Let me ask my question like this: I understand the chart you have published to say commercial and investment banks have made campaign donations to the Cruz presidential campaign.
Name one.
http://www.npr.org/2016/01/14/463093708/the-ted-cruz-goldman-sachs-loan-explained
“The campaign paid zero interest, the documents say.”
No one but an insider politician could get a zero interest load from Goldman Sachs and Citibank. Period.
Then there is this gem of hypocrisy;
“Goldman Sachs has always been a tender subject in the Cruz organization. He doesn’t apologize for Heidi Cruz’s job there, but he attacks Goldman and other Wall Street financial firms as “crony capitalists” with too much power in Washington.
The day after announcing for president, he told Bloomberg News, “Goldman is one of the biggest banks on Wall Street, and my criticism with Washington is they engage in crony capitalism. 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.”
If there turns out to be some impropriety in the loans, the Cruz campaign could be grievously wounded. Even without that, deals with Goldman Sachs and Citibank could blur the anti-establishment line Cruz has always drawn for himself.
But by mid-afternoon Thursday, Cruz was actually fundraising off the controversy.”
That from the guy who wrote a book with the title of “A Time For Truth”. What a stinking steaming pile of status quo crap. I believed him, actually believed he was “ the only principled candidate in the race”. I’d like a refund on the book.