Posted on 01/17/2016 10:18:35 AM PST by SatinDoll
There's horse****, and then there's outrageous denial of something that nobody ought to take at face value or believe.
Sure, the NY Daily News and Cruz are "no longer friends" after his gratuitous slam at New York in the debate, but that's not the part that ought to make people simply shout LIAR! or even CROOK! every time they see him.
No, it's this story:
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) downplayed a report late Wednesday that he had not listed personal loans he and his wife received before donating roughly the same amount to his 2012 Senate campaign, calling the matter an "inadvertent filing question."
"The facts of the underlying matter have been disclosed for many, many years," he told reporters in Dorchester, S.C. "All of the information has been public and transparent for many years, and that's the end of that."
Cruz and his wife Heidi obtained two loans, the New York Times reported Wednesday: one from Goldman Sachs, and another from Citibank that totaled about $750,000. The amount later increased to $1 million before being paid down. Heidi Cruz is a managing director at Goldman Sachs, currently on leave while her husband runs for president.
So Cruz got a loan from his wife's employer while running for the Senate.
That's not illegal, generally. But failure to disclose it is.
As for it being an "inadvertent filing question" I don't believe and you shouldn't either. I'm speaking as a guy who was Treasurer for a man who ran for the US House, so I know exactly what the rules are and how carefully you must comply with them to be within the law.
Oh yes, I said law too, not suggestion.
The FEC allowed us to close the books on the campaign I worked on shortly after the election. I understand that's extremely unusual (it usually takes them quite a while to grant permission to close it out) but then again (1) it was a Libertarian candidate and we didn't go through that much money and (2) everything was done "by the book", on-time.
Maybe that had something to do with it, eh?
But see, my view is this -- if I'm going to take on something like that as a responsibility then I get to (1) know what the law requires and (2) assiduously adhere to it. If I'm not willing to do both (1) and (2), considering that doing this sort of thing is a voluntary venture, then I don't get involved.
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.
“When appointed, Roberts looked like an awesome choice. None of us could have known what would happen later. If you did.... What are the winning powerball numbers for next week?”
Sorry, that won’t work. We didn’t know Roberts personally or work with him for YEARS like Cruz did. Cruz isn’t as dumb as you all would like us to believe.
Why not? Does it in any way hurt your feelings to know Trump has a mother? Or is it the Scottish part that offends you?
Could it be possible that Roberts evolved in the intervening years? Didn’t Donald’s views evolve in about the same number of years?
“Does it in any way hurt your feelings to know Trump has a mother? Or is it the Scottish part that offends you?”
Straw man, won’t work! CRuz SAID there was no difference in the circumstances of his birth (IN CANADA) and Trump’s mother who WAS an AMERICAN CITIZEN and Trump was born in the USA, but Cruz didn’t bother to say that, only that she was born in Scotland.
Ted Cruz is either a LIAR or a VERY bad lawyer...not knowing he was Canadian is the big lie!
Why did Cruz bring Trump’s mother into it at all?
“Could it be possible that Roberts evolved in the intervening years? Didn’t Donald’s views evolve in about the same number of years?”
Evolved to what? Supporting the illegal Obamacare and propping up Barak?
To me the Goldman Sachs things is important. They give him the money, he “loans” it to his campaign, he pays it back whenever he wants (still hasn’t paid it off) at I assume near zero interest. Corporations can’t contribute to candidates and individuals are capped at $2500. Basically it’s a laundered unlimited campaign contribution. How much more influence does Goldman and Citicorp get when they come in at $1 million? He’d get shredded in the general over this.
Look, I'm not trying to play tit for tat and I'm not going to change your mind, but just what kind of Justice will Trump pick. You can't know and yet you support Trump with great verve. Using Cruz compliments for Roberts, what, 11 years ago? As some kind of determining factor between him an a guy who praised Hillary much more recently is mid boggling.
Why not? Does it in any way hurt your feelings to know Trump has a mother? Or is it the Scottish part that offends you?
Is this fun for you?
Why did Cruz bring Trump’s mother into it at all?
Let me guess, you still feel very upset about the failure to invalidate Obama’s election on this issue.
Hell, I I’m still ticked off that it never got the hearing that it should have. It’s Over now and defeating Cruz won’t change that in the slightest. I’m sorry but it won’t.
If it ever gets its time in court it will be in the hands of Justices who may not rule in a way you agree with.
That answers the question. :). I bet you are a blast at Parties.
My ancestry is partly Scottish. I’m sorry if that hurts you in any way.
Why did Cruz bring Trump’s mother into it at all?
The optics on the loan thing is really not good. It just looks bad.
Anyone engaging with the poster “Liz” needs to read the link from the following posts. Not only have they attacked Cruz in the past, but have made comments that can only be classified as anti-semitic, specifically when they criticized Cruz for “Taking advantage of the plight of middle eastern christians” when he was booed off stage for stating that they needed to stand with the nation of Israel who suffer similar persecution. Also note that while “Liz” is a supposedly bleeding-heart Trump supporter, there’s not one comment from them regarding the joint rally Cruz and Trump held on the Iran Nuclear Deal which was very much concerned with Israel’s security as well as the US.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/gop/3319374/replies?c=58
.
We already had ‘Liz’ figured out way back.
Trump trolls are on the federal protected species list.
.
The ‘loan thing’ is nonsense.
It was almost completely paid off by the time that any documents were to be filed, and it was not a “contribution” thus probably not reportable, but that will be shown later anyway.
Wrong as usual. Liabilities have to be reported in campaign filings. Cruz isn’t arguing whether he is required to report these two loans he just. “Forgot”. Funny nobody else seemed to “ forget “ just Ted.
N.i.c.e input.
Perry angered Bachman supporters when he did nothing ....no campaigning, no nothing....then dropped into the race, completely halting Bachman’s hard-won momentum.
Perry donned cement overshoes when he looked down on voters, sneering at us b/c we opposed in-state tuition for illegals....saying we had no heart.
He was never able to recover from that ....especially b/c trusting Texans never knew he was giving their tax dollars to illegals.
‘Perry donned cement overshoes when he looked down on voters, sneering at us b/c we opposed in-state tuition for illegals....saying we had no heart.’
Haha! You do have a way with words. Reminds me of the funniest line I read on FR from that particular campaign:
Statement: Perry’s prime directive is to destroy the Cain campaign.
Freeper wit: That beats his original prime directive, which was to destroy the Perry campaign.
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.