Smug Cruz – The Full Recording of Ted Cruz Comments About Donald Trump and Ben Carson…

A couple of short points (because the focus needs to be on his words) about this recording.  Initially, when questioned Cruz denied the statement.  Secondly, when questioned again by Megyn Kelly (last night) Cruz refused to take ownership of his words.   This is a pattern, a long, historic, and very specific pattern.  Pay close attention to his words.

Here’s the full audio as referenced in the New York Times article (click orange arrow):

ted cruz large

Last point:  CTH has a complete research library on Cruz’s activity(ies), associations and intents around Washington DC since January 2013.   That meticulous library was/is retained for a very specific reason…..  not yet.

This entry was posted in Cold Anger, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Notorious Liars, Ted Cruz, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

691 Responses to Smug Cruz – The Full Recording of Ted Cruz Comments About Donald Trump and Ben Carson…

  1. sundance says:

    Liked by 4 people

    • Sundance, what happens if the GOP has a brokered convention and Trump runs third party?

      Liked by 1 person

      • If he gets Ben Carson with him as his running mate – !) It won’t matter because together they CAN WON as a 3rd party. It would really show that they ARE INDEPENDANT from the establishment of the RNC and the DNC. 2) It will be the end of the republican party.

        Like

      • jollyroger88805 says:

        What happens is Trump and Carson form a Team and run as The Great American Party (GAP). 1) They can win the Presidency even going up against both the anti-people parties 2) It will destroy the republican party.

        Like

      • kinthenorthwest says:

        As things stand it might not work, cause Carson says he will run 3rd party too. If the Non-Democratic votes get split too much we will end up Screwed.

        Like

    • Ziiggii says:

      Over the target – √
      Taking flack; brace for impact – √

      Ready another bombing run….

      Like

    • jollyroger88805 says:

      ==== 1898 Ark case A person (CRUZ) BORN OUT OF THE JURISDICTION of the United States (Canada) CAN ONLY BECOME A CITIZEN BY BEING NATURALIZED either by treaty, as in the case [p703] of the annexation of foreign territory, OR by authority of Congress, exercised either by DECLARING CERTAIN CLASSES OF PERSONS to be citizens, as in the enactments CONFERRING CITIZENSHIP UPON FOREIGN-BORN CHILDREN (Cruz) of citizens (Cruz’s Mom)……(Excerpt from) The ARK Opinion of the Supreme Court written by Justice Gray. TED CRUZ IS A NATURALIZED CITIZEN AT BIRTH and ineligible to be President or VP

      Like

  2. He has a very odd and untrustworthy way of speaking. He reminds me of the coke snorting, high functioning Patrick Bateman from American Psycho.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. sundance says:

    Liked by 13 people

  4. sundance says:

    Cruz knows….. Cruz knows his quest could end. And his quest is $$$$…

    Liked by 5 people

    • Summer says:

      Of course. His staffers and volunteers (aka Cruzbots) do his dirty work for him on every conservative website while he is riding on Trump’s coattails.

      Rafael Cruz — a backstabber and an opportunist. Who is not even eligible to run.

      Liked by 4 people

      • macpipkin says:

        The constitution demands a person be a naturalized US citizen at birth and then relies upon the congress to define what that means.

        “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

        So, who was considered a natural born citizen once the first congress met?

        The Naturalization Act of 1790 answered that:

        “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.”

        This law is how the first congress defined natural born citizen and it was signed by President George Washington.

        This means from day one a person born outside the US was a natural born citizen as long as his/her ~father~ was a US citizen. This also means geography has never mattered in determining who is and is not a natural born citizen of the United States.

        Let that sink in…

        Both Senator Cruz and Barack Obama were born under the same revised law regarding natural born citizenship. From December 23, 1952, and November 13, 1986 the law stated:

        “When one parent was a U.S. citizen and the other a foreign national, the U.S. citizen parent must have resided in the U.S. for a total of 10 years prior to birth of the child with five of the years after the age of 14.”

        Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson was born in Delaware in 1935. She graduated from Rice University in 1957 and did not go to Canada until she was near her 30s where she gave birth to Ted in 1970. Therefore, she meets this requirement. If the understood timeline of her travels is correct, Obama’s mother would have been outside the country too soon to qualify under this rule if the president were born anywhere outside of US jurisdiction. This, of course, made the location of Obama’s birth important.

        Now you know the rest of that story.

        The only thing which has changed from the constitutional founding of this country onward is the citizenship of the mother now matters as much as the citizenship of the father.

        If you want to be against Cruz for policy or even personal reasons, fine, but you can take the ineligible to run lie and stow it. And, before you cite Montana v. Kennedy understand that decision was rendered before the law Cruz and Obama were born under passed. In fact, that law was a response to the quandary the SCOTUS found itself in when deciding Montana v. Kennedy…

        Sources:

        US Constitution:
        http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

        “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790):
        http://www.indiana.edu/%7Ekdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

        Explanation of citizenship and naturalization over the years:
        http://www.ranchodlaw.com/other-visas/citizenship-and-residency/

        On the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” (Harvard Law Review):
        http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

        Liked by 2 people

        • The Naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed in 1795. The Naturalization Act of 1795 removed the designation of Natural Born Citizen.

          Like

          • macpipkin says:

            And??? The law Cruz was born under put it back…

            Your point was?…

            Like

            • Ray says:

              It most certainly did not.

              Citizenship was granted by Pub.L. 82–414 § 301(a)(7), 66 Stat. 236. That states “citizen”, it does not state “natural born citizen”. Additionally, if § 301(b) was not complied with citizenship would be revoked. A natural born citizen can not have their citizenship revoked.

              Liked by 1 person

              • macpipkin says:

                Again, please read…:

                The constitution demands a person be a naturalized US citizen at birth and then relies upon the congress to define what that means.

                “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

                So, who was considered a natural born citizen once the first congress met?

                The Naturalization Act of 1790 answered that:

                “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.”

                This law is how the first congress defined natural born citizen and it was signed by President George Washington.

                This means from day one a person born outside the US was a natural born citizen as long as his/her ~father~ was a US citizen. This also means geography has never been the sole determiner of who is and is not a natural born citizen of the United States.

                Let that sink in…

                Both Senator Cruz and Barack Obama were born under the same revised law regarding natural born citizenship. From December 23, 1952, and November 13, 1986 the law stated:

                “(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.”

                Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson was born in Delaware in 1935. She graduated from Rice University in 1957 and did not go to Canada until she was near her 30s where she gave birth to Ted in 1970. Therefore, she meets this requirement. If the understood timeline of her travels is correct, Obama’s mother would have been outside the country too soon to qualify under this rule if the president were born anywhere outside of US jurisdiction. This, of course, made the location of Obama’s birth important.

                Now you know the rest of that story.

                The only thing which has changed from the constitutional founding of this country onward is the citizenship of the mother now matters as much as the citizenship of the father.

                Search 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act Title 3 Chapter 1 to read the law Cruz and Obama were born under.

                Sources:

                US Constitution:
                http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

                “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790):
                http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

                1952 Immigration and Nationality Act Title3 Chapter1

                Explanation of citizenship and naturalization over the years:
                http://www.ranchodlaw.com/other-visas/citizenship-and-residency/

                On the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” (Harvard Law Review):
                http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

                Like

                • Wrong! The Constitution says Natural Born Citizen it nowhere says the president/VP must be a naturalized citizen at birth. That’s ludicrous!!

                  Article II Section 1 Clause 5 (direct quote from the Constitution)

                  No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” (emphasis mine)

                  Naturalized citizens, whether they are naturalized at birth – as foreign born children of citizens are as long as the parents file a CRBA form with a US Consulate when the child is born – as far as I know, Cruz has never released his CRBA form proving he actually is a naturalized citizen – or whether they are naturalized sometime later in life – are not Constitutionally eligible to be president or VP.

                  Hamilton suggested the requirements for president be ‘born a citizen’ or citizen by birth. Jay said that wasn’t a strong enough check against foreigners being elected to the highest office and commanding our military. Jay said the person should be a Natural Born Citizen – one born on US soil to two citizens. Jay was right. obama is a not a Natural Born Citizen and look at what he has done to our Country!!

                  Cruz was born in Canada, he was a native Canadian citizen until he renounced two years ago. Where is his CRBA??? If a person is not born in this Country, the only way they can be a citizen is through naturalization. Fact. Period. C’est fini.

                  Like

            • No, it did not. Cite where it says that.

              Like

              • macpipkin says:

                And again, please read…:

                The constitution demands a person be a naturalized US citizen at birth and then relies upon the congress to define what that means.

                “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

                So, who was considered a natural born citizen once the first congress met?

                The Naturalization Act of 1790 answered that:

                “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.”

                This law is how the first congress defined natural born citizen and it was signed by President George Washington.

                This means from day one a person born outside the US was a natural born citizen as long as his/her ~father~ was a US citizen. This also means geography has never been the sole determiner of who is and is not a natural born citizen of the United States.

                Let that sink in…

                Both Senator Cruz and Barack Obama were born under the same revised law regarding natural born citizenship. From December 23, 1952, and November 13, 1986 the law stated:

                “(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.”

                Eleanor Elizabeth Darragh Wilson was born in Delaware in 1935. She graduated from Rice University in 1957 and did not go to Canada until she was near her 30s where she gave birth to Ted in 1970. Therefore, she meets this requirement. If the understood timeline of her travels is correct, Obama’s mother would have been outside the country too soon to qualify under this rule if the president were born anywhere outside of US jurisdiction. This, of course, made the location of Obama’s birth important.

                Now you know the rest of that story.

                The only thing which has changed from the constitutional founding of this country onward is the citizenship of the mother now matters as much as the citizenship of the father.

                Search 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act Title 3 Chapter 1 to read the law Cruz and Obama were born under.

                Sources:

                US Constitution:
                http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

                “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790):
                http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

                1952 Immigration and Nationality Act Title3 Chapter1

                Explanation of citizenship and naturalization over the years:
                http://www.ranchodlaw.com/other-visas/citizenship-and-residency/

                On the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” (Harvard Law Review):
                http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/

                Like

                • You completely contradict yourself in your comment.

                  Again, a law that has been repealed has no legal force. It doesn’t matter that for 5 years at the beginning of this Country foreign born children of citizens were considered Natural Born Citizens. Congress changed its mind Congress reversed that stipulation. Congress decided that foreign born children of citizens were not Natural Born Citizens, they were naturalized citizens. They realized that Natural Born Citizens can only come from Natural Law never man-made law – like the laws Congress makes.

                  No person who is a native citizen of another country can ever be a Natural Born Citizen of the US. That is simple fact. Natural Born Citizen means complete and sole allegiance to the US. Cruz was born a Canadian. Until two years ago, he was a Canadian citizen. That fact excludes him from ever, ever being a Natural Born Citizen. Fact, jack.

                  Like

        • jetstream says:

          This is absolute deception and misinformation.
          See http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

          Like

          • macpipkin says:

            So you run to a tin foil outfit to back your delusion and that means what?

            Show me where the constitution defines natural born citizen. Show me where the law Cruz was born under says something other than what is stated above.

            Here is the complete code: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401

            The mere opinions of anyone do not matter in this debate. The only players are the facts and the law…

            Like

          • jetstream says:

            The constitution demands a person be a naturalized US citizen at birth…

            The Constitutional requirement for the Presidency is that a person be a “natural born Citizen”, not a “naturalized” US citizen.

            …and then relies upon the congress to define what that means.

            Congress makes law, the Supreme Court interprets law.

            From the very first sentence, this person’s comment is filled with deception and misinformation but we are told condescendingly to “Let that sink in…” and “Now you know the rest of that story.” Then we are lectured to “take the ineligible to run lie and stow it.”

            I could go on, but why.

            Liked by 2 people

            • moogey says:

              Bravo.jetstream. Nicely written.

              Like

            • macpipkin says:

              Natural born citizen = naturalized at birth. If not, what is the meaning? Hint: It has nothing to do with nature.

              Defining something ≠ interpreting something. Nowhere in the constitution is natural born defined. The founders had differing views of what it should mean, but the first congress defined that meaning with the Naturalization Act of 1790 which allowed for foreign born individuals to be natural born citizens provided the father was a citizen. The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act included the mother as well.

              Where is your backing? Where do your views come from? What evidence informs your opinion? 1961 Montana v Kennedy? Sorry, petitioner was born in 1906. What can you point to to back up your words?

              I really don’t blame you. Civics isn’t taught anymore… :-/

              Like

              • Ya know, it’s really easy to find the definition of a word.

                Naturalization:

                The admittance of a foreigner to the citizenship of a country.

                The process by which a foreign citizen becomes a citizen of a new country.

                The legal act or process by which a non-citizen in a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country.

                The process by which U.S. citizenship is granted to a foreign citizen or national after he or she fulfills the requirements established by Congress in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). (this is from the uscis.gov site)

                Cruz was born a foreign citizen and was granted US citizenship through our naturalization laws. Because his mother was a US citizen when Cruz was born, all she had to do was file a CRBA form with a US Consulate. She had to do this for Cruz to be granted naturalized citizenship. Citizenship was not his by Natural Right. It was his only through the naturalization laws Congress passed. Naturalized citizens are not eligible to be president/VP.

                Like

      • I think it was a Cruz bot that just got me blocked from commenting on FB.

        Like

        • macpipkin says:

          Was it a closed or open group? If it was open, I’d stand shoulder to shoulder with you to tell them they were/are wrong. If the group is a closed, or invite only, group I’d say we all need space to formulate our best arguments and exchange ideas.

          I try to only debate where debate is open. Debate and discussion is a great thing. It sure beats the alternative. If the group/page was supposed to be open, I hope they see their error and correct it.

          Best to you…

          Like

      • pirinor says:

        Fear not.

        The Trump 2016 supporters are blowing the Cruzits out of the water on these sites.

        Like

        • macpipkin says:

          Especially when you take into account the mods stopped me from being able to post. It was restored in the past two days. So in a rigged debate, you win… Congrats…

          This site is so far from the spirit of Andrew Breitbart. They really should remove the reference.

          Like

      • kinthenorthwest says:

        SCOTUS needs to take on this whole citizenship law. Until then it will be let to the interpretation of whom ever wants to fight it.
        There are already quite a few people on both sides of the aisle that have said they will fight Cruz’s nomination; whether it be at the convention or national level.
        Besides Cruz being a lying wolf in sheep’s clothing; Cruz’s citizenship issues are only going to screw up this election more.

        Like

    • mad3703 says:

      This is a direct reference to Scott Adams hypothesis that Voters vote on who could win in a cage match. Amazing game being played here.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. joshua says:

    Excuse me! What is all this OBSESSION with the word “LOVE”….all the Bushes use it, now Hilliary uses it, Cruz uses it, Carson uses it….and all the other candidates…except Trump uses it about his FAMILY…the others use it about HUMANITY or something….but it is just a WORD in a political speech or statement USED to convey some kind of warm personable FEELING…..the WORLD might have some Love in relationships, but LOVE does not define a people or a strategy for policy.

    This is PC BS…..

    Like

    • zephyrbreeze says:

      Trump has been the only one using it. He says he loves the people in the crowd, and how there is a feeling of love. NO politician that I remember has ever spoken this way.

      Liked by 2 people

      • grainofsalt says:

        So very true. Also, Trump replies back to whoever yells at him, “I love you!”. He replies back even in the middle of his speech, “I love you back, darling!” or “I love you more!” It is Trump whom I always hear saying this “Love” word. Well, may be it is part of following what was in the GOP leaked memo, i.e., to do what Trump does, etc. Everyone is parroting Trump including Hillary.

        Liked by 2 people

    • RT says:

      Cruz is very PC. Not surprised he uses fake language. Carson does the same (I think he’s well-meaning but I don’t care for it).

      Like

    • catmom says:

      It is an appeal to emotion instead of logic and reason.

      Liked by 2 people

    • macpipkin says:

      When did “love” become politically correct. I have heard Trump use the word outside of family.

      Seriously, look up what it actually means to be politically correct/incorrcect. Being politically incorrect has nothing to do with bombast or calling names. Politically incorrect actions and words are those which tell a truth or make a point many wish would go away.

      Like: Post-op transsexuals have the highest suicide rate of all transsexuals. Yes, this is true. Yes, many wish this fact or tuth to not be spoken. But, who did I attack? No one. Who did I call a name? No one.

      Ted Cruz is not politically correct. The man has as many arrows in his back as he does his chest and he still stands his ground…

      Like

    • Jenny R. says:

      See: Orwell, George. 😉

      Liked by 1 person

  6. LibertyLady says:

    Trump says what the American people believe. Cruz knows but is too cowardly to say it then chimes in after like he’s the only grown up. Cruz has donors to please. He has already sold us out on tpp.

    Liked by 1 person

    • macpipkin says:

      How has Cruz sold out the Tea Party? Just like Trump, you guys make these claims with nothing to back it up.

      Ted Cruz stood his ground while every other republican senator, except Jeff Flake, screamed at him to compromise and allow them to look like they opposed raising the debt ceiling while allowing it to pass anyway. Cruz didn’t budge and forced republicans to go on the record with their vote.

      Meanwhile, Trump has publicly supported and funded many leftist democrats because it was good for business.

      Tell me all about that Trump spine now…

      Like

      • Notmeagain says:

        So he stood his ground–and then what? What has he accomplished by doing that? How many times has he done that lately? He’s been on the road instead of in the Senate standing his ground. How many people has he gotten to do his will? As to Trump’s spine, he gets incoming flak daily like I’ve never seen and he doesn’t back down, but others do, they copy him including “me too” Ted.

        Liked by 2 people

        • macpipkin says:

          He forced members of the republican caucus to go on the record as it concerned raising the debt ceiling. He did not allow them to hide behind procedure. What part of that did you miss?

          He has been present at every vote of consequence putting himself squarely on the record. Please pay attention.

          Now besides supporting many leftist democrat politicians, and being for single payer (government run) healthcare, please tell me what Donald Trump has ever accomplished in the political arena…

          Like

          • Notmeagain says:

            You know, one of the best ways to spot a belligerent troll is the words they use over and over. Favorite phrases are “Please pay attention” and in general snarky “what did you miss” (fool). And the other thing is harping over and over on what is supposed to be a negative point. Trump did say what you said about single-payer health. Yet he only said it once, and he has yet to put out what I’m sure will be a very detailed and cogent policy statement, so your harping on that one utterance is uninformed and simplistic and probably going to be deconstructed. And the other thing you are harping on is that he has supported liberals. Check his donation record. It’s public, we have here. He has given more to Republicans.

            The whole attraction of Trump is that he has accomplished a lot as a manager, which is what the President does, he’s a manager and cat wrangler. Being a politician means being experienced at running campaigns successfully. So far Trump is stomping the professional politicians, clear evidence that he is a better manager than any of them.

            But, if it is so important to you to have someone accomplished in politics, Mr. Trump has achieved a lot in the political arena, despite not being a professional public, err, servant. He has had every politician in the country talking about his proposals and statements from the beginning. And he has made all of them stand on their record, every day. He has had them talk more policy in 6 months and defend it than any of them did in their lives. Cruz has made a few in the Senate go on record on votes. He did not win any of his proposals, because he could not convince enough people to side with him, that’s my point. And on many of these votes it’s a sham anyway. Don’t you understand how often Boehner and McConnell have set things up so some people can vote “conservative” yet the not-so-conservative agenda always seems to fail? Cruz is not effectual with his grand stands, neither is Paul. Neither one has the chops to twist arms in Congress.

            Liked by 1 person

            • azgary says:

              THIS is exactly the problem with slick teddy and by extension his supporters.

              slick teddy can NEVER win if the truths come out about his downer/owner bought and paid for positions, votes, obfuscations and lies.

              THATS why slick teddy and his supporters fear sunlight, they HATE the truths coming out into the open more than they hate the FACTS that they are the true slick teddy.

              and they try to claim Trump supporters are the “cult” and “personality” voters.

              we recognize Trumps warts but because of his positions we are ok with them.

              slick teddy supporters deny and try to hide his warts precisely because they are his positions bought and paid for by the lobbyist/donors and know he cannot win with the truths known.

              when you expose his corruption and positions they become unglued.

              NOTHING makes a slick teddy supporter angrier than seeing his own words publicized.for the most part slick teddy supporters are what they accuse Trump supporters of.

              other than the wackjob lib trolls, nobody gets more hostile and abusive than the slick teddy supporters when you simply quote amnesty ted and display the truths of his positions and globalis/elitist ownership.

              Liked by 1 person

            • grainofsalt says:

              Bravo notmeagain! Applause! Applause!

              Like

          • dick johnson says:

            Are you allowed to have jelly donuts private Pyle?
            Ted Cruz is Garbage!!
            from Nov 30 2015 CTH

            Ted’s wife *Heidi Cruz,

            *Currently on leave from Goldman Sachs – While on the Council of Foreign Relations HEIDI S. CRUZ completed a task force report on Building a North American Global Community – she was also an energy investment banker with Merrill Lynch in Houston, Texas. She served in the Bush White House under Dr. Condoleezza Rice as the Economic Director for the Western Hemisphere at the National Security Council, as the Director of the Latin America Office at the U.S. Treasury Department, and as Special Assistant to Ambassador Robert B. Zoellick, U.S. Trade Representative. Prior to government service, Mrs. Cruz was an investment banker with J.P. Morgan in New York City.

            GLOBAL ECONOMIC MELTDOWN: brought to you in part by Goldman Sack!!!!!

            Ted Cruz is GARBAGE!!!!!!!!!!

            Liked by 1 person

      • AllOrNothing! says:

        Mr. Trump hasn’t been a paid politician, so we can’t judge his record as a paid politician.

        Mr. Cruz, has been and so we can judge his. I don’t know all his history, but I do know a little. He appears to have some integrity…anyone who publicly calls McConnell out as a liar deserves some credit. But Mr. Cruz voted for the TPA and Corker Bill…and his excuses for that don’t sit right with me. Actually, I was for Mr. Cruz before Mr. Trump appeared on the scene.

        Based on what Mr. Trump says now, I think he would have voted accordingly. He is saying what nobody else is saying…what most of us believe, bye the way. Something that can’t be said for THE REST of the candidates, save Mr. Carson, to some degree.

        I’ll give Mr. Trump the benefit of the doubt.

        Like

        • macpipkin says:

          I am beginning to wonder if any of you people ever read the news at all.

          Ted Cruz did not vote for TPP. He voted for the same thing every modern president has received when negotiating a deal, the ability to negotiate with other nations without 535 people looking over the president’s shoulder demanding edits. The TPPA has not been voted on and Ted Cruz has come out against the current text.

          Voted yes in a 98 yes to 1 no count to fight another day and acknowledge there was one good thing about it: http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-why-i-voted-yes-for-corker-iran-bill/

          If either Trump or Cruz becomes president the Iran deal is toast.

          You say Donald Trump is saying things other people are not because you are not paying attention. Again, Ted Cruz ranks higher on every conservative scale out there. Donald Trump is still for single-payer healthcare and will nominate moderate judges to the Supreme Court keeping them as a super legislative body as opposed to a panel of impartial judges.

          And yet again, Donald Trump has supported with his time, words and money leftist democrats running for office. How does this not figured into the record?…

          Like

          • Jenny R. says:

            Where does Cruz stand on H1B visas? And how many H1B holders then turn around and overstay after their visas expire? And how many employers play fast and loose with the requirements for an H1B?

            Like

            • Fej says:

              Cruz is wrong on H1B’s as he is on many immigration issues. That’s why I’m for Trump. I believe Cruz is weak on immigration because of his family history and his ethnicity which he hopes will pay off in Hispanic votes. He is wrong on this but I believe that is where he’s coming from.

              Like

          • Fej says:

            Correct. Cruz ended up voting against the bill. I’m for Trump because of immigration but Cruz is a good man. I would like to see him as veep.

            Like

          • AllOrNothing! says:

            “I am beginning to wonder if any of you people ever read…” I was wondering the same thing about you. I said TPA, not TPP.

            I’ll accept what Trump says now, and forgive what he said years ago. You’re erroneously asserting Trump’s past positions as being his present positions…things RINOs, Democrats and MSM, gleefully do.

            Other CTH posters have eloquently elaborated on his other compromising positions, so, I’ll leave it at that.

            We’ve given up enough American sovereignty with sell-out politicians. It’s now or never. Trump and people 2016!

            Liked by 1 person

          • pirinor says:

            Of course, noble Ted Cruz rode his unicorn to flip-flop town.

            Maybe you should start reading before denouncing others.

            “Cruz was a supporter and voted in favor of TPA or fast-track when it was first put to a vote in May. Only a month later, Cruz issued an op-ed denouncing the additions of Export-Import Bank reauthorization and immigration laws, and then voted in opposition. His change of stance is well documented, and we rate his change of position a Full Flop.”

            Here’s the link: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/08/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-changed-position-trade-promotion-authorit/

            You should be familiar with the site.

            Liked by 1 person

            • macpipkin says:

              You’re more familiar with it than I. It’s liberals being liberals.

              Should people not be affected by new information, like McConnell’s lies about there not being a deal with democrats concerning the EX/IM?

              The final trade deal has still not been voted on…

              Like

      • amjean says:

        TPP does not stand for Tea Party.

        Liked by 1 person

      • mad3703 says:

        Cruz did not attend the Senate Committee Meeting on the Global Immigration amendment yesterday to verbally speak out. Sessions spoke and Raphael Cruz voted by proxy. He puts his name on stuff but only fights enough to look like a conservative.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkihB6IHsX0 .Those are the kind of opportunities you don’t miss if you truly care about the country.

        He has only had 1 Bill enacted. Standing ground falls into the “nice try but what did you accomplish ” category.
        https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=412573#current_status%5B%5D=28&enacted_ex=on

        Liked by 1 person

  7. joshua says:

    TRUMP = BIG ACTION HISTORY
    CRUZ= BIG MOUTH, NO ACTION HISTORY (except Cat in the Hat)

    Liked by 4 people

    • macpipkin says:

      Being a key player in defending our right to keep and bear arms before the SCOTUS is nothing? Telling a republican president to shove it and winning another case before the SCOTUS many said was not winnable as it concerned UN/international interference in our justice system is nothing?

      Ted Cruz has a higher conservative rating than Trump on every issue. Trump has already let on he would nominate moderate judges to SCOTUS and is still for single payer, socialized, healthcare. “As far as single payer, it works in Canada, it works incredibly well in Scotland” were his words.

      You’re supporting a cult of personality who has cloaked himself in conservative rhetoric for political, yes political, expedience. Good luck with that…

      Like

      • Notmeagain says:

        All his actions before SCOTUS were on behalf of Texas litigation. Not his. It was his job and he did well. He had a reputation in law school of being the most convincing arguer, whether he agreed with a point or not. So being successful in his job is still not a marker of how he really feels. He’s a good lawyer, that’s what they do.
        And if you don’t think health care is socialized (i.e. funded and controlled by the government) in this country, you had better take a closer look at the Federal and State budgets. Medicare, Medicaid, CDC, Public Health Corps, VA, Indian Health Services, individual grantees, we are heavily socialized already.

        Liked by 1 person

        • macpipkin says:

          So he defended these cases and won, including those which was said were not winnable, because he didn’t believe in what he was doing? Please.

          Then, you gloss over Donald trumps love of single-payer healthcare by obfuscating the point. Sorry, this is it going to play…

          Like

          • Notmeagain says:

            And once again with the single-payer healthcare. Once, ok. Twice could be a coincidence. Three times is hostile action.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Notmeagain says:

              And I believe that he believed in the paycheck he would get for doing a good job. Give us some other examples of how he promoted the Second Amendment. Then tell us how he can go to the border with Beck and hand out teddy bears to illegal children without saying “soon you’ll go home, here’s a nice souvenir” — but he’s really firm on immigration.

              Liked by 1 person

      • mad3703 says:

        He has only had 1 Bill enacted. Standing ground falls into the “nice try but what did you accomplish ” category.
        https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=412573#current_status%5B%5D=28&enacted_ex=on

        Like

      • pirinor says:

        Let’s round out your list:

        Colluding with Breitbart owner, Robert Mercer’s data mining company to harvest unsuspecting viewers private information.

        Collaborating with Facebook to harvest more personal information on voters. That’s Mr. Civil Liberties for you.

        Your boy is going down hard.

        Liked by 2 people

  8. BenY says:

    Breitbart has been pushing Cruz like the latest miracle drug. It will be interesting when Trump responds to Cruz actual positions, the ones he so cleverly disguises.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. RT says:

    “To his bosses…” Trump’s already formulating his line of attack: Cruz is OWNED.

    Liked by 7 people

  10. Ivehadit says:

    This is from a Thomas Lifson article at Americanthinker.com today, “Trump’s lesson for the GOP”:
    “Cruz may be the one compromise candidate who could unite the deeply split GOP.”

    Why is that, Thomas? Why would you say he is the “compromise candidate”?
    The answer says it all! THAT is the VERY reason we distrust Cruz!
    TRUMP is the ONLY one. Go Donald! HE will TRULY unite the party of AMERICANS!

    Liked by 2 people

    • lovemyAmerica says:

      This a thousand times!
      I don’t care if Trump is not a “true” conservative. Does anyone even know what that is anymore? He is for us…the U.S.
      Also sick and tired of the ‘conservative base” bs. There is no conservative base…..just a bunch of RHINOS.
      Go Trump

      Liked by 2 people

      • grainofsalt says:

        👍👍 2 thumbs up. Sick and tired also of hearing “not a true conservative” and what have you. I don’t care! I care that Trump loves America and the people.

        Like

      • pirinor says:

        Well said sir!

        Who the hell is defining what a “true” conservative is anyway? Did I miss the memo from the GOPe? I’m pretty sure that we conservatives are the one’s deciding that based on our voting decisions, not some elite d-bag’s list of values.

        And those conservative rating

        Like

    • Notamemberofanyorgainizedpolicatal says:

      HA! THAT’S A LAUGH!

      Cruz is 100% FRAUD!

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Lupe Almaguer says:

    Whatever, Ted Cruz! Trump will n not only be the nominee, he will be our next President. Cruz is dreaming if he thinks that Trump’s supporters will go to him. Keep on dreaming, it’ll never happen.

    Liked by 5 people

  12. 240grjhp says:

    Cruz is just another snake oil politician. His Owners (Eh..Donors..same smell different odor) are the typical K Street CoC types.

    Liked by 2 people

    • 240grjhp says:

      BreitBart has been infected with Cruz disease.

      Liked by 1 person

    • mketch says:

      Is it just me, or does Cruz remind anyone else of Severus Snape in Harry Potter?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jenny R. says:

        No, Snape seemed vile at the beginning but turned out to be one of the good guys; Cruz has seemed like one of the good guys, but dig deeper and some pretty no-good stuff comes up. Always be careful of surface appearance, as my parents always said.

        Like

        • pirinor says:

          No.

          Severus Snape is TC’s campaign manager. That’s how they can ignore getting the floor wiped with them and still be confident of victory. It’s magic.

          Like

    • anon says:

      The harsh reality is that Cruz will NEVER win a general election. The Republican Party is inferior in numbers to both Democrats and Independents (individually). There is no victory without a huge chunk of the Independent bloc. He absolutely does not resonate with them. I know this: I used to be one of them. He also won’t peal any Democrats off. Trump will. Really, I’m not trying to be jerk. I get that many think he would make the best President, and maybe you’re right, but it’s a dream. Unless Hillary Clinton gets caught having sex with a farm animal and it goes youtube or some such other appalling and utterly unlikely scenario, Cruz will not become President.

      The ugly reality is that it is either Trump or Clinton. I know many of you aren’t happy with that and prefer others. Heck, I’m a Trump supporter and I’d prefer someone else, too: Dwight Eisenhower. It’s too bad a patriot and wise steward of our civilization like him could never openly advance in our political system now. Now, thanks in large part to the treehouse, I know why. Thank guys, especially SD the proprietor and our host.

      Liked by 3 people

  13. Phoenix1960 says:

    Cruz was in studio on Kelly show and had chance to “hit it out of park” but chose not to. Hitting it out of park would have been calling prior segment with Beck “unacceptable and un-American” to make allusions that Trump is in any way comparable to Hitler and that anyone making such allusions is to be shunned.
    Instead he weasel worded his excuses and denied his comments regarding Trump.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. FTWPhil says:

    Like his pappy was sayin’, Cruz will cure all that ills you. He’s magical snake oil. You can see the wonders it does for his hair. What a fantastic elixir of wonderment!

    Like

  15. RT says:

    I’m glad the Trump Campaign is watching sneaky Cruz carefully. There is no “alliance” as Scruz Bots have claimed.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. stringy theory says:

    I’m sorry Cruz turned out to be what he is, instead of a true, conservative. But I figured out he was untrustworthy a long time ago, well before I found Trump was the one and only. I am amazed that with all of his baggage, so many still think he’s a 100% conservative instead of a closet member of the GOPe and global society. Glad this recording made it into the daylight–thanks Sundance.

    Liked by 4 people

    • macpipkin says:

      Donald Trump’s support of nationalized single-payer healthcare and his consistent support of leftist Democrats with his time, words and his money mean nothing to you?

      I will take the complete record of Ted Cruz over the record of Donald Trump as it concerns being a conservative in times where it is tough to be a conservative any day…

      Like

      • Martin says:

        Stop trolling

        Liked by 3 people

      • Notmeagain says:

        You’re really working for Jeb!, aren’t you? This whole “Trump is not a conservative” theme was Rove from the start, I’m pretty sure. Hallmarks: single pay, gave to leftist Democrats. By the way, that’s the fourth time you’ve said those things. You know you aren’t going to change minds so you are resorting to spamming threads. No more soup for you.

        Liked by 2 people

      • georgiafl says:

        Ted Cruz has no executive experience, has never built or sustained any concrete organization. He is a junior first term Senator like Obama.

        Cruz has not managed to change anything, or do anything stop Obama’s obscene policies or create a coalition of conservatives in the Senate.

        His trip with Beck to the border to support illegals and his refusal to support conservative challengers in 2012 does not sit well with me.

        Moreover, Cruz voted for TPA and the Corker bills, thus paving the way for Obamatrade and the Iran Deal.

        His connections and associations through his donors and his wife’s job are also a reason to be wary about Cruz.

        Liked by 2 people

        • macpipkin says:

          Real good, attack the man’s wife…

          Worked real well for Dewhurst…

          I’ve already answered this elsewhere.

          Corker bill was 98 to 1. What difference does 97 to 2 make? Cruz earned some points for this which made his speech calling McConnell a liar all the more biting.

          Granting negotiating power to the WH clears the way for nothing. The final vote has yet to be held.

          Cruz was charged with and successfully revamped the Texas SG office. His work allowed him to go eight for nine in the SCOTUS.

          Attack Heidi all you want. You don’t have a leg to stand on… http://blogcritics.org/anatomy-of-a-smear-heidi-cruz/

          Like

      • lumoc1 says:

        Some people believe that If you repeat a lie enough times it becomes the truth. Are you one of those?

        Liked by 1 person

      • pirinor says:

        If you guy is so awesome, then why isn’t he winning?

        Why is he lurking in Trump’s shadow? If he’s so great and terrible, maybe he should go on the offense. But he’s too timid to roll the dice. Definitely not a winner.

        Liked by 1 person

    • BenY says:

      I wish I had found out before sending him my money.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Pops says:

    At the next debate, Trump should use his thirty-second opening monologue to explain that CNN refused to donate to the vets, so he is donating x amount (or has). After that, he should pull a teddy bear from his pocket and toss it toward Cruz, saying ‘Here, Ted, one of your illegal friends dropped this.”

    Note, I have nothing against Cruz taking a dig at his opponents, but doing it in private – and then denying it – is not the way to win friends and influence people.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. 240grjhp says:

    Cruz is a PRICC (Progressive Republican in Conservative Clothing).

    Liked by 2 people

  19. macpipkin says:

    As I stick to the topic(s) and have used no curse words my comments are being moderated…

    Says a lot…

    Like

  20. keebler AC says:

    So……..that filibuster speech was just a bear hug of love…….for Conservatives with nothing behind it but craven goals to fulfill his father’s dreams of a son being the New Dominion Order’s leader – to attain both total wealth and Christian salvation.

    And, Ted apparently is of the liberal principle that the ends is justified by the means? Really? Really?

    It says A LOT about a man who must grovel not only to the leader before him as a snivelling toady but that Cruz has to grovel before his wife, Heidi, VP of Goldman Sachs, main household bread maker, before he was allowed to run for president. On the reverse, Melania could see beyond Trump’s low poll numbers and insist that she knows her husband ought to run for the sake of the country.

    One wife believed in her husband. The other did not. Wow.

    Liked by 1 person

    • macpipkin says:

      What says a lot is Donald Trump has absolutely no conservative record to speak of. The only thing he has is the words he has used for the past several months. That is it.

      When given the opportunity to change his mind on the issue of single-payer healthcare he did not. He is for raising taxes on some people prolonging the governments choosing of winners and losers. And yet again Donald Trump has thrown his total support behind leftist democrats. When asked, he said it was “good for business.” Yes, those would definitely be the words of a principled man.

      I will take the complete record and the acumen of Ted Cruz over the Donald Trump side show any day.

      Ted Cruz has actually fought for the things Donald Trump has recently claimed to be all for. Before you ask where his accomplishments are, there are some, please be prepared to show me Donald Trump’s conservative accomplishments. He took $1 million and a lot of connections from his father and grew a business. That is not conservative at all. It’s being a businessman. Leftists do this all the time.

      Donald Trump has hinted he would be open to appointing “moderate” judges to the Supreme Court. This would accomplish nothing more than that body continuing to act as a judicial oligarchy. Ted Cruz has promised only judges who look to the original intent of the authors of the Constitution and its amendments would be considered. This is a big conservative difference.

      What good are our constitutional rights if we have a Supreme Court who will drive a steamroller over them at the drop of a hat?..

      Like

      • keebler AC says:

        Yikes, no wonder you are being moderated.

        People who refuse to cite facts and are either unread, uninformed or plain old misleading get moderated because it’s a frank waste of time. The mods keep the place clean of misleading, rabid trolls who purposely post old and out of date news that has been de-bunked by the well informed, researched and source-linked comments.

        I can’t make it through your comment because it’s totally debunked by information.

        I for one, say good bye, because I’ve got better things to do than educate the willing blind.

        (Raises hand to answer!)

        Ted Cruz is not a Constitutionalist because quite frankly he doesn’t understand what the Founding Fathers intended when they escaped from tyranny in Britain.

        And if he understands the US Constitution, he doesn’t agree with it. That makes him a progressive who acts against the US Constitution and calls it progress for himself, “his people” and the global players such as Europe, Cuba, South America, and the middle east. Fast tracking TTP which was probably in the works by entities such as CFR where his wife was once an active player, and calling it a “free trade deal” was a sign Ted Cruz wants America to be ransacked by international tyranny.

        Liked by 1 person

      • georgiafl says:

        Conversely, Ted Cruz has no executive experience, has never built or sustained any concrete organization. He is another junior first term Senator.

        Cruz has not managed to change anything, or do anything stop Obama’s obscene policies or create a coalition of conservatives in the Senate.

        His trip with Beck to the border to support illegals and his refusal to support conservative challengers in 2012 does not sit well with me.

        Moreover, Cruz voted for TPA and the Corker bills, thus making the way for Obamatrade and the Iran Deal.

        Keep vetting every candidate.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Fej says:

          Cruz ended up voting for TPA/TPP. Yes, I was not happy that he even thought of voting for it in the first place but let’s be accurate.

          Like

          • Fej says:

            Sorry I meant against. He ended up voting against TPA/TPP

            Like

            • georgiafl says:

              As I understand it, he voted for TPA which paved the way for TPP to pass without his vote. Pretty tricky. Same with Obama’s Iran deal…his vote for the Corker bill enabled the Iran deal to pass the Senate.

              Like

              • keebler AC says:

                Tricky Dicky.

                Ted Cruz isn’t much different from Barack Obama. Says one thing – does another surrepticiously – finishes by blaming someone else so he keeps looking gilded.

                Liked by 1 person

      • pyromancer76 says:

        So what is conservative, macpipkin, in your eyes. Being productive, making use of American capitalism to enhance both oneself and the economy is conservative in my eyes. Not being rah rah about H1B visas that are only about taking higher paid jobs away from Americans is conservative in my eyes. Supporting the Constitution by refusing enemies entry into this country is conservative. Voting for fair trade and not globaloney open-all-borders trade is conservative in my eyes. There are many ways I see Cruz wanting to sneak in as a so-called conservative points while he is serving those uniparty people — who, by the way, have provided absolutely no opposition to Obama from the git go. Shameful. Treasonous. Oh, and who is his wife? What are her values? Where has she put her productive energy? It almost appears that you must be smoking something. Yes, we all have our choices and that is the American way. But it also is the American way to be honest. Honestly, Cruz is no conservative.

        Liked by 4 people

  21. ScruffyLeon says:

    About Cruz and Trump:
    My dad was an auto mechanic during the 60s and 70s. He owned his own Auto Repair shop. As you can imagine he had lots of tools (wrenches, screwdrivers, sockets, etc). When I would help him and complain about the hard work, he would always tell me the job is not as hard if you pick the right tool for the job.
    I believe Donald Trump is the right tool we need now for this very difficult task looming ahead of us. He has the needed skill sets to get America back on track.

    Liked by 4 people

  22. pyromancer76 says:

    240grjhp says: December 11, 2015 at 1:55 pm “Cruz is a PRICC (Progressive Republican in Conservative Clothing).”

    Now that is an acronym of which I heartedly approve. Almost every Republican in the Congress and Senate is a Progressive (non)Republican. We did not elect them to serve us in that way. Fool me once, shame on me (openly dissing the entire Republican electorate in 2012; purposefully running the flavor of the month and then settling on xxx). Fool me twice, shame on you. There will be no third time, you PRICCS, with your obvious evil delight. I have never seen politicians demean their citizens with the malevolent vigor as our current (named) Republicans. It will be a clean sweep this election and next. There will be no third party. We are the Republicans and we are the majority of Americans. The Augean stables will be cleansed. Join the movement or get rolled over. Enough with the PRICCs.

    Liked by 1 person

    • keebler AC says:

      Yes, you outlined it very clearly!

      The Republican hacks in Congress and its propaganda media we’ve discovered are abusers and disrespectful of its voters – those who put them in office and look to them for intelligent reporting. Abusers of its people. It’s shameful.

      Like

  23. Fej says:

    Excuse me, I’m looking for the site where conservatives eat their own?

    Like

  24. mnmike says:

    And, Ted Cruz was proven right! Ben Carson is sinking. Trump is out supporting Ethanol and professing to being an evangelical (who can’t name any verses in Scripture).

    Like

  25. kinthenorthwest says:

    Told you there is something smelly and fishy about Cruz.
    Even if Cruz manages to fool the people with his flip flopping lying talk, he still has his birthplace issues to overcome. Its going to be interesting to see how the GOP will handle Cruz if people start screaming Cruz is not eligible due to birthplace. H3LL there are already politicians on both sides ready to pounce on Cruz’s ineligibility, along with other high ranking non-politicians.

    Like

  26. Blaine says:

    Ted Cruz is a crooked paid puppet, he’s no different than what we have in office now, except he’s not a Muslim yet! Cruz’ story about his father is a LIe…that’s a fictional story to try and make him look like his family struggled to get to America! I pray that Trump doesn’t pick Cruz for V.P. that will be a YUGE MISTAKE!

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s