Posted on 01/27/2016 7:37:59 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The short answer is, probably not. But it'll take you a while to get there.
The New York Times dropped a story about Ted Cruz's first Senate campaign, noting that Ted Cruz's million-dollar loan to his initial Senate campaign was made possible by his wife's employer, Goldman Sachs, who floated Ted and his wife a significant loan. The loan remains outstanding - he and his wife still owe somewhere between $50K and $100K on it - and it turns out that Cruz, allegedly, failed to disclose the loan in campaign filings.
A review of personal financial disclosures that Mr. Cruz filed later with the Senate does not find a liquidation of assets that would have accounted for all the money he spent on his campaign. What it does show, however, is that in the first half of 2012, Ted and Heidi Cruz obtained the low-interest loan from Goldman Sachs, as well as another one from Citibank. The loans totaled as much as $750,000 and eventually increased to a maximum of $1 million before being paid down later that year. There is no explanation of their purpose.
Neither loan appears in reports the Ted Cruz for Senate Committee filed with the Federal Election Commission, in which candidates are required to disclose the source of money they borrow to finance their campaigns.
There is some excitment over the Great Failure, but it seems like the New York Times, which has been more than receptive to opposition research this cycle (I mean, at least they didn't say Ted Cruz, like Marco Rubio, was fiscally irresponsible for once liquidating an IRA to replace a broken fridge) has made a bigger deal about a campaign loan than the campaign loan deserves.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
It will be an attack line by the left if he wins. I think he lost Republicans in various swing states with the NY Values comments. Doubling down hurt. Regardless of what he meant. His problem not mine.
RE: I think he lost Republicans in various swing states with the NY Values comments.
Which “swing states”?
Cruz was never going to win New York anyway. Most Republicans in this state ( e.g. Peter King ) hates his guts.
And yes, those are the Republicans who embody New York values.
I’m sure all the candidates are free from influence of banks. Right?
When in Rome. Ole Trump’s been greasing the skids with banks for decades.
Um, no, 99.5% do not have a problem with his GS loan.
To rise to the management level she has attained, one cannot be a mere huckster, fraudster, or avaricious con man. No, the get to that level of management in the den of vipers known as Goldman Sachs, one must be a true con ARTIST.
So yeah, there’s a lot wrong with that. You sound you maybe got out with your soul. Or perhaps they did not utterly corrupt your soul, so you would not have fit in.
Fair disclosure: I used to be a regulator of brokerage firms.
Well, since the question only named the COMPANY, which if there was any truth in naming law on the books would be called “The Vilest House of Greed and Corruption in History” and not the LOAN, the comment still stands.
And if you have a problem with what your government has done for the last decade, understand, all of Congress is basically the Washington DC branch office of GS - the foulest den of iniquity in the country.
Heidi Cruz was Private Wealth Investment Manager at Goldman Sachs.
Are you telling us that there is NOT ONE person in any investment bank who holds that position who is not an avaricious con man/woman at all?
If this were so, who would entrance their wealth to be managed by people like these?
Hard to believe.
All con ARTISTS have a great shtick.
The stupid ones go elsewhere and get bounced out of the business (stupid crooks fed my family for years) or have a moderately successful career elsewhere.
There may be a FEW people at the large wirehouses that have a little bit of honesty and a conscience, but none at Goldman that have been there for more than a few years.
>>>>>>If this were so, who would entrance their wealth to be managed by people like these?<<<<<<
The same people that keep thinking that politicians somehow matter in this nation and that voting or involvement are somehow important.
>>>>>Hard to believe.<<<<<
And yet, at one point in history, state of the art maps of the world contained blank spaces captioned with “Here Be Dragons”. My own children at one point in their lives believed that an obese man rode a sleigh powered by 8 reindeers and distributed toys to every child in the world in the space of a few hours of one night...
I think the skepticism in me comes from your SWEEPING statement to the extent that ALL wealth managers are crooks.
If you only replaced ALL with SOME, you would have had more credibility.
As it stands now, I remain in my skepticism.
Rehashing this nothing burger?
The ones that have been with the wirehouses for more than a couple of years are. Others that work for smaller firms, not so much. GS ones are the worst of the worst.
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.