Posted on 02/03/2016 2:25:15 PM PST by FR_addict
By now most people are aware of the controversy surrounding Candidate Ted Cruz and his failure to reveal $1.3 million in campaign "loans" from Goldman Sachs and Citibank during his 2012 campaign for the senate. At the heart of the issue is a failure of Ted and Heidi Cruz to list Wall Street "loans" on the required Federal Election Commission financial reports.
Together with the campaign officials the Cruz's say the non-reporting was an accidental oversight. However, a watch dog group has now filed a complaint with the FEC which is step one to beginning an FEC investigation.
Update! Today the FEC requested information from the Cruz campaign, with a response due by March 8th: The full complaint (pdf) is outlined below. However, the larger question behind the complaint would be the motive for Ted and Heidi Cruz to hide the source of their campaign funds. The activity the complainant is presenting to have the FEC investigate, if proven accurate, is factually illegal.
The "accidental omission" is not necessarily the problem. The irreconcilable consequences from an accurate filing are the larger issue.
They can correct the missing information and file amended reports. However, if the Cruz campaign corrects the record based on the explanations to the media, the amended reports will reflect their violations of federal campaign finance laws...
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
Therein lies the rub.
‘Trump campaign staffer “sundance,”’
If you’re saying this as a non-Christian, fine. Slander away; the Golden Rule does not apply to you.
Christians, however, are held to a higher standard. We’re not supposed to smear people with false allegations.
Unless of course you have solid evidence. If so, by all means provide it.
Who said they were “unsecured” loans? They were fully secured loans on the Cruz’s assets. They were not made to the campaign and the campaign was not in any way responsible for paying the loans.
The Robert Mercer angle alone is showing some VERY ALARMING probabilities.
The fact that Mercer owes the IRS between $6 and $10 billion, and is in a legal dispute over payment
in connection with Mercer setting up the Keep the Promise (KtP) Super-PAC before turning it over to David Barton (Glenn Beck affiliate)
and then Mercer giving Carly Fiorina the start up money from KtP to begin Carly for America
and then Mercer purchasing the Data Analytics for Ted Cruz,
and then Mercer buying influential interest in the Breitbart website to the benefit of Cruz
All gives the brutally obvious motive of a quid-pro-quo.
Robert Mercer spends $100 million to get Ted Cruz the White House; Ted Cruz then turns around and leverages a better IRS result for Robert Mercer.
One of Cruz’s primary campaign points is the elimination of the IRS and the imposition of a flat tax. If successful, that would save Mercer $6 to $10 billion.
“It’s not lying. It’s wise use of words.”
- Ted “Nixon” Cruz
One more satisfied customer...
It’s such a beautiful day...
Because it’s obvious to anyone who’s an adult that these are not loans. LOL. This is one way money is laundered and donated to a candidate-—they give him a “loan” which is either never paid back, and written off, OR more likely paid by a third party. It’s audit proof as far as the bank goes. But the FEC figured out a long time ago what is up with these “loans.” Especially if it’s Goldman Sachs (for whom Heidi Cruz is a senior executive) or any bank.
Another Government by Goldman Candidate
Some of the posters who routinely characterize what Cruz did here as ‘failure to report a loan’ are over on other threads swooning & fanning their faces over Cruz’s ‘dirty tricks’ in Iowa during caucus night.
Re-read the complaint - they were Unsecured.
StArt looking at chad sweet’s wife...what her firm does....how big it is and her position
Then start to wonder about Ted’s visa stance
The writer knew he or she would look like a fool to actually come across as thinking it was really a LOAN. LOL! You’d have to wonder about a journalist who would actually think that money was a real loan. Cracking me up.
Kinda cool and it makes me smile.
You're right. That's why Cruz used his own assets to secure the loan.
Maybe you could have the first idea of what you're talking about before you post on such things.
Bigger problem for me is how he goes from ‘borrowing against all his assets” and now is net worth is 4.5 million by his on estimate.That is tricky business where I come from.
More excellent work by Sundance. Doing the work the Government Class media won’t do. (PS-—nothing will come of this “loan”...Seriously? The banksters who pulled off what they did in 2008 are gonna get tripped up by this? No-—not as long as Cruz continues to do what they pay him for.)
It’s flippin’ weird how the FEC isn’t interested in Clinton’s finances. Commie bastards.
Hi Responsibility2nd,
Does this “Sundance” have a real name? Or is it like one of the anonymous government officials leaking info which can’t be supported, or questioned?
Gwjack
A Goldman-Sachs banker and the smartest lawyer there is can't get away with saying they didn't know the rules.
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.