Cruz Explodes: Trump "A Narcissist At A Level I Don't Think This Country Has Ever Seen" (vid)

RealClearPolitics ^ | May 3, 2016 | RealClearPolitics

[i88schwartz]

CRUZ: I'm going to tell you what I really think of Donald Trump. This man is a pathological liar. He doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth. And in a pattern that I think is straight out of a psychology textbook, his response is to accuse everybody else of lying.

MORE -- with VIDEO at link

[DiogenesLamp]

Cruz knew exactly what level of slimy creepy sewer politics Jeff Roe is famous for.

Maybe, but not actually demonstrated. I'm sure a guy who is selling himself doesn't portray himself as slime, i'm pretty sure he would claim he is just effective.

Re your timeline, let’s cut to the Chase. Just give me links to where CNN A, announced that Carson was “suspending his campaign,” and B, said Carson would have a “big announcement,” the following week. Those are the only two items that concern me.

My recollection is that this is covered in the timeline link I sent you. I think it goes into quite good detail as to what happened and when, and by whom.

It even mentions that CNN immediately set out to distance itself from what it's people had done, so I very much doubt CNN would maintain any online data that proves otherwise.

I think our evidence is what people contemporarily reported regarding CNN's Tweets and statements. I doubt you will get anything further from CNN itself. Certainly nothing culpatory.

[Fantasywriter]

Jeff Roe did not try to sell himself to Cruz. He ran an anti-Cruz campaign in an attempt to prevent Cruz from winning the election for US Senator in TX. In this campaign Roe did his usual slime and smear routine—in this case, against Cruz.

As I said once already, and you evidently overlooked in reading my post, Cruz acted outraged over Roe’s smear tactics. That was his public reaction, anyway. Privately he must have lapped the sewage up, because he hired Roe to run the very next election he participated in. If you take the Golden Rule seriously, it means that Cruz liked being lied about and smeared so much, he arranged for the other GOP presidential candidates to receive the exact same treatment.

I waded through the extremely verbose timeline you inflicted on me. As I could have told you, it proved, yet again, that CNN NEVER reported that A, Carson was “suspending his campaign,” or B, Carson would have a “big announcement” the following week. Neither of these quotes originated with CNN.

Try to understand: there are ***recordings of Cruz-camp-originated-voicemails*** stating both the above mentioned ‘facts.’ Can you not grasp this??? The Cruz camp conveyed to all the caucus locations two wholesale LIES that CNN never reported. No amount of spin changes that; Roe played one of his typical dirty tricks, this time on Carson. It was filthy, disgusting, and indefensible, period.

[DiogenesLamp]

As I said once already, and you evidently overlooked in reading my post, Cruz acted outraged over Roe’s smear tactics. That was his public reaction, anyway. Privately he must have lapped the sewage up, because he hired Roe to run the very next election he participated in.

You should read up on what Nixon did when he found out John Kennedy's team had broken into his Accountant's office and used his own financial records against him. (In reality, it turned out his accountant had stabbed him in the back, and that the "break-in" was just a lie.)

Nixon said: (and I paraphrase) "So that's how they play the game? Well okay then."

Even assuming that Cruz hired a slimy guy in full knowledge that he is a slimy guy, given what was thrown back at Cruz, I don't think discussing slime throwing is a winning strategy. Some of the vilest things i've seen since the "Chris McDaniel supporters are Racists that want to prevent Black people from voting" tactic, were thrown at Cruz. Slander and dirty tactics way beyond someone's staff making a mistake about what Ben Carson meant when he said he was going home.

I waded through the extremely verbose timeline you inflicted on me. As I could have told you, it proved, yet again, that CNN NEVER reported that A, Carson was “suspending his campaign,”

That was implied by the manner in which they said it. It was a reasonable assumption based on what Chris Moody said: "Carson won’t go to NH/SC, but instead will head home to Florida for some R&R."

That is a very unusual thing for a Primary candidate to do. It only makes sense if you assume he's done campaigning. I don't fault anyone for making that assumption. I made the same assumption when I saw the Talking heads on the news say that.

Apparently not only did *I* think it meant that, so did other people, because at 6:53, (3 minutes BEFORE the first Cruz campaign tweet) Carson's spokesperson tweets this:

@RealBenCarson will be going to Florida to get fresh clothes b4 heading back out on the campaign trail. Not standing down.

— Jason Osborne (@Jmrhosborne) February 2, 2016

Apparently he wanted to make it clear that Carson wasn't standing down. The only reason he would feel the need to make this clear is if he thought people would get the wrong impression from what was already said... Which they did.

or B, Carson would have a “big announcement” the following week. Neither of these quotes originated with CNN.

It could be deliberate, or it could be a "brain fart." Jake Tapper stated that Carson was going to make an announcement that evening,(Tapper said "at 9:15 local) not next week, so the "next week" part is wrong, but the "announcement" part was in fact said.

But the fact remains, even at the worst case, this is misbehavior by staff, and not evidence of Cruz himself deliberately lying to anyone.

So how did this get pushed forward as the basis of Ted Cruz lying? It wasn't Ted Cruz doing it, if in fact you can make the claim with a straight face that it was a deliberate lie in the first place.

Try to understand: there are ***recordings of Cruz-camp-originated-voicemails*** stating both the above mentioned ‘facts.’

I should not be surprised. I thought Carson's announcement didn't make any sense unless he was dropping out. It is reasonable to believe that other people thought the same thing.

The Cruz camp conveyed to all the caucus locations two wholesale LIES that CNN never reported.

Except they certainly did. Their reporting can be interpreted in no other way than that it appears as if Carson is dropping out.

No amount of spin changes that; Roe played one of his typical dirty tricks, this time on Carson.

And you place no blame on Chris Moody, Jake Tapper, or Dana Bash who created the impression that Carson was dropping out?

If you can watch this video, and tell me that it is completely unreasonable to see this as an indication that Carson is stopping his campaign, then I fear you have lost objectivity.

Both of them make it appear as if Carson is dropping out.

But the point remains. The whole thing is a pretty flimsy basis on which to build the whole meme that Ted Cruz is a liar.

[Fantasywriter]

To put a finer point on the issue. CNN reported that Carson was “taking a break.” Had the Cruz camp conveyed this info, it would have been factually accurate.

So why didn’t they?

Because it would have allowed voters to draw the correct conclusion: that Carson was taking a break [which is NOT synonymous with “suspending his campaign”].

Roe doesn’t take chances. To be absolutely certain caucus goers drew the wrong conclusion, he added the wholly fictitious report that Carson would have a “big announcement” the following week. Put those two lies together, and no Iowan could mistake the message.

It was gutter politics at its worst—Roe’s speciality. Why so many Cruz supporters defended it is a mystery. Had Cruz’ supporters risen up against this sleaze, Cruz and/or Roe might have taken notice, and run a cleaner campaign. And who knows, but what that would have made Cruz a more attractive and viable candidate in the long run.

What a shame.

[Fantasywriter]

I would point to the Iowa dirty tricks as indicative of the kind of sleazy, gutter politics Roe is famous for. It was Cruz approving a sick, malicious, damningly false and vile lie in the NH ad that establishes Cruz as a liar. The ad states as fact that Trump made himself rich from using eminent domain—a one-hundred percent falsehood. What is more, the entire ad is designed to depict Trump as having personally thrown an old widow out on the street and then bulldozed her home. In fact, Trump made the woman extravagantly generous offers, she turned them down and kept her house. She did not at any time lose it to eminent domain. The entire ad was a nauseating sleaze-fest.

[Just mythoughts]

And ‘Oh Mandy’ was right there at CNN helping Cruz out with Carson.

[DiogenesLamp]

To put a finer point on the issue. CNN reported that Carson was “taking a break.” Had the Cruz camp conveyed this info, it would have been factually accurate.

The words "taking a break" were not spoken by either Jake Tapper, or Dana Bash on that broadcast. The chyron at the bottom of the screen said "Carson to take a break after Iowa", but If you were just listening to the broadcast you might not have seen that.

Even if you did, the words spoken by Tapper and Bash provoke a much more serious meaning than a mere hiatus. Who announces they are heading home and skipping campaigns in two primary states on the eve of a primary in which they were doing badly?

Who does that?

So why didn’t they?

Because it would have allowed voters to draw the correct conclusion: that Carson was taking a break [which is NOT synonymous with “suspending his campaign”].

Or possibly because no other interpretation of "taking a break" and skipping campaigning in two primary states, followed by an "announcement" later that night (at 9:15) makes any sense.

You simply do not put those words and circumstances together and expect people to *NOT* draw the conclusion that you are wrapping it up. Again, that is the sentiment that Tapper and Bash both conveyed. That this was a bizarre behavior for someone who wasn't quitting. (They used the word "Unusual")

Roe doesn’t take chances. To be absolutely certain caucus goers drew the wrong conclusion, he added the wholly fictitious report that Carson would have a “big announcement” the following week.

I don't know anything about Roe. I never heard of him until you mentioned him yesterday. I drew the same conclusion when I saw people on Television reporting that Carson was "going home" and skipping campaigning in New Hampshire and South Carolina. It did not seem reasonable to me that anyone would say such a thing unless they were ready to stop.

I did not receive a phone call from the Cruz camp telling me Carson was suspending his campaign. That is what I thought at the time with no assistance from anyone else in understanding what I heard.

Why so many Cruz supporters defended it is a mystery.

I don't think it needs to be defended. I think it is exactly what it appeared to me to be at the very beginning. Carson's staff announcing something weird, News reporters reading into it the same thing that any objective person would read into it, and overzealous Cruz staffers rushing to exploit what they regarded as a Godsend. I see it as incompetence, not deliberate deceit.

But the point remains. This is an extremely flimsy pretext on which to make the argument that Ted Cruz is a liar. From what I can see, the deceitful and underhanded tactic was to keep repeating that this incident establishes him as a liar.

No it didn't. But for those who want to promote that meme, it comes down to people convincing themselves to believe the reality they very badly want to create.

[Fantasywriter]

Excellent point—Mandy was in it up to her delicately sculpted eyebrows.

The same Mandy who tweeted about the joys and perks of ‘dating’ other women’s husbands.

[Just mythoughts]

Yes, ‘Oh Mandy’ was the CNN connection.

[Fantasywriter]

Carson never said he was suspending his campaign. CNN never said he was suspending his campaign. The inferences you drew reflect just that—the inferences you drew. Others should be allowed the same option—to draw their own conclusions, rather than having your conclusions force-fed to them.

If the Cruz camp had used CNN’s wording in their voicemails it would have been a non-story. That the Cruz camp reported false info is a fact. Your justifying it simply takes you down to Roe’s level.

[DiogenesLamp]

Carson never said he was suspending his campaign. CNN never said he was suspending his campaign. The inferences you drew reflect just that—the inferences you drew. Others should be allowed the same option—to draw their own conclusions, rather than having your conclusions force-fed to them.

When one is communicating with others, one cannot help but communicate one's own opinion. The opinion people express is colored by their own inferences and conclusions. It cannot be otherwise.

If they have drawn the wrong inferences, this does not make of them a liar, it makes them mistaken. Now you are saying this was deliberate, and I am pointing out that even if this was, Cruz himself did not do it. I also point out that it is very reasonable to conclude that it wasn't even deliberate.

If the Cruz camp had used CNN’s wording in their voicemails it would have been a non-story. That the Cruz camp reported false info is a fact. Your justifying it simply takes you down to Roe’s level.

I am not justifying it. I see it as a simple mistake. I am pointing out that a very grave Evil was done to a man on the basis of mistakes by his staff.

The accusations directed at Cruz of being a "Liar" over this, were not reasonable. They were in fact, evil and despicable. People have painted him out to be a monster, and on the flimsiest of accusations. This incident happened to be one of them.

[okie01]

The accusations directed at Cruz of being a "Liar" over this, were not reasonable. They were in fact, evil and despicable. People have painted him out to be a monster, and on the flimsiest of accusations. This incident happened to be one of them.

Further, Cruz offered his apology to Carson -- though, arguably, none were necessary.

Carson, ungraciously, wallowed in victimhood and refused to accept, continuing to maintain he'd been wronged -- even though his own staff contributed to the error.

With this stunt, my respect for Carson went into the toilet.

[Fantasywriter]

‘I am pointing out that even if this was, Cruz himself did not do it.’

Where have I said Cruz did it? Direct quote, please.

I have given you an example of a foul, rotten, malicious, disgusting Cruz LIE. It happened in NH, not IA.

[DiogenesLamp]

Further, Cruz offered his apology to Carson -- though, arguably, none were necessary.

Carson, ungraciously, wallowed in victimhood and refused to accept, continuing to maintain he'd been wronged -- even though his own staff contributed to the error.

I thought that was bad form on Carson's part. I think his recalcitrance contributed heavily to the false rumor being spread that this was an example of Cruz dishonesty.

Carson's campaign was obviously faltering at this point. I was an early Carson supporter, and Carson shot himself in the foot with some of the kooky things he had been saying. I saw it as doomed by the point Iowa came along.

Had Carson came out as Number one, nobody would have been making the assumption that his "going home" statement could mean he was dropping out. I think most people realized that he wasn't gaining traction and the obvious assumption was that he would have to exit at some point.

Iowa was a pretty obvious point for him to do it. Such an announcement was anticipated, and would not have been a surprise. The Surprise was when he didn't.

[DiogenesLamp]

‘I am pointing out that even if this was, Cruz himself did not do it.’

Where have I said Cruz did it? Direct quote, please.

I believe the comment upon which this portion of the thread has proceeded deals with examples of Ted Cruz lying. Someone offered up this example further up the thread, so it is the implicit thesis of every response.

In other words, this is the premise being debated; Whether or not Ted Cruz is a Liar and this was one of the examples of him supposedly lying.

I have given you an example of a foul, rotten, malicious, disgusting Cruz LIE. It happened in NH, not IA.

Which one was that? Was it the gun thing? I thought I debunked that.

[Fantasywriter]

‘Someone offered up this example further up the thread, so it is the implicit thesis of every response.’

That’s ridiculous. The person who posited that example is responsible for it, not people who’ve never advanced that argument.

Otoh, if you’ve memorized your pat answers to that particular example, I can see where you’d like to acuse everyone of using it. Like they say, if all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

‘Which one was that?’

See post 185.

[DiogenesLamp]

That’s ridiculous. The person who posited that example is responsible for it, not people who’ve never advanced that argument.

I asked for an example of Ted Cruz lying in message 50.

Cyberman offered the Carson dropping out story as an example of a Lie Cruz told. Message Number 58.

I point out that this is not an example of Cruz Lying. (Message #102)

You come in at message 166 responding to my commentary to "Blue Highway." By this point, the message chain is pretty much regarding the claim that Cruz was Lying about Carson in Iowa.

That was the topic thesis of the message chain to which you were responding.

Otoh, if you’ve memorized your pat answers to that particular example, I can see where you’d like to acuse everyone of using it. No, actually my methodology is to wait until they give me an example of a Ted Cruz "lie", and then I go check it against information available on the internet in an attempt to verify whether this example is valid or false.

So far I haven't seen an example of a Ted Cruz "lie" that can pass the "reasonable man" test.

Like they say, if all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

I'm thinking that this was the exact methodology of people who employed the lie hammer to beat an opponent into submission. They just kept beating on him with that hammer.

‘Which one was that?’

See post 185.

I'll have to look at that when I get back. I have got to go rescue someone having car trouble in another town. Probably have to look at it tomorrow.

At this point I have no idea if Trump or any of his companies engaged in eminent domain trickery, but I would find it very strange if there is not some sort of event or incident involving Trump properties upon which this assertion rests.

If Trump has been a boyscout in the real estate market all his life, I will find that surprising. New York is a cutthroat town, and a lot of businesses have to play cutthroat just to survive in that city.

[Fantasywriter]

‘At this point I have no idea if Trump or any of his companies engaged in eminent domain trickery, but I would find it very strange if there is not some sort of event or incident involving Trump properties upon which this assertion rests.
If Trump has been a boyscout in the real estate market all his life, I will find that surprising. New York is a cutthroat town, and a lot of businesses have to play cutthroat just to survive in that city.’

This is called Magical Thinking. You have zero evidence that Trump “made himself rich by using eminent domain.” zero. Squat. Nothing. The donut.

But because you can ***imagine*** Trump making himself rich by dastardly means, it must be true.

I’m back in Obot land. No matter what the charge against Obama, if an Obot could ***imagine*** a scenario in which Obama was innocent, then ***in fact*** he was innocent. Iow, no evidence required, only imagination and false presuppositions. It’s a sickness.

Re Cruz’ lies. When I entered the discussion, I gave you an example of a straight up, irrefutable, monstrously vicious Cruz lie. It is fallacious to conflate my example with others. My example stands alone.

[DiogenesLamp]

This is called Magical Thinking. You have zero evidence that Trump “made himself rich by using eminent domain.” zero. Squat. Nothing. The donut.

Took me 10 seconds. First link I pulled up.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/donald-trumps-eminent-domain-nearly-cost-widow-house

For more than 30 years Vera Coking lived in a three-story house just off the Boardwalk in Atlantic City. Donald Trump built his 22-story Trump Plaza next door. In the mid-1990s Trump wanted to build a limousine parking lot for the hotel, so he bought several nearby properties. But three owners, including the by then elderly and widowed Ms Coking, refused to sell.

Trump turned to a government agency – the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA) – to take Coking’s property….

I won't say i'm shocked, because I know how the big boys play in Cities like New York. There's more. Read the whole thing.

Point is, the image of Trump pushing a grannie out of her house fits in the case of Vera Coking.

Here is the woman:

And here is her house:

Note Trumps unfinished Casinos on either side?

Of course when the Cruz campaign made the ad, i'm sure they theatricalized the event to make it into a better political ad, but the underlying accusation is based in truth.

When I entered the discussion, I gave you an example of a straight up, irrefutable, monstrously vicious Cruz lie. It is fallacious to conflate my example with others. My example stands alone.

If you are referring to the ad you mentioned earlier, I believe the above link refutes the claim that it is a lie. Apparently Donald Trump did engage in eminent Domain abuse.

If you are referring to the "Trump is anti-gun" ad, that wasn't produced by the Cruz campaign. It was an independent PAC that did that.

[Fantasywriter]

I haven’t had an exchange like this since the last time I argued with Obots. They, and now you, totally change the subject, and then say “I won!”

How many times do I have to tell you what Cruz’ ad said?????

Seriously, how many times?????

Cruz ad did NOT say Trump turned to the Casino Authority for help. It never came close to suggesting that. That is ***NOT*** the lie I cited.

I’m going to ask you something honestly, as one conservative to another. Namely, if you are unwilling to read with sufficient comprehension to grasp the lie after I’ve repeated it three or four times, what’s the point? What on earth is the point???

I’ll repeat the lie just once more. I shouldn’t, as it is unnecessary. Once should have been enough. Four or five repetitions [counting this one] is ridiculous.

The lie is that “Trump made himself rich by using eminent domain.” That is the LIE. Does your precious, one-sided, half-baked, leaving-out-more-FACTS-than-what-it-includes Trump-hating article prove that??? So exactly how much DID Trump make? One million? Can’t be; at Trump’s level, a million bucks doesn’t “make him rich”.

A billion? Did Trump make a cool billion off the wwindow’s house? If so, I’ll concede the argument. Trump made himself rich from using...er, from the Casino Authority using, eminent domain. Just prove Trump made a billion, and you win.

By the way, what Trump offered the widow for her house is a matter of record. How much was that offer? How much less than that offer did she end up taking years later?