charlotte businesses may no longer offer or enforce sex-specific facilities and face penalties if they do.

Before the amendment, the public accommodations ordinance had two separate parts.

The first part prohibited denying anyone “the full and equal enjoyment of the … facilities … a place of public accommodation because of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

The second part prohibited discriminating on the basis of sex, but exempted “[r]estrooms, shower rooms, bathhouses, and similar facilities which are in their nature distinctly private.”

Adding the new categories of “sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression” to the second part of the public accommodations ordinance would not have suited the objectives of radical activists to overhaul existing bathroom policy. Therefore, City Council eliminated the second part of the ordinance completely, including its bathroom and shower exemptions.

They moved “sex” to the first part and added the new classifications. So, the new language is just this:

“It shall be unlawful to deny any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or national origin.”

“This is a boneheaded blunder and a further embarrassment to Charlotte.”

If “gender identity” and “gender expression” mean that a transgender must be allowed to use the bathroom and shower of choice, then “sex” means that ALL men must be permitted to use women’s facilities and vice versa. The City Attorney says that’s not what was intended, but it is what the language says.

This is a boneheaded blunder and a further embarrassment to Charlotte.

If you live in Charlotte, please ask your City Council representatives what they were thinking. If you don’t live in our city, be vigilant that your own city council does not create a national media circus for your hometown.”

https://www.votedanbishop.com/news/2016/02/24/blunder-new-charlotte-ordinance-prohibits-all-sex-specific-bathrooms-and-showers-inside-of-city-limits-000041?AID=7979

Dan Bishop letter to Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts on February 1, 2016.

https://www.votedanbishop.com/uploads/content/dan-bishop-letter.pdf

NC House Bill 2.

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E2/Bills/House/PDF/H2v1.pdf

From NC Governor Pat McCrory March 25, 2016.

“Myths vs Facts: What New York Times, Huffington Post and other media outlets aren’t saying about common-sense privacy law.”

“1. Does the new bill limit or prohibit private sector companies from adopting their own nondiscrimination policies or practices?

  • Answer: No. Businesses are not limited by this bill. Private individuals, companies and universities can adopt new or keep existing nondiscrimination policies.

2. Does this bill take away existing protections for individuals in North Carolina?

  • Answer: No. In fact, for the first time in state history, this law establishes a statewide anti-discrimination policy in North Carolina which is tougher than the federal government’s. This also means that the law in North Carolina is not different when you go city to city. 

3. Can businesses and private facilities still offer reasonable accommodations for transgender people, like single occupancy bathrooms for instance?

  • Answer: Yes. This bill allows and does nothing to prevent businesses, and public or private facilities from providing single-use bathrooms. 

4. Can private businesses, if they choose, continue to allow transgender individuals to use the bathroom, locker room or other facilities of the gender they identify with, or provide other accommodations? 

  • Answer: Yes. That is the prerogative of private businesses under this new law. For instance, if a privately-owned sporting facility wants to allow attendees of sporting events to use the restroom of their choice, or install unisex bathrooms, they can. The law neither requires nor prohibits them from doing so.

5. Does this law prohibit towns, cities or counties in North Carolina from setting their own nondiscrimination policies in employment that go beyond state law?

  • Answer: No. Town, cities and counties in North Carolina are still allowed to set stricter non-discrimination policies for their own employees if they choose.

6. Does this bill mean transgender people will always have to use the restroom of the sex of their birth, even if they have undergone a sex change? 

  • Answer: No. This law simply says people must use the bathroom of the sex listed on their birth certificate. Anyone who has undergone a sex change can change their sex on their birth certificate.

7. I’m worried about how this new law affects transgender children or students in North Carolina. Does this bill allow bullying against transgender children in schools?

  • Answer: Absolutely not. North Carolina law specifically prohibits bullying and harassing behavior against children on the basis of sexual identity. 

8. Does this bill affect people with disabilities?

  • Answer: No. Statewide law also bans discrimination based on disability.

9. Why did North Carolina pass this law in the first place?

  • Answer: The bill was passed after the Charlotte City Council voted to impose a regulation requiring businesses to allow a man into a women’s restroom, shower, or locker room if they choose. This ordinance would have eliminated the basic expectations of privacy people have when using the rest room by allowing people to use the restroom of their choice. This new local regulation brought up serious privacy concerns by parents, businesses and others across the state, as well as safety concerns that this new local rule could be used by people who would take advantage of this to do harm to others.

In fact, the Charlotte City Council tried to pass this ordinance before but failed, and passed the same ordinance in February of 2016 despite serious concerns from state officials, business leaders and other concerned citizens.

10. What about parents or caregivers bringing children into the restroom?

  • Answer: The law provides exceptions to young children accompanied by parents or care givers.

11. Will this bill threaten federal funding for public schools under Title IX?

  • Answer: No, according to a federal court which has looked at a similar issue.

12. Will this bill prevent people from receiving medical attention in an emergency?

  • Answer: Absolutely not. Nothing will prevent people from receiving medical attention in public or private accommodations. 

13. Will this bill affect North Carolina’s ability to create or recruit jobs?

  • Answer: This bill does not affect companies in North Carolina. North Carolina was one of the top states to do business in the country before this law was passed, and preventing Charlotte’s bathroom ordinance from going into effect on April 1 won’t change that.

14. Why is the state telling cities and towns what it can and can’t do by repealing an ordinance the elected members of the Charlotte City Council passed?

  • Answer: North Carolina is one of at least 37 states like Virginia where cities and towns cannot pass rules or regulations that exceed the authority given to them by the state. In passing the bathroom ordinance, Charlotte was exceeding its authority and setting rules that had ramifications beyond the City of Charlotte. The legislature acted to address privacy and safety concerns if this ordinance was allowed to go into effect on April 1. 

15. Do any other regulations in North Carolina cities, towns or counties come close to what Charlotte was recommending?

  • Answer: No. Not that we are aware of. Therefore, nothing changes in North Carolina cities, towns and counties, including in Charlotte, regarding discrimination practices and protections now that this law has passed.

16. Did only Republicans vote for this bill?

  • Answer: No. 11 Democrats voted for this bill in the N.C. House of Representatives and no Democratic Senators voted against it. In fact, Democratic Senators walked out to avoid voting on the issue at all because many were going to vote for it and they did not want show their division. 

17. Why did the Legislature call a special session to overturn the bathroom ordinance?

  • Answer: The new Charlotte ordinance, which would have required all businesses to change their restroom policies and take away the expectation of privacy people have when using the restroom, was going to go into effect on April 1 if no action was taken.

18. Is North Carolina at a disadvantage when it comes to recruiting jobs because it does not have ordinances like the one Charlotte was proposing? 

  • Answer: No. In fact in the last 3 years without an ordinance like this, North Carolina has created the 6th most jobs in the country – over 260,000 net new jobs. We know of no examples of companies being recruited to North Carolina that have asked if the state has an ordinance like the one Charlotte was proposing.”

http://governor.nc.gov/press-release/myths-vs-facts-what-new-york-times-huffington-post-and-other-media-outlets-arent-0

NC Laws are based on facts such as biological science, not feelings.

How do you rule in a court of law on someone’s feelings, i.e., that they associate with another sex type?

Common sense and grounded legal principals expose the Charlotte ordinance as foolhardy and impractical.

Now to my warnings to Jennifer Roberts, Roy Cooper, Bruce Springsteen, PayPal and other entities  threatening the NC economy and business.

Two can play that game.

I will do my best to see that Roy Cooper is not elected governor.

Jennifer Roberts, you are history.

Bruce Springsteen, PayPal, et al, you can be boycotted too and I intend to do so and encourage others to do likewise.

 

 

 

Ted Cruz Vermont eligibility lawsuit update, February 19, 2016, Plaintiff H. Brooke Paige, Cruz not natural born citizen, Cruz born in Canada in 1970, Canadian Citizenship Act of 1976 Cruz born a Canadian Citizen AND a British Subject

Ted Cruz Vermont eligibility lawsuit update, February 19, 2016, Plaintiff H. Brooke Paige, Cruz not natural born citizen, Cruz born in Canada in 1970, Canadian Citizenship Act of 1976 Cruz born a Canadian Citizen AND a British Subject

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

Just in from Mr. H. Brooke Paige, plaintiff in the Vermont Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio eligibility challenge:

“UPDATE – Paige v. State of Vermont, et al (Secretary of State, Jim Condos,
Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz and Marco Antonio Rubio)

Citizen Wells,

February 18, 2016 – All parties, the Vermont State Defendants, Cruz and
Rubio,  have responded each   with their own Motions to Dismiss, the first
effort of a disingenuous and desperate lawyer who wants to shield his
client from having to face the music.

It is exciting to have defendants who, because of their divergent
political leanings refuse to cooperate in developing a unified strategy to
extinguish the humble, tenacious plaintiff. Unfortunately, the attorneys
for Rubio and Cruz seem amazingly unfamiliar with the “natural born
citizen(ship)” subject matter – regurgitating the tripe and drivel
regularly posted on “obot” websites; while Daloz, the state’s Asst. A/G,
appears to be doing a “cut and paste” job from his 2012 effort. Truly sad
to see such vacuous “work product” for these high priced “Blackstone
Lawyers.” (Thomas Jefferson complained that “many a law student finds
Blackstone’s writings – a smattering of everything, and his indolence
easily persuades him that if he understands Blackstone , he is a master of
the whole body of law.”)

I have filed separate Opposition Briefs for each of the defendants’
Motions to Dismiss as each develops a differing approach to defend their
favorites particular “flavor” of natural born citizenship.

•       Vermont Assistant Attorney General Todd Daloz offering “born in country
with at least one citizen parent” to defend the democratic darling, Mr.
Obama.

•       “K’ Street Mouthpiece (D.C.) Brady Toensing, representing Rubio, arguing
that “native birth” (14th Amendment citizenship) alone is sufficient to
qualify his “son of Cuban parents” to serve as President.

•       Lastly, Gregory D. Cote, Esq., the Beantown Lawyer (“Redacted”) makes a
valiant attempt to convince anyone who will give him “the time of day”
that his Canadian Citizen client, Cruz,   is somehow more than merely a
“citizen of the United States” a condition granted to him by Congress, not
by his birth circumstances alone the condition necessary to be a Natural
born citizen (i.e. born in country to two citizen parents – Vattel, 1758).

Further it has come to light that since Cruz was born in Canada in 1970,
prior to the Canadian “Citizenship Act of 1976,” he was born a “Canadian
Citizen AND a “British Subject”  having “the right of abode” whereby he
could moved to the “British Isles” and gotten a job and taken up permanent
residence without needing to take any further action .
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/cit/overview/hist.asp

The Vermont Primary Election is held on Town Meeting Day, March  1st, and,
since the defendants have argued that the issues are not “ripe” until the
passing of the election,  our next move will be to ask the court to
prevent the Secretary of State from releasing the results of that election
until the court determines the qualification of candidates Cruz and Rubio
AND  whether their names appearing on the ballot has cause damage to the
other candidates, sufficient to alter the results of the election.”

Ted Cruz Illinois court eligibility appeal, Lawrence Joyce plaintiff, Cruz not natural born citizen, Judge Maureen Ward Kirby will hear arguments at Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Cruz born in Canada

Ted Cruz Illinois court eligibility appeal, Lawrence Joyce plaintiff, Cruz not natural born citizen, Judge Maureen Ward Kirby will hear arguments at Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Cruz born in Canada

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

From New York Magazine February 18, 2016.

“Lawsuit Over Ted Cruz’s Eligibility to Run for President Heads to Court”

“During Wednesday night’s CNN town hall, Ted Cruz dismissed the latest legal threat from Donald Trump, assuring a voter that he’s definitely eligible to run for president. “Under the law the question is clear,” he said. “There will still be some who try to work political mischief on it, but as a legal matter this is clear and straightforward.” Unlike Cruz’s right to air old footage of Trump on Meet the Press in a campaign ad, the issue raised by Cruz’s birth in Canada to an American mother actually isn’t settled — but now it looks like we may finally get an answer. CNN reports that an Illinois judge has agreed to hear arguments in a lawsuit challenging Cruz’s eligibility on Friday.

The lawsuit in question actually has nothing to do with Trump (though, it’s unlikely we’d be debating the obscure legal arguments over whether Cruz is a “natural born citizen” if it weren’t for the ex–reality star). Suburban lawyer Lawrence Joyce initially filed an objection to Cruz’s placement on the primary ballot with the Illinois Board of Elections, but it was dismissed earlier this month. Now the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago has agreed to hear the case.

Legal challenges over Cruz’s eligibility have been filed in at least three states. Joyce seems primarily concerned about the political fallout from the questions surrounding Cruz’s candidacy, rather than the possibility of a secret Canadian infiltrating the U.S. government. He told Chicago’s WLS that he’s concerned about what would happen if the challenge came from a Democrat in the fall after Cruz secured the GOP nomination. “At that point, all of his fundraising would dry up. And his support in the polls would drop dramatically. He may be forced at that point to resign the nomination,” he said.”

Read more:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/02/ted-cruz-eligibility-case-heads-to-court.html

NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen

NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

Two state ballot entities recently ruled on Ted Cruz remaining on their ballots.

The Illinois state board of elections ruled that Ted Cruz is eligible as a natural born citizen.  IL is consistently listed as one of the most corrupt states in the US and the home of Obama, another non natural born citizen.

No surprise.

The New Hampshire ballot commission took a more honest approach.

“If there is a clear ruling on some issues that somebody clearly doesn’t meet, we would apply it. If there is a constitutional uncertainty about the meaning of something – which from my research and from all the stuff that was thrown at us at the commission there certainly is about the natural born citizen thing — we don’t undertake to make that decision,”

I was disappointed to find what I consider to be the most inaccurate article I have uncovered at American Thinker, February 5, 2016.

“Illinois and New Hampshire Agree Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen”

“Trump persists that Cruz’s citizenship is still an open question. It is not, and the election boards of two states, New Hampshire and Illinois, have now ruled, in response to complaints, that Sen. Ted Cruz is indeed, under the laws and Constitution of the United States, a “natural born citizen” fully eligible to be President of the United States. As the Washington Examiner reported:”

“A ballot commission in New Hampshire also ruled in favor of Cruz in January, but the language in Monday’s decision by the Illinois board took a stronger tone than the previous ruling, warning other skeptics, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.””

“Indeed, it is unnecessary. The question of Cruz’s citizenship has been asked and answered. Is Trump saying that a baby born in Paris to a vacationing American family is not eligible to run for president and must be “naturalized” like some illegal alien from Guadalajara?

Some noted legal scholars would beg to differ from Trump’s concern that Cruz is not in fact a “natural born” citizen.

Jonathan Adler, who teaches courses in constitutional, administrative, and environmental law at Case Western University School of Law, writes in the Washington Post:

Ted Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was a U.S. citizen. His father, a Cuban, was not. Under U.S. law, the fact that Cruz was born to a U.S. citizen mother makes him a citizen from birth. In other words, he is a “natural born citizen” (as opposed to a naturalized citizen) and is constitutionally eligible.”

“Also agreeing with Cruz’s eligibility are two constitutional scholars who have argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. As the Washington Post reported:

Writing in the Harvard Law Review, two former top Supreme Court litigators, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, said: “All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase ‘natural born Citizen’ has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.”

“Now two state boards of election have certified Cruz’s eligibility, which is beyond dispute, no matter how much Trump whines, pouts, and throws out groundless accusations.”

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/illinois_and_new_hampshire_agree_cruz_is_a_natural_born_citizen.html

Aside from being wrong on the definition of natural born citizen, this article is blatantly inaccurate:

New Hampshire did not rule that Cruz is a natural born citizen.

It omitted the opinion of constitutional expert Laurence Tribe of Harvard:

“Cruz says this is all settled law, but Harvard’s Laurence Tribe disagrees.

“It clearly is not settled law,” Tribe said in recent an interview.”

“That’s because Tribe says Cruz is a constitutional “originalist,” who believes the document should be followed to the letter. Tribe says jurists who share such a view might well conclude that Cruz is not eligible to be president — because he was not born in America.

According to Tribe, this shows that Cruz is trying to have it both ways.”

http://www.wbur.org/2016/01/15/donald-trump-ted-cruz-laurence-tribe-citizenship

From The Dallas Morning News November 24, 2015.

“The New Hampshire ballot commission today rejected efforts to kick Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz off the primary ballot based on his birth outside the United States.

That clears a key legal and political obstacle as the Texas Republican seeks the GOP nomination for president. But it’s not a clear win on the question of eligibility.

Rather, the panel found that with the law of eligibility so murky, it can’t second-guess the senator’s own claims that he passes constitutional muster. Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any other authority has explicitly ruled that someone like Cruz — born on foreign soil, with one American parent – can or cannot be president.

“It would be really nice if somebody would get this issue of law decided who has authority to decide constitutional issues, so every four years we don’t have this come up again,” said Manchester attorney Brad Cook, a Republican who chairs the 5-member New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission.”

Read more:

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/11/regardless-of-canadian-birth-ted-cruz-survives-ballot-challenge-in-new-hampshire.html/

AMERICAN THINKER OWES THE PUBLIC AN APOLOGY.