Cruz Lies to America!

On January 14th, 2016 the FOX Business Network hosted the GOP Debate in Charleston, South Carolina.   Neil Cavuto, anchor and managing editor of the Business Network, was a moderator, along with Maria Bartiromo.

During the debate, under the spotlight of a live national broadcast, Cavuto asked Ted Cruz about Cruz’s qualification to hold the office of President, given the Constitution’s requirement to be a natural born citizen, as a result of Cruz’s birth in Canada.  Up front Cavuto recognized that Cruz’s citizenship was not in question.

See Video below (Time Stamp: ~2:02 )

Cruz began his answer by indicating that John McCain was born abroad in Panama and was able to run for president, and that Mitt Romney’s Dad was able to run for President  despite being born abroad, because of their parents being citizens.   Here Cruz subtly misrepresents the Constitution’s demand as “being able to  run for President”,   despite the fact that requirement only prohibits those not being natural born from holding the office.  The requirement for President says nothing whatsoever about “running for office”.

Quite obviously those who have previously run for office, including McCain and George Romney,  are not necessarily natural born citizens as a result of having run for that office.   This also applies to  Roger Calero, who was on the  ballot in 5 States in the 2008 Presidential election, and yet Calero was not even a U.S. Citizen.

By  Cruz’s  reference to  those who “ran for office”,  implying they were qualified to hold that office as natural born citizens, it should now be apparent that Cruz began a calculated dishonesty intending to confuse and manipulate the ignorant American voter from the very start of his response to Cavuto’s question.

Cruz then indicated the following further practiced, deliberate falsehood:

“.. the birther theories, that Donald has been relying on, some of the more extreme ones, insist that you must not only be born on U.S. soil, but have two parents born on U.S. soil. Under that theory, not only would I be disqualified, Marco Rubio would be disqualified, Bobby Jindal would be disqualified,and interestingly enough Donald J. Trump would be disqualified… because.. because  Donald’s mother was born in Scotland.”

WRONG!  As consistently recognized in  5 separate Supreme Courts decisions over this country’s history, the terms of natural born ONLY require that the parents must be CITIZENS at the time of birth, in addition to the  offspring being on the country’s soil! 

According to Cruz’s explanation, those five distinct Supreme Court decisions, as early as 1814 (The Venus), must necessarily be “birthers” as well, which is obviously untrue!  These terms have nothing to do with those “birthers” at all, however tagging the issue as “birther” is a good way for Cruz to dishonestly impugn the issue by false association with those birthers. There is actually no existing claim made by anyone conversant in the actual facts, that the parents must be born on the soil as well as the offspring.  

This falsehood was no mere mistake by Cruz, but rather a calculated and practiced lie promoted by Cruz, done to rely, again, on the ignorance of the American voter, while simultaneously using that dishonesty to make it appear as if even the front-runner, Trump, might not be qualified.

Cruz then went on, saying, “On the issue of citizenship, Donald, I’m not going to use your Mother’s citizenship against you.”   This was obviously a very poor yet calculated attempt to echo Ronald Regan’s famous response (video) during the 1984  Presidential Debates regarding Mondale, “I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

Once again we have clear evidence that this response by Cruz was practiced and deliberate.

Throughout Cruz’s answer, the Cruz supporters were cheering, showing that they actually had no  awareness that Cruz was lying to them, as well as no knowledge of the Constitution and its terms for natural born.  Yet it is these same supporters who insist that Cruz is our salvation, asserting that he is a constitutional conservative, which he clearly is not.

Finally Cruz ended his answer by reducing the qualification for President to being simply American, saying they are “all Americans on this stage”, and by this entirely dismissing the stringent demand stipulated by the Constitution for the office of President, showing no real regard for the Constitution overall.  Instead, Cruz continued, he wanted the selection of a GOP candidate to be by who is most qualified candidate, as adjudged by the voters, yet again entirely discarding the fact that there is any constitutional mandate limiting those qualified to hold the office.  That’s some constitutional conservative there!

Cruz cannot be that stupid for this clearly practiced answer to be a legitimate mistake. If he is that stupid, Cruz doesn’t belong in the office of President. Cruz just believes that we Americans are that stupid.  Are we?

Sure, Cruz went to law school, but they don’t  teach the Constitution in Law school,  they teach Constitutional Law, and certainly don’t teach the meaning of natural born.   On his own, Cruz could have researched  those five Supreme Court decisions over this country’s history that recognize natural born to  be “birth in the country to parents who were citizens”, along with numerous other qualified references.  Yet Cruz would have us believe he did not do so, no staffer did so, and that if caught in this lie,  it might just be dismissed as a legitimate mistake.

At minimal, Cruz undoubtedly has heard these terms accurately related by others, heard that they require the parents to have been citizens (only) at the time of birth, yet he chose to misrepresent these terms for his own benefit.

Cruz’s response was clearly choreographed by Cruz campaign staffers and consultants, and is unmistakably a very practiced, deliberate lie intending to rely on the ignorance of the American electorate.

I cannot, and will not ever, vote for Ted Cruz because he is not a natural born citizen, and neither is Marco Rubio, nor Bobby Jindal, nor was John McCain.   Donald Trump however is a natural born citizen.

An enormous number of Americans now want this election to turn out well because they are desperate to restore this country, and legitimate government by the terms of the Constitution. However what Cruz is showing is only more of the same smarmy  Washington corruption and disregard for the Constitution, all while abusing the American people themselves.

Overall, Cruz’s answer to Cavuto’s question clearly demonstrated that Cruz puts his personal ambition ahead of country, Constitution, and even his own integrity,

Ted Cruz is not the answer.  The question is whether  you’re smart enough to not be sucked in by Cruz’s series of calculated lies.


19 thoughts on “Cruz Lies to America!

    • Natalie, I am so glad that you appreciate my article, and thank you for coming to the Liberty Born site. Please make yourself comfortable, and feel free to make comments or ask questions.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Hello, T. J.!

        I only have two things I would have ADDED to this article. Actually, two NAMES: Nikki Haley and Barack Hussein Obama, NEITHER of whom is a NBC of the USA.

        Obviously, I would have added Obama’s name because he USURPED the office of POTUS, and it is still my hope and prayer that this will be brought to light, and ALL those responsible for this FRAUD, including his main co-conspirators, Nancy Pelosi and John McCain, will be brought to justice.

        I would add Nikki Haley’s name because I am already hearing “whispers” about her being the VP running mate of whomever is the eventual nominee, but like Jindal and Rubio, Haley had ZERO USA citizen parents at the time of her birth, so there is NO WAY she is a NBC, and therefore, according to the last line of the 12th Amendment, she would NOT be eligible to be the Vice-POTUS.

        Other than that, I LOVED this article and am sharing it in my group on FB, and the first three paragraphs above will be my comment that I attach to it:

        Thanks for Standing Up for the Constitution!

        Don Dillon


  1. […] Read this excellent and revealing review and summary of the tactics Ted Cruz is using to deceive the American Electorate on the “natural born Citizen” issue: […]

    EDITOR: Commander Kerchner, thank you so much for again citing my blog!


  2. I have lost so much respect for Cruz, and many of his (good) TEA Party followers who just accept his (or Mark Levin’s) opinions since they are “constitutional lawyers”. The good news is that there is no scenario where Cruz wins the Presidency, and highly unlikely he will win the GOP nomination. The non-TEA Party Republicans who make up 65%% of the GOP voting, already are splitting much more heavily for Trump. And even in a miracle, there is no way the mainstream media allows him to office because – despite this horrible manipulation – he IS dangerous to both GOP and DEM entrenched interests and will be Palinized the minute he is nominated. Relentlessly. He simply isn’t very likeable.

    Unfortunately, if he returns to the Senate, it’s possible his eligibility to the SENATE is challenged now, since he didn’t relinquish his Canadian citizenship until 15 months ago AFTER he was elected…

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Keep up the good work in exposing this matter, T.J. (As you did in your article the day before, on the difference between the Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795; extremely Important research.)

    This is appalling stuff. Outrageous. Despicable. As you point out; Cruz KNOWS FULL WELL what he is doing, He is deliberately trying to obfuscate the issue. It’s a shyster-lawyer technique. ‘Look over here, people of the jury – look: Over here. See this hand?’,,,

    As I say: Please keep up exposing this charade, this Game That People Play.


  4. For NEWBIES looking for an introduction to “natural born Citizen”, I suggest , and my string of comments posted beginning at (in which I started to address my cognitive dissonance (Note: I still marvel at how I could have simultaneously believed (and still believe) that Barack Hussein Obama II is ineligible for the presidency and yet supported CANADIAN born Ted Cruz for President. It was as if I had ignored any knowledge of that inconvenient fact until the other candidate I support, Donald Trump, caused me to focus on the subject.)) Although my comments often linked to comments posted on which were initially approved for display (and subsequently (on or around January 24, 2016) were censored by Commander Kerchner), I posted the main points in my 3 revised postings of January 25, 2016 commenting on Mario Apuzzo’s posting of “A Citizen is One Thing, But a Natural Born Citizen is Another”

    Makes one consider the inconsistency [cognitive dissonance(?)] of Ted Cruz (who supposedly advocates for original intent) … Actually, I was thinking but I didn’t want to previously say it, perhaps CANADIAN born Ted Cruz believes – let’s put it this way – that he is more than the typical human being and thus equality before the law would not necessarily be applicable to him. Indeed, apparently on or around January 26, 2016, it’s being reported that CANADIAN born Ted Cruz is suggesting that Donald Trump suffers from “Messiah Complex”; perhaps CANADIAN born Ted Cruz is projecting his own view about himself. It’s interesting that Donald Trump has recently been repeatedly suggesting that CANADIAN born Ted Cruz is nervous … It makes me suspect that besides “natural born Citizen” we need to consider the 25th Amendment. Today, it also came to my attention: “The aspirations of [Canadian born] 18-year old Ted Cruz” – Wake up folks – this punctuates the need to follow the U.S. Constitution and the danger of electing a person with relatively little experience. Unfortunately, part of the reason that we are in this situation is because the system is apparently so systemically dysfunctional/corrupt that there is desperation/frustration to elect someone who will actually follow through on his/her campaign promises.


  5. It’s so sad — don’t all these ‘pretenders’ realize that they could, at this point in our history, do Much more good for America by acting out some minimal respect for the Constitution .. than they ever could in eight years of EXACTLY imitating BO’s lawlessness and dishonesty? Actually, imitating his fatuous egoism as
    well — do they Really think they’re THAT indispensable .. that everything has to be swept aside to make
    way for their blessed reign? Where do we Get these people? Our politics seems to be a machine for
    singling out shallow, slick opportunists, time after time. it seems, if we are going to have the rule of law,
    that we need to raise the IQ of the voters……


  6. With a reasonable amount of research and a sincere desire for the truth it should not be so difficult to determine the original meaning of “natural born Citizen”. However, WHY DO WE SEEM TO ASSUME THAT THE STANDARD FOR NATURAL BORN CITIZEN WOULD BE LOWER ACCORDING TO THE LIVING CONSTITUTION? Wikipedia states “In United States constitutional interpretation, the Living Constitution (or loose constructionism) is the claim that the Constitution has a dynamic meaning or that it has the properties of an animate being in the sense that it changes. The idea is associated with views that contemporaneous society should be taken into account when interpreting key constitutional phrases.” ( ) First of all, given the grandfather clause and the natural born Citizen clause, an argument could be made that the trajectory of the Constitution was for a higher standard to be eligible for the unique position of the presidency (which includes the military role of Commander in Chief)! Moreover, as the SUPPLY of American Citizens INCREASE and as the dangers of modern warfare become GREATER in terms of (the NEED/DEMAND for) security/safety we should at least maintain the standard of the presidency and certainly not reduce it. According to (some of) the Court (who in the recent aftermath of the Civil War started to play around with what “natural born Citizen” may mean), I would argue that if the standard can be transformed (i.e. lowered) then why can’t it be restored (i.e. increased)!!! Furthermore, to be put bluntly, is there anyone alive today who can claim that following the original meaning of natural born Citizen (born in the United States when both parents are U.S. citizens) would create any significant danger of pretext for discrimination of the kind that still apparently existed in the immediate years following the Civil War? It’s also important to remember that judiciary tends to show extreme deference for the military and the Commander in Chief is by definition military – the military sphere is different than the civilian sphere.


  7. The only thing I can figure is that cruz’s “voters” are the SAME liberal jerks who voted for barry the usurper TWICE and they would LOVE to validate the usurper’s invalid presidency by electing yet another usurper.


  8. Just to be clear, I have relentlessly supported those who purportedly have genuinely advocated for Conservative positions (including Ted Cruz). That being said I will not make myself an accessory to violation of the U.S. Constitution by voting for Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio – both of whom are not natural born Citizens. I am also disappointed that Trump only focused on Cruz and avoided Rubio (in terms of natural born Citizen); makes me wonder if Cruz’s argument in a debate regarding Trump’s mother’s place of birth, may have rattled Trump. It’s horrific. In any event, if I have to choose between Cruz/Rubio vs. some Democrat for President of the United States, I would either not vote at all or support the Democrat. It wouldn’t be the first time that I supported a Democrat. For example: I supported Alison Lundergan Grimes in her election against that horrific RINO Mitch McConnell (after the candidate I initially supported Matt Bevin was defeated). Even if Cruz would be a natural born Citizen (which he is not), a vote for Cruz would not address extremely significant issues such as the trade deficits. Senators tend to make lousy Presidents because they lack executive experience; they may just be good orators/critics. Just also look at how horrific Senators Clinton and Kerry have run the State Department. Indeed, in many respects the resumes of Cruz/Rubio are similar to Obama (albeit to a certain extent with the opposite ideology). On the other hand, President Reagen had many years of executive experience such as governor of California. Furthermore, on the most important conservative issue, immigration, Cruz (like Rubio) is unreliable as discussed by Sarah Palin (who was a successful mayor and governor). Sarah Palin: Choosing Trump Over Cruz “Wasn’t A Tough Decision” – ; – ‘ …”(The choice) became much less difficult once some inconsistencies started coming out about Cruz’s position on amnesty, on building that wall (along the Mexican border), and securing our jobs and our homes via tighter borders,” Palin said. “You know, I just started looking a little bit closer and realizing we just don’t need more of the same. We need that fresh, energetic, can-do spirit that Trump has brought with him from the private sector, which I love. So yeah, end of the day, it wasn’t a tough decision.” …’ Cruz also seems to have a pattern of unethical campaign behavior – examples: ,


    • Robert, here’s the problem with “litigating the issue of natural born citizena”. The Supreme Court will never, ever take any case involving the qualification of a sitting candidate, or existing office holder, because it is prohibited from doing so by the Constitution itself.

      Under the doctrine of justiciability, there are various considerations that any case must meet in order to be heard, among these are that it must be a real controversy, that it is not moot, nor unripe. And the court must be able to offer a real remedy, not just an advisory opinion.

      Also among these concerns is the fact that the case cannot be a “political question”, which means, among other things, that the issue cannot be assigned to another branch of government. Unfortunately, under the Constitution as it is understood, the Congress is given the task of qualifying the candidates, particularly at the time of counting the votes. While it can be argued that Congress has not done so in this regard, particularly not in the 2008 election for McCain and Obama, that absence of any effort to duly qualify the candidates does not allow the authority to pass to the Court.

      If you pause and think about this, it would be extremely bad if the Court had the power to remove a sitting occupant in the office of President, as this would make our government subject to the pleasure of the Court, just nine persons dressed in black. By being under such a black-robed judicial supremacy, there would no longer be any sort of Balance of Power between the 3 branches.

      The short version is that the Supreme Court cannot, and will not ever, take any case regarding a candidate, or office holder, because the Court cannot provide a remedy, as it has no authority to remove persons from the ballot, nor to remove them from office. Given this, it is no surprise that the only pronouncements on the terms of natural born to come from the Supreme Court have come from cases considering citizenship only, not any actual candidate’s qualification. Natural born is often recognized in the discussion of citizenship because it is the basis of citizenship in every society — being persons born into that society from members of that society. There have been 5 such cases over the course of Supreme Court history that have consistently recognized the terms of natural born citizen to be birth in the country to parents who were citizens.

      Today, conspicuously, our media, politicians and political pundits have such a high degree of corruption that they pretend these 5 Supreme Court recognitions do not exist, and dismiss those terms as ridiculous and unfounded. AT any rate, because of the facts of justiciability, we can dismiss those claiming that the current cases not obtaining a writ of Certiorari (Cert) to be heard by the court, failed such due to lacking merit. That is just not the case.


      • T.J.,
        Pennsylvania statute allows citizens to challenge a candidate’s nominating papers, including a candidate’s affidavit with the declaration that the candidate is eligible for the office he seeks. I have filed(pro se) a petition of objection to Cruz’s filing with the Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg(There is another Commonwealth Court cases that considered such a challenge), compiling a strong argument that Cruz is naturalized and multiple Supreme Court decisions defining and distinguishing natural born from Naturalized citizens. My hearing in Harrisburg is March 10th. Frankly, I expect to win the case, but ponder the resulting effects. If Cruz is thrown off the primary ballot in Pennsylvania…. does that effect other venues beyond Pennsylvania? Unless it does, I don’t expect Cruz will take it to a higher court, figuring he would have lost in Pennsylvania anyway. If my challenge does set a precedence, what are the implications?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Carmon, while i am somewhat fascinated by your challenge, given that I myself am a resident of Pennsylvania, I sincerely believe that the chances of such a challenge being acted upon is slim at the State level, and hearing such a challenge (Certiorari) even less likely on appeal to the Supreme Court, given my previous explanation of Justiciability. I doubt that any Pennsylvania court would question Cruz’s legitimacy on the ballot, given the national exposure, and think that recognizing the actual terms of natural born citizen would be extremely unlikely.

        However I will be watching for news of your case. Best of luck!


  9. T.J. — Regarding your comment regarding justiciability, are you arguing that regarding all courts and all agencies? Were the litigation(s) (Illinois and New Hampshire) alluded to in “Ted Cruz Is A ‘Natural Born Citizen,’ Board Of Election Finds” — — denied based on “justiciability”? Also is there any relevant case law of a candidate whose law suit against another fellow candidate(s) being denied because of lack of standing etc. (regarding a similar issue of eligibility)? Also aren’t agency decisions ultimately often reviewable in at least some judiciary? — RP


    • Obviously the Illinois Board of Elections has no authority to overrule the 5 separate Supreme Curt decisions over this country’s history. Another favorite is to cite minor appeals court cases, such as the Ankeny case (Ankeny vs Governor of Indiana 2008) in Indiana, the Indiana Court of Apeals does not not have jurisdiction of the Constitution as indicated by the Constitution itself, and the Governor does not have the authority to choose who is on the ballot.

      The terms of natural born citizen have already been consistently recognized (not “decided”) by the Supreme Court of the United States, starting with The Venus case in 1814. Those terms recognized by the Supreme Court are, “birth in the country to parents who were citizens”.

      The Illinois Board of Elections has zero authority to overturn the Supreme Court on this matter. In fact that board of Elections only shows its incompetence on the matter by representing it to be about “citizenship”, i.e. “citizenship criteria”, when natural born citizen has nthing whatsoever to do with citizenship under the law. This is why we do not find natural born citizen defined in law.

      It is further incompetence for the Board of Elections to indicate that John McCain and George Romney appearing on past ballots somehow indicated their qualification as NBCs under the constitution. It does not, and the Constitution only prohibits those who are not NBC from holding the office of President, and even then does not presume they are natural born if they attain the office of President. In fact SR 511, the U.S. Senate non-binding resolution suggesting that McCain was a natural born citizen, involved serial fraud by certain members of the Senate, but curiously indicated McCain was a citizen by two claims 1) His parents were citizens, and 2) he was born on American soil.

      “McCain – A Case of Senate Fraud” (PDF)



    “These first hand accounts of Ted Cruz lying, cheating, and stealing Iowa are startling” –

    “Explosive Audio Surfaces – Cruz Campaign Telling Iowa Precinct Captains Carson Had Dropped Out of Race…” –

    “Dirty Politics” – / “Phony GOP Establishment Preaches “Do As I Say, Not As I Do”” –

    Also do not underestimate the danger of Marco Rubio (who also does not appear to satisfy Vattel’s elucidation of natural born Citizen) … “Yoda [to Luke Skywalker]: Remember, a Jedi’s strength flows from the Force. But beware. Anger, fear, aggression. The dark side are they. Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Luke… Luke… do not… do not underestimate the powers of the Emperor or suffer your father’s fate you will.” –


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s