Posted on 03/14/2016 7:56:31 AM PDT by zek157
Ted Cruz failed to report two loans he received in 2012 for his Senatorial campaign.
During the campaign itself he claimed he had liquidated his own personal family wealth to finance the campaign. That was a lie; he in fact got two loans; one from Goldman Sachs and the other from Citibank. His wife works for Goldman.
At least one of these loans (the Goldman one) was "secured" by a brokerage account.
Some of Cruz's excuses have included that this was allegedly his "retirement" money.
Well, if that's true I have some more questions.
You can borrow against a 401k -- up to 50% of its value. But, that 401k couldn't have been his, since he didn't work for Goldman and further, if you leave a job you must immediately repay the entire balance of any loan you have out or it is considered a premature distribution and subject to a penalty tax. This is why, in general, 401k loans are stupid because you cannot always control whether you will leave a job and there is no exception for "I was laid off or fired."
The problem is that no other sort of retirement account, such as a self-directed IRA, rollover from a previous 401k into an IRA or otherwise, can be margined.
These, by their nature and law, are cash accounts and cannot be borrowed against. Taking funds from them, with the exception of a ROTH which allows funds in some circumstances to be removed (not borrowed against) is considered a premature distribution and subjects you to a penalty tax rate.
So the question is this: What sort of account was that? Was it a taxable account and thus marginable? Or was it tax-advantaged and thus a loan that nobody that isn't "special" could ever obtain? Further, where are the details of said loan including the interest rate charged? Margin loans carry a fairly heavy interest rate, especially today in a world of zero rates. In short, did Cruz effectively obtain leverage -- a margin loan in effect, irrespective of what it was called -- on a tax-advantaged account that no ordinary person could get?
And if so what was the quid-pro-quo for that very-special act that nobody else can get?
Outsider eh?
Cruz is not an outsider; in fact he and his wife are both bankster stooges who have used the "screw the public" bankster system run by Goldman and Citibank and failed to disclose it as required by law.
Shady Ted.
Anyone who uses the word, bankster, in a sentence is an occupier stooge or enabler.
This issue isn’t going away. It will be a big issue when Cruz runs for the Senate again in 2018.
Anyone who uses the word, bankster, in a sentence is an occupier stooge or enabler.
Anyone who finances a “grass roots” campaign with dubious loans from Goldman Sachs is a FRAUD.
Dubious loans? The loans were against his own accounts were they not? If Trump had done the same thing, you would be crowing about how brilliant he is.
I will vote for Trump or Cruz, but you folks who think you have a new savior are going to be sorely disappointed.
You would do well to have a better understanding of Karl Denninger, but then some people like surprises. He’s far form an Occupy Wall Street type.
Have a nice day.
At least Ted has not bailed on anything and declared bankruptcy, 4 times, getting to keep his money every time, but shafting his investors. Who is the fraud?
Rule of law is nothing if not followed. By everyone.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/us/politics/ted-cruz-wall-street-loan-senate-bid-2012.html
“They’re two different reporting regimes,” he said. “The law says if you get a loan for the purpose of funding a campaign, you have to show the original source of the loan, the terms of the loan and you even have to provide a copy of the loan document to the Federal Election Commission.”
There would have been nothing improper about Mr. Cruz obtaining bank loans for his campaign, as long as they were disclosed. But such a disclosure might have conveyed the wrong impression for his candidacy.
All employees of Goldman Sachs automatically got a brokerage account (prior to 2013 that is). It is neither a 401K or tax deferred account. Authors should actually research what they’re talking about.
I have wondered about that also...are there laws for plain folks and laws for “special people” like Cruz?
"At least Ted has not bailed on anything and declared bankruptcy, 4 times
Has, um, Ted, ever owned a business, let alone multiple businesses?
Has Ted ever hired anyone, signed paychecks or complied with all the government requirements to run a business?
Nope.
Good grief. Trump borrows $Hundreds of Millions. Secured, unsecured? Who knows? Some of his money went to Dem politicians.
He favors adding a 47% tax on Walmart shoppers buying Chinese goods. He has stated that his policies would result in Americans buying fewer new cars over their lifetime. And declares that as “No big deal”.
And you guys are going after a Cruz loan. Give me a break.
Well Karl, many of us have “retirement accounts” that are none of the above.
They are also known as “savings accounts”, which CAN be margined.
Uh...by the way Karl, which candidate are YOU supporting who has NOT benefited from business with Goldman Sachs?
The writer sounds like he knows a whole lot about not enough.
Dubious loans? The loans were against his own accounts were they not? If Trump had done the same thing, you would be crowing about how brilliant he is.
I will vote for Trump or Cruz, but you folks who think you have a new savior are going to be sorely disappointed.
We don’t know that. Cruz continues to be in violation the law and will not release the details of the loans.
I am under now illusions about Trump. But after seeing what a fraudulent “principled conservative” Ted Cruz is I have no problem rolling the dice with Trump.
Donald Trump has 3 accounts with Goldman Sachs.
You obviously don’t know anything about the author.
Cruz did report the loans in other filings and explained how it is common that someone might think this type of collateralized loan didn’t need reporting to the FEC, considering it was basically HIS money.
It’s COLLATERAL, which means personally guaranteeing loans with banks.
This isn’t a crime nor is it unethical, and certainly not a reason to keep beating someone over the head with it.
Also, according to Mark Levin ( whether you believe him or not is your decision ), the LOAN HAS BEEN PAID BACK.
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.
