Posted on 06/13/2015 6:45:19 AM PDT by ncalburt
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150324/FREE/150329968/cruz-avoids-mentioning-his-wifes-goldman-sachs-job
(Excerpt) Read more at investmentnews.com ...
Goldman Sachs managing director Heidi Cruz, the wife of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas),
has taken an unpaid leave of absence from the bank, Bloomberg News’
Michael Moore reports.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/cruz-wife-takes-unpaid-leave-at-goldman-2015-3#ixzz3cxWUX24I
Article at Bloomberg.com
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-23/cruz-s-wife-heidi-said-to-take-unpaid-leave-from-goldman
Cruz’s Wife Heidi to Take Unpaid Leave From Goldman
Yes, Goldman was at the epicenter of the scams that threw the country into an economic tailspin along with the likes of AIG, both of whom I despise. I realize they were not alone but they were there and I will never regard them well if I ever did. That also goes for GM, Chrysler and several others.
Cruz does owe a full exposure and plan for how he will address his conflict of interest and let the people decide on the facts instead of his current campaign telling us what a huge sacrifice he and she are making to run for office. If you do something for the right reasons do it and never breathe a word about the cost or your loss. If you can’t do that you are doing what you do grudgingly... no man can serve two masters for he will love the one and hate the other.... it is a conflict of interest.
He is.
Ted is rapidly flunking the smell test on this one folks.
The appearance of conflict of interest has appeared. He is working too hard to justify his position and he is failing at that. When an appearance of improperness surfaces you’ll find most times that when you dig below the surface there are big problems that have been hidden well up to the time they appeared.
If you have a responsibility to others and something doesn’t look quite right you have an obligation to find the truth and if you can’t find the truth you have an obligation to protect the interests of those who have given you their trust... the best way to do that is to say NO.
She's on leave of absence. That means she is still entitled to profit sharing and bonuses.
Obviously you have never been married.
I really don’t care what she does for Goldman. She has not quit, she is on a leave of absence, a sabbatical and she can go back. She can go back even if she does quit. It is to Goldman’s advantage to take her back and to have an employee who is connected to a United States Senator.
The genie is out of the bottle and can’t be put back in. I expect her to ride for the brand as long as she stays on the ranch and if she leave the ranch I expect her to still be loyal to the brand.
Personally, I doubt the character of anyone who works for Goldman. Character is like virginity.
“Why isn’t Ted pushing for the details of the legislation it be transparent to the public?”
Another great point you’ve made.
Yes, this mess stinks. Almost anything that has to be hidden has a problem.
Yeah. I want to know so tell me where and when and where I can see him demand the legislation be transparent and what he or just about anyone else besides Jeff Sessions has done to bring out the truth and explain it to US.
He voted to give the agreement fast track authority. That means he voted for the agreement.
Ted Cruz has said dozens of times that a vote for cloture (to end debate and not allow any amendments to a bill) is a vote for the bill. He accused every Senator who voted for cloture on the continuing resolution of voting for funding Obamacare. So he can't back track from that position. He voted for TPA, so in essence, he has given his approval for TPP.
When you are on a leave of absence you are entitled to bonuses and profit sharing. When you work for Goldman Sachs, often the profit sharing and bonuses for VP's are in the seven figures.
No, she is on unpaid leave.
“When you are on a leave of absence you are entitled to bonuses and profit sharing. When you work for Goldman Sachs, often the profit sharing and bonuses for VP’s are in the seven figures.
But Ted has no conflict of interest on a trade bill that would clearly benefit Goldman. /sarcasm off.
No point in wasting time with these trolls. They’re beneath contempt and completely unworthy of wasted respect. All they want is attention. I barely consider them human.
This from a Hugh Hewitt interview on Thursday.
Question, if we have had TPA for 80 years how did it go away? If it didn’t go away, and I don’t think it did, why do we need a new one? Ted is oversimplifying this answer and leaving facts out. In other words, he is brushing it off. Why?
I want to know about the TAA and the TiPA as well.
http://www.hughhewitt.com/senator-ted-cruz-on-2016-tpa-tpp-and-the-islamic-state/
HH: Let’s take that opportunity, then, to go and talk about free trade. TPA, TPP, Export-Import Bank, Senator Cruz, for clarity’s sake, can you quickly give us an overview of where you are on those three issues as there’s quite a lot of confusion among conservative voters as to where different people are and why on each of those three issues?
TC: Sure. There is a lot of confusion, and there’s unfortunately a lot of misinformation that you can get on the internet, that people are confused. So let’s explain what each of those three are. TPA is trade promotion authority. That’s also known as fast track. That is the process through which free trade agreements are negotiated. Historically since FDR, virtually every president has had fast track authority. What fast track provides is simply if a free trade agreement is negotiated, the Congress will vote on it up or down without amendment. And history has demonstrated for the last 80 years that the only way to get free trade agreements adopted is to have fast track, that if there is no fast track, free trade agreements do not end up being negotiated. TPA is what the Senate voted on recently. I voted in favor of fast track, because I support free trade. I think free trade benefits America, it creates jobs, opening markets to our farmers, to our ranchers, to our manufacturers, improves economic growth. In Texas alone, roughly three million jobs depend upon international trade. And if you support free trade, the only way history has shown free trade agreements get negotiated is with fast track. Now there is a second issue that’s caused a great deal of confusion, and that is TPP.
It appears that there is a small cabal of those who did not like Cruz at all from his announcement and are taking eye-popping swipes at the man and his wife.
Some of the comments are astonishingly juvenile.
Not at all the caliber of thoughtful FReeper comments I am used to reading.
Pathetic.
Cruz is the man! Honest, sincere, and principled. Who would you support?
LONG LIVE Ted and Mrs Cruz!
This is why TPA is up for renewal. Some person has made the best stab I have found at finding something coherent on the subject of this alphabet soup but we still do not know what is in it and I am suspicious.
For example, Roger Hedgecock sitting in for Rush yesterday, said that there is a provision that if a visa is applied for and the feds don’t act on it in 30 days it is automatically approved. That pretty much means that all visa applications will be approved. A new law makes it lawful to do that which is otherwise unlawful or not in the best interest of US nor does it protect our sovereignty ... more open borders is what it is.
http://www.educationviews.org/efforts-simplify-taa-tpa-tpp-2/
Trade Promotion Authority has been used to reduce trade barriers since FDR. When Harry Reid took over the Senate, he killed it. History demonstrates that it is almost impossible to negotiate a free-trade agreement without TPA. Right now without TPA, America is unable to negotiate free-trade agreements, putting the United States at a disadvantage to China, which is taking the lead world-wide. It is not in America’s interests to have China writing the rules of international trade.
Mike Bloomburg is avalible for the Cruz haters.
So just who is their canidate of choices ?
Musical chairs ?
Donald Pimp pull the football out like Lucy Trump ?
He makes some good points but his DNA is still a Democrat.
Rand Paul ? Seriously ?
Who wants to invite queers into the GOP ?
Who wants to give free tuitions away then tax the older working Americans for it.
Who wants to give amnesty to black criminals for their votes.
Who wants to finally destroy America’s military but reducing it’s budget.
Who supports Obama’s policy towards the Castro regime.
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.