Posted on 03/12/2016 1:21:31 PM PST by Sean_Anthony
Which explains why he is awfully quiet today. I think Cruz knows he screwed the pooch.
If Cruz HAD remained silent about Trump’s leftist leanings and quid pro quo contributions, you’d be complaining that Cruz’ silence can be bought (for 5K).
Now, go vote for the benefactor of Marxists with a clear conscience.
Three Republicans, desperate to cast front runner Donald J. Trump behind them in unbridled ambitions to lead America from the Oval Office, have thrown completely in with the Democrats in blaming main street Americans for Friday night’s George Soros orchestrated Chicago protest.
In the aftermath of the Chicago protest, for which Soros’ group MoveOn.org took partial responsibility, never once did Senators Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or Governor John Kasich call for public safety in presidential primary rallies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGYgHFMJkA
Shame on them!!!!!!!
Cruz approved an ad that said Trump’ made himself rich using eminent domain. That is the nastiest, most vicious lie Cruz could have concocted. A, private citizens can’t use eminent domain; only the state. B, Trump didn’t make one penny—not one red cent—off Atlantic City’s attempt to use eminent domain. Trump has never made one thin dime off ED anywhere at any time.
Cruz put out a malicious, premeditated, one hundred percent lie—and he did it to a person whose campaign donation he greedily pocketed. Cruz is without shame.
Kelo allows private entities to attempt to confiscate the private property of others. Trump supports this outrageous decision. I have no idea whether Trump himself has ever profited from this miscarriage of justice.
Per orders from the Establishment.
All three have proven they are not leaders. They are followers afraid not to be PC.
Are you dense???? Cruz didn’t make an ad saying Trump supported Kelo. He approved an ad saying Trump has made himself rich by using eminent domain.
It is a total, complete, nasty, vicious, premeditated, malignant LIE.
Can you grasp this???
"Earlier today over thirty people were arrested at one rally. And then tonight as violence broke out the rally was canceled altogether. Now, the responsibility for that lies with protesters who took violence into their own hands. But in any campaign responsibility starts at the top. Any candidate is responsible for the culture of the campaign." (Emphasis added.)
What you see here is blame for the violence being places squarely on the protesters. As to responsibility for the tone of the campaign. Is that not a truthful statement? Do Trump supporters hold Cruz responsible for the tone if his campaign? It would certainly seem so based on many, many posts on this forum.
One of my clients made a comment on Friday about the incident in North Carolina and her fears that Trump was setting a tone that would lead to violence. I was surprised when I did a quick Internet search at the number of notable incidents.
Trump Supporter Charged: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-protester-sucker-punched-at-north-carolina-rally-videos-show/
Trump Throws Man Out Without Coat.http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-01-08/donald-trump-threw-a-protester-out-of-a-vermont-rally-without-his-coat
Crowd Cheers as Muslim Woman...: https://news.vice.com/article/muslim-protester-kicked-out-donald-trump-rally-south-carolina
Trump on Protestor. I'd like to punch him in the face: http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/politics/donald-trump-nevada-rally-punch/
And of course, the tomato comments.
Let's be real about human nature. Individuals who are inclined to respond with violence do NOT hear Trump say "don't hurt anyone" as something Trump really means. They hear the "punch in the face" and the "throw him out without his coat" and the roar of approval from the crowd as what Trump REALLY means. This applies to both those who support Trump and those opposed to Trump.
The kind of passion this political stuff inspires is not something Trump has dealt with before. Whatever outrageous thing he said on his TV show resulted in better ratings - no downside. To this point the things Trump has said at his rallies have had no downside. That will certainly be changing and Trump may need to quit playing the showman.
The notion that Trump was going to go unchallenged in places with large leftist populations is simple-minded. Trump's over-the-top crowd pleases are going to be used to define him by people not nearly so reasoned as Ted Cruz and those groups will not be limited to just the participants in Chicago.
Ted Cruz's comments were neither in support of protesters who resorted to violence or in denial of free speech and assembly rights to Trump supporters. While Trump supporters are having a field day deliberately misunderstanding those comments said comments point straight at a serious issue in Trump's campaign. Getting all bent out of shape at Cruz doesn't change the situation.
The willingness of so many on this forum to ignore the consequences of Trump's actions and to instead participate in an untruthful accusation against another is mind-boggling.
I have no idea whether Trump enriched himself through Kelo. This is one reason I yearn for a one-on-one debate, to get to the bottom of the back and forth charges.
I oppose Trump b/c of his liberal bent. I’d vote for freakin’ Gilmore over the guy who helped Hillary Rotten advance, and who, to this day, speaks glowingly of Pelosi, Reid and Schumer.
And then in the next breath, threw Trump right under the bus.
Just because you are ignorant of Trump’s eminent domain issues doesn’t mean everyone else is. There is only one case Trump had anything to do with, and it was the Coking property in Atlantic City. Trump didn’t make one penny off it. The Cruz ad is a TOTAL, UNMITIGATED LIE. Can you possibly comprehend this???
Ted Cruz showed de facto solidarity with Far Left, BLM/MoveOn (and other) lawbreakers at a moment when the entire field of GOP candidates should have united in forcefully repudiating the criminality of some extremists bent on subverting American democratic process. Kasich acted similarly. Simply espicable.
Cruz hoped to smear Donald Trump by trying to conflate the minor issues they've had as somehow responsible for the pre-planned, organized criminality, violence, and disturbing the peace fomented by left-wing extremists and their ilk.
Politics truly makes for strange bedfellows. Cruz stood against law & order and allied with the thugs.
And that's not just my opinion; that's irrefutably the opinion of many (former) Ted Cruz supporters, as evidenced on FB, FR and many other real and virtual community and news sites all over the country...
It's not just Trump supporters who disagree with your spin about the Cruz quote.
Ted Cruz is being blasted by his own supporters in this instance. You're in denial as far as what was said and how it was intended.
If people (including many of his supporters) have "misunderstood" something he has said, then Ted Cruz should at least xplain how what he said didn't really mean what his supporters thought it meant.
Ted Cruz is a lawyer who knows how to be precise with words. He knew exactly what he was saying, and he's rightly catching Hell for it from his own voters...
Trump DOES support the abominable private party eminent domain decision to this day. THAT I know.
Cruz authorized an ad that said Trump had made himself rich from using eminent domain. That is a total and revolting lie. Are you now supporting all out, bald faced lying? It appears you are.
Shame.
Let’s assume you are right. Sadly, e.d. is an issue that few will vote on. There is little to gain from lying. Mistakes happen. But, in any case, no way am I going to vote for a guy who enables Hillary, Kerry, Schumer, Reid and Pelosi. And, let’s all hear what Trump secretly told the NYT!
This mania—yes, I’ll call it that—to excuse Cruz runs counter to the very basis of his support. He’s supposed to be intellectually brilliant and a consistent conservative, correct?
Well if he’s brilliant, why did he approve an ad with such a glaring lie? How could he not know the basic facts about the Coking case, which is the only eminent domain case Trump has had anything to do with? Cruz must know Atlantic City lost the case and Coking kept her house. Trump made bupkis.
How then is approving a wholesale lie conservative? Aren’t conservatives supposed to have some morals and ethics? How about Christians? Does the Golden Rule mean, ‘Approve a malicious lie against your political opponent’?
There are similar cases, but I know if I mention any of them the niggling could potentially go on forever. I’ll just say, for example, that if Trump had hired Bush’s entire financial team plus Neil Bush, it would be considered bad. When Cruz does it, it’s fine. So now ‘consistent conservative’ morphs into ‘someone closely aligned with Jeb and the Bush clan.’
I can, believe me, understand people saying they don’t like Trump OR Cruz. But after all that Cruz has revealed about himself, I cannot understand the unrelenting defense of him. Even if I couldn’t countenance Trump, I could not do the mental gymnastics required to justify Cruz.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.