Trudeau Trumps Trump’s Trade Tirade

June 11, 2018

©2018 jbjd

I just read an opinion piece in the Washington Post, written by a Canadian, excoriating Canada’s Prime Minister Trudeau for claiming the high ground in President Trump’s trade tirade.

Here’s where I think most pundits are doing a disservice to the general(ly under-educated, under-informed) public, in both the U.S. and Canada, when it comes to matters of trade.

Before we engage in an analysis of trade between our two countries, even before we consider political affiliation or bent; we should consider the legal basis for the President’s unilateral decision to impose tariffs on Canada, bypassing both Congress and our other traditional trading partners. Taken at his word; Trump unilaterally imposed tariffs on the basis of the legal rationale, this is for national security. And, it’s a good thing he did because, under Article I of the Constitution, which delineates the powers of the Legislative branch, Congress controls trade, a power only partially ceded under Article II, the Executive branch, for reasons of national security, as determined by the Executive. Okay, so far. But all state action additionally requires at least a “rational basis.” So, here’s my dilemma.

Currently, Canadian forces stationed in the U.S., are helping to protect the national security of the whole continent.

 North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) – established in 1958 and based at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colorado, NORAD is a Canadian and U.S. bi-national organization tasked with aerospace warning, aerospace control and maritime warning for North America.

Where are the news and opinion writers addressing this seeming “national security” contradiction, even setting aside their apparent indifference to the implications of Trump’s actions on the integrity of our Constitution?

I will be curious to see what “jbjd” readers on either side of the public trade debate think of that.


TRUMP OBSCURES “THE VIEW”

January 9, 2017

©2017 jbjd

Thin-skinned Donald Trump’s latest foray into Twitterland evidences his personal race toward irrelevance, but the marketeer extraordinaire still manages to drag “The View” closer to fatal obsolescence.

The discussion on today’s show included the remarks from Meryl Streep at last night’s Golden Globes, during her acceptance speech as recipient of the Cecile B. deMille Award. Streep took full advantage of the accolade bestowed on her by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, to focus her remarks on the press. Her speech included references to the public ridicule displayed on November 25, 2015 by then R-Presidential-nominee-wannabe Trump against Serge Kovaleski, an investigative reporter at the NYT, and an admonition that the “famously well-heeled Hollywood foreign press” and everyone should “hold power to account.” She followed with an entreaty to support the Committee to Protect Journalists.

First, here is Streep’s speech, in its entirety.

Some panelists on “The View,” including Whoopi and Joy Behar, voiced agreement with Streep’s disdain for making fun of the handicapped. The discussion also included a spirited defense of Trump’s gyrations from Jedediah Bila, late of FOX News. She admits at first viewing, she also thought Trump was making fun of the reporter’s congenital affliction. However, “…then I watched a series of clips of Donald Trump using those exact hand gestures to mock other people… .”

Whoopi shows an excerpted video of Trump ridiculing Kovaleski. Jedediah cites to an excerpted video in which Trump ridicules Ted Cruz at a rally in February 2016, using gestures she now describes not as “exact” but only as “very similar.” (Here is a snippet of that segment, which include the excerpted images of both events.)

See that? Just seconds after Jedediah’s interpretation that these ‘visual aids’ indicated her initial interpretation was wrong, that is, Trump did not specifically target Kovaleski with physically animated gesticulations because of the man’s obvious physical handicap; even Whoopi and Joy Behar buy into Trump’s elixir. Now, the two women re-cast their objection to his conduct on these more generalized grounds: he should not make fun of someone just because that person disagrees with him.

Note to Trump apologists of whatever political ilk: when it comes to accurately interpreting his output, pay closer attention to distinctions of time and place. See, Trump’s initial mock(-up) targeting Kovaleski occurred at a political rally he held on November 24, 2015. A global outcry immediately followed. The reality-show-producer-cum-political-huckster, with his tiny fingers firmly pressed on the pulse of the public, grasped that, this time, he had gone too far. So, aiming to re-cast the deplorable image he had imprinted in people’s minds, he staged arguably similar antics directed at victims without obvious physical afflictions, after that.

(Keep in mind at all times, “The View” is not a news show. The video excerpt they ran of Trump’s attack on Kovaleski is clipped so as to omit these introductory words uttered as Trump launched into his offensive ‘song and dance,’ words which tend to reaffirm that Trump targeted the man because of his obvious physical disability: “…written by a nice reporter, the poor guy, you gotta see this guy…”

For a comprehensive report on Trump’s Kovaleski concoction, please, read Donald Trump’s revisionist history of mocking a disabled reporter, which appeared in the WaPo on August 2, 2016.)

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My mind is a terrible thing to waste.

 

 

 

 

 

 


EVEN DONALD TRUMP CANNOT SULLY this SOLEMN SCENE

July 30, 2016

©2016 jbjd

(See important UPDATE at 21:27, below.)

According to The Fiscal Times; while R Presidential nominee Donald Trump had begun his usual public pablum attack against other speakers featured at the DNC Presidential  Nominating Convention who he felt had maligned him, including his D opponent Hillary Clinton, former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Ret. General John Allen, Commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan from July 2011 to February 2013; as of 19 hours ago; he had yet to attack Gold Star father Khizr Khan. Trump Lashes Out at DNC Critics — Except for One

According to The Hill, as of a couple of hours ago, he still has left Mr. Khan alone. But this doesn’t mean, he left the offensive speech unscathed. Only this time, instead of going after the speaker of the truth-which-stung; rather, Trump went after the man’s wife. Trump responds to Muslim DNC speaker: ‘I’d like to hear his wife’

The comments posted on The Hill are laced with xenophobia and hatred of anything Islam, making their authors easily identifiable as Trump acolytes. Both he and they obviously view the world in the same scary us-versus-them way. And they both miss the obvious point.

Without detailing my life story, let me just say, Mr. and Mrs. Khan are not the first Muslim couple from Pakistan whose demeanor I have been in a position to observe. Perhaps this explains why, rather than seeking out a telltale sign of the stereotypical mute wife pictured in the minds of Trumpettes; I watched Mrs. Khan through the eyes of a mother whose own heart would stop beating if I was to lose one of my sons.

Trump attributed her silence to Muslim female subservience. On the other hand; not surprisingly, I saw a woman who, on the verge of publicly weeping, struggled to retain the privacy of her grief while at the same time proudly looking on as her resolute husband shared recollections of the death of their beloved son for the good of this nation. (Would Trump the Magnificent have us believe he didn’t see her eyes were filled with tears? I mean, I know FOX News did not broadcast the speech, live – Here’s What Fox News Aired Instead of the Speech by Fallen Muslim Soldier’s Father but surely, by now, everyone who missed the live event knows what was said and, has taken a peek.)

Whenever I detected her husband’s subtle touch, or glance, I didn’t automatically pronounce, see, he’s the boss in this Muslim coupling, keeping his wife in her place. Rather, I thought, what profound tenderness, and devotion. I marveled that even addressing the DNC (and the world), this man is not sidetracked from comforting his wife, ever aware she still grieves for her lost child.

Yes, unlike Donald Trump, I watched and recognized their shared pain, manifested differently. I listened and considered the stark distinction between the sentiment expressed here, and the overarching malicious meme of the Trump candidacy.

I cried.

UPDATE at 21:27: Well, well, well. I posted this original article at 2:13 PM EDT. Politico’s Morin published Trump rebuts Khizr Khan: ‘I’ve made a lot of sacrifices. I work very, very hard’ 14 minutes after that. In it, she quotes Trump from a taped interview with George Stephanopoulos to be broadcast tomorrow, in which Trump expands his criticism of Mrs. Khan.

But Trump also said Ghazala Khan looked “like she had nothing to say.” He added, “She probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say. You tell me.”

So, I was correct in positing Trump’s seemingly innocuous “I’d like to hear his wife” was just another not-so-thinly-veiled guiding of the masses to augment the pernicious stereotype, all Muslim men subjugate ‘their’ women. And, from the same article, there was this.

Mrs. Khan was interviewed by MSNBC on Friday, the day after the convention ended. “She said she didn’t speak at the convention because she is still overwhelmed by grief.” (Emphasis added by jbjd.) Again, lacking Trump’s anti-Muslim game plan made me right, all along.

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My mind is a terrible thing to waste.


TRUMP’S GHOSTWRITER BUSTS HIS OWN MYTH

July 18, 2016

UPDATE 07.20.16 (at bottom)

©2016 jbjd

Finally, The Art of the Deal ghostwriter Tony Schwartz comes back to life to proclaim, when it comes to Donald J. Trump; take it from me, what you see is all that you will ever get.

Last December, in a column entitled DONALD J. TRUMP PROVES HE IS NOT ONLY STUPID, HE’S A LOUSY NEGOTIATOR; I detailed the many ways, Trump’s real-life performance repeatedly fails to live up to his hype. The piece ended with this lamentation:

For the first time, I would take a look at the best selling The Art of the Deal; and contrast Trump’s tips for success in a high-stakes confrontation; against his abysmal performance on the stage. In this way, I could reinforce even to his truest believers that just because he wrote a book on the subject doesn’t mean, he is any good at political negotiations; and further, given that the primary ‘skill’ he claims for the job of President is his superior negotiating ability then, this means he is incompetent to do the job.

Only, notwithstanding Trump’s name appears in HUUUGE letters above the title of the book, I discovered that just like Bill Ayers wrote Barack Obama’s inspirational Dreams from my Father; someone else wrote Donald Trump’s ‘negotiating bible,’ too.

For months thereafter; wherever appropriate, I included this fact that, Trump did not write The Art of the Deal, in comments I posted throughout the blogosphere. However, at the time, I pejoratively described the book’s real author, Tony Schwartz, as a motivational guru of sorts, which characterization happened to be consistent with my opinion that anyone who participated in Trump’s fraud was equally a conman.

But having just read Donald Trump’s Ghostwriter Tells All in The New Yorker, I publicly proclaim, when it comes to Tony Schwartz, I have changed my mind. In fact; the work which Schwartz began after the book came out, which I had previously assumed was his attempt to capitalize on the prior association with Trump was, on the contrary, an act of profound contrition resulting from that collaboration.

For example, here is the intro to Jane Mayer’s piece:

“The Art of the Deal” made America see Trump as a charmer with an unfailing knack for business. Tony Schwartz helped create that myth—and regrets it.

Then, there’s this.

…Feeling deeply alienated, he instead wrote a book called “What Really Matters,” about the search for meaning in life. After working with Trump, Schwartz writes, he felt a “gnawing emptiness” and became a “seeker,” longing to “be connected to something timeless and essential, more real.”

If you are one of those voters who believes Trump’s ability to run the Executive branch of our federal government can be extrapolated from the anecdotes contained in The Art of the Deal, you are not alone. As Trump touted when he announced his Presidential run; he claims to feel the same way.

Trump, facing a crowd that had gathered in the lobby of Trump Tower, on Fifth Avenue, laid out his qualifications, saying, “We need a leader that wrote ‘The Art of the Deal.’ ”

But, even assuming, arguendo, the sentiment Trump expressed is both heartfelt, and true; Trump is not that candidate.

If that was so, Schwartz thought, then he, not Trump, should be running. Schwartz dashed off a tweet: “Many thanks Donald Trump for suggesting I run for President, based on the fact that I wrote ‘The Art of the Deal.’ ”

Schwartz had ghostwritten Trump’s 1987 breakthrough memoir, earning a joint byline on the cover, half of the book’s five-hundred-thousand-dollar advance, and half of the royalties. The book was a phenomenal success, spending forty-eight weeks on the Times best-seller list, thirteen of them at No. 1. More than a million copies have been bought, generating several million dollars in royalties. The book expanded Trump’s renown far beyond New York City, making him an emblem of the successful tycoon. Edward Kosner, the former editor and publisher of New York, where Schwartz worked as a writer at the time, says, “Tony created Trump. He’s Dr. Frankenstein.”

If only his creation would retreat to the Arctic tundra never to be heard from again…

UPDATE 07.20.16: On July 18, the Trump Organization issued a “Cease and Desist” letter to Mr. Schwartz, demanding he stop claiming he wrote The Art of the Deal – his name appears on the cover, overshadowed by Trump’s – and return all royalties paid – these are split between the two men, fifty/fifty – retroactively. Schwartz insists he is undeterred in setting the record straight about Trump; indeed, he points to Trump’s reaction as further evidence, he was right to come forward to expose, the emperor he helped to create, has no clothes.

If this modus operandi doesn’t convince Trump sycophants this man is temperamentally unfit to be President then, they lack not only good sense but also imagination as to the damage he can inflict on his ‘enemies,’ both real and perceived, with the power of the Oval Office bankrolling his tantrums.

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My mind is a terrible thing to waste.

 


TRUMP the CHUMP

January 27, 2016

©2016 jbjd

(03.02.16: While the video below is no longer available free of charge; luckily, I also posted images of an extensive expose I had found about the video, which was printed in New York Magazine in 1989, the same year in which, but for threats of lawsuits from The Donald, the documentary would have been unveiled.)

 

Trump.Stern.1 Trump.Stern.2 Trump.Stern.3 Trump.Stern.4 Trump.Stern.5 Trump.Stern.6 Trump.Stern.7 Trump.Stern.8 Trump.Stern.9 Trump.Stern.10 Trump.Stern.11 Trump.Stern.12 Trump.Stern.13

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My mind is a terrible thing to waste.


CRUZ for PRESIDENT CAMPAIGN COPIES OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE GAMBIT and CARLY FIORINA HITS a HOME RUN

January 9, 2016

© 2016 jbjd

CORRECTED and UPDATED (IMPORTANT) 01.10.12

Please don’t be misdirected into believing that U.S. Senator (R-TX) Ted Cruz’ latest ‘birth certificate’ shenanigans have put his eligibility matter to rest.

It is Friday, January 8, 2016. Over-sized headlines on Drudge proclaim in huge letters that Presidential candidate Ted Cruz has produced his mother’s birth certificate showing she was born in the U.S.A., implying this alone establishes his Constitutional eligibility to be President (as a natural born citizen). But trust me; thus far he has failed to provide documentary evidence that supports a rational legal conclusion he is even a U.S. citizen, let alone natural born. It’s true. It’s all here.

First, a brief legal primer on determining U.S. citizenship at birth, for a child born in Canada.

The status of U.S. citizenship is determined by examining the U.S. Code in effect at the time of birth. Cruz was born in 1970, in Canada. Does that make him a U.S. citizen? The applicable U.S. Code says,

U.S. citizenship to a child born in Canada [in 1970] whose father [admittedly] is not a U.S. citizen is conditioned on both 1) the U.S. citizenship of the mother; and 2) her having lived in the U.S. for five (5) 10 (ten) years, two (2) five (5) of which must have occurred past the age of 14. (8 U.S.C. 1401, Act 301 (g)) June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 1, § 301, 66 Stat. 235)

Thus, at a minimum; an application of facts to law that will determine whether Cruz is a U.S. citizen would require at least two additional documents: his birth certificate, and the birth certificate of his mother. And as this Salon article written by Steven Lubet, the Williams Memorial Professor of Law at Northwestern University demonstrates; the fact that determining his citizenship would require both birth certificates has been public knowledge since at least as far back as 2013, the year Senator Cruz took office.

Ted Cruz’s origins continue to haunt him

[subtitle omitted by jbjd]

by Steven Lubett

In order to fulfill his promise to the voters, Cruz must therefore submit proof that he is a U.S. citizen, which will be trickier for him than for most people. Cruz has thus far released only his Canadian birth certificate, which confirms that he was born in Calgary, Alberta, in 1970, and additionally states that his mother was born in Wilmington, Dela. The second part is crucial – Cruz’s only claim to U.S. citizenship through his mother – but it is also hearsay. The birth certificate is primary evidence of Cruz’s own birth, but the entry about his mother merely records her assertion to the Alberta Division of Vital Statistics. Even though I don’t personally dispute what he says, “My mother said so” is not what is usually meant by “proof.”

How, then, can Ted Cruz prove his U.S. citizenship to the satisfaction of the Canadian authorities? He could submit his passport, or perhaps the document called a Consular Certificate of Birth Abroad (if his parents obtained one), but those would have the same hearsay problems as his birth certificate. The only sure-fire evidence, therefore, would be his mother’s birth certificate, presumably issued when she was born in Delaware.

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/20/ted_cruzs_origins_continue_to_haunt_him/

In an article entitled “Dual citizenship may pose problem if Ted Cruz seeks presidency,” The Dallas Morning News reported in August 2013, “For the first time, Cruz released his birth certificate Friday in response to inquiries from The Dallas Morning News.” An image of the document appeared on the site. Information had been filled in on what looks like an official government form captioned: “Division of Vital Statistics, Department of Health Edmonton, Certificate of Birth.” Id. On the line for mother’s birthplace, someone had typed “Wilmington, Delaware, U.S.A.” Id.

At this same time, Cruz did not release the other document we have established is vital to his U.S. citizenship validation, which is the U.S. birth certificate for his mother.

(Please click on that link above to The Dallas Morning News from August 2013; and keep in mind, we’re talking about events which occurred three years ago. Then, scroll down the page till you reach the embedded Daily Caller video entitled “Trump plays birther card on Ted Cruz”; it shows a clip from of ABC’s “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos broadcast in August 2013, featuring a segment with Jon Carl on the ground at the Iowa State Fair. Play that whole video. It opens with Stephanopoulos:  “Every August the Iowa State Fair features pork tenderloins, deep-fried Twinkies, a whole bunch of ambitious politicians with the White House in their sights. Forget that it’s three years before the next election, it’s never too early, Presidential hopefuls are out in force across the Hawkeye state this week-end.” Then, it cuts to Carl, at the Iowa State Fair. “We even ran into Donald Trump out here… he says that he might run.” What follows is Carl’s exchange with Trump. Carl asks for Trump’s “assessment of the field,” and goes down the names. “Ted Cruz.” Trump loves his opposition to Obamacare. Then, Carl asks about “Trump,” citing his history of questioning Obama’s birth certificate. This leads to a question from Carl about Cruz’ eligibility, pointing out, Cruz was born in Canada, but his mother was an America citizen. Trump’s abbreviated response: “Look, that will be ironed out…”)

Three years later, Presidential candidate Trump raises the specter his fellow candidate, Cruz, might have a problem with Constitutional eligibility. Days later, on January 8, 2016, in the article linked on Drudge‘s headline, Breitbart announced, “The Cruz for President campaign provided Breitbart News exclusively with the birth certificate.” The ‘birth certificate’ they were talking about is for Cruz’ mother; an image of what purports to be that document appeared on the site. Information had been filled in on what looks like an official government form captioned: “State of Delaware, Standard Certificate of Birth.” Id. On the line for mother’s birthplace, someone had written “Wilmington, Delaware.” Id.  For whatever reason, Breitbart provided readers with no explanation as to how the Cruz campaign transmitted this ‘document’ to them. The source code for the image  displayed in the article contains only a Breitbart electronic trail; it is posted on the Breitbart Scribd page, with no visible attribution to the Cruz campaign. 

In no particular order of import; here are just a few of the material facts which trouble me about this ‘Ted-Cruz’-mother’s-U.S.-birth-certificate-presentation’ and have aided my analysis that this is part of a broader well-orchestrated dog-and-pony show. (I am sure I will write additional columns on this issue, as time (and paid employment) allow.)

PROBLEM #1: Under the U.S. Code, any mock-ups like this coming not from the U.S. Senator, or from “Mr.” Cruz, but out of the Cruz for President campaign only constitute paid political advertising. Further, these materials must be identifiable to the viewer as sponsored by the campaign.

(I have written extensively about the difference between legally cognizable identification documentation, and a paid political advertising campaign. See, for example, DE-CODER RINGS (1 of 2) and WHY PRESIDENT OBAMA WAITED until APRIL 27, 2011 to RELEASE a FACSIMILE of his LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE.)

PROBLEM #2: This 2016 exclusive presentation on Breitbart marks the first time an image of the birth certificate of Cruz’ mother has become available for public display, notwithstanding as explained above; since he was born in Canada 1) her birth certificate is required to establish whether he is a U.S. citizen; and 2) questions as to his U.S. citizenship have dogged him since at least as far back as 2013. But even with the crescendo of eligibility speculation beginning at least as far back as then; as we said, the only evidence he produced to establish his U.S. citizenship was his birth certificate. And that was it for the next three years. Then, in February 2015, with his run for the Presidency all but guaranteed; The Dallas Morning News reported that rumors of ineligibility resurfaced. Now, with the stakes for establishing his eligibility raised considerably; you might think a smart lawyer like Cruz would produce his mother’s U.S. birth certificate as evidence he was legit. Well, you would be wrong. Because all he coughed up that same birth certificate for baby boy Cruz he had offered up to the same newspaper three years earlier! Id.

PROBLEM #3: Under both the U.S. Code and recent holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court protecting false political speech; unless intended for an unlawful purpose like defrauding the government; pretending to a media outlet that a facsimile of an ‘identification document’ like the image of a birth certificate (or of a form of renunciation of Canadian citizenship) is real, does not violate the law, precisely because as a matter of law, it identifies nothing.  Think about it this way. Let’s say, you are applying for a civilian job and, in order to verify your educational background, your prospective employer asks you to provide an “official” school transcript. You wouldn’t go to your school; have them copy your records and hand them over to you; and then deliver these to the employer. No; that’s not “official.” Because you could have tampered with the information in your possession and under your control. Rather, you would likely ask your school, in writing, to mail these records to that employer, on your behalf. (You might also satisfy the request to provide an official transcript by having the record holder place the documents into an envelope and ‘sealing’ the flap with embossing, which you can then hand to the company.)

How might ‘inquiring minds’ similarly obtain official identification documentation with respect to Cruz’ U.S. citizenship status? Well, they might try obtaining the relevant information from Canadian officials. Indeed, the The Dallas Morning News said they tried to obtain such ‘official’ verification of Cruz’ U.S. citizenship status way back in August 2013, in the same report in which they posted the image Cruz provided, of his Canadian birth certificate with his mother’s birthplace filled in as U.S.A.

Officials at Citizenship and Immigration Canada said that without a signed privacy waiver from Cruz, they cannot discuss his case. Id.

And, today, three years later, Breitbart News echoed the Dallas News’ frustration at being unable to access Cruz’ identifying information:

Canadian immigration authorities could not provide Breitbart News with additional documents, citing Canadian privacy laws.  Id.

So, for three years and counting; why hasn’t Cruz provided either of these media outlets with the necessary waiver authorization so that they could directly obtain his official identification documentation?

PROBLEM #4: Despite the fact spelled out in PROBLEM #1 that this maternal ‘birth certificate’ displayed on Breitbart has no legal bearing on Cruz’ U.S. citizenship status inasmuch as it was issued by his Presidential campaign; the timing of the campaign’s release is nonetheless way off. Coincidentally, Presidential Candidate Carly Fiorina hinted just the other day she found a ‘timing’ dilemma in another aspect of Cruz’ citizenship brouhaha, which tends to bolster my present ‘Breitbart timing’ observation.

Interviewed on January 7, 2016 by FOX’s Greta Van Susteren, Ms. Fiorina was asked to comment on what Susteren characterized as Cruz’ eligibility dispute,  begun by Trump and joined publicly just that day by Sen. McCain, who agreed there was some legitimacy to the issue because Cruz was born in Alberta, Canada “to an American mother and a Cuban father.” She asked where Fiorina stood on this “discussion.” Fiorina replied, “Well, I don’t know all  the particulars but I would say this. I find it odd that Senator Ted Cruz did not renounce his dual Canadian citizenship until 2014, when it became clear he was running for President.” Van Susteren asked, “Meaning what, meaning that he wanted to be a Canadian until 2014, is that what that means?” The candidate clarified, “I don’t know; I think  you oughta ask him.” http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/video/video-fiorina-questions-why-ted-cruz-took-so-long-to-renounce-his-dual-canadian-citizenship/

I have a theory on the answer to Ms. Fiorina’s question.

Here is the full title of the article by Professor Lubett, published by Salon in September 2013, including the sub-heading I omitted above, followed by the ‘money’ excerpt from that article: (all emphasis added by jbjd)

Ted Cruz’s origins continue to haunt him

What’s really keeping Ted Cruz from finally renouncing his Canadian citizenship? An expert investigates

What is keeping Ted Cruz from finally renouncing his Canadian citizenship?

Perhaps Cruz simply hasn’t gotten around to it. In fairness, the Canadian government requires more than a simple shout-out before canceling somebody’s citizenship. The aspiring ex-Canadian has to pay a fee of $100 and submit an official “Application to Renounce Canadian Citizenship,” which could be a bother for someone with a busy schedule of Tea Party meetings and lectures for the Heritage Foundation. On the other hand, the renunciation form is pretty simple. There are only 12 questions on the application, and most of them request basic information such as name, address and date of birth, all of which could be handled by a staffer.

There is one section, however, that could cause Cruz some trouble, and perhaps that is the reason for his delay. Question 5 instructs the applicant to “attach proof” that he is (or will become) a citizen of a country other than Canada. That may seem like it is none of Canada’s business, but in fact the requirement follows from important principles of international law – including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – which call upon governments to protect individuals from becoming stateless. Of course, Canada’s requirement of proof was not established with U.S. senators in mind, but it does reflect an admirable intention to ensure that all individuals have national rights in at least one country. And in any event, it is up to Canada to decide how and in what manner its citizenship may be annulled – the U.S. has similar rules – and Cruz has no choice but to follow the necessary protocol.

Id.

Recall that the The Dallas Morning News reported in August 2013; problems were surfacing related to Cruz’ dual citizenship. Id.

The circumstances of Cruz’s birth have fueled a simmering debate over his eligibility to run for president. Knowingly or not, dual citizenship is an apparent if inconvenient truth for the tea party firebrand, who shows every sign he’s angling for the White House….Two visits in recent weeks to Iowa, the first state to winnow the field of presidential candidates, set off a fresh flurry of commentary on the issue. He heads to New Hampshire, another early voting state, on Friday — another strong sign that he’s eyeing a 2016 run.

The Morning News article went on to say that Cruz announced he would resolve the problem immediately by having his team of lawyers research how to “renounce” his Canadian citizenship. Id. And, inasmuch as Professor Lubett’s article in Salon pointed out, renouncing his Canadian citizenship required proving he had citizenship elsewhere, presumably in the U.S.; he would have to establish at this point, his mother was an American citizen. In short, he would need to produce his mother’s birth certificate before officials in Canada could process his Canadian citizenship renunciation. (Lubett also pointed out; Cruz could have used a U.S. passport, which is issued by the State Dept., to prove he is a citizen of the U.S. However, in order to obtain a U.S. passport, one must present evidence of being a U.S. citizen. And, inasmuch as Cruz’ birth certificate evidences he was born in Canada; he could not prove to our State Dept. he had inherited U.S. citizenship through his mother, without producing her birth certificate, anyway.)

The Dallas Morning News reported nine months later. in May 2014, that the process to terminate Cruz’ Canadian citizenship had been finalized; they posted the copy Cruz gave them of what he said was the official letter. (Actually, it wasn’t a letter at all but a form captioned, “Certificate of Renunciation of Canadian Citizenship.” Id.)

This means, the birth certificate for Cruz’ mother was in his possession at the latest, before the date on that letter-cum-Certification of Renunciation.

In sum; before Cruz could obtain the Canada letter-cum-Certification of Renunciation he provided to The Dallas Morning News in May 2014, he must have had possession of his mother’s birth certificate, and it must have shown, she was a citizen of the U.S.A.

So, here’s the problem associated with the relationship between the timing Ms. Fiorina pointed to in her interview with Greta, of Cruz’ alleged renunciation of Canadian citizenship in [May] 2014; and his campaign’s distribution to Breitbart the mock-up of his mother’s birth certificate two years later, in January 2016. Questions as to his status as a U.S. citizen centered on more than his dual-citizenship. This meant that just renouncing his Canadian citizenship in May 2014 only solved some of those pending Constitutional eligibility problems. The other questions related to his eligibility status centered mostly on whether he was born a U.S. citizen, which determination you now know could have been all but resolved as soon as he produced the birth certificate for his mother. And, based on the date that appears on the Canada letter-cum-Certification of Renunciation provided to The Dallas Morning News; we know he held that document by May 2014.

Then, why hasn’t he made that birth certificate available to The Dallas Morning News, or Breitbart, or any other media outlet, between May 2014 and now?

PROBLEM #5: The AP reported in August 2013 that Ted Cruz said he got his U.S. passport when he was in high school.

IMPORTANT UPDATE 01.10.15

Today, RCP posted an interview by CNN’s Jake Tapper, on Ted Cruz’ campaign bus. Tapper asked Carly’s question about the timing of Cruz’ renunciation. Let me explain how that has opened up the proverbial can of worms.

The important exchange is 01:10-3:20.

So, what’s so bad about that? I’ll tell you.

Ted Cruz is a smart and politically ambitious man. Here’s the Cruz bio that appears on the Congressional site: graduated Princeton University, B.A., 1992; graduated Harvard University, J.D., 1995; Law Clerk to Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist; Associate Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice; Director of the Office of Policy Planning, Federal Trade Commission; Solicitor General of Texas 2003-2008; lawyer; elected to U.S. Senate 2012. http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C001098 And as I pointed out earlier; The Dallas Morning News raised Cruz’ dual citizenship status during the 2013 Iowa State Fair, where the R Presidential nominee wannabes, including Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, had ‘launched’ their campaigns.

There is no way in hell that this man hadn’t fully researched his U.S. citizenship pedigree long before August 13, when The Dallas Morning News pointed out to him, he was likely still a Canadian. Id.

But I noticed something else that stinks about this eligibility play.

On January 7, Heidi Cruz – she’s Managing Director at Goldman Sachs – was interviewed on Boston Herald Radio. Here’s what she said about the eligibility issue (10:00-11:10):

Ted is indisputably a U.S. citizen. He is a natural-born citizen. … He fits that definition without a question.

(Note in that segment, Heidi did not say, Ted is a U.S. citizen ‘because his mother is a citizen.’ However, she does mention maternity in reminding the host that Mitt Romney’s father George – he ran for the R Presidential nomination against Nixon in ’68 – was also a citizen, “born in Mexico, but to a mother who was a U.S. citizen.”)

Now, watch her husband’s January 7 responses to questions about eligibility from Mark Halperin of Bloomberg Politics. (I cannot embed this; but watch from 00:50-02:00):

http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=b171980b65ae4996bffea4da902c7846&ec=JqNGYyMDE6LHW3JgZ6JCYoGU3NddPVyF

The very first Congress, in defining a natural born citizen said, the child of a U.S. citizen is a natural born citizen.

(Note that just as soon as Cruz ended that sentence he was off on another tangent, no pause, no breath. He did not interject, ‘therefore, I am a natural born citizen because my mother is a U.S. citizen’ (or leave any room for Halperin to ask that next logical question.)

And, in today’s video, with Jake Tapper; Cruz began by repeating the party line about his U.S. citizenship, sort of:

The Constitution and federal law are clear. The child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural born citizen.

However, Tapper kept on the subject as the exchange continued, asking whether his parents ever voted in Canada, clearly referencing the fact, voting records indicate she was on such a list, meaning, she would have had Canadian citizenship at the time. Cruz answered:

My mother didn’t, because she was a U.S. citizen, and my mother, look, the internet has all sorts of fevered swamp theories…

So, for the first time during any of these interviews, he now claims, “my mother was a U.S. citizen,” apparently in order to quell Tapper’s voting list reference. But notice, he begins another revelation, “and my mother…” and then stops himself, quickly pivoting to something else. But Tapper keeps going until he brought up Carly’s question. Now, listen to what Cruz said right after that:

Look, my mom was born in Wilmington, DE, was an American citizen by birth, she’s been an American citizen all 81 years of her life…

Question: What happened between January 7, when Mr. & Mrs. Cruz would only answer questions from the press as to the candidate’s eligibility, with vague generalities about the law; and January 10, when the candidate specifically alleged, ‘My mother was born in Delaware, USA’?

Answer: Breitbart posted the campaign’s mock-up of Cruz’ mother’s birth certificate on January 8 and Jake Tapper asked why Carly Fiorina thought it ‘odd” that he renunciated his Canadian citizenship in 2014.

As I said, Carly Fiorina hit a home run by positing that question…

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My mind is a terrible thing to waste.


TOOLS of the TRUMP/DRUDGE/COULTER TRADE

December 31, 2015

©2015 jbjd

Business is booming for the Trump/Coulter/Drudge troika, but I would bet that millions of consumers still have no idea they are the unwitting tools of the tricks of the TCD trade.

Yep, Ann “how-many-fucking-Jews-do-they-think-there-are-in-the-United-States” Coulter is BFF not only with Donald “laziness is a trait in blacks” Trump but with Matt “they-came-up-with-the-name-ISIS-to-be-confused-with-Issa” Drudge, too. Indeed, as you can see for yourself in this clip; the author of  ¡Adios America! The Left’s Plan To Turn Our Country Into A Third World Hellhole calls Drudge “blessed.” (The way in which the TCD troika manipulates what you think you know will be explored in another posting. But note that in this video, Coulter hints at Drudge’s subliminal power to lead the blind masses: “I’m just terrified,” she admits, “If Matt Drudge ever goes on vacation, they’re going to pass amnesty in the dead of night.”)

I had suspected for months, Coulter and Trump were joined at the hip, even before she confirmed their partnership by introducing him at his ‘coming out’ in Iowa.

I was alerted to their symbiotic relationship by his newly ramped up anti-immigrant meme. For example, on June 16, Trump proclaimed, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said in the speech. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” June 16. So, I checked and, not coincidentally, Coulter’s ¡Adios America! came out two weeks earlier, on June 1. In fact, as you can see in the next video; an interviewer from BBC’s Newsnight program noticed the striking similarity in their language with respect to people with brown skins. He asked whether Trump took his reference to “Mexican rapists” from her. As you can see; Coulter proudly reveals, Trump initiated contact with her before her book came out to solicit an advance copy.

(IMPORTANT NOTE: In the BBC video, Ms. Coulter alleged ¡Adios America!, the sole focus of which book is immigration, is well-annotated. However, six months earlier, in June; Bill Maher pointed out on his show that the ‘stats’ in her book seemed to him to be way ‘off.’ Specifically, he asked where are the “stats” proving that Mexicans entering this country are “rapists”the discrepancy between the 11,000,000 illegal immigrants the government estimates are living here; and her figure of approximately 30,000,000. Now put on the spot by someone who had not only read her book but also was willing to ‘call her out’ on its contents; she conceded, it’s impossible to get government figures – ‘they don’t keep them’ – so she found alternative means. And, as you can see for yourself in this video from Maher’s show; Ms. Coulter’s alternative means of reaching the real numbers of illegal immigrants living here included an econometric calculation invented by a couple of financial analysts from Bear Stearns. (I am not kidding. You can read the transcript on YouTube, below the video.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhhgrzqN6gI

But what cemented for me Trump’s unholy alliance with Coulter was his gross misrepresentation of the scope of illegal immigration. Dept. of Homeland Security, Pew Research, and the Center for Migration Studies all peg the number at around 11,000.000. He now insists, the U.S. government’s count of 11,000,000 illegals is wrong and, in fact, the numbers is actually closer to 30,000,000 or “it could be 34,000,000.” Id.  When asked where he got that number, he says, “I am hearing it from other people…” But those of us who are paying attention know, he got it directly from Coulter’s book. And she admitted, she made up the figures in her book! Id.

In August, Trump came out with his ‘written’ immigration plan. National Review‘s Michael Barone dubbed it “Half-Serious Half-Fantasy.” Coulter gushed it was “the greatest political document since the Magna Carta.” Of course she did; because he based it on her and her book.

As for evidence of the cozy bond between Coulter and Drudge; a picture is worth a thousand words.

They were spotted at the 2014 NBA Finals in Miami by fans watching the game at home.

coulterdrudge3

Here’s a brief video of that same game. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/heres-video-of-ann-coulter-and-matt-drudge-hanging-out-at-nba-finals-game/#ooid=g5NzBhbjpDnpSrcFmraotKkD3AboLbMQ

coulterdrudge2

And they were together to watch the December 15 Republican debate.

 

coulterdrudge1

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3362898/Internet-news-guru-Matt-Drudge-resurfaces-Republican-debate-flamethrowing-conservative-pundit-Ann-Coulter-arm.html

Ms. Coulter, the likely brains of the bunch, actually graduated college and went on to earn a law degree! On the other hand, while Donald Trump keeps reminding his audiences, he is “smart’; he has yet to provide documentary evidence he attended college, let alone earned a BA/BS degree. (You might recall that even after Carly Fiorina hinted as such, in a tweet, he could only muster a demand for an apology and, with none forthcoming, he dropped the subject like the proverbial hot potato.) As for gossip-monger Matt Drudge, well, he claims he graduated from high school.

I imagine the thought has crossed Coulter’s bright mind: If the TCD troika can keep flying under the radar then Donald Trump can actually become President.

If that happens; prepare to say hello to Press Secretary Matt Drudge, and Ann Coulter, AG.

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

My mind is a terrible thing to waste.

 


%d bloggers like this: