Media Reports A Second Wall Street Banking Loan “Inadvertently Omitted” By Candidate Ted Cruz….

The New York Times outlines another loan for Senate Candidate Ted Cruz that was “Inadvertently Omitted” in 2012 by the campaign team of Heidi and Ted Cruz.   But, no-one seems to ask the key q Before I forget to bring up, If you have a bad credit rating and are stuck in a European country you require to understand that prior to you start looking for a quick loan without UC – Upplysningscentralen at låna-pengar.biz/utan-uc It is best to know your precise rating and be upfront with it when you apply to any sort of lender listed. That method if they are going to turn you down, you understand right now without squandering anymore time – and without having actually rejected applications appearing on your credit report, pushing your score even lower. uestion “why”?

There are two issues behind the Wall Street loans which Ted Cruz omitted from his campaign finance disclosures to the FEC, neither of which have anything to do with a candidate taking out an equity line of credit.

a17b2-hip-replacement-recall-briberyted cruz 1

♦  The first key issue is a matter of political integrity.  In 2012 Senate candidate Ted Cruz was campaigning against big banks, bank bailouts specifically, and taxpayer funded bailouts in general.

Obviously if the Texas electorate discovered candidate Cruz was using his connections to Goldman Sachs and Citibank (CitiGroup), while simultaneously campaigning against the same institutions – his political opponents would have been able to point to a particular ideological hypocrisy in that regard.

However, the second issue, is actually the BIGGER issue. 

Why does the FEC require a federal candidate to disclose a loan taken out to finance their campaign?

Within the answer is where you will find the GREATER concern.

The FEC requires candidates to disclose bank loans taken out to finance their bids for office simply because such loans can be used to subvert campaign finance laws.

If a candidate takes out a loan, in any amount, any entity can repay the loan on the candidate’s behalf – and that’s a way to subvert rules on the amount of contributions.

If, as an example, those who control/influence policy objectives within Goldman Sachs wanted to hold influence upon a candidate, they could simply loan him/her money and then allow repayment by their own group.   This is also why FEC rules only allow candidates to take out loans, to finance campaigns, that have traditional collateral to back them up.

Think about it this way.   A candidate has $500,000 in traditional assets: a house, bank account, investment account etc.  That candidate is, by FEC regs, allowed to take out a $500k loan against such assets.  This is traditional loan/collateral, equity, considerations.

A candidate CANNOT, however, take out an unsecured signature loan for their campaign.

cruz and heidiIf a candidate could take out an unsecured signature loan, it opens the door wide open to corrupt exploitation by external influence.

The candidate with $500k in assets, or a Manchurian candidate with zero in assets, could be given a $2 million loan – which the loan originator would not expect to get back.  In this example, third parties, who are part of the influence equation, could pay back the loan on the candidate’s behalf, avoid FEC/public scrutiny and hold influence over what the elected political official does in office.

That’s the BIGGER question in this example.

•  Was this second scenario a method for Wall Street, via Goldman Sachs, to put the well-educated husband of one of their “employees” into office, simply to insure that as a U.S. Senator he was friendly to their interests?

•  Would Wall Street industrial bankers, who finance global corporations, be able to insure this type of candidate would, as an example, advocate for something like Trans-Pacific Trade?

•  Would Wall Street institutional bankers, who benefit from low interest loans via U.S. Treasury, be able to influence such a candidate to avoid auditing the federal reserve?

•  Would Wall Street institutional banking agents who benefit from low interest federal borrowing, and higher interest investment loaning, be able to influence policy regarding North American economic development?

•  Would, as an example, a billionaire hedge-fund manager (Robert Mercer), who is in a legal fight with the IRS to the tune of $10 BILLION taxes owed, be willing to invest several million, perhaps tens of millions, into a presidential campaign in an effort to win the White House and influence a U.S. Tax Policy that would tilt the IRS scales in his favor – and consequently save him billions?

Those become the bigger questions to consider when asking yourself why would such a brilliant legal expert, a very smart lawyer like Ted Cruz, just inadvertently omit such a filing to the FEC.

Wouldn’t an equally sharp spouse like Heidi S. Cruz, who was -according to Ted- a key decision maker in the loans, and who is also an energy investment banker with Goldman Sachs, also identify the concern?

I’ll leave those answers up to you….

(Via New York Times)  The Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, already facing scrutiny for not disclosing a Goldman Sachs loan he used for his 2012 Senate campaign, also failed to disclose a second loan, from Citibank, for the same race, according to a letter he sent Thursday to federal election officials.

The one-page letter said that the “underlying source” of money for a series of personal loans Mr. Cruz made to his Senate campaign in Texas included both bank loans, which totaled as much as $1 million. Both loans were “inadvertently omitted” from the required filings, the letter said. Previously, Mr. Cruz has only acknowledged using the loan from Goldman for his campaign.

The latest disclosure casts further doubt on his oft-stated story of having liquidated his entire family savings of slightly more than $1 million to fuel a come-from-behind win in the Republican primary. The tale has become part of a campaign narrative of a populist, scrappy Mr. Cruz putting everything on the line to overcome a wealthy establishment opponent.  (read more)

Dr_Phil_teen_youtube_beating

ted and heidi kiss

This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, Christian Values, Conspiracy ?, Election 2016, Ted Cruz, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

422 Responses to Media Reports A Second Wall Street Banking Loan “Inadvertently Omitted” By Candidate Ted Cruz….

  1. Jemima says:

    More important than his financial dealings or his eligibility to run for President is Cruz’s clear lack of leadership ability while in the Senate. Yes, he stood up for Conservative principles but he remained a lone wolf in the wilderness. He was unable to inspire or rally his colleagues to the cause. Then how would he rally the general population? He wouldn’t.This is the real problem with Cruz. Mention his name in casual conversation as Presidential choice and more often than not you will hear: “I don’t like him.”

    Liked by 8 people

    • carole says:

      Well said, Jemima! This is the one thing everybody can see (and I’m surprised that the whole world isn’t talking about it). I’ve been saying this since day one: Cruz will NOT be able to get anything done. He will not be able to work with Congress. He is heartily disliked in Congress. THIS is the elephant in the room (aside from all the other sleaze that makes him a very bad candidate.)

      Liked by 2 people

    • Nothing is more important than eligibility – only once this is established may qualifications be considered.

      Liked by 5 people

      • mcfyre2012 says:

        Indeed. If a person is not even eligible, all other points about that person are moot.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Miss America says:

        Yes, I was very turned off by Cruz’ sarcastic answer in the debate, “oh, glad you’re asking the important questions”. What is more important than that?? (Especially after the debacle that has been the Obama presidency). Add to that his deliberate false information about Trump and his mother, and I am completely put off.

        Liked by 3 people

        • The fact about Trump’s mother was true, just irrelevant!

          Like

          • ladysforest says:

            The fact is that mother Trump was naturalized four years prior to Mr. Trumps birth. She was a US citizen. Citizen father, citizen mother, born in the US. The qualification wasn’t meant to stretch back to a candidates grandparents, and it would have to to insure that the parents were born citizens.

            Like

  2. LawrencePaul says:

    Once the spotlight was on Slick Eddy it was only a matter of time before the skeletons started leaping out of the closet, Challenging Trump exposes you to the light and none of these jokers are uv stable.

    Liked by 8 people

    • LawrencePaul says:

      This also begs another question. How many more of the Shysters in Washington have also pulled this scam. Judging by their willingness to sell American workers down the river for the benefit of corporate globalists, a good many of them I imagine.

      Liked by 4 people

  3. SharonKinDC says:

    After the latest revelations and condemnation of millions of people, I think Canchurian Ted is the ‘conservative’ version of Manchurian Obama.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Agreed. He is a planned weakening of the American concept of sovereignty, They are trying to get us to not only accept foreign rule, but to think it was our idea.

      For this to have happened, there must have been a concerted, decades-long push to get #FoisTED to follow the track he did. Just like they greased the skids for Obama (e.g., the perfectly timed outside pressure to make under-qualified Obama the President of Harvard Law Review), they must have pushed and prodded Ted at every juncture to rise rapidly on an Obama-like trajectory, to get into position for a White House run.

      This is dangerous stuff. Both parties are clearly in on this stuff – up to their eyeballs. They are making the presidency a psy-op for “managing” the United States. WTF. We either take the bland globalist JebBurger, or the tastier but unhealthier ForeignBurger. Any choice but Trump validates global control over the United States. And Trump was NOT supposed to be on the menu!

      Liked by 5 people

      • UUGGHHH, I am so irritated! Despite feeling that something was always off about Cruz, I voted for him, can’t remember what he claimed the issue was with Dewhurst but THIS LOAN info would’ve blown things up but good.

        God bless and protect Donald Trump!

        Liked by 4 people

        • Cruz has had a great story – very easy to believe. I was a big supporter, too. The problem is that I wasn’t digging deeper – but as my excuse, I have to say that the facts simply weren’t available. Indeed, they didn’t really matter until Cruz “decided” to run for President. But they should have, before he voted for TPA.

          #FoisTED. That’s my excuse.

          Like

        • ladysforest says:

          Was it public back then that Cruz was born in Canada? I never knew much about him until he began to campaign for prez

          Like

      • rajabear1 says:

        You may be more spot on than you think. Look back at the time line of when Beck stopped doing the chalkboard connection lessons and then left fox to start his new endeavor in TEXAS, the start up time of Mercury1 (odd name unless you have a powerful friend named Mercer) and what good old Ted was up to leading up to that time period. And isn’t Barton based out of the great state of Texas?
        I know it sounds crazy, but I believe there is some serious dot connection to be done here. Anyone that had followed Beck at that time (yes, hanging my head) noticed a change. For me, within a few months, I started tuning him out. The religious bent, no more chalkboard dot connecting, and the contradictions. Just not the same–at all.
        It’s almost as if while exposing everything on the left and the obama administration, he or whomever thought, ‘hey, why can’t we follow thier game plan, but for ‘our’ side!’
        The way Beck intoduced Cruz to the nation and now looking back all the similarities between obama and Cruz are uncanny. No coincidence. Think money and power of the globalists is just too delicious to turn away. Think that’s why a non NBC is essential.
        Like I said,crazy, but there is a ‘there’ there.
        Sorry for the rambling, wish I could be more articulate and concise, just not very good at writing out what’s in my brain like so many of you all are.

        Liked by 3 people

        • ColoradoChloe says:

          My husband said almost the same thing the other day. And you said it just fine.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Agreed – just fine. There are some serious dots there, and I’m thankful for the information.

            I’ve only tuned into Beck occasionally, but the one thing that I’ve consistently thought in recent years, is MANIPULATION – the thought that Beck is both highly manipulable, and actually being manipulated.

            Some real food for thought here. It’s putting some reality behind my unexplained speculations. It explains the HOW of the assertion of right-hand control by globalist forces.

            Like

        • Dottie says:

          Of course the dots always connect .I never liked Cruz. I started researching him two years ago. There was just something too orchestrated about him ..his history..his robotic speeches..his photo ops..his grandstanding.. I had friends who would tell me I was crazy..he was a constitutionalist.. Well of course he was..he was from Harvard. Look at the history of those that come out of Harvard.Not all of them..I don’t want to be guilty of putting someone in a box, but the fact is it is the training and grooming ground for the elites and the political class. I think it is time to start putting others in that aren’t lawyers. They know too many loop holes and know how to change the law to suit their needs.

          And I have said the very same thing about the similarities between Cruz and Obama and got called everything, but something nice, but now..some are saying.. You were onto something a long time ago. Intuitiveness is a gift.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Sandy Johnson says:

          I am in complete agreement with what you say. I have been telling people that this is Obama all over again. They figure they got away with it once, why not twice.
          Your analysis of Beck is spot on! He and David Barton are very dangerous in many ways. Like you I stopped watching him around the same time, something wasn’t right with him.
          As for connecting the dots, I wish Christians would wake up and use the brains God gave them. I actually had a Christian man tell me today that all of these red flags with Cruz and him sealing his records are NON issues😳
          I about choked on my coffee! If people don’t wake up, we are doomed to repeat history!

          Liked by 1 person

        • illuvatar11 says:

          Yeah, you said it fine. Just be like Trump and speak it loud and direct and let the chips fall where they may.

          Like

      • SharonKinDC says:

        Perfectly stated, Cankles.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Papoose says:

    According to the usurping candidate, he put it on one paper instead of the other paper.

    They are not ‘papers’, they are documents. Again, a sentence structured to deceive.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Sandra says:

    Sundance, this is a perfect example of why I come to your web site. I was just beginning to learn about the loan issue when I read your statements:

    The candidate with $500k in assets, or a Manchurian candidate with zero in assets, could be given a $2 million loan – which the loan originator would not expect to get back. […] Was this second scenario a method for Wall Street, via Goldman Sachs, to put the well-educated husband of one of their “employees” into office, simply to insure that as a U.S. Senator he was friendly to their interests?

    This makes me sick. I can’t imagine any other explanation. Trump must not choose Cruz for VP or any other position.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Mr Rational says:

      Apparently you come here to be lied to.
      Sundance’s smearing example has nothing to do with what Cruz did.
      Cruz borrowed against his own assets, reported it on more than one form, and did not report on a second form.
      What he did is like you or I borrowing against our 401K.
      Sundance is intentionally misleading people.

      Like

      • Voltaire's Crack says:

        What is your explanation for how a brilliant man like Cruz made the exact same “oh shucks” error not once, but twice?

        Liked by 2 people

        • ColoradoChloe says:

          Cruz, the brilliant lawyer didn’t know he held dual Canadian/American citizenship until 2015 and “forgot” to report a loan when filing paperwork for his US Presidential run. When he was a practicing attorney people paid him good money to represent them. Surely he wasn’t as “forgetful” then. The good people of Texas might want to double check the work of their sitting senator Cruz. Just in case, there might have been a few things he “forgot” to do in fulfilling his sworn duty to them. He might tie a string around his finger, it worked for my brother-in-law.

          Like

      • JRD says:

        Not working.

        Cruz intentionally concealed this in order to run as a TEA Party candidate.

        “In willful denial” doesn’t work any longer.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Notmeagain says:

        With this second loan it begins to strain the imagination that he could borrow so much against his assets. But you are missing the original part of this, Cruz making a big deal of how much he believed in himself that he told his wife “Let’s liquidate all our assets for this campaign.” Bet she rolled her eyes and said, “no, we’ll get a loan.” After all, she is a banker. Got him a nice loan at her bank, one of the big banks Cruz said he was going to crusade against. And that was so nice he got another loan at another one of those nasty banks.
        And then Mr. Super Smart Legal Eagle didn’t file his paperwork correctly. Oh, sure, it was probably a campaign flunky who screwed up, but the buck stops with the boss, right?

        Liked by 2 people

      • Rusty abbe says:

        Yep sundance is misleading at best…you can cheerleader for trump but you shouldn’t mislead about his opponents.

        Like

        • Voltaire's Crack says:

          What is your explanation for how a brilliant man like Cruz made the exact same “oh shucks” error not once, but twice?

          Liked by 1 person

        • Jake says:

          Don’t worry Rushty.

          You’ll be so pleased when Trump becomes President and Apple brings jobs back to the US from China and makes your iPhones in this country again!

          Like

      • Steele81 says:

        I am prob missing something, but in my experience a person with $500,000.00 could only borrow about 70% of the asset value and possibly even less depending on the assets themselves. That Mr. Cruz used half a million to borrow close to a million is a sweetheart deal that certain is worthy of scrutiny.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dottie says:

        Did you read the article..no he did not borrow against his assets..He got a loan on his signature alone..through his wife’s employer. Come on this is Jim Jones followers were..They could never believe the guy was evil.. Why would the FEC say he didn’t disclose it if he did. They don’t want to be held liable for saying something false..come out of your stupor..Besides Sundance didn’t report this..it was from a New York paper. and don’t say..New York papers all lie..The fact is he hasn’t really denied this.. This is campaign money.It isn’t anything like you borrowing against your 401 k. They were given a loan on their signature alone..not an asset.

        Like

        • jimbob says:

          Did you read the article..no he did not borrow against his assets..He got a loan on his signature alone..through his wife’s employer.

          Nothing in the article says he got a signature loan.

          Like

      • Sandra says:

        Mr Rational, I suggest you read the New York Times article linked to by Sundance above. Your summary of the situation is not correct.

        Like

    • gellieba says:

      Cruz is the apprentice to be fired …

      Like

    • Dottie says:

      Guaranteed he won’t..It is the Trump brand no matter what he does.He will not want the stain on his reputation.

      Like

  6. Mr Rational says:

    There is no excuse for this trashy article.
    Some of the posters are a little bit simple, and their ignorance can be excused.
    Sundance is not simple, he has the ability to understand these concepts. He also understands the difference between printing facts and smearing with innuendo, opinion, and fantasy. Yet he has gone forward with this and similar scat-journalism for some time.
    Maybe Sundance will someday return to credibility, but for now the Conservative Trumphouse has become a joke, and is a study in the rise and fall of an internet brand.

    Like

    • LawrencePaul says:

      You seem to have picked up Slick Eddy’s habit of talking down to and insulting their intelligence. I wonder if you are also bought and paid for by the New York banks that the Canadian claims to hate? Just sayin.

      Liked by 3 people

    • sundance says:

      Mr. “Rational” avoids some rational things:

      The guy he is making excuses for is supposed to be the smartest, most brilliant conservative ever. He’s also a well versed lawyer, and so is his wife.

      The FEC is investigating him for illegal filing omissions.

      The lawyer has admitted the omissions.

      Liked by 9 people

      • LawrencePaul says:

        Well there is very little doubt that Slick Eddy is smart but when a person think that they are so much smarter than anyone else that they can fool everyone they are bound to be found our eventually. As the saying goes “you can fool some of the people all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. Our Canadian friend thought that he could. I guess not though eh.

        Liked by 4 people

        • MVW says:

          Look, these documents are intended to let the voters know what is going on. The fact that it has just been discovered means that the omission was important and therefore not just an oversight. Yes, on other documents it was indicated but apparently those other documents are not where one goes to understand the campaign finances. So, the slick lawyer gives the excuse that it was inadvertent? And it just so happens to contradict Cruz’s narrative?

          A pattern of deception is clear.

          Liked by 2 people

        • gellieba says:

          like it a lot

          Like

    • JRD says:

      Credibility? Sorry, your idol worship has you “in willful denial” and you refuse to vet Cruz.

      Your propaganda doesn’t work here.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Debian Man says:

      Panties In Bunch Alert

      Liked by 2 people

    • zadatn says:

      Cruz had to go to a bank when he was in college to pay his $1800.00 Poker card gambling debt. Thank goodness his Aunt was some sort of officer at the bank. I can’t see Heidi, a banker with Goldman Sachs, wanting to go into debt. Doesn’t fit her resume. Maybe that’s why she had to seek therapy for depression.

      Like

    • Kay Elle says:

      Mr. “Rational”‘s comments read more like a personal diatribe against Sundance than an intelligent, fact-based critique of what was written. Green-eyed monster rearing it’s ugly head, perhaps?

      Like

    • RINOKiller says:

      NO TROLLS ALLOWED!

      GTFO

      Like

    • Sandra says:

      Mr Rational, read the New York Times article or any of a number of other articles written by reputable news organizations. As a Washington Post article says, “He didn’t simply “forget” to file the disclosure; he made up a self-reverential story to go with it.” And he did it for both his Senate and Presidential campaigns. This is a big problem. Are you going to admit it?

      Like

    • kathyca says:

      “Some of the posters are a little bit simple, and their ignorance can be excused.”

      How very magnanimous of you — a**hole. How’s that for a little bit simple.

      Liked by 1 person

    • nyflacon says:

      Yes, facts are stubborn things. You can always go to RS.

      Liked by 1 person

    • El Torito says:

      The Cruz campaign is nearly dead. Mr Rational (hardly) and Cruz zealots are having a bit of trouble keeping up with how fast and thoroughly the facade that is their Messiah is crumbling. My advice to Mr. Rational: Don’t take it personal, just take it. Try to come to terms with the fact that Cruz can never be the GOP nominee. That would be Rational.

      Like

  7. Regina says:

    lamecherry:
    This is apparently Cruz Values and not New York Values which Cruz attacks and smears, because if we expand this, we now know that Rafael Ted Cruz was getting money from one of the scoundrel debt traders which made a fortune off of TARP bailouts, which made the loan to Cruz even possible.
    Part two in this, is the fact that Citibank has been buying up US industry, particularly American oil, as their owner is Saudi Muslim terror oil.

    So when Ted Cruz took out a loan, he took money from swindlers and enemies of America, and these are the crooked dealers who Ted Cruz answers to.

    The criminal part in this, is Rafael Ted Cruz did not inform the Federal Elections Commission, that he had taken out these loans from Goldman Sachs and Citibank in sweetheart deals, and in public stated he was self funded. That is deception and fraud, and that is something called a felony in the criminal courts.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Chris Allen says:

    Cruz epitomizes the need for Trump..,

    Liked by 4 people

  9. sammyhains says:

    Robert Mercer created and funded the “Keep The Promise” Super PACs for Ted Cruz.
    Anyone willing to bet that is a message from Mercer to Cruz about promises Cruz made behind closed doors to Mercer about making his IRS problems go away?

    Like

  10. zadatn says:

    Cruz is going to owe a lot of people a lot of money. These big boys don’t give money without a reciprocal agreement.

    Like

  11. WeThePeople2016 says:

    This whole thing stinks to the high heavens. When you start digging into Cruz’s financial dealings, his family history including his citizenship/birth, his flip-flopping, his family, etc., the more questions you have that are not answered. His flippant, snarky, arrogant responses are not going to cut it anymore. I also thought he said that he wasn’t going to attack other candidates? Wasn’t that his stance? Well, not anymore – he not only attacked Trump, but he attacked an entire state with it!

    Liked by 2 people

  12. zadatn says:

    Bookkeeping is not that hard; you simply must account for everything that comes in and goes out, categorize it correctly, and the books have to balance.

    It’s damn hard to have the books balance when you leave $1 million smackers off one side of the sheet, isn’t it?

    I will not vote for someone who I believe is a crook and there is no damned way that you can be off by a million bucks on reconciling your campaign inflows and outflows and not know it.
    Market-ticker.org

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Big Picture says:

    This is appalling. I hope his defenders are right, but if these allegations are true, I am really angry at being conned. I even gave the guy money early on, mostly because he was able to stand up to the MSM and talked about the importance of the Constitution.

    But the truth is, the more I see of him, the more he reminds me of Nixon; highly intelligent but lacking emotional intelligence. I especially dislike his smarmy attitude. He strikes me as a preacher’s kid who is trying to be the good boy and the teacher’s pet. Not someone I want as my leader.

    When I learned that his wife is a Goldman Sachs executive, the alarm bells went off. If these documents prove that he is just another lying donor puppet, I will really be pissed off.

    What is our country coming to? Men are not angels, but can’t we find any statesmen?

    I just hope and pray that Trump does not betray us. He really is the last man standing between us and tyranny.

    Liked by 3 people

    • As a constituent who campaigned to put him in his Senate seat I’m angry at being conned over several issues, like all his talk of fiscal responsibilty and then BILLION$ poured into the Texas built F-35 boondoggle that won’t even be able to use its gun until at least 2019 and has a cost per plane that means a full compliment of them for a Nimitz class carrier cost twice as much as building the carrier did. Mean while our troops go on short rations and Lockheed Martin finance a huge PAC to campaign for Ted.

      Like

  14. Tundra Ted is a very dangerous man, his owners are even worse. I hope we can break-up this Wall Street-DC crime ring once and for all.

    If we can’t/don’t, it’s all over.

    TRUMP 2016!!

    Like

  15. Sandra says:

    Now it’s funny to go back and look at what Cruz has said in the past. From a March 2015 Politico article (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/ted-cruz-wall-street-heidi-cruz-goldman-sachs-116381):

    “Goldman is one of the biggest banks on Wall Street, and my criticism with Washington is they engage in crony capitalism,” he said. “They give favors to Wall Street and Big Business, and that’s why I’ve been an outspoken opponent of crony capitalism, taking on leaders in both parties.
    The candidate said that like other firms, Goldman seeks out and receives favors from the government. “I think they’re entitled to practice their business, but without subsidies or special benefits,” he told John Heilemann and Mark Halperin.

    He was careful with his wording so as to not bite the hand that has fed him so well….

    Liked by 1 person

  16. John L. Battey says:

    I would like to know, as a current constituent of Senator Cruz, how he can explain, as a “true conservative”, his ardent support on the Senate Armed Services Committee for the single most wasteful project in US Military history; the Lockheed/Martin F-35 Lightning II. Nimitz class aircraft carriers usually have aboard at least three dozen F/A-18 Hornets. Replacing them with Navy F-35Cs would cost more than $12 BILLION dollars per ship — more than twice what it cost to build the Nimitz class USS Ronald Reagan! There is also the consideration that the 25 MM GAU-22 Gatling gun mounted in the F-35s for dogfights and strafing won’t really be usable until it is programed into the helmet sighting/targeting system, currently projected for sometime in late 2019.
    It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the fact that the F-35 is made in Texas or that Lockheed/Martin made massive contributions to Ted’s campaigns – that would mean that Ted is for sale just like any other Party hack.
    https://www.f35.com/a…/uploads/documents/Cruz_MAH_Letter.pdf
    https://www.f35.com/…/d…/16173/f-35_weekly_update_9_4_15.pdf

    Like

  17. Jennifer Rubin: 10 reasons the Goldman Sachs loan is a nightmare for Ted Cruz
    By JENNIFER RUBIN

    SNIPPET:
    This New York Times story could not have come at a worse time for Sen. Ted Cruz, who had already been knocked off-balance by Donald Trump, is falling in his must-win state of Iowa and is being attacked as a slick politician who won’t level with voters.

    FULL ARTICLE HERE:
    http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20160114-jennifer-rubin-10-reasons-the-goldman-sachs-loan-is-a-nightmare-for-ted-cruz.ece

    Like

  18. terriergal says:

    If this is an attempt to paint Cruz as some kind of shady deal politician, can we look at the log in Trump’s eye?
    Here is a good start:
    http://trumpthemovie.com/watch/
    Wouldn’t the more important issue be to ask who repaid the loans (if anyone yet)?

    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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s