There is nothing whatsoever to like about an evangelical Canadian charlatan who, with his daddy, claims he is god’s gift to America and hates Wall Street and the financial sector. In fact, it is particularly hypocritical for an immigrant like Texas Ted Cruz to spin a fairy tale about he and his wife, an employee of Goldman Sachs, cashing in all their worldly possessions to fund a run for the U.S. Senate; a run founded in part on criticizing the financial sector, the banking industry and Wall Street in particular.
Now it is revealed that Raphael Cruz and his wife secured a significantly large loan from Mrs. Cruz’s employer and Wall Street financial giant Goldman Sachs to fund Ted’s Senate campaign. Likely aware that even Texas voters would see the hypocrisy in taking Wall Street money while criticizing Wall Street, Cruz failed to disclose that loan and one from Citibank as required in his campaign finance reports.
There is nothing whatsoever improper about Cruz and his wife getting a big loan from his wife’s employer to fund his campaign for the Senate if he had disclosed it on his financials. However, if he had disclosed them it certainly would “have conveyed the wrong impression about his candidacy” as an anti-Wall Street Republican; a wrong impression his tea party supporters may have taken the wrong way if they were not so enamored with an evangelical fanatic because he hated President Obama.
According to a review of Texas Ted’s personal financial disclosures filed with the Senate, the immigrant’s reporting is lacking any liquidation of assets to account for all the money he spent on his campaign as he and his wife claimed. Remember, the Cuban-Canadian immigrant asserts that he and Mrs. Ted made a heartfelt decision and family commitment to cash out everything they owned just to fund his god-anointed campaign for the Senate.
Cruz’s personal financial disclosure does show that the Mr. and Mrs. Cruz obtained a large, low-interest loan from Mrs. Ted’s employer Goldman Sachs as well as a loan from Citibank. The loans initially totaled $750,000 and increased to over a million dollars, but there was no explanation of their purpose.
The problem for Cruz is that the loans were not reported in the Ted Cruz for Senate Committee filed with the Federal Election Commission; a requirement for any candidate borrowing money to finance their campaigns. In fact, other campaigns that were investigated and found to be lacking in honest reporting were fined “for failure to meet disclosure requirements.” The purpose of the requirements are, for one thing, to alert voters to whom is buying the candidates’ loyalty and to prevent candidates from receiving special treatment from lenders; particularly lenders employing the candidate’s spouse.
As of yet there are no revelations that the Cruz campaign was afforded any special break on their campaign loans, but that still does not excuse Cruz’s failure to disclose, or his lies that he and his wife devoted their life-savings to a Senate run. A run, by the way, that Texas Ted campaigned as “a populist firebrand” criticizing Wall Street and big banking’s influence over Washington politics. It is the same theme he is using in a run for the White House.
In fact, earlier in the year the Canadian immigrant slammed Goldman Sachs’ clout in Congress in particular and said, “Like many other players on Wall Street and big business, they seek out and get special favors from government.” That would include the “special favors” from Republicans in Congress on a crusade to end regulatory oversight on Wall Street and the financial sector such as repealing Dodd-Frank financial reform. Cruz is a hypocrite as well as dishonest.
According to the Cruz campaign, honest Ted did absolutely nothing wrong; he is an evangelical Republican and staunch, true conservative after all. His spokeswoman, Catherine Frazier, had little choice but to acknowledge that the loan from Mrs. Cruz’s employer Goldman Sachs was a source of money for his Senate race, but she was silent as to whether the Citibank loan was used. According to Frazier, Texas Ted is like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and claimed that Cruz’s failure to report the $500,000 loan from Goldman Sachs was simply “inadvertent.” She also said there was no attempt “to hide anything” and that now that Cruz was caught cheating, “the campaign would be filing corrected disclosures as necessary.”
Frazier went on to say that all “transactions have been reported on his many public financial disclosures and the Senate campaign’s F.E.C. filings;” all except the nearly $1 million just revealed to be “not reported.” And that is what a campaign finance expert and lawyer said is Cruz’s problem.
A former election commission lawyer specializing in campaign finance law, Kenneth A. Gross, said even if Canadian-Cruz listed the loans from his wife’s employer in a Senate ethics report, it does not meet the requirement to “promptly disclose the loan to election officials during a campaign” because it only deals “with the candidate’s personal finances.”
Gross said the personal disclosure and campaign disclosures “are two completely different reporting regimes. The law says if you get a loan for the purpose of funding a campaign, you have to show the original source of the loan, the terms of the loan and you even have to provide a copy of the loan document to the Federal Election Commission;” something Cruz was certainly aware of.
Regardless if the Cruz campaign says Texas Ted’s failure to follow the law and disclose a loan from his wife’s employer was “inadvertent,” it is more likely it was deliberate and Cruz is a dirty liar. Every congressional candidate is provided with a comprehensive federal guide to campaign finance reporting, and that guide makes it abundantly clear that,
“If the original source of money for a candidate’s personal loan was a margin loan or a line of credit, it must be disclosed. Bank loans to candidates and loans derived from advances on a candidate’s brokerage accounts, credit cards, home equity line of credit, or other lines of credit obtained for use in connection with his or her campaign must be reported by the committee.”
If Cruz had not made criticizing Wall Street and the financial sector an important part of his Senate campaign, his failure to immediately disclose the Wall Street loan might look inadvertent. However, when one considers the carefully contrived story that, the while condemning Wall Street’s influence in Washington, the Cruz family cashed in all their assets to win a Senate race it appears Cruz is a typical evangelical Republican; a hypocrite, a liar, and a cheater.
Audio engineer and instructor for SAE. Writes op/ed commentary supporting Secular Humanist causes, and exposing suppression of women, the poor, and minorities. An advocate for freedom of religion and particularly, freedom of NO religion.
Born in the South, raised in the Mid-West and California for a well-rounded view of America; it doesn’t look good.
Former minister, lifelong musician, Mahayana Zen-Buddhist.