False. In fact, what Cruz said is exactly the opposite of what you claim he said, Here is what Cruz said about the violent protesters:
"Protesters have no right to engage in violence. The First Amendment gives every one of us a right to speak, but we don’t have a right to silence others. And to the extent these protesters are organized leftist groups, whether it’s Black Lives Matter or Bernie Sanders or George Soros, or some other moveon.org leftist group, they’re simply trying to terrorize political speech. That is not their right. It is wrong, and we need to stand against it."
So you are quite wrong. It is exactly the opposite.
B/S. Cruz is on daily blaming Trump.
Actually, you’re wrong. What you just posted was further elaboration given by Cruz. OP is correct on Cruz’s initial comments.
It’s not what was said before the “but” that concerns me; it’s what was said after.
You’re politically FOS.
Trump folks don’t want to hear the truth.
Many (former) Cruz supporters who heard and read Cruz's works for themselves are in disagreement with you.
Cruz exposed himself as a naked opportunist, rebuked organized criminal thugs only in passing, and proceeded to smear Trump as the cause.
Cruz showed a total lack of leadership, lost 300,000 Twitter followers virtually overnight, and he also lost the votes of many of his own supporters.
Ted Cruz damaged himself last Friday. He's a lawyer who knows how to use words precisely, and it's clear what he was trying to do.
If Ted Cruz really was a leader, he would have led the entire GOP field in forcefully and passionately repudiating the thugs who engaged in a criminal conspiracy to infringe on the Right of the People to Peaceably Assemble. He woiuld have showed solidarity with a frontrunner whose People were attacked by the intolerant Left.
If Cruz wins the nomination, and possibly before, those same orchestrated thugs are going to show up at some of his rallies. You can count on it.
When that happens, will it be because of Cruz's violent rhetoric? Of course not, because that's not the cause. These criminals want to suppress the democratic process, and Ted Cruz is helping to encourage them to do so.
Win or lose, the chickens are really going to come home to roost for Ted Cruz for his putting raw political opportunism ahead of being a true statesman. There's simply no denying it.
Sorry, I heard him myself say more than that! He goes on to say that Donald Trump told his supporters to punch them in the face. AND Trump never told his supporters to do that. What he did say about the protestor at one of his events who hit other people before being taken out, Donald told security to get him out and be careful with him, and because Donald say that man hit others, he said that he (meaning Donald) “felt like punching the protestor in the face.” The protestor who had ALREADY hit others there to listen.
Well,he said that, but then he added quite a bit more to that statement which you did not include that blamed Trump, but I am including it for you:
I think a campaign bears responsibility for creating an environment, when the candidate urges supporters to engage in physical violence–to punch people in the face. The predictable consequence of that is that it escalates and today is unlikely to be the last such instance,” Cruz said in a sorrowful tone.
“That’s not how our politics should occur,” he added.
As Cruz ended his brief comments to the press, the Senator raised the specter of the riots that plagued the 1968 Democrat convention held in Chicago, riots that ripped the city apart.
“You know, the City of Chicago in 1968 saw some ugly days when politics descended into hatred and incivility and even violence and it is my hope that in 2016 that we can appeal to our better angels and avoid going down that road once again,” Cruz concluded.
The Senator later spoke before the gathered Republicans at the Lincoln Day dinner giving a typical stump speech without mentioning the troubles Trump found in the Windy City.
I also want to mention something about the events this evening in Chicago. This is a sad day. Political discourse should occur in this country without a threat of violence without anger and rage and hatred directed at each other. We need to learn to have disagreements without being disagreeable, to have disagreements while being respecting human beings on the other side.
Earlier today over thirty people were arrested at one rally. And then tonight as violence broke out the rally was canceled altogether. Now, the responsibility for that lies with protesters who took violence into their own hands. But in any campaign responsibility starts at the top. Any candidate is responsible for the culture of the campaign. And when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that’s facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discord.
He was asked if Trump should have canceled the rally.
I think that the decision should be based on public safety. But I think a campaign bears responsibility for creating an environment, when the candidate urges supporters to engage in physical violence–to punch people in the face. The predictable consequence of that is that it escalates and today is unlikely to be the last such instance. We earlier today in St. Louis over thirty arrested. That’s not how our politics should occur.
You know, the City of Chicago in 1968 saw some ugly days when politics descended into hatred and incivility and even violence and it is my hope that in 2016 that we can appeal to our better angels and avoid going down that road once again.
There is video at the link as well...Nice to put out the entire set of his comments...