Ted Cruz Broke the Law

[Ebsy]

Ted Cruz Didn’t Disclose Loan From Goldman Sachs for His First Senate Campaign

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Senator Cruz's flagrant disrespect for our nations' laws is now clear.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

This does not bode well for Senator Cruz. I suspect everyone from Bush to Trump is giggling, though.

[Maxwell]

So is TRUMP going to completely sweep the Republican primaries? excellent news!

[Trapsy]

Ted Cruz Didn’t Disclose Loan From Goldman Sachs for His First Senate Campaign

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Senator Cruz's flagrant disrespect for our nations' laws is now clear.

Trump's ticket to victory.

[wolfsblood07]

I would not count Cruz out by any means. 

[Adam Griffin]

GOP primary voters - and in this case, Cruz's supporters specifically - aren't going to care one bit about this. Too many people within the GOP think that anyone should be able to spend any amount of money through any method in the electoral process: why would they be upset at him for "sticking it to the man"?

[Averroës Nix]

Even if this isn't significant, Cruz now has to cope with a headline that includes his name and GOLDMAN SACHS running just a couple of weeks before the caucuses. Not good, particularly for a candidate who has seen more than his share of negative stories over the past two weeks.

[yankeesfan]

The debate tomorrow may be fortuitous for resetting the news cycle.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

The debate tomorrow may be fortuitous for resetting the news cycle.

Or amplifying it, depending on how it goes.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

I though Democrats only cared about the Obamacare laws.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

And the obvious corruption of Ted Cruz comes out.

[Eraserhead]

Disturbing stuff.

[Sir Mohamed]

I would not count Cruz out by any means. 

You don’t have to count him out… it’s enough if he’s weakened seriously. However, I stay with my prediction that Rubio will be the nominee.

[wolfsblood07]

I would not count Cruz out by any means. 

You don’t have to count him out… it’s enough if he’s weakened seriously. However, I stay with my prediction that Rubio will be the nominee.

Rubio or Cruz would be great.  Who knows what crazy drama would play out in international affairs should Trump get in?  He would insult every world leader eventually.

[Brittain33]

GOP primary voters - and in this case, Cruz's supporters specifically - aren't going to care one bit about this.

[Torie]

The key unknown fact is whether the loan in question was properly underwritten. Was it a sweat heart loan made to buy influence, or one justified by the security put up or income stream or whatever? Sure, if the proceeds of the loan were used in the campaign, and he was legally required to report that, and he did not, he will have to explain that too. I am not sure however what his motive would have been to deliberately cover that up. I assume that it is legal to personally borrow money to finance your campaign.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

The key unknown fact is whether the loan in question was properly underwritten. Was it a sweat heart loan made to buy influence, or one justified by the security put up or income stream or whatever? Sure, if the proceeds of the loan were used in the campaign, and he was legally required to report that, and he did not, he will have to explain that too. I am not sure however what his motive would have been to deliberately cover that up. I assume that it is legal to personally borrow money to finance your campaign.

The loan was underwritten by the Cruz's investments and savings...  the same investments and savings that Cruz repeatedly claimed he and his wife had "liquidated" and put into his campaign. It is absolutely legal to personally borrow money to finance a campaign, but you have to tell the FEC that is what you did Cruz "forgot" that last bit. Oops.

The two things Cruz appears to have done "wrong":

1) failed to disclose the source of much of "his" campaign funds to the FEC

2) told voters he was using his own money, while campaigning against Goldman Sachs (which his wife worked for) when in fact he was funding his campaign via a loan from the very company he was railing against (secured by his own wealth).

The first is a flat-out violation of election law. Not that there's much of a penalty. The second is perfectly legal, but may or may not hurt his chances in future elections.

I suspect how this plays out will be heavily influenced by tonight's debate.

[Stranger in a strange land]

This also raises the question of how Cruz is funding his presidential campaign. No doubt opposition researchers are on that one...

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Well this is concerning.

[Free Bird]

But Hillary totally didn't...multiple times

[Maxwell]

I think it'll be hard for Ted Cruz to be President from a prison cell.

[Virginiá]

But Hillary totally didn't...multiple times

Yes, and so many go on and on about it. So when her GOP contenders also break the law, people will also talk about that. Clinton doing something is irrelevant in this discussion.

Always interesting why in some new Clinton 'scandal' threads, no one is ever like, "But Walker totally didn't", or "But Christie totally didn't", and so on.

[jimrtex]

The key unknown fact is whether the loan in question was properly underwritten. Was it a sweat heart loan made to buy influence, or one justified by the security put up or income stream or whatever? Sure, if the proceeds of the loan were used in the campaign, and he was legally required to report that, and he did not, he will have to explain that too. I am not sure however what his motive would have been to deliberately cover that up. I assume that it is legal to personally borrow money to finance your campaign.

Both loans were collateralized by brokerage accounts.

The concern would be if someone made a personal loan of more than $2500 to avoid contribution limits, and then later forgave the loan.

[Slow Learner]

I think it'll be hard for Ted Cruz to be President from a prison cell.

OMG LATTER DAY EUGENE DEBS!!!

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

The key unknown fact is whether the loan in question was properly underwritten. Was it a sweat heart loan made to buy influence, or one justified by the security put up or income stream or whatever? Sure, if the proceeds of the loan were used in the campaign, and he was legally required to report that, and he did not, he will have to explain that too. I am not sure however what his motive would have been to deliberately cover that up. I assume that it is legal to personally borrow money to finance your campaign.

Both loans were collateralized by brokerage accounts.

The concern would be if someone made a personal loan of more than $2500 to avoid contribution limits, and then later forgave the loan.

Actually, the concern is that Cruz didn't obey the law. But as it turns out, it doesn't seem like that will matter. Probably because none of his peers (on either side of the aisle) want to rock the boat with crazy ideas like "obeying the law".