He makes things up and shockingly some people believe him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXnAO3MFLB8
wow great video, thanks.
He says one thing, and does another. He is a completely amoral individual and lies without conscious.
2 Timothy 4:3 seems to be the only explanation.
If Cruz and the GOP Establishment manage to steal the nomination, you can start buying your tickets to Hillary's Inauguration Gala Ball.
I am simply amazed at the amount of people who have fallen for this charlatan.
Let’s talk about this youtube video from Stephen Miller.
1) He says Ted Cruz prefers to talk about the National Enquirer story instead of the issues.
Not sure what he’s talking about. Cruz called the story “garbage” and refers to it only when asked in interviews.
So, he should direct his observations to those who ask him about it.
2) IMMIGRATION.
True — Ted Cruz in 2013 did introduce a bill to open U.S. borders for those entering into the United States through the proper LEGAL channels. He fought to allow more legal immigrants into the United States during the Senate’s most consequential immigration debate since George W. Bush’s presidency.
It is also true that he sought to both double the cap of legal immigration from 675,000 to 1.3 million and pushed for a dramatic increase of 500% for high-skilled H-1B visas to 325,000.
However, very recently,after giving it much thought, Ted Cruz issued an immigration plan that went even further right than even Jeff Sessions’ 2013 amendment.
The new plan would in part halt all legal immigration until the unemployment rate decreases. The new plan also would end birthright citizenship, suspend the H-1B visa program for 180 days to investigate alleged abuses and deny certain government aid to legal immigrants.
Here is his current immigration plan:
https://www.tedcruz.org/cruz-immigration-plan-summary/
Now an argument can be made that “I don’t believe him” because of what he said in the past....
If Trump folks want us all to forget his numerous changes and flip flops ( If you want me to list them, I will indulge you) telling us THIS TIME HE MEANS IT, why should we not give Ted Cruz the same consideration?
2) On Trade <-— It is a fair attack on Cruz. But people have disagreed on how to bring lost jobs back to the USA.
During the last debate, Ted Cruz exchanged sharp disagreements with Trump explaining why he believes that a 45% tariff on Chinese goods is bad for American Consumers overall.
He believes that the best way to create jobs in the USA is to make the creation of businesses attractive to investors and businessmen everywhere — lower and simpler taxes ( individual and corporate ), curbing unnecessary regulations, a stable dollar, encouraging all forms of energy innovation.
Now a legitimate disagreement can be made regarding whether tariffs on Mexico and China or even the rejection of NAFTA will bring jobs back to the USA ( Ted Cruz disagrees with this ). This is a VALID policy debate and I wish that with the filed of candidates now down to a mere 3, they would get the opportunity to debate this one more time ( minus the personal stuff ).
If those who believe that Trump’s trade proposal makes the better sense, go ahead and vote for him. I personally believe that it won’t work and will even worsen the situation.
The lie that he is eligible to be President is the most pervasive. Ted Cruz was born in Canada to a foreign born parent which makes him ineligible to be President of the United States!
It has been said time and again that no court, not even the SCOTUS, has authority to judge the eligibility of a Presidential candidate. That is why no court proceeding has been effective to block Cruz from being on the ballot. Only Congress can judge the eligibility of the President.
AMENDMENT XX
Passed by Congress March 2, 1932. Ratified January 23, 1933.Note: Article I, section 4, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of this amendment. In addition, a portion of the 12th amendment was superseded by section 3.
Section 3.
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
You have to download it from SSRN Social Science Research Network.
You should know how to read dry research documents though.The Natural Born Citizen Clause as Originally Understood - Mary Brigid McManamon -Widener University Delaware Law School
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2444766
A horrific statutory precedent would be created by the election of Ted Cruz. Suppose Cruz is nominated and elected. A few years from now a Muslim man in Saudi Arabia heavily in the oil industry takes an American wife. They travel back to the middle east and a child is born. By your flawed view he is considered a Natural Born American. The child, raised by his father as violently anti-American but comes back here, runs a flawless campaign with lies and deceit and is elected. This candidate could not be stopped because of the precedent set by Cruz. According to their arcane rules, if a Islamic is leader of a country it must become an Islamic nation. The destruction of The USA is at hand, and it is your hand.
Seriously, I do not think it would get that far. The Democrat party would sue in Congress to nullify a Cruz election and it would be upheld. The GOPe would have no problem voting to stop Cruz in this way. At the last moment his NWO/CFR appeasement Vice Presidential nominee would become President. What evil webs we weave?
Yet, even before that, a Cruz nominee would face so many vehement attacks from Liberal Democrats through the campaign after the convention that the general election would be a fruitless joke.