Posted on 02/18/2016 1:43:00 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Donald Trump was so unhappy about the Cruz Campaign's "Supreme Trust" ad that he sent a "cease and desist" letter demanding that the Cruz campaign immediately stop running the ad featuring Trump currently running in South Carolina. During an epic press conference Sen. Ted Cruz rejected Trump's frivolous demands. In its response the Cruz campaign said the ad is not an attempt to mislead the public:
The objective of the ad is precisely the opposite - to provide the voters of South Carolina with important and accurate information so that they can make an informed decision when they go to the polls.
The Cruz response goes on to say that every statement in the ad concerning Mr. Trump's pro-abortion views comes from Mr. Trump's own mouth. According to the Cruz campaign, the point of the ad is that they do not believe Mr. Trump's recent campaign claim that he is pro-life and the voters should not believe Mr. Trump either:
Mr. Trump's implausible claim that he is pro-life doesn't meet a reality test," said Rick Tyler, a campaign spokesman. "His words and actions simply cannot be reconciled. Mr. Trump last week said that Planned Parenthood does do wonderful things, but supporting Planned Parenthood is incompatible with holding the pro-life position Mr. Trump is now claiming.
It's good to see Cruz to respond to the Donald's constant threats to sue.
If Trump didn't care for "Supreme Trust" ad, he will have another melt down like those he had during the CBS South Carolina Republican Debate over the "Donald's Choice" ad released Wednesday by the Cruz-supporting Courageous Conservatives PAC. The ad goes on to reference three names Trump has floated as possible replacements for Justice Scalia. Watch the ad:
Justice Scalia's death reminds us the next President will pick as many as four Supreme Court Justices and hundreds of other federal judges.
Just who would Donald Trump pick?
One person Trump suggested took Roy Moore off the Alabama Supreme Court for displaying the Ten Commandments.
Another forced Indiana to fund Planned Parenthood.
And one more who threw out New Jersey's Partial Birth Abortion Ban.
Everything is on the line now: our rights.
Our freedoms. Our America. And the courts are the battleground.
So who do you trust? Who do you trust to fill our federal courts?
Donald Trump with his New York values?
Or Ted Cruz, who won cases before the Supreme Court protecting gun rights, religious freedom and against the World Court.
Saturday's our last chance South Carolina!
Don't blow it.
Ted Cruz. For President.
Let's take our country back. Now. Before It's Too Late.
The three judges are Alabama's former Attorney General Bill Pryor, who in 2003 backed a decision to oust Chief Justice Roy Moore from his position for refusing to follow a federal court order that he remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the front of the state's judicial building.
Seventh Circuit Judge Diane Sykes, who authored an opinion striking down an Indiana law that would have defunded Planned Parenthood,
and Trump's older sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, who in her first year as an appellate judge for the Third Circuit wrote a decision that overturned a New Jersey law banning late-term abortions.
"Appointed to the office of Solicitor General of Texas by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, Cruz served in that position from 2003 to 2008. The office had been established in 1999 to handle appeals involving the state, but Abbott hired Cruz with the idea that Cruz would take a "leadership role in the United States in articulating a vision of strict constructionism." As Solicitor General, Cruz argued before the Supreme Court nine times, winning five cases and losing four.
Cruz has authored 70 United States Supreme Court briefs and presented 43 oral arguments, including nine before the United States Supreme Court. Cruz's record of having argued before the Supreme Court nine times is more than any practicing lawyer in Texas or any current member of Congress. Cruz has commented on his nine cases in front of the U.S. Supreme Court: "We ended up year after year arguing some of the biggest cases in the country. There was a degree of serendipity in that, but there was also a concerted effort to seek out and lead conservative fights."
[SNIP]
....In addition to his success in Heller, Cruz successfully defended the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments monument on the Texas State Capitol grounds before the Fifth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court, winning 5-4 in Van Orden v. Perry.
[SNIP]
Bam. Nice ad.
Good deal. Trump can run from his political record because lucky for him he has none (a unique way he’s gotten this far!). But he cannot run from his biography, whom he’s funded, whom he’s praised, what party he’s worked to support most of his life, his lifelong affinity for liberals and liberal values. Now, as he tries to bamboozle people in to thinking he is a conservative, it’s good to remember that he hates Cruz the most. Why? Because Cruz is a real conservative, not a pretend one. Cruz has alienated some RINOs by not compromising. Trump has alienated RINOs because he hates that they stand in his way.
SEN. TED CRUZ: We're seeing the Washington establishment abandoning Marco Rubio. I think they've made the determination that Marco can't win and they're rushing to support Donald Trump. And just yesterday Bob Dole explained why the establishment is supporting Donald Trump. They said he's someone we can make a deal with. He's someone we can cut a deal with.
And I would note Donald just a couple of days ago drew the difference between me and him. And he said, look, Ted won't go along to get along. He won't cut a deal. So if as a voter you think what we need is more Republicans in Washington to cut a deal with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, then I guess Donald Trump's your guy.
I almost think these Red State articles aren’t actually written to persuade an audience. They’re written so that the writer doesn’t lose his mind, though, obviously, deranged people who suffer the same derangement profit from it as well.
“....That $100,000 gift from Trump to the Boehner-allied super PAC was twice as big as his next-biggest contributions. [Trump’s] given $50,000 .. to Karl Rove’s American Crossroads (2010) [and $50,000 to] the pro-Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) Kentuckians for Strong Leadership (2013)...
And then Trump gave McConnell’s PAC another $10,000 in Nov 2014.
P.S. They should have left out the New York Values part of that ad. Not smart. I dare him to run it in New York
:)
And you think that Donald Trump is presidential material and will "Make America Great Again." Such is your "derangement."
And you believe that Ted Cruz's mutant face isn't really made of bread dough, even though it is.
Cruz - Roberts - Obamacare. Mmmm mmm mmm.
I’m a Conservative Republican and live just north of NYC and work in NYC. We all know exactly what he means by NY values. It’s only the liberals in NY (plenty of them) who are offended because they also know exactly what he means. He could have said California or Hollywood values. Pretty much the same.
A relative of mine who lives in NYC (upper west side), an educated and successful person, actual rejoiced in Scalia’s death (on Facebook, no less) since we had a Democratic President to appoint another lefty. Aside from his lack of knowledge of the process (which I pray stops any appointment this year), I was horrified as how far a previously reasonable person could go bash a deceased Great American over politics.
Donald Trump has donated to the very politicians who shoved Obamacare down our throats - Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, Schumer [and many other Democrats], as well as giving large donations to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Trump would never pick a consistent constitutional conservative like Cruz - besides Cruz’s record is clear - his stand on issues is well known.
After Robert Bork was blocked, every Supreme Court nominee now has to pretty near have NO history of advocating for or against anything.
Great ad! So Donald threatens to sue and Cruz doubles down; he must be intimidated.
The really funny thing about the “New York Values” thing is that New Yorkers outside of NYC know exactly what he’s talking about.
Funny...
Can’t deal with facts, only personal insults.
Well, we shall see.
After Robert Bork was blocked, every Supreme Court nominee now has to pretty near have NO history of advocating for or against anything.
But it depends on which party nominates and who Chairs the Judiciary Committee at that time. It only takes a simple majority on the Senate floor if he gets out of committee. but yeah, I hear ya. Grassley (who endorsed Rand Paul) is the current Judiciary Chair.
A Democrat Senate, then no, they would Bork him sure enough. Such a shame
Is New York exceptional?
It’s not in the cards.
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.