Colorado County GOP Chair: Errors with Ted Cruz’s Delegate Win, Might Need Do-Over

The chairwoman of the Boulder County GOP has admitted that grave errors affected the Colorado Republican caucus, in which

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

won a clean sweep of 34 delegates without opening up the process to voting by everyday citizens.

Breitbart News has obtained an email that Boulder County GOP chairwoman Peg Cage sent to other top Republican officials in Colorado, including to other party chairs, describing the errors in the process that led to “the perception of fraud.” Reached for comment on the email, Cage said that the caucus might have to be done over.

Since Breitbart News’s original report on massive voting problems at the caucus — including names of candidates being left off ballots and at least one woman not being able to vote — insiders have come forward to tell this reporter about other alleged inconsistencies, including a screw-up in the Pueblo and Mesa counties that led to one county having twenty more ballots and another twenty less. Trump supporters even protested the results of the caucus on the steps of the Colorado State Capitol.

“Rather than spend their time working on try to build integrity and correct errors — I know that’s happening they’re working on it right now —today at 1:30 there’s a bill being pushed by [state chairman] Steve House to push from a caucus system to a primary system as if that would change things,” Boulder County chairwoman Peg Cage told Breitbart News.

“The Trump supporters think that the Cruz supporters stole the election. The Cruz supporters were very concerned that they might not get seated in Cleveland” so they have been publicizing that the Trump campaign does not plan to contest the results, Cage said. But those delegates could still be un-seated by the Republican National Committee.

“If it’s that bad, I guess if there’s any question that our delegates won’t be seated, then that would be a case where it might make sense to have a do-over,” Cage said. “I would say it would. It might be the better way to go just to make sure that our delegates, they ought to be able to go forth and get seated.”

“I think they were mostly, from what I saw, clerical errors. To me, it’s inexcusable … The ballots themselves had names missing. People who had signed up.”

“It seemed to happen in all of the districts. So I guess the state has something to do it because it was up to the state who received those forms … There were many people at the state convention itself who they had to say, well this person was this number and it doesn’t appear that way in the book. It just wasn’t clean … It wasn’t clean because of those clerical mistakes,” Cage added.

Cage indicated that she is not a Trump supporter, but rather a Cruz supporter simply concerned with electoral integrity, saying, “As a county chairman I can’t publicly declare. I do have a favorite … Well, I was standing up by the stage when [Cruz] was up there.”

Cage sent an email expressing her concerns to fellow party chairs last Tuesday.

“Changing the process by which we get to counting votes won’t change the perception of fraud,” Cage wrote. “There were problems with the election in Colorado Springs:

  1. Many people who had filed their Intent to Run for National Delegate forms were not put on a ballot.
  2. Clerical errors created the perception of fraud (duplicate and omitted names and numbers)
  3. Despite calls for unity by elected party officials, one candidate was perceived to have been favored
  4. Ballot counting was perceived to have been done in secret, by the Secretary of State (in his orange Cruz shirt) on equipment from the county where he was the County Clerk.”

Cage was referring to Secretary of State Wayne Williams, who showed up to the caucus in an orange Ted Cruz shirt and was photographed with Cruz election lawyer David Sawyer in a Facebook photo:

Williams Sawyer

Cage detailed further problems:

SOLUTION:  We, the elected party officials for our counties, are responsible to call for a complete airing of the problems, including naming each offended party and the candidate they pledged to support and showing all ballots with their additions and omissions.  A flow chart, like Anil’s, for each county should be included to show that procedures were followed correctly to get delegates to the assembly.  We must insist that professional clerical staff be added and trained at the State level to avoid mistakes that cause such contention…

…There were mistakes- people who had filed their Intent to Run forms were not put on the ballot. It happened in every CD and at the state assembly. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t done to favor Cruz, as his Colorado campaign chairman, Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO), was left off the CD4 ballot. But it happened frequently enough that the perception was that fraud had been committed. That was bad, but leaving numbers off of a simple sequenced number ballot is inexcusable. These were simply clerical errors (I hope – see, there’s room for doubt), but they brought division among our ranks and could have been prevented if the staff had been more professional and double-checked their work.

Cage wrote to the state party chairman Steve House:

Steve, if you see this note, that’s why it’s seen as bad for me to be on your side. You ran on election integrity and promised that you’d create a team of people that could train us at the county level to watch for fraud in our elections, but that hasn’t happened yet. Republican County Clerks should be included in such a team, but there also need to be folks who are not Clerks. Clerks get re-elected if they make voting easy, but as we’ve seen in this discussion, ease of voting doesn’t equate to integrity in voting…You may not agree with my particular solution, and I am certainly open to discussion that leads to the best solution, but we must take the blame and make it stop here. Or lose.

Reached by phone, Colorado GOP spokesman Kyle Kohli said that Trump convention manager Paul Manafort “indicated to our delegates directly” that Trump would not contest Cruz’s delegate share.

“There was never any concern about the delegation being un-seated to begin with,” Kohli said.


Tabloid says it has proof: Ted Cruz’s father is mystery man in Lee Harvey Oswald photo

Lee Harvey Oswald, front left, standing next to man never identified by the Warren Commission, center in white shirt, handing out leaflets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee taken outside the International Trade Mart in New Orleans on Aug.16, 1963. The National Enquirer is now saying that they have determined through photo analysis that the man is Rafael B. Cruz, father of GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz. Johann Rush/WSDU-TV



The National Enquirer has published what it says is conclusive evidence that Ted Cruz’s father, Rafael B. Cruz, is the man photographed next to JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald distributing pro-Castro leaflets in 1963 in New Orleans.

The Cruz presidential campaign fired back unequivocally. “This is another garbage story in a tabloid full of garbage,” communications director Alice Stewart told McClatchy. “The story is false; that is not Rafael in the picture.”

The explosive suggestion that Cruz’s father would have had any affiliation with Oswald is not corroborated in any other way. Cuban-born Rafael Cruz is now a fervent anti-communist, but there was a time he supported then-rebel leader Fidel Castro. His son, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, frequently relates his father’s arrest and torture by government officials and subsequent escape to the United States.

The elder Cruz ended up at the University of Texas at Austin and still supported Castro, who led the revolution that overthrew the Batista regime in 1959. Castro formally declared himself Marxist in 1961.

“The U.S. government was duped. The American people were duped. I was duped,” Rafael Cruz wrote in his book, “A Time for Action,” released in January. “When people ask me why I supported Castro in over-throwing the Cuban government, I readily admit that I didn’t realize he was a communist.”

There are photos of Rafael Cruz participating in a pro-Castro rally in 1959 and an article in the student newspaper where he describes his support for Castro. And one report questions the extent of the elder Cruz’s connections to Castro before fleeing Cuba.

The photos of Oswald distributing pro-Castro literature are from August 1963, just a few months before the JFK assassination in Dallas, which the Warren Commission Report on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy said was carried out by Oswald.

The tabloid hired photo experts who compared the elder Cruz’s photos from the late 1950s and early 1960s with the ones released by the Warren Commission. The man in the white shirt next to Oswald was never identified by the commission, and the Enquirer is now saying it was Cruz and blasted on its May 2 cover that “Ted Cruz Father Now Linked to JFK Assassination!”

The Enquirer has a testimonial from Mitch Goldstone, president and CEO of ScanMyPhotos, a California-based digitizing photo service, who told the tabloid, “There’s more similarity than dissimilarity. . . . it looks to be the same person and I can say as much with a high degree of confidence.”

And Carole Lieberman, a University of California – Los Angeles forensic psychiatrist and expert witness based in Beverly Hills, California, compared the photos and told the Enquirer “they seem to match.” Neither Goldstone nor Lieberman returned phone calls from McClatchy.

But Gus Russo, an author and journalist who has written extensively about the JFK assassination and Oswald, is dubious. Russo told McClatchy in an interview that Oswald, who was living in New Orleans in 1963, was not connected to the Cuban community there and would not have had a Cuban supporter helping him. “He was the ultimate loner,” said Russo. Another man seen in the video handing out leaflets had been hired by Oswald to do so at an unemployment office, according to the Warren Commission. Rafael Cruz also lived in New Orleans, but it was later in the 1960s.

As for the photo “evidence,” Russo said, “It’s very subjective. It’s not proof. It’s just an opinion. To charge something this big, you’d better have better proof than that ‘it looks like him.’”

The FBI would not comment about its photo recognition and aging identification techniques but referred McClatchy to a web page about its Investigative and Prosecutive Graphic Unit.

The Enquirer has focused on Ted Cruz during the presidential campaign with sensational stories about his alleged mistresses and supposed connection to the DC Madam. The tabloid, which has endorsed presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, said in a “declaration” published on a page of the story that the paper had been approached by someone it does not identify during the New York primary with the photos. “In this instance, we believe American voters have a right to know the truth about the Cruz family,” it says.


FRAUD: Michelle Fields’s Honduran Born Mama Is Pro-Amnesty, Anti-Trump Activist #GrabGate

Michelle Fields’s mother, Xiomara, is a Honduran-born activist who opposed Donald Trump long before her daughter’s alleged incident.

The elder Fields runs a nonprofit for illegal immigrants in Los Angeles that receives a substantial portion of its funding from the U.S. and California tax payers.

A 2014 posting on a forum for the Honduran consulate in Los Angeles accuses Fields’s mother of cheating illegal immigrants.

We reached out to both Fields and will update this post when we hear something back.

Michelle Fields clearly has a conflict of interest regarding Trump.

Her mother’s federal money will be cut off if Trump kicks out all the illegals makes America great again.

Here’s just one of the many anti-Trump statements that Fields’s mother has since deleted from her Facebook:

mama anti trump statement

Fields’s mama deleted this from her Facebook.

Fields, for her part, deleted a tweet from her mother warning that Donald Trump may deport her.

(We found the tweet though!)

Michelle Fields's mother suggests she'll be deported at a Trump event.

Michelle Fields’s mother suggests she’ll be deported at a Trump event.

Fields’s mother is also an immigration consultant connected to pro-amnesty Honduran organizations in the U.S. She is a leader and founder of La Casa del Hondureno (The Honduran House). She was also president of the Honduran-American Alliance, according to the Los Angeles Times in 1999.


Fields, pictured at right at an event promoting benefits for illegal aliens and Hispanic immigrants.

Fields, pictured at right at an event promoting benefits for illegal aliens and Hispanic immigrants.

Fields was quoted in a Spanish language newspaper discussing all she does for illegal immigrants.

We help them fill out applications deferred action and Temporary Protected Status (TPS); we also have immigration lawyers who come to give free legal advice… says Xiomara Fields, president of the organization.

La Casa del Hondureño is dedicated to guide the community in legal, educational and health issues, in order to contribute to progress and knowledge of migrants.

The idea is to guide the community and tell people that do not be fooled; there are many people with asylum cases that are defrauded by notaries who pose as lawyers, promising something that will not ever meet… she adds.

This organization offers free legal seminars once a month, where reporting on immigration protections, labor rights, prevention of domestic violence and victims of crime benefits.

They also provide free counseling programs county health for pregnant women and older adults; and report on the procedures for establishing a business.

People who come to our countries is what makes the most difficult tasks and this is the way to help them, so they have a better quality of life… said Fields.

This organization offers Hondurans the process of birth, marriage and death; likewise, it provides support to families who need to repatriate a corpse and those require a rap sheet.

The only thing we charge shipping is spending and what is paid to tramitador, or $ 30 for a birth certificate. Sometimes it is more expensive to get help from a family member… says Fields.

Ada Martinez-Befort, prosecutor of the organization, ensures that these contributions allow finance the operations of the office. However, higher costs are covered by community events. [From Google translate because you aren’t paying me (ha!) to do any translations for you. Emphasis is ours].

Fields mama

Ay carumba! Like mama, like daughter?

Fields mama 2

As I am banned from Twitter, go ask Ms. Ayer-Fields for yourself. And please tell user @1Gueest that I’d like to offer him (or her–I ain’t no sexist) a job.

Fields’s boyfriend Jamie Weinstein is similarly anti-Trump. Weinstein’s late father Harris Weinstein was a major Republican donor.

It was Weinstein who first promoted Fields’s story.

Fields claimed on national television that she was a supporter of Trump’s but given her family’s financial incentives to lie and her history of lying.

Why should we believe her?


Ted Cruz the Liar

” By resorting to false, malicious & too-often self-serving attacks on their opponents, the Ted Cruz camp (and others too) diminishes their own credibility … amongst other leaders, the press, donors, and most importantly the voters of Texas at large. (If you believe what we have been hearing the past month or so, this is the just latest in a pattern of mis-steps by the Cruz Campaign.)

While Ted Cruz has, to date, capitalized on a blossoming legal career to cast himself as a fighter, which undoubtedly is true given his personal story, many are just now learning Cruz is a partner at a high-powered law firm with a history of contributing 100’s of $1,000’s of dollars to Democrats such as the Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Democratic National Congressional Committee’s campaigns

Ted Cruz was hired as a partner Morgan Lewis & Bockius in 2008, during the presidential election in which Barack Obama became president. Morgan Lewis & Bockius made contributions totaling over $200,000 in support of Obama’s campaigns for President, as well as $750,000 to Democrats since Cruz became a partner.

Lawyers like Ted Cruz train in public speaking , they can “ Lie with a straight face”.. Ted is owned and paid for by his donors and special interest groups.. he is A PUPPET.. . It’s his job to be able to speak well and he has a special gift , “ The Gift of Gab”…he is a smooth talker , he can twist your words, lie, play mind games to distract and he can make a believer out of anyone who listens. Ted Cruz is a LIAR & CHEAT..

Donald Trump is neither a “ Trained Speaker nor a Politician” unlike Ted Cruz , who is a career politician , polished and rehearsed. Donald Trump is on a learning curve and he will get up to speed. He is a patriot, taking on a heroic task, and being thanked by massive abuse . He is a decent , honest , selfless guy who loves this country, and who is willing to make a great sacrifice so much of what is left of his life, because he knows that this country needs to be fixed, and that it is going to require someone who can do the job. He just doesn’t see anything around him other than political hacks, so he is willing to take this huge responsibility.

Do we want an articulate career politician who can talk and make our head spin or do we want someone who wants to make “ America Great Again”? I’d rather have a much more Honest Patriot as President than a smooth taking LIAR and a CHEAT like Ted Cruz who is a Christian.
If you want to see a true reflection of a man, look at his children. TRUMP 2016″

Gross Negligence? Report Suggests Hillary Clinton Violated The Espionage Act

Evidence may be mounting that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton violated a provision in the federal Espionage Act.

The penalty for such a violation under the Espionage Act of 1913: a fine, a prison term of up to ten years, or “both.”

Fox reports the FBI and Department of Justice investigation into Clinton’s emails now focuses on a single provision in the Espionage Act. Did Clinton allow an unauthorized person access to the national defense information in her email inbox? The investigation is focusing on the provision pertaining to “gross negligence.”

The law (18 U.S. Code & 793 subsection f) is very clear.

The law applies to “Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense,” which obviously includes Clinton. Classified information appeared throughout her emails recovered by investigators.

The law is broken if that person “through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed.”

The law could also be broken if the person “having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—”

With that in mind, here are some trouble spots for Clinton as the investigation plays out:

Hackers Got Into Her Email Inbox

On the morning of August 3, 2011, Clinton received a fake speeding ticket in her email inbox with the subject line “Uniform traffic ticket.” If Clinton clicked on the email to see if she actually got a speeding ticket, then the hackers would have been able to steal all of her information.

This was one of at least five times that Clinton received messages from hackers, who might have been Russian.

The problem was bad enough that security experts were called in to look at the infected messages the next month, in September 2011. The experts concluded that as part of this scheme, victims’ information was forwarded to overseas computers, including at least one in Russia.

Her Server Was Completely Insecure

As Breitbart News reported, Clinton’s email server had a webmail subdomain that gave hackers unrestricted access to her inbox. had a subdomain called, according to the account’s encryption certificate. That subdomain is a web-based email portal that considerably weakened the server’s defenses and invited attack.

A webmail portal allows web traffic to bypass hardware and software firewalls to easily access the server’s mail “interface.”

Platte River Networks Handled Her Private Server

Clinton’s Denver-based email storage firm Platte River Networks never had a security clearance to handle classified information.

Platte River told Breitbart News that it picked Clinton’s server up from her home in Chappaqua, New York, where the server was stored in a basement. But the IP addresses for Clinton’s server show that it shared physical space with Clinton Foundation servers, and it traced to New York City. The Clintons could have moved the device to Chappaqua before Platte River got there.

She Didn’t Tell Her Own Department She Had A Private Email Account

When it comes to “gross negligence,” this one is a doozy. If Clinton’s email account HAD been hacked, the State Department IT Help Desk wouldn’t have been able to help her. They didn’t even know she had a private account.

When Clinton’s server went down in February 2010, her top aide Huma Abedin told her what happened:

“Ur email must be back up!!,” Abedin said. “What happened is judith sent you an email. It bounced back. She called the email help desk at state (I guess assuming u had state email) and told them that. They had no idea it was YOU, just some random address so they emailed. Sorry about that. But regardless, means ur email must be back! R u getting other messages?”

The White House Told Her To Use Government Email

Hillary Clinton ignored White House guidance on official email use.

Top White House adviser Valerie Jarrett recently threw Clinton under the bus, saying that the White House wanted Clinton to use government email.

“Yes, there were. Yeah, absolutely,” Jarrett said when asked if the White House sent guidance to Cabinet secretaries about not using private email. “Obviously we want to make sure that we preserve all government records, and so there was guidance given that government business should be done on government emails and that if you did use a private email that it should be turned over.”


Rush Limbaugh: Democrats Promise Free Everything

RUSH: First up is a montage here from the debate last night.  Bernie Sanders, Hillary, Lincoln Chafee, and they’re all talking about all the free stuff.  College and health care and whatever you want. If you’re an illegal immigrant, it’s all yours.  All you have to do is show up.

SANDERS:  Make every public college and university in this country tuition-free.

HILLARY:  Anyone to go to a public college or university tuition-free.

SANDERS:  We’re all gonna have medical and family paid leave.

HILLARY:  Make sure every child gets health care, including undocumented children and others.

CHAFEE:  Funding education, funding infrastructure, funding health care.

HILLARY:  Enhance the benefits for the poorest recipients of Social Security.

SANDERS:  We should be putting money into education.  I want Wall Street now to help kids in this country go to college, public colleges and universities.

HILLARY:  I know we can afford it because we’re gonna make the wealthy pay for it.

RUSH:  (laughing)  We can afford it ’cause we’re gonna make the wealthy pay. We are $18 trillion in debt.  Now, you can afford anything if you ignore that, and if you don’t think that’s a problem and if that number is irrelevant, the money never has to even be serviced or paid back, then of course you can afford anything.  But the truth is, we can’t afford anything.  We can afford maybe, what, what’s the number that we drag in by tax revenue every year?  The numbers are confusing, but $3 trillion whatever we can afford every year, but we so exceed that.  We have exceeded it for so long. We’re already paying for things we can’t afford.  And these people just want to lap more and more on top of it.

You know, one of the biggest misdirections in public dialogue and politics is?  The taxpayers’ expense.  Taxpayers have to pay. The taxpayers don’t pay anything.  The reason is they’re not conscious of it.  Everybody’s taxes are withheld from their paychecks, those who work.  Very few people are independent contractors that actually pay their taxes themselves.  The vast majority of people never see the money they pay in taxes, any kind.  Property tax is part of the homeowners, the mortgage payment every month, very little tax do you ever see, particularly income and payroll taxes.

So people come along, “This is gonna cost the taxpayers X, and that’s gonna cost the taxpayer Y.” It doesn’t cost you anything.  We build a battleship, you don’t think it’s cost you anything.  What’s your share of it?  Whoever sent you a bill for your portion of a B-2 bomber?  So the idea of a taxpayers expense doesn’t mean anything because it has no basis in relatability.  So you can run around and talk about we’re gonna pay for this, we’re gonna do this, we can afford this, and the taxpayers are not gonna worry about it.  They’ve never gotten a bill for anything.  So the idea that it’s costing them something is totally over their head, totally escapes them without any consciousness or any awareness of an annual deficit and an accumulating national debt and what it actually means.  And I venture to say 90% of the population doesn’t have the slightest clue what it means. It can’t be a negative used against the Democrats.

For 50 years people on our side have been trying to prove and establish that the Democrats can be beaten by talking about all the excessive spending. But the fact is it doesn’t work, it doesn’t persuade anybody to not support or vote Democrat because they’re never aware of having to pay for any of it, be they taxpayers or recipients.  They’re not aware of having to pay for any of it.  They never see the tax revenue that’s collected from them in the first place, and they certainly aren’t aware how it’s allocated.

RUSH: Here’s Lee in Gilroy, California.  Great to have you on the program, Lee.  I’m glad you waited.  Hello.

CALLER:  Hey, Rush.  Longtime listener.  Last night when I was watching the debate last night, was watching all the clowns debate each other, when they got to especially Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, when they got to the part where they promised all the free handouts, you know, I sat there and I really contemplated that. And I felt, just in my gut, I’m like, wow, you know, Republicans are really in trouble here.

RUSH:  Well, is your question, how do you compete with that?

CALLER:  Exactly.  How do you compete with all those handouts, especially —

RUSH:  See, that’s the scary thing.  This is the scary thing from the standpoint of whatever percentage you want to say supports this stuff, that we have to conclude we’ve lost that percentage of the country.  When you have what was on that stage last night, all these promises for a much bigger warfare state, free this, free that, you have to realize that there’s a portion of the population that does applaud it, think it’s great, think it’s cool, thinks that is the purpose of government, is to take care of people and to help people.

And what’s wrong with it, they will say?  What’s wrong with free college?  What’s wrong with food stamps?  What’s wrong with helping people?  What’s wrong with bringing illegals in so they can make something of themselves?  And that begins an entire education process of trying to explain to people how it’s hurting the people you’re trying to help.  It’s denying them their dignity.  It’s denying them their opportunity to be totally self-sufficient and to find out how good and capable they are.  And sometimes people look at that whole effort as a lost cause waste of time.  So, yeah, I mean, it’s my assessment following the 2004 election.  American people voted for Santa Claus.  Other 2008, I’m sorry.


There’s Nothing in the Constitution About Anchor Babies: Donald Trump’s Latest Fight Against the Drive-By Media

Rush Limbaugh: I never want to sound like one of those off-putting, arrogant, condescending know-it-alls, but I don’t know how I can avoid it here.  This argument over the 14th Amendment and anchor babies is one of the greatest illustrations how even some of the brightest people in this country do not understand the Constitution.  There’s nothing in the 14th Amendment about anchor babies.  (interruption)  You think there is?  You do or don’t?  (interruption)  There’s nothing in the 14th Amendment that says if you are born to a mother who is a citizen that you’re automatically a citizen.  It isn’t there.  Even some of our presidential candidates think that it is.

The Constitution is very clear:  Congress has sole discretion over defining who is and who isn’t a citizen and how you become one.  It’s not the 14th Amendment.  There’s a Breitbart story: “Trump, Reporter Spar Over Term ‘Anchor Baby.'” And then there’s a Los Angeles Times story: “Jeb Bush Says ‘Anchor Babies,’ Hillary Clinton Responds on Social Media.”  Everybody’s upset over the term, as though it’s some sort of PC, political correctness violation or something, “anchor babies.”

I don’t know, folks, it’s irrelevant.  The Constitution says nothing about anchor babies.  The 14th Amendment says nothing about birthright citizenship.  And look at all the people who think that it does.  The Constitution says Congress has complete control over who is and who is not a US citizen.  And, by the way, here’s a little shocker for you.  Even the Supreme Court, back when it used to makes sense, the Supreme Court has never ruled that a baby born to illegal aliens in the US is automatically a citizen.  Did you know that?  And look at how many people just automatically accept that as the case.

I mean, this came up last night on Hannity.  Brother Levin, Mark Levin, who is a constitutional expert, you want to talk about exasperation, here’s somebody who thinks it’s simple to understand the Constitution.  Just read it.  It’s written in plain English, and it’s not hard to understand it whatsoever.  The14th Amendment does not require birthright citizenship.  It doesn’t mention it.  Trump is right about it, and the media is arguing with him.  That’s why the Breitbart story:  “Trump, Reporter Spar Over Term ‘Anchor Baby”…

Read the complete article

error: Content is protected !!