Main Menu

Ted Cruz: My father was a US citizen

Just when you thought that the US 2016 Republican presidential primary couldn’t fall any lower on the rationality scale, Donald Trump resets expectations with new charges that Ted Cruz’s father was involved with Lee Harvey Oswald in the Kennedy assassination. Trump to Fox News:

I mean, what was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the death? Before the shooting? It’s just horrible.

But what followed clearly rocked my sense of reality. Cruz responded:

Yes, my dad killed JFK, he is secretly Elvis, and Jimmy Hoffa is buried in his backyard.

Elvis Presley was born in Tupelo Mississippi and was a natural born citizen of the United States.

A National Enquirer article indeed claims that a photo of Lee Harvey Oswald handing out leaflets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee includes Raphael Cruz, but that was August 17, 1963, more than three months before the Kennedy assassination. An article in the Miami Herald examined the claim and reports that the photo identification is subjective.

In other election news, I got an answer to a question I’ve been wondering about, whether Hillary Clinton would make Trump’s birtherism an issue in the election: She has. In a May 1 address to the NAACP in Detroit, Clinton said:

The leading Republican contender is the man who led the insidious birther movement to discredit the President’ citizenship. And when he was asked in a national television interview to disavow David Duke and other white supremacists who are supporting his campaign, he played coy. We cannot let Barack Obama’s legacy fall into Donald Trump’s hands.

, , , , , ,

24 Responses to Ted Cruz: My father was a US citizen

  1. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 3, 2016 at 8:49 pm #

    Cruz has suspended his campaign.

  2. avatar
    Curious George May 3, 2016 at 10:18 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Cruz has suspended his campaign.

    Interesting that Ted Cruz never, ever denied that the individual pictured with Oswald was Ted’s father. Then he suspends his campaign, after he loses in Indiana.

  3. avatar
    traderjack May 4, 2016 at 12:25 am #

    I would have voted for Cruz if he had met the standards, but I wouldn’t because he was not born in America.

    Now all of the don’t need to be born in America will have to dredge up some other reason for him being eligible.
    I was born out of country and both of my parents were American ciizens but my whole life i was told I could not be President because I was not born in the USA.

    Probably he decided he couldn’t win, and he withdrew to get out of the court actions and prevent the action going to SCOTUS for future actions
    court actions now moot.

  4. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) May 4, 2016 at 2:38 am #

    An article in the Miami Herald examined the claim and reports that the photo identification is subjective.

    It’s a rehash of “Malcolm X is Obama’s daddy because they look so much alike”. I’m pretty sure the guy in the picture and Cruz’ father are not the same person.

  5. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) May 4, 2016 at 2:38 am #

    Curious George: Then he suspends his campaign, after he loses in Indiana.

    I guess that was more due to him being exposed as the Zodiac killer.

  6. avatar
    john May 4, 2016 at 3:08 am #

    I love it! Trump is our GOP nominee. Get ready to say goodbye to Hillary Clinton.
    Also it appears Joe Arpaio has been vindicated:
    http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/appeals-court-rules-in-favot-of-sheriff-arpaio-in-workplace-raids-controversy

    Joe Apraio for VP!

  7. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 4, 2016 at 7:20 am #

    Unless the Supreme Court rules someday, you’ll never know for sure.

    traderjack: I was born out of country and both of my parents were American ciizens but my whole life i was told I could not be President because I was not born in the USA.

  8. avatar
    Sam the Centipede May 4, 2016 at 11:09 am #

    john:
    I love it!Trump is our GOP nominee. Get ready to say goodbye to Hillary Clinton.
    Also it appears Joe Arpaio has been vindicated:
    http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/appeals-court-rules-in-favot-of-sheriff-arpaio-in-workplace-raids-controversy

    Joe Apraio for VP!

    Who could ever have been in doubt that you would be a supporter of that vile buffoon?

    Joe Arpaio is more likely to be living in a prison than working in the White House.

    And you will continue spouting idiotic racist nonsense. And you will continue to be disappointed that the real world ignored you and you fellow racists.

  9. avatar
    gorefan May 4, 2016 at 11:24 am #

    Various conservative websites are upset about Cruz’s leaving the race. They all quote Alexander Hamilton’s statement on President Adams’ run for a second term as a reason to vote for Clinton:

    “If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”

  10. avatar
    Curious George May 4, 2016 at 11:44 am #

    john:
    I love it!Trump is our GOP nominee. Get ready to say goodbye to Hillary Clinton.
    Also it appears Joe Arpaio has been vindicated:
    http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/appeals-court-rules-in-favot-of-sheriff-arpaio-in-workplace-raids-controversy

    Joe Apraio for VP!

    John, you’re still out in the ozone. Even Donald Trump is cognizant of the limited, unenthusiastic response from audiences when he mentions Joe Arpaio’s name at Trump rallies across the country. And, with the very real possibility that old Joe has the possibility of federal criminal referrals coming from Judge G. Murray Snow in the Melendres v. Arpaio hearings, I wouldn’t get too excited about the prospects of Joe being picked for a VP running mate anytime soon.

    Now go back to your immaginary world of Lilliputians and leprechauns.

  11. avatar
    The Magic M (not logged in) May 6, 2016 at 9:55 am #

    Although you can’t ever be sure about anything with Trump, it’s highly unlikely an old white man is going to pick an even older white man as his running mate.

    gorefan: They all quote Alexander Hamilton’s statement on President Adams’ run for a second term as a reason to vote for Clinton:

    They have an even better option:
    Have one or two of their favourite candidates run as third party.
    If they succeed in stopping both Trump and Clinton from getting 270 EC votes, the decision goes to the House – which would likely vote for the “real” GOP candidate over Trump.
    That is taking a risk because nobody knows how their base will react when a candidate with, say, 10% of the popular vote ends up becoming President, but as they say, so are the rules and have always been, so crying about them after the loss is intellectually dishonest.

    [As an even more controversial variant, if Dems take the House, the question becomes: Does the sitting House choose the President or the new one? Would the GOP dare to do that when they’ve been yapping about “let the voters decide” when it comes to SCOTUS nominees? Likely. But that could actually trigger a lot of unrest if people feel the Presidency was “stolen” from them, not just from Trump, but from Hillary as well.]

    If however that should not happen and if Trump actually wins the general election, the situation will be just as interesting.
    Either Trump will be quite the lame duck if Dems take the House (and possibly the Senate) back, or we might end up with an effective three party system where, say, Dems control the House, Republicans the Senate and Trump the Oval Office.
    (And I can see the GOP obstructing Trump almost as much as they’ve been opposing Obama.)

  12. avatar
    James M May 6, 2016 at 11:36 am #

    The Magic M (not logged in): Does the sitting House choose the President or the new one?

    Since 1936 (an effect of the Twentieth Amendment), the incoming House is seated before the Electoral Vote is counted. Before the Twentieth Amendment, the outgoing House would have chosen.

  13. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 6, 2016 at 1:29 pm #

    I would think that a Republican running as a third party candidate would ensure Hillary Clinton getting 270 electoral votes, not prevent it.

    The Magic M (not logged in):
    Although you can’t ever be sure about anything with Trump, it’s highly unlikely an old white man is going to pick an even older white man as his running mate.

    They have an even better option:
    Have one or two of their favourite candidates run as third party.
    If they succeed in stopping both Trump and Clinton from getting 270 EC votes, the decision goes to the House – which would likely vote for the “real” GOP candidate over Trump.

  14. avatar
    CRJ May 6, 2016 at 4:15 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy [HRC]The leading Republican contender is the man who led the insidious birther movement to discredit the President’ citizenship. And when he was asked in a national television interview to disavow David Duke and other white supremacists who are supporting his campaign, he played coy. We cannot let Barack Obama’s legacy fall into Donald Trump’s hands.

    It’s to bad Hillary didn’t step up and remain distanced from Obama as she’d done earlier in her Campaign. Embracing this unpopular line of Obama’s ineligibility really may prove her place in Obama’s Sinking Ship.

    Though she may have been forced to like the State Department enthusiastically applauded her Private Server for the Government, linking that more closely, for and based, on a Pardon Agreement, it will not prove her Leadership but may show it all compromised.

    http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2016/05/special-report-why-democrats-must.html?m=1

    [Here is why #Democrats who pull the Voting Lever for ❤Hillary Clinton actually must pray for #RacialInequality, must hope for #GenderDiscrimination, and have set their eye upon #DeferredProsecution because in a Racially Equal World, in Perfect Gender Equality, and in an Economical Justice for all in the USA ❤Hillary Clinton as a rich white female should be Prosecuted equal to a poor black male and that can’t happen if she is aloud off as a crook. ]

    Dr. Conspiracy: Unless the Supreme Court rules someday, you’ll never know for sure.

    Now your for it? I’m telling you Anti-Birthers are yet going to rue-the-day they didn’t jump for Judy v. Obama 14-9396 because they might have had a 50/50 shot at a favorable decision by the SCOTUS.

    THAT % is likely depreciating by 48% with Obama’s last 6 months and the Trump-Train firmly planted on the GOP TRACK and HILLARY’s losing grip on Reality, the percentages are headed to hell.

    I personally could not imagine Obama himself not pluncking down 5K for printing cost to have received a favorable SCOTUS Decision and estatically shaking my hand ( high- ✋ 5) in the heighth of his popularity.

    But alas it appears indeed Obama’s Achilles Heel for not doing so has jet-fueled Trumps popularity in the un-settled matter and so the wreck of Obama’s Legacy.

    Could anyone here have ever imagined CRJ winning at SCOTUS against the venerably smooth talking Obama?

    Heavens. That’s near ludicrous, but now both Obama and Clinton have blown it. Blown the “Gift” that was so easily placed before them.

    Tis really a shame they are seen as so opposed to nothing but help? I mean it’s not often a sitting President loses in the United States Supreme Court to a convict right? 😂😂😂 but you’d think they didn’t have a chance the way they FLED!

    Alas., we are left with discredit and disappointment for Trumps Train fueled on Birther Jet Fuel nearly out of Obama’s legal reach unless.., by some miracle the United States Supreme Court found CRJ’s forma pauperis “mistakenly” Denied?

    I guess I’m losing my ability to help aren’t I? Well.. You can’t say I didn’t try my best.

  15. avatar
    bob May 6, 2016 at 6:10 pm #

    CRJ:
    I’m telling you Anti-Birthers are yet going to rue-the-day they didn’t jump for Judy v. Obama 14-9396 because they might have had a 50/50 shot at a favorable decision by the SCOTUS.

    The district court dismissed Judy’s suit as frivolous. The circuit court affirmed that dismissal. There was no chance that SCOTUS was going to grant cert., or grant relief, in Judy’s waste of judicial resources.

    Could anyone here have ever imagined CRJ winning at SCOTUS against the venerably smooth talking Obama?

    Only Judy’s ego.

    Alas., we are left with discredit and disappointment for Trumps Train fueled on Birther Jet Fuel nearly out of Obama’s legal reach unless.., by some miracle the United States Supreme Court found CRJ’s forma pauperis “mistakenly” Denied?

    Judy’s IFP application wasn’t mistakenly denied: Judy failed to fill it out properly. And now Judy whines like a child because he couldn’t follow simple directions.

  16. avatar
    Slartibartfast May 6, 2016 at 7:37 pm #

    CRJ:

    It’s to bad Hillary didn’t step up and remain distanced from Obama as she’d done earlier in her Campaign.

    In the real world, we are aware that President Obama is just waiting for the primary to be decided before starting his full-throated campaign for Hillary. We also know that President Obama’s approval ratings are good (better than Reagan’s at this point of his presidency) and he’s one hell of a campaigner. Do you not understand why the Clintons campaigned for President Obama in 2016?

    Embracing this unpopular line of Obama’s ineligibility really may prove her place in Obama’s Sinking Ship.

    Which is mostly nonsense, but I will agree that President Obama’s ineligibility is an unpopular line of reasoning.

    Though she may have been forced to like the State Department enthusiastically applauded her Private Server for the Government, linking that more closely, for and based, on a Pardon Agreement, it will not prove her Leadership but may show it all compromised.

    Did anyone order word salad with gratuitous and random capitalization?

    [Here is why #Democrats who pull the Voting Lever for Hillary Clinton actually must pray for #RacialInequality, must hope for #GenderDiscrimination, and have set their eye upon #DeferredProsecution because in a Racially Equal World, in Perfect Gender Equality, and in an Economical Justice for all in the USA Hillary Clinton as a rich white female should be Prosecuted equal to a poor black male and that can’t happen if she is aloud off as a crook. ]

    Looks like you’ve got a whole army of straw men there.

    Now your for it? I’m telling you Anti-Birthers are yet going to rue-the-day they didn’t jump for Judy v. Obama 14-9396 because they might have had a 50/50 shot at a favorable decision by the SCOTUS.

    Want to bet on that? I think most anti-birthers are going to move on at some point and forget about you entirely. If you’re remembered at all (by anyone) it will be as a terrorist and crank who’s primary attribute was incompetence.

    THAT % is likely depreciating by 48% with Obama’s last 6 months and the Trump-Train firmly planted on the GOP TRACK and HILLARY’s losing grip on Reality, the percentages are headed to hell.

    Every court that has ruled on this subject since Wong Kim Ark (and previous to it, for that matter) has ruled in President Obama’s favor and there is no reason to expect that to change. Which you would know if you had a grip on reality. Just out of curiosity, how will you rationalize it in the very likely event that Hillary Clinton is our next president?

    I personally could not imagine Obama himself not pluncking down 5K for printing cost to have received a favorable SCOTUS Decision and estatically shaking my hand ( high- 5)in the heighth of his popularity.

    As I said above, President Obama’s popularity is pretty good right now and every time SCOTUS denied cert to birthers was a favorable decision for him (as were all of the lower court decisions). Why should he have shelled out a nickel or wasted a nanosecond on the birthers unless he was looking for jokes for the correspondent’s dinner?

    But alas it appears indeed Obama’s Achilles Heel for not doing so has jet-fueled Trumps popularity in the un-settled matter and so the wreck of Obama’s Legacy.

    I do not think anything means what you think it means. We’ll see how things play out, but I think your predictions have about a 0% chance of being accurate.

    Could anyone here have ever imagined CRJ winning at SCOTUS against the venerably smooth talking Obama?

    We don’t imagine that you can fill out a form correctly and the evidence suggests that we’re right.

    Heavens. That’s near ludicrous, but now both Obama and Clinton have blown it. Blown the “Gift” that was so easily placed before them.

    Most people overestimate their own importance, but Mr. Judy takes it to stunning new heights.

    Tis really a shame they are seen as so opposed to nothing but help? I mean it’s not often a sitting President loses in the United States Supreme Court to a convict right? but you’d think they didn’t have a chance the way they FLED!

    Why should it matter if a case is against a sitting president or an unrepentant terrorist? The fact is that your case never had any merit at all and the best way to deal with it was to waste as little time as possible on your nonsense—preferably none at all.

    Alas., we are left with discredit and disappointment for Trumps Train fueled on Birther Jet Fuel nearly out of Obama’s legal reach unless.., by some miracle the United States Supreme Court found CRJ’s forma pauperis “mistakenly” Denied?

    No one in the SCOTUS will ever take a look at those papers again. You are delusional if you think otherwise. Although the first part of the sentence really lends credence to the idea that you are delusional.

    I guess I’m losing my ability to help aren’t I? Well.. You can’t say I didn’t try my best.

    You will never have the ability to help anyone until you get help yourself and that cannot happen until you admit that you need it, but if you have truly tried your best to help then your best isn’t very good at all.

  17. avatar
    Rickey May 6, 2016 at 8:12 pm #

    traderjack:

    Probably he decided he couldn’t win

    Probably? The handwriting was on the wall. Trump has nearly twice as many delegates as Cruz, and Trump is only 169 delegates short of the magic number with 445 delegates yet to be chosen. Trump needs to win only 38% of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination.

  18. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy May 6, 2016 at 8:16 pm #

    Yes, I can.

    CRJ: Well.. You can’t say I didn’t try my best.

  19. avatar
    James M May 7, 2016 at 1:16 am #

    Curious George: Interesting that Ted Cruz never, ever denied that the individual pictured with Oswald was Ted’s father.Then he suspends his campaign, after he loses in Indiana.

    The interesting thing for me is that there are photos of people associated with Oswald, whose identities are somehow not known. The investigators didn’t track them down and question them, and they never mentioned it.

    But it’s not Cruz — not tall enough.

  20. avatar
    Rickey May 7, 2016 at 1:40 am #

    CRJ:

    I personally could not imagine Obama himself not pluncking down 5K for printing cost to have received a favorable SCOTUS Decision and estatically shaking my hand ( high- 5)in the heighth of his popularity.

    You still haven’t figured out how these things work, have you?

    The Supreme Court was never going to make a ruling that Obama is eligible to be president. Even if you had been granted IFP status, SCOTUS would have denied cert without comment.

    Your lawsuit was dismissed as frivolous because you failed to state a claim for which relief could be granted by a Federal court. Your cert petition utterly failed to address that point. Instead of raising legal arguments to challenge the reasons for the dismissal, you filed a mostly unintelligible cert petition which re-argued the merits of your claim that Obama is ineligible.

    You should have heeded Abraham Lincoln’s words: “He who represents himself has a fool for a client.”

  21. avatar
    Lupin May 7, 2016 at 2:47 am #

    I think Cruz quit for the same reasons Nixon didn’t wish to alienate the pro-Goldwater base in64, which cost Nelson Rockefeller (an ardent Goldwater critic) the nomination in 68. After Trump loses, Cruz believes he can scoop up his base for another run in 4 years. I think he is wrong.

  22. avatar
    CRJ May 9, 2016 at 2:36 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Yes, I can.

    Thank you Doc for demonstrating that. Let me rephrase. I did my best. 😉

    Rickey: The Supreme Court was never going to make a ruling that Obama is eligible to be president. Even if you had been granted IFP status, SCOTUS would have denied cert without comment.

    Ricket goes conspiracy on us.. Lol with conjecture as fact he could never prove.

    bob: Judy’s IFP application wasn’t mistakenly denied: Judy failed to fill it out properly.

    Only Bob doesn’t know if you screw that up the Court Clerks send it back.. Shhh.. Don’t disturb his delusions, however it does set a very clear trend of hostility towards the poor and impoverished Bob seems to thrive on, along with the U.S. Supreme Court Justices.

    This is good.. Lol
    https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/729562293424377857

  23. avatar
    bob May 9, 2016 at 12:15 pm #

    Ricket goes conspiracy on us.. Lol with conjecture as fact he could never prove.

    Rickey’s “conjecture” is based on the lower courts dismissing Judy’s suit as frivolous. And SCOTUS rejecting every birther petition.

    Only Bob doesn’t know if you screw that up the Court Clerks send it back.

    The SCOTUS clerk sent Judy a letter explaining the deficiencies in his IFP application. And Judy failed to address those deficiencies.

  24. avatar
    Rickey May 9, 2016 at 6:34 pm #

    CRJ:

    Ricket goes conspiracy on us.. Lol with conjecture as fact he could never prove.

    No conjecture was necessary.

    May 20 2015 Waiver of right of respondent Barack H. Obama, President of the United States to respond filed.
    Jun 3 2015 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 18, 2015.

    Your petition was distributed for conference without a single justice asking for a response from the respondents. This means that none of the nine justices had any interest in hearing your frivolous case.