Mark Levin To Marco Rubio- It's Time To Run For President! (Mark loves Ted, he loved Rubio, 2011).

Youtube ^ | March 5, 2011 | Youtube

[true believer forever]

Mark Levin spent three hours tonight trashing Trump over his remarks about Ted Cruz, among other things. Levin failed to mention Cruz's attack on Trump behind closed doors with his donors, which he first denied, until an audio popped up proving Cruz did in fact make the comments he denied.

Behind closed doors, that's where politicians function best - Ted Cruz is no different. It may be tiring the way Trump puts it all out there, and I feel sure he is outgrowing that, but after Obamacare and so many other things, I will never ever ever support another politician who says one thing when the door is closed and another when the little people are listening in. Slippery Cruz.

[CatherineofAragon]

" If he detects any hostility— he will blow Cruz gone with “ Where were you born?” It will go off like a bomb and destroy Cruz"

So in addition to being a fawner in a personality cult, you're a Cruz birther.

Pretty stupid.

[true believer forever]

Cruz explained to a donor in a private conversation why he thinks he's going to win. Then he expressed his admiration for Trump in public. That's duplicitous to you?

Cruz also said that neither Trump or Carson had the gravitas or judgment to be president. This was in a donor meeting. When confronted about it on Kelly, he denied it, until an audio of the meeting showed up on the net. Duplicitous? At the very least. Backstabbing and cowardly? Yes. Say what you want about Trump, he puts his feelings on Everything out there!

[dangus]

What he said behind the doors is not at all different from what he says in front of the cameras.

“The final two candidates are Ben Carson and Donald Trump. Both of them I respect, Donald and Ben. ... The media is frustrated that I have chosen to bear hug both of them with love. One of the reasons I’m thrilled that Donald Trump is running is he has framed the central issue of this campaign as, ‘Who will stand up to Washington?’ Now if that’s the central question, then the next question is, ‘OK, who has stood up to Washington.’ Who has taken on not just Democrats but leaders of their own party... If that is the terrain, we win that fight.”

Or did you think that by acknowledging that Trump is a decent person, Cruz can’t offer a reason why he should be president?

Rush and Levin aren’t attacking Trump because Trump has said why he feels he’s the better candidate than Cruz; they are because the reason Trump has offered is lame, hypocritical, and typical of liberals.

[JoSixChip]

Actually that is what Machado, an illegal alien, said that he heard Trump say. Of course the msm wants to manipulate small minded people by disguising it. See below:

"And it seems the meeting was fruitful, shared Machado. Trump told the trio "Youve convinced me."

But I am sorry that you are such a halfwit that you are so easily manipulated by the msm. There, feel better?

[dangus]

He didn’t deny it.

“Mr. Cruz, questioned about the remarks on Thursday after a speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, said he was “not going to comment on what I may or may not have said at a private fund-raiser.””

Someone in his campaign did call the story misleading. Not “untrue.” Clearly, the headline did not capture the tone of the actual conversation. From the headline, you would think that Cruz has launched a new attack on Trump; when you find out the details, you find that someone recorded a private conversation, wherein Cruz mostly praised Trump but explained why he thinks he will win.

Now... why is Trump sending moles into Cruz’ meetings?

[JoSixChip]

He voted against it.

He not only voted for it, he took out and pened a WSJ op-ed to pressure his peers to vote for it too. You might want to do a little research on this before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

[SecondAmendment]

Hatch changed while in Washington, which was kind of his point in "Men in Black'.

Rubio talked a good game, but his history in the Florida house made me very suspicious of him from the beginning.

But I am also very suspicious of Trump, because he is not a demonstrably life long conservative, which Levin clearly is.

This latest attack "from the left" on Cruz is very reminiscent of Newt's unforced error in 2012, in fact I think you even posted something about it.

And I do agree with Levin, that substantive policy issues are fair game and should be hashed out, I would much rather hear Trump discussing how he would eliminate H1-B visas, then the number of friends Cruz has in the senate.

[true believer forever]

What he said behind the doors is not at all different from what he says in front of the cameras.

“The final two candidates are Ben Carson and Donald Trump. Both of them I respect, Donald and Ben. ... The media is frustrated that I have chosen to bear hug both of them with love. One of the reasons I’m thrilled that Donald Trump is running is he has framed the central issue of this campaign as, ‘Who will stand up to Washington?’ Now if that’s the central question, then the next question is, ‘OK, who has stood up to Washington.’ Who has taken on not just Democrats but leaders of their own party... If that is the terrain, we win that fight.”

Or did you think that by acknowledging that Trump is a decent person, Cruz can’t offer a reason why he should be president?

Rush and Levin aren’t attacking Trump because Trump has said why he feels he’s the better candidate than Cruz; they are because the reason Trump has offered is lame, hypocritical, and typical of liberals.

You conveniently left out the part where Cruz talks about Carson and Trump not having the judgment to be president now that paris and SB top the election, one of the left's favorite talking points re Trump and Carson both.

btw, here's the audio, for those of us like our truth undiluted:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/12/12/leaked-audio-of-ted-cruz-bashing-trump-sends-the-donald-into-another-twitter-rage-audiotweets/

[JoSixChip]

I have refrained from commenting on your APA attacks which require a whole series of lengthy responses.

I recommend you don't, I'm know it would be quite lengthy and convoluted.

You might remember, or look through your posting history, I've heard your lame excuses before and I have no need or desire to make you look foolish again.

[Starstruck]

You might want to do a little research on this before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

And you might want to check out the fact that he voted against the final version of the bill before you start calling people fools, fool.

[Catsrus]

orry, you are dead wrong. Cruz worked on the Bush campaign and did advise him on immigration. Google can be your friend,. Use it wisely!

[Catsrus]

You are so wrong. Trump mentioned the wall in his initial speech on June 16. He took all kinds of crap for saying what he did about illegals.

[JoSixChip]

And you might want to check out the fact that he voted against the final version of the bill before you start calling people fools, fool.

While true, it also shows you to be not very knowledgeable in such matters. The deed was done, and it was done by Cruz's leadership long before the final passage vote.

[true believer forever]

He didn't deny it.

“Mr. Cruz, questioned about the remarks on Thursday after a speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, said he was not going to comment on what I may or may not have said at a private fund-raiser."

Someone in his campaign did call the story misleading. Not "untrue." Clearly, the headline did not capture the tone of the actual conversation. From the headline, you would think that Cruz has launched a new attack on Trump; when you find out the details, you find that someone recorded a private conversation, wherein Cruz mostly praised Trump but explained why he thinks he will win.

Now... why is Trump sending moles into Cruz' meetings?

Mostly praised him? He said he didn't have the judgment to be president, neither he or Carson. Cruz later went on Megyn Kelly and indirectly denied it, saying it was just a NYT report with anonymous sources. Ted is very very slick and you have to watch very closely. I liked him a lot for a long time. And why would you assume it was a Trump mole? It seems to me the msm has been stalking Cruz for a long long time. True to form, another Cruz supporter automatically blaming Trump without proof. You are tiresome, all of you.

[semimojo]

For heaven's sake, Ted Cruz's stood up against the president of the United States, the Majority Leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, the whole Democrat party, the Republican establishment and the establishment media.

True enough, but fighting all of those helped him politically in his planned run for President.

Upsetting Trump's supporters would be a different matter.

[dangus]

I was providing the context, for what you obviously already knew, not leaving anything out. That context is that Cruz praised Trump, and has made a decision to continue to do so.

If you like a candidate who is now attacking Cruz for not caving to the McConnell’s unconditional surrender to President Obama, that’s fine with me. It’s your pathetic whining that Cruz attacked Trump that’s disgraceful.

[FreeReign]

Check Trump's record on the the issue. Specifically check Trump's July 24th 2015 amnesty comment. It wasn't until July 30th that he mentioned deportation for the non criminals and even then he had to add that he would expedite the good ones back.

You are so wrong. Trump mentioned the wall in his initial speech on June 16. He took all kinds of crap for saying what he did about illegals.

Read my comment again. It isn't terribly long nor is it terribly complicated. In no place in my comment did I mention anything about Trump and the wall. My comment was on amnesty!

You are so not right.

[true believer forever]

You’re wrong. I don’t usually say that, but you’re wrong. There is more audio from the same meeting coming out. Trump made the point about Cruz mainly saying what is empirically true - for all his sound and fury, what has Cruz accomplished in the Senate? He made a lot of stands that changed nothing. Trump, on the other hand, has built a company that required coalescing everything from unions, to contractors, to corporate, environmental elements. Do you really think Cruz could do that? He would lumber in, grandstand, and nothing would get changed. That is his track record. All sound and fury, no tangible results.

[RginTN]

lol, nice try. Trump’s the current frontrunner and if you’re gonna bash Levin for supporting Rubio in 2011 then its only fair to remind of Trump’s Clinton donor history. All have made wrong decisions in their history only God is perfection

[Starstruck]

While true, it also shows you to be not very knowledgeable in such matters. The deed was done, and it was done by Cruz's leadership long before the final passage vote.

Cruz's leadership. Isn't that contrary to what Trump just said. I'm knowledgeable enough to know that TPA was a done deal no matter what Cruz did. In the final vote he did vote against it. That's what counts. He didn't like the final version.