Why Senator Cruz' Undisclosed Goldman Loan Is A Real Problem
The recent revelation that Republican hopeful Ted Cruz failed to disclose a 2012 $1 million loan from the Wall Street investment bank, Goldman Sachs, raises legitimate legal concerns, and could spell trouble for the presidential hopeful. As Mediaite.com's Rachel Stockman reports (via LawNewz.com),
The New York Times first reported that campaign disclosure reports show that before a scheduled run-off in the May 2012 senatorial election, Cruz received a low-interest loan from his wife’s bank, which his campaign committee never reported to the Federal Election Commission.
The Cruz camp is brushing this all off as a BIG oversight. Cruz promised to immediately amend the filing if there were any problems. The Texas Senator said that he and his wife put their liquid net worth into the campaign and the loans in question were “disclosed over and over and over again.”
That’s great but here’s the problem: what he did could still be a violation of federal law.
Here is what Cruz told CNN last night:
“The fact that the information was out there somewhere doesn’t negate the fact that it wasn’t disclosed on the candidate’s campaign disclosure… that’s a violation of federal law,” Paul Ryan with The Campaign Legal Center told LawNewz.com. The group is a nonpartisan, and goes after Republicans and Democrats alike for campaign finance violations.
To be clear, here’s the federal law that Cruz may have violated:
52 USC 30104 (b)(2) (6) requires the committee of a federal candidate to disclose on a report filed “loans made by or guaranteed by the candidate” and 52 USC 30104(b)(4)(d) requires the reporting of “repayment of loans made by or guaranteed by the candidate”
So the question is, what can happen next? Clearly someone will have to file an official complaint (I have no doubt that will happen). If they do, the FEC could impose fines.
The real problem for Cruz is if evidence somehow emerges that this was ‘knowing and willful.’ If that could be demonstrated, then Cruz could potentially be prosecuted criminally by the U.S. Department of Justice, according to campaign finance experts. Cruz insists that it’s not.
“The bottom line – any money that is obtained or received to fund a campaign needs to be reported,” Ryan said.
As Martin Armstrong concludes,
The dishonesty here is that Cruz has pretended to stand against the bankers. “Like many other players on Wall Street and big business, they seek out and get special favors from government,” Cruz told the New York Times previously. How dishonest is this statement and then forgetting to report a loan from Goldman Sachs? His wife Heidi, is a managing director at Goldman Sachs and has taken a temporary “leave”during his presidential campaign.
I am sorry. But Cruz is bought and paid for and would be in the pocket of the New York Banks no different than Hillary, Bush, or the rest of them who take money from this crowd. You do not forget to report a loan from Goldman Sachs when your wife is a managing director. Come on. How stupid do we have to be to entertain this excuse?
(27 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Let me get this straight. It was a margin loan against the assets in their account. I am not a fan of the system or the parties, but a margin loan? Not the best financial advise I would give, but I do not see this a special treatment. The readers on this site should get that. NOW the wife working there is another issue, I do see a problem with that access.
I don't think it was the ideal structure, but given the timing pressures of campaign expenses and the time frames for underwriting a new loan it may very well have been the most expedient option, since it would simply be utilizing an existing line of personal credit.
I think the shit storm is overblown is overblown, if, in fact, what he did was personally loan his own campaign money by drawing down an existing personal line of credit. Who his broker was is largely irrelevant, unless they relaxed lending guidelines and terms beyond what they already do for employees (which bites them and their employees in the ass every time GS stock takes a nose dive). But we won't know until the amended filings are released.
"unless they relaxed lending guidelines and terms beyond what they already do for employees"
not that it matters what law(s) she breaks but didn't someone do this for hrc to buy her (/their) ny home to be able to run for senate?
It was a source of finance for the campaign. The law states very specifically that is what it is required to report.
Otherwise, voters could get the idea that no bank had any hold on him, as his rhetoric proclaimed. It is a conflict of interest, not just the appearance. It is a violation of the law, a violation covering up exactly what the law was intended to prevent.
"It's A-OK when the politician promising ME what I want breaks the law; but, NOT any other candidate!"
( quote variously attributed to Clinton supporters, Cruz supporters, and most other hypocritical douchebags )
No, the candidate was the source of finance for the campaign, not GS. If GS had directly loaned the campaign money that would be a different matter, but the actual evidence so far points to too many people getting their panties in a bunch over the GS name (I wonder how the outcry would differ had he used fungible money from margin in an etrade account to self finance his campaign...)
The law is quite specific, and no one outside of the JEW YORK TIMES and TINFOIL TYLER appears to be alleging that GS loaned the campaign money.
Mr. and Mrs. Cruz are NOT stupid.
They have a staff including expensive specialty lawyers that damned well know what the rules are.
THEY BROKE THE LAW WHEN THEY PURPOSEFULLY LIED BY OMISSION.
YOU BROKE THE LAW. Any competent US Attorney could have you convicted and jailed for 10 years. But don't take it personally, it's a byproduct of being a natural person and intended function of US legal system.
You're also correct that Cruz does have a specialty staff (intelligence... I won't go near, but if YOU are intelligent, that assertion should have made YOU stop and think)
See page 3 (Column A - Total for this period, Line 13A - LOANS made or guaranteed by the candidate) - THIS LOAN WAS DECLARED.
Like I said elsewhere, Tinfoil Tyler and the Jew York Times royally jumped the shark here.
Given the complexity of US laws there could be some other form that wasn't filled out correctly or there could be some missing attachment... It's not my area of expertise, but factually GS did not loan the Cruz campaign money, and the Cruz campaign did disclose the existence of the loan to the FEC, on FEC Form 3, dated July 15 2012 stating that Cruz had loaned his campaign 960,000 during the Q2 filing period.
--
What's sad is that ALL THIS INFORMATION was available to anyone with an internet connection prior to my actually getting off my ass and looking it up (and it only cost about 5 minutes of my time).
All anyone needs to do is plug Committee ID: C00492785 into http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/candcmte_info.shtml?tabIndex=3
I am with you UR. I don't get the big stink. He took out a margin loan against stock he owned.
POS, wife was Goldman MD and CFR member - but he's a real "outsider"
ding ding ding... strike 2 you r out cruz.
strike one really and it is not the gs story
Edit: we are so friggin railroaded, the voting booth is hopeless. Yea Trump! Gag! Hopeless!
George Carlin: Why I Don't Vote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxsQ7jJJcEA
George Carlin: The American Dream
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY
Yea George.
Need a write in candidate groundswell big enough to swamp the diebold put. if that is even possible. They system/scheme is dead. Everybody's awake now
and would not make any difference, this system will not allow piecemeal reform from the inside. Cabals are open, evolving systems of considerable complexity at that level and so grow and adapt.
One of the Tarpley videos I watched last night states that the locus of the Cabal has shifted out of the Israeli-Neocon criminal network to Brzynscki's CFR. Tarpley seems to track those things, I have no idea and no way to judge except judging the man and his scholarship in areas I can evaluate. Tarpley seems solid, despite not liking Ron Paul. And I can see why, 9/11 : Paul calls for an investigation, avoids the stronger argument that would invalidate the government the way Paul supports.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tef2UDN_2k
Allen and that part of the cabal, the "nuke them til they glo" crowd is still in power behind a foreign policy that merely shifts some of our terrorist efforts north a way, and certainly doesn't stop them through Russia's southern borders, ISIS phase of Gladio.
I'll watch that later, still trying to figure out the power structure players
America is in the way of the nwo and they cant get control w the 2nd amend still working. The Neocons trying to keep us hedgemony while staring at full blown us demographic crisis coming up fast. Standing army and prepetual war to keep power. Lots of thrashing around before the bad ending which is inevitable.
We dont survive as a rep republic at this rate. And that ties in somewhere. Lots of groups working to that end anyway.
And most people are completely with the obama sotu diatribe that we are doing great, un real times... to contradict my previous statement abt being awake, lol they are not all awake
We have to tkae the government down. A general strike will do it. Follow up with stopping airports. All this is trivial, all we have to do is talk them up as the solution for when we are finally fed up.
Our government is not competent, and so will inevitably cause an outrage. So far, they are winning the public PR campaign, but not the one happening behind the scenes, like this is.
They have to keep pushing the envelope, the feds, because they need the initiative, we are catching on faster than their chaos envelops us. So of course they will do something violently stupid, and that will be the trigger. Just make sure everyone knows to drop everything and conferge on the nearest public space. Then the media is ours and we are on the way to ending this government.
General strike, then their airports. Can't run an oligarchy without general air traffic.
Cruz was not even at the vote for audit of the fed thus he voted "No". He is an elite for the elite and no different than Hillary...
Ted Cruz Co-Sponsored the bill, ya douchebag!
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s2232
So that explains him not showing up for the vote?
"Since when did it become illegal be bet against your own team and then throw the game?!"
- Ted 'Pete Rose' Cruz
And then he didn't vote on it.
It says so right at your own link.
I guess cows don't reeed two gud.
No Vote R Cruz, Ted TXDid I say he voted for it? He was campaigning. if he was against it, would he sponsor it?
Who doesn't read well?
Why cosponsor a bill and then not vote on the damn thing?
Oh, that's because its all for show you bloviating bovine.
The fact that McCain voted yea is proof positive that there was no chance of passage in the first place.
McShitstain is a master of voting to look good at home after vote counting, he only votes with TPTB when it's close.
you got that right any chance this passes and McCain would be first in line with a NO vote...
Cruz is finished as a candidate.
Ted BARELY qualifies for naturalization - forget natural born status. Everything he said in the debate about the issue was weasel-words; his debate lies answered in FULL:
http://trumpcampaignanalysis.blogspot.com/
Protections against divided loyalties:
1. American mother
2. American father
3. Born in America
4. No foreign ties or allegiances
Ted gets 1 of the 4, but he's 'natural born'? Is that what the founders intended? Their intentions weren't _crystal clear_, but we do have this (From Congressional Research Service):
"In 1825, in a significant and widely recognized work on the Constitution, William Rawle specifically noted that the term “natural born citizen” as used in the Constitution would include “every person born within the United States ...whether the parents are citizens or aliens....”
Anchor babies have a stronger claim to eligibility than Ted does.
Ted is more qualified to run for Prime Minister of Canada.
At least he could then run as an outsider.......ohhh....wait.
He only gave up his Canadian citizenship recently. Another dual shit-i-zen.
are you mentally handicapped? you think that Cruz is done as a candidate when he possess more legitimatcy to be president than Barack Hussein Obama, the two term president?
GeezTyler, where are you getting these morons from? Huffpost?
You can go back into "edit" and delete your moronic post if you want.
As compared to the fact that both are lying shits, I find these issues irrelevant, tho likely true precisely because they are.
I think you'd probably get some debate about that interpretation of what constitutes a citizen. The 14th amendment is pretty clear about aliens and others who are under the jurisdiction of other countries. The 14th amendment says nothing about anchor babies, in fact it goes to great lengths to exclude aliens (diplomats, soldiers etc) from being considered since they're under the jurisdiction of another country.
The Tea Trash claim Cruz is one of them, a Washington "outsider."
Cruz undergrad at Princeton, grad school at Harvard. Wife an MD at Goldman Sachs.
Yes, right- a "maverick" if I've ever seen one.
Princeton/Harvard/Goldman Sachs trumps the entire Democratic field *combined.*
Tea Trash are so ignorant I wonder how they remember to breathe.
That's why the GOP elites and Wall Street LOVE Tea Baggers. They are SO easily manipulated and infiltrated.
If all the billionaires in the US lived in the same county they could not elect a dog catcher.
Tea Trash + anti-black Racists are the key.
Cruz lied to the Tea Party.
His supporters may very well NOT have supported him if he had honestly disclosed the enormous Goldman and Citi loans on the legally required campaign financing affidavits.
The Tea Party -and everyone else that believed he was being transparant and honest- got fucked by this criminal douche.
He's none of those things...He's, he's... TED CRUZ, Duck Hunter:
http://img.opposingviews.com/sites/default/files/styles/402x250/public/f...
Many of them are not stupid. But, they have an agenda.
He worked on GWBs campaign in 2000, he's been either in academia, as an aide to the SCOTUS, or on the government teat as an elected official. I believe he spent a whopping two years in the private sector.
Fuck Cruz.
With ALL the rules and regs one has to live by in this day and age.....
It is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE that Cruz didnt fill out one of the MANY pieces of paper our FUCKED UP GOVERNMENT produces.... and now, being CRUZified for it!
poor little teddy...........
"Those who hate Israel hate America," he added, prompting more boos and heckling.
As the crowd continued to shout, Cruz said, "If you will not stand with Israel and the Jews, then I will not stand with you," and then left the stage. --Jon Terbush
http://theweek.com/speedreads/446504/ted-cruz-booed-stage-defending-isra...
Well, ya see that's kinda how it works... You take $$$ from the Squid, you sorta have to toe the (Zionist) line. Let's see if the usurious octopus helps the poor dispensationalist Goy or leaves him twisting in the wind...
http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/canadian.jpg
He has the strained look of someone firmly impaled on GS's 'influence' - aka 'The Hidden Hand' of the 'Free Market'.
If Ted Cruz is going to be prosecuted by Obama's POS Justice Dept, it damn well better be after Hitlery is behind bars.
That would be a first. she gets indicted and pardoned on the same day. They throw their cards in the air, walk away.
The worse it gets the stronger the idiot party gets.
3rd party, actually just really another party than the D/R party
JUst like Hillary, he's done. Stick a fork in both of them
Perhaps he''ll promise a joint presidency with his wife and Goldman.
The first Menage A Trois Presidency.
EDIT: Actually....they've ALL been Menage a Trois Presidencies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1792
http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Panic_of_1792
The Panic of 1792 was a financial credit crisis that occurred during March and April of 1792. William Duer and Alexander Macomb speculated against stock held by the Bank of New York.[1] In the background, the first Bank of the United States engaged in a large credit expansion and so fueled the wave of speculation. But at the time of the Panic in 1792 the Bank of the United States was not functional and so Hamilton had to rely on the Bank of New York.
Hamilton’s crisis management in 1791 and 1792 may illustrate the moral hazard problem that is ever present in financial crisis management. By coming to the aid of the markets in 1791, Hamilton may have encouraged the speculative bubble of 1792 by making market participants believe that there was something like a "Hamilton put" on the table. Two centuries later, it was said that Alan Greenspan’s similar actions in dealing with the Asian, Russian, and LTCM crises of the 1990s created the notion of a "Greenspan put" that fueled the so-called dot com bubble of the late 1990s. Effective management of a financial crisis may sow the seeds of another one. Hamilton invented here what in time would be termed Bagehot’s rules for how a central bank should act in a crisis some nine decades before Bagehot rediscovered them.[2]
A consequence from the panic of 1792 occurred May 17th of that year when twenty-four broker-dealers of New York met under a buttonwood tree on Wall Street and signed an agreement to trade with each other on preferential terms. This is often regarded by many, including the NYSE itself, as the origin or founding of the New York Stock Exchange.