Posted on 03/14/2016 9:35:21 AM PDT by Iscool
Dana Bash: It may surprise some people that Ted Cruz, who went in riding a wave of anti-Washington sentiment, that his wife, you, are an executive at Goldman Sachs, the epitome of Wall Street. Do you see any contradiction there?
Heidi Cruz: I don’t. Ted doesn’t have an anti Wall Street sentiment. He has an anti government support sentiment, an anti-relying on government for their well-being.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
IBCDS
Hey Dana!
Who are YOU supporting that has no ties to GS?
Rats. OP beat me with CDS.
Cruz is not who he has portrayed himself to be.
His mask slipped when he blamed Trump for the leftist anarchists disrupting his events.
What office is Mrs Cruz running for?
Why not B.Hussein about his wife’s make-work job at that hospital?
Trump has “ties” with Goldman Sachs as well — many millions of dollars in loans (some of which he didn’t repay), and he’s also an investor.
Just as Trump is not evil for working with GS, Cruz is not evil for working with GS.
Trumpsters sure sound a lot like Democrats when they argue against Cruz.
Cruz is a sell out.
Trump is the only politician with no ties to GS or Wall Street.. no ties at all.. just like he has never cozied up to the liberal big government Left, and... oh, wait...
Are we supposed to infer a secret “Establishment” tie-in for Cruz, while ignoring Trump’s prior overt statements and actions?
I’m confused....
At least none of those with CDS are found wandering on the side of the roadway in a daze.
Thanks for proving my point.
Ted Cruz is for free market capitalism and against crony-capitalism. Isn't that what conservatives are supposed to be for?
Ted Cruz voted against the Wall Street bailout and Trump supported it. That pretty much says it all. But Trump supporters will still try to say up is down and black is white.
As she should. She should also grill Hillary on the content of her Goldman Sachs speeches.
“Just as Trump is not evil for working with GS, Cruz is not evil for working with GS.”
WRONG !
Trump did biz with GS getting legitimate construction loans that were too large for most banks.
And tell Cruz’s wife that GS calls the White House their “D.C. Office”
Isn’t it amazing that CNN is now becoming more honorable in its reporting than Faux News? Really Ramos asking Clinton about being indicted and not letting go? 360’s fair interviews with Trump it’s eerie.
Cruz showed his TRUE colors this weekend when he blamed Trump and trump’s supporters for the violence in Chicago. Go to hell Ted!
Trust Me Hillary and Goldman Sachs is out there more than Cruz’s and Goldman Sachs
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 (as a $300,000 per year globalist lawyer).
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 (and that he and wifey "broke their piggy bank" to enable him to defeat a better-funded opponent---none of which is true).
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?
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.