Showing posts with label Ted Cruz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ted Cruz. Show all posts

Monday, July 17, 2017

Ted Cruz concluded Mitch McConnell is a liar in 2015, now Ron Johnson appears to be doing the same

The Ted Cruz incident with McConnell involved the Export-Import Bank (story here).

Now, Ron Johnson is reportedly concluding McConnell committed a breach of trust by privately telling moderate senators that the Medicaid cuts in the healthcare bill won't actually occur, as reported here.

The current Republican bill in the Senate appears dead as four senators in the Republican caucus have said they don't support it. With a 2-seat majority, only 3 defections are tolerable (the tie-breaker vote is cast by the Vice President, Mike Pence).

When all is said and done we might find out that the loss of support is all intentional and orchestrated in order to save the Senate from having to vote on the issue again at all. The nay-sayers may be handsomely rewarded at some future date while getting to please their constituencies.

Remember, Republicans generally don't believe in anything except for what is. In other words, maintaining the status quo is their objective. They are pragmatists who are willing to accept progressive creations once passed, like the income tax, Social Security, Medicare and now Obamacare, and will defend those programs no matter how they became law.

Lighting their hair on fire for anything is completely out of the question, including for the constitution.

The only thing that will save us now is a meteor strike on the Senate chamber while they are all in session.

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Politico's real story from January was that the DNC, the Hillary campaign, Alexandra Chalupa, Rep. Marcy Kaptur, journalists, government officials and intelligence operatives all colluded with Ukraine to take out Manafort and disrupt Trump's campaign

You should read it to appreciate the four fingers pointing back at the Democrats every time they point at Republicans yelling "collusion".

The whole article was designed to run interference for Chalupa and the Democrats, putting the best spin on it they could after uncovering the dirty details. The heart of the story begins seventeen paragraphs in, after trying in the first sixteen to make what follows not say what it says, here:

The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia. ...

Manafort’s work for Yanukovych caught the attention of a veteran Democratic operative named Alexandra Chalupa, who had worked in the White House Office of Public Liaison during the Clinton administration. Chalupa went on to work as a staffer, then as a consultant, for Democratic National Committee. The DNC paid her $412,000 from 2004 to June 2016, according to Federal Election Commission records, though she also was paid by other clients during that time, including Democratic campaigns and the DNC’s arm for engaging expatriate Democrats around the world.

In an interview this month, Chalupa told Politico she had developed a network of sources in Kiev and Washington, including investigative journalists, government officials and private intelligence operatives. While her consulting work at the DNC this past election cycle centered on mobilizing ethnic communities — including Ukrainian-Americans — she said that, when Trump’s unlikely presidential campaign began surging in late 2015, she began focusing more on the research, and expanded it to include Trump’s ties to Russia, as well.

She occasionally shared her findings with officials from the DNC and Clinton’s campaign, Chalupa said. In January 2016 — months before Manafort had taken any role in Trump’s campaign — Chalupa told a senior DNC official that, when it came to Trump’s campaign, “I felt there was a Russia connection,” Chalupa recalled. “And that, if there was, that we can expect Paul Manafort to be involved in this election,” said Chalupa, who at the time also was warning leaders in the Ukrainian-American community that Manafort was “Putin’s political brain for manipulating U.S. foreign policy and elections.”

She said she shared her concern with Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S., Valeriy Chaly, and one of his top aides, Oksana Shulyar, during a March 2016 meeting at the Ukrainian Embassy. According to someone briefed on the meeting, Chaly said that Manafort was very much on his radar, but that he wasn’t particularly concerned about the operative’s ties to Trump since he didn’t believe Trump stood much of a chance of winning the GOP nomination, let alone the presidency.

That all started to change just four days after Chalupa’s meeting at the embassy, when it was reported that Trump had in fact hired Manafort, suggesting that Chalupa may have been on to something. She quickly found herself in high demand. The day after Manafort’s hiring was revealed, she briefed the DNC’s communications staff on Manafort, Trump and their ties to Russia, according to an operative familiar with the situation. ...

Chalupa asked embassy staff to try to arrange an interview in which Poroshenko might discuss Manafort’s ties to Yanukovych. While the embassy declined that request, officials there became “helpful” in Chalupa’s efforts, she said, explaining that she traded information and leads with them. “If I asked a question, they would provide guidance, or if there was someone I needed to follow up with.” But she stressed, “There were no documents given, nothing like that.”

Chalupa said the embassy also worked directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions. ...

Andrii Telizhenko, who worked as a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy under Shulyar, said [Shulyar] instructed him to help Chalupa research connections between Trump, Manafort and Russia. “Oksana said that if I had any information, or knew other people who did, then I should contact Chalupa,” recalled Telizhenko, who is now a political consultant in Kiev. “They were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa,” he said, adding “Oksana was keeping it all quiet,” but “the embassy worked very closely with” Chalupa.

In fact, sources familiar with the effort say that Shulyar specifically called Telizhenko into a meeting with Chalupa to provide an update on an American media outlet’s ongoing investigation into Manafort.

Telizhenko recalled that Chalupa told him and Shulyar that, “If we can get enough information on Paul [Manafort] or Trump’s involvement with Russia, she can get a hearing in Congress by September.”

Chalupa confirmed that, a week after Manafort’s hiring was announced, she discussed the possibility of a congressional investigation with a foreign policy legislative assistant in the office of Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), who co-chairs the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus. But, Chalupa said, “It didn’t go anywhere.”

Asked about the effort, the Kaptur legislative assistant called it a “touchy subject” in an internal email to colleagues that was accidentally forwarded to Politico.

Kaptur’s office later emailed an official statement explaining that the lawmaker is backing a bill to create an independent commission to investigate “possible outside interference in our elections.” The office added “at this time, the evidence related to this matter points to Russia, but Congresswoman Kaptur is concerned with any evidence of foreign entities interfering in our elections.” ...

In [an] email [released by Wikileaks], which was sent in early May to then-DNC communications director Luis Miranda, Chalupa noted that she had extended an invitation to the Library of Congress forum to veteran Washington investigative reporter Michael Isikoff. Two days before the event, he had published a story for Yahoo News revealing the unraveling of a $26 million deal between Manafort and a Russian oligarch related to a telecommunications venture in Ukraine. And Chalupa wrote in the email she’d been “working with for the past few weeks” with Isikoff “and connected him to the Ukrainians” at the event.

Isikoff, who accompanied Chalupa to a reception at the Ukrainian Embassy immediately after the Library of Congress event, declined to comment.

Chalupa further indicated in her hacked May email to the DNC that she had additional sensitive information about Manafort that she intended to share “offline” with Miranda and DNC research director Lauren Dillon, including “a big Trump component you and Lauren need to be aware of that will hit in next few weeks and something I’m working on you should be aware of.” Explaining that she didn’t feel comfortable sharing the intel over email, Chalupa attached a screenshot of a warning from Yahoo administrators about “state-sponsored” hacking on her account, explaining, “Since I started digging into Manafort these messages have been a daily occurrence on my yahoo account despite changing my password often.”

Dillon and Miranda declined to comment. ...

The [Financial Times] noted that Trump’s candidacy had spurred “Kiev’s wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a U.S. election,” and the story quoted Leshchenko [Ukraine's parliamentarian] asserting that the majority of Ukraine’s politicians are “on Hillary Clinton’s side.” ...

[A]n operative who has worked extensively in Ukraine, including as an adviser to Poroshenko, said it was highly unlikely that either Leshchenko or the anti-corruption bureau would have pushed the issue without at least tacit approval from Poroshenko or his closest allies.

“It was something that Poroshenko was probably aware of and could have stopped if he wanted to,” said the operative. ...

Telizhenko, the former embassy staffer, said that, during the primaries, Chaly, the country’s ambassador in Washington, had actually instructed the embassy not to reach out to Trump’s campaign, even as it was engaging with those of Clinton and Trump’s leading GOP rival, Ted Cruz.

“We had an order not to talk to the Trump team, because he was critical of Ukraine and the government and his critical position on Crimea and the conflict,” said Telizhenko. “I was yelled at when I proposed to talk to Trump,” he said, adding, “The ambassador said not to get involved — Hillary is going to win.”

This account was confirmed by Nalyvaichenko, the former diplomat and security chief now affiliated with a Poroshenko opponent, who said, “The Ukrainian authorities closed all doors and windows — this is from the Ukrainian side.” He called the strategy “bad and short-sighted.”

Andriy Artemenko, a Ukrainian parliamentarian associated with a conservative opposition party, did meet with Trump’s team during the campaign and said he personally offered to set up similar meetings for Chaly but was rebuffed.

“It was clear that they were supporting Hillary Clinton’s candidacy,” Artemenko said. “They did everything from organizing meetings with the Clinton team, to publicly supporting her, to criticizing Trump. … I think that they simply didn’t meet because they thought that Hillary would win.”

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

He ain't dead yet: Ted Cruz sees Trump's Wall, raises him one


"El Chapo led the Sinaloa drug cartel," Cruz explained. "There is a sense of justice. A sense of, this is what is right, that the people who are violating the border like crazy, we should use their ill-gotten gains [$14 billion] to finally build the wall, and to finally ensure we have the assets to secure the border."

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Bravo Sen. Ted Cruz: Sen. Sessions meeting ambassador a nothing burger


Jeff was being asked about the Trump campaign communicating with the Russians. I think he understood that he was answering in that capacity. And that is perfectly understandable. 

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Thanksgiving weekend's big laugh: Ted Cruz calls Trump's cabinet "a team of all-stars coming together"


Real courageous there, Ted, waiting for Limbaugh to say so first.

What a miserable cretin.


Thursday, November 17, 2016

Trump interviews with the likes of Cruz and Romney are designed to do just one thing

Keep him in the headlines.

You'd think they'd catch on by now.

But no, this is serious, right?

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

With a 2-seat margin in the US Senate, Ted Cruz and Jeff Sessions should stay where they are and not join the Trump administration

There'll be time to promote them later.

Trump needs Sessions to carry the water on immigration, and Cruz needs to prove himself to us on the issue.

Trump also needs Cruz to keep the Freedom Caucus in line in Congress to get the agenda passed.

If Cruz loses in Texas in 2018, he can always be rewarded with a post as a consolation prize. 

Monday, October 31, 2016

Trump hasn't yet run one radio ad in my market in Michigan

I listen to talk radio pretty much non-stop during the election season, and here in western Michigan Trump actually visited today for the first time in a month but I haven't heard one ad on the radio this week for Trump, let alone one ad on the radio in any other week in the last 30 days.

He's not going to win Michigan that way. Not without the western counties that all went for Ted Cruz. By eschewing the radio waves here Trump shows me he's not serious about winning Michigan. He keeps asking for money, but never seems to spend it on the one thing which could spread the enthusiasm present at his rallies to the older Republican base.

I think Trump will lose Michigan and simply wasted his time coming here today, mistakenly continuing to practice what's been appropriate to the primary strategy when the general election requires something more.

Clinton's Real Clear Politics polling average tonight in Michigan is +6.3.

Saturday, October 8, 2016

Joe Pags thinks "not in the labor force" does not include the retired, but it does

It's shocking how many people still think, wrongly, that "not in the labor force" includes huge numbers of people who could be or should be working but aren't.

Today on his show Joe Pags said the number not in the labor force, currently over 94 million, does not include retired people, when, for example in 2014 the retired constituted 44% of those "not in the labor force". The truth is the retired always constitute the single largest proportion of those "not in the labor force".

The sick and disabled in 2014 accounted for almost 19%, and people going to school made up another 18% of the total "not in the labor force". Tell me there are some claiming disability who don't have one who should be working, but don't tell me the damn kids should be working. 15.5% were homemakers while 3.5% had other reasons. There's probably many people in these categories who might want a job but can't find one, or ought to be working but aren't, but nothing even remotely close to the almost 39 million retired at the time.

Joe Pags joins a long list of idiots who are quite outspoken in their ignorance about this, including Zero Hedge, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Donald Trump, et alia. Thinking there might be vast numbers of hidden unemployed in "not in the labor force" is just plain lazy stupid.

None of these apparently have had the slightest interest in checking this out on Al Gore's amazing internet using the google machine, which takes you to this page at the Bureau of Labor Statistics with one of the better explanations out there.

I can only conclude the ignorance in the case of Joe Pags is willful because Joe Pags is smarter than that. But then again, he thinks Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen.

His bad.

Friday, September 23, 2016

Ted Cruz says he'll vote for Donald Trump as promised, urges you to join him, and says Hillary is wholly unacceptable

Here on Facebook, citing primarily Supreme Court appointments and the fate of the Bill of Rights, then the costs of ObamaCare for millions of Americans, the Democrat war on coal, oil and gas, the lawless executive illegal immigrant amnesty, threats to National Security from Muslim immigration, and Obama's giving up of US control of the internet.

That should also help him get reelected down in Texas.

Smart move. Really late, but a smart move.

Friday, August 26, 2016

Hard libertarian billionaire daughter Rebekah Mercer is behind Trump's shift to Bannon and Conway, away from deportation

The price of consensus for Mercer's "help" in retrospect was obviously that Trump soften his deportation stance. Bloomberg's story here in June completely misses the signficance of the Mercers' libertarianism.

The Hill had the story already on August 17, here, the day Trump shook up his campaign by hiring Stephen Bannon as CEO and Kellyanne Conway as campaign manager, detailing Mercer's links to Stanford, the Heritage Foundation, BREITBART, the Ted Cruz campaign and libertarian think tank CATO:

“The Mercers basically own this campaign,” said a source who has worked with Rebekah Mercer in her political activities. “They have installed their people. ... And now they’ve got their data firm in there.” ... Little has been written about the Mercers because they avoid the public spotlight, but conservative sources who know the family, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described them as “kind, civic-minded people and consensus-builders.” ... But that source, who has worked with Mercer in some of her other political ventures, said it was a surprise to some people that the Mercers had swung so forcefully behind Trump, given her ideological bent. “She identifies as a libertarian. At least she always did,” the source said, adding that Mercer was a big supporter of libertarian think tanks like the Goldwater Institute and Cato. “With Bekah you always had to prove your libertarian racing stripes,” the source added. “This seems really strange.”

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Wednesday, August 3, 2016

Michigan primary turnout yesterday was 19.1% of registered voters

According to the Michigan Secretary of State, 1.405 million votes were cast in primary races yesterday out of 7.36 million registered through the end of July, just 56% of those cast in March.

2.5 million turned out on March 8th in the presidential primary, about 34% of registered voters, smashing an all-time record for a presidential primary set in 1972 at 1.9 million. In excess of 1.33 million of those 2.5 million votes in March were cast for Republicans vying for the presidential nomination finally secured by Donald Trump after Ted Cruz lost in Indiana.

In presidential elections since 1972, turnout nationwide has averaged 74% of those registered but just 53% of the voting age population.

Thursday, July 28, 2016

Monday, July 25, 2016

Mark Levin is cracking up: Somebody, please help him

Mark Levin is talking like a certifiable nutcase tonight.

OK, maybe every night, but honestly I haven't been paying attention very much since Ted dropped out after Indiana, if only because I don't enjoy the venom while I'm cooking dinner for my family.

Tonight Levin is embracing the Democrat talking point in response to the Wikileaks e-mails that Putin and Trump are somehow working together against Hillary, evidently because Levin can't stand the idea that Trump might come to an understanding with old Vlad. Never mind somebody hacked the DNC and exposed all their hypocrises and Levin is thus participating in . . . oh look! a deer!

And I guess George W. Bush's infamous high estimation of Vladimir Putin's character has somehow conveniently fallen out of Mark's now aging memory. He looked deep into his eyes and saw . . . what exactly?

Next we learn Reince Priebus' treatment of Ted Cruz is morally equivalent to Washerwoman-Schultz' treatment of Bernie Sanders. ... Uh huh. Gotcha Mark.

And finally, at least that's as far as I got because I turned Levin off after this one, Mark Levin attacked Ron Radosh because Ron had the temerity to point out Bernie's Judaism got attacked by a DNC anti-Semite in one of the e-mails.

Now conservatives, you know, people with long memories like elephants, hence the symbolism, know that Ron Radosh has done yeoman service for DECADES in this country exposing the Stalinist sympathizers on the left in the United States, and they are legion.

That last one is utterly despicable coming from Mark Levin, so fade to black.

Get some help Mark.

One speech: Ted Cruz now viewed unfavorably by 49% of Republicans, up from 35% in May

Overall Republican favorable opinion of Ted Cruz has tanked 19 points from 60% to 41% between early May and late July in CNN/ORC polls.

Huffpo deliberately overstates the data here by comparing apples and oranges, but the decline in Cruz' favorables among Republicans is huge nonetheless: a decline of almost 32%. But worse are Ted Cruz' unfavorables among Republicans which went up 14 points, from 35% to 49% of Republicans, a whopping 40% increase in his unfavorability.

Bang! And you're dead.

May 2016
July 2016

Friday, July 22, 2016

Trump's new problem with Christians: He won't accept Ted Cruz' endorsement, but gay man Peter Thiel's is just fine

Trump, quoted here:

"If he gives it, I will not accept it," Trump, the GOP presidential nominee,  said at a Friday morning press conference in Cleveland.

Thursday, July 21, 2016

Senator Dan Coats of Indiana tears into Ted Cruz

Quoted here:

“I think what people saw last night is what we have seen in the Senate. No matter how conservative you are, you never can meet Ted’s standard. He only thinks of himself, he doesn’t think about party. He’s a wrecking ball. He’s the most self-centered, narcissistic, pathological liar I’ve ever seen – and you can quote me on that."