The grassroots are in rebellion. The rebellion has yielded a two man race for the nomination for the highest office in the land. Of these two candidates, one seems to want to " unify" the party in order to save it. The other is accused of wanting to destroy the character of GOP. Thus, the contest now is said to be who can save the GOP?
But why accept this premise? Isn't that how the left likes to channel the discussion towards their policy goals? In other words, it is a trick.
The trick is to get the stepchild of the GOP, the grassroots, to care about the future of the GOP. But why should the grassroots care about this party? Hasn't it continually abused the grassroots to the limits of endurance? Why let them walk away with another victory?
If Trump ruins the GOP, maybe it needs to be "ruined". For if it's fixed and healthy now, we certainly don't seem to be happy with it. That was the reason for the rebellion in the first place. The grassroots are getting outfoxed and robbed of a victory which should be theirs. Cruz is betraying the grassroots by joining with the Establishment in an attempt to unify and save an "abusive parent" which doesn't deserve to be saved.
Cruz has gotten this far by rebelling against this Establishment. Instead of trying to unite with them, he should be finishing them off!
Defeat the Establishment, and then let them find another home. Welcome them back if they want to be more reasonable. Until that time, they are still the enemy.
I don't believe Cruz. I don't trust Cruz. It doesn't appear that many do. He alienates everyone, and then he tries to unite everybody? How? By changing the subject?
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, April 9, 2016
David Stockman's Contra Corner
Simple Janet Yellen Jabbering On The Edge Of A Live Volcano
Summary
Summary
- Markets have been churning, no real progress in 18 months
- During that time, earnings are down 18.5%
- Five straight quarters of decline in earnings, if projections for current quarter hold
- Inventories are surging
- Signs of recession abound, but markets bounce upward?
- Hence, the term dancing on the crater's edge
Yellen jabbering about full employment and low inflation. Neither claim tells the correct story.
Many people still unemployed. The real unemployment rate is much higher. Same with inflation. Middle class is getting hammered.
Yellen claims no bubble, but a debt bubble is colossal.
Yellen is right there with the casino operators of Wall Street, dancing on the edge of a live volcano.
Friday, April 8, 2016
Spacex lands first stage on barge
This is a first. It's the second time that they've recovered a first stage.
Now we get to see if they can refly it successfully. This could be a big day in history. Somehow, it doesn't do much for me. In a gloomy mood, I suppose.
There was or is a radio guy here in Houston who fond of saying "don't let anyone steal your joy". Maybe I just like being pissed off.
Now we get to see if they can refly it successfully. This could be a big day in history. Somehow, it doesn't do much for me. In a gloomy mood, I suppose.
There was or is a radio guy here in Houston who fond of saying "don't let anyone steal your joy". Maybe I just like being pissed off.
Who or What is Behind Trump’s Online Army?
Legal Insurrection
Here's another website that I have trusted. Maybe they have something here, maybe they don't. But this one I cannot track down myself, so I don't know whether or not they are making stuff up again.
But let's assume it's true. It doesn't have anything to do with my support of Trump. Nor does it have anything to do with my dislike of Cruz. The author seems to be attaching great significance to this.
But this goes further and once again, there is an attempt to blow it up into something else.
Anybody can do anything on the web.
That's something for everybody to keep in mind. The stuff you see on the web may not be what you think it is.
Here's another website that I have trusted. Maybe they have something here, maybe they don't. But this one I cannot track down myself, so I don't know whether or not they are making stuff up again.
But let's assume it's true. It doesn't have anything to do with my support of Trump. Nor does it have anything to do with my dislike of Cruz. The author seems to be attaching great significance to this.
But this goes further and once again, there is an attempt to blow it up into something else.
Anybody can do anything on the web.
That's something for everybody to keep in mind. The stuff you see on the web may not be what you think it is.
Trump has big lead in New York, but there's some warning signs
Just watching this now. Kinda like a death watch. Maybe things seem to be improving, but all of a sudden, things could take a turn for the worse. Then it is all over.
If he doesn't win a majority, he is going to lose a lot of delegates. He needs 'em all. He has to win statewide, and in each district. It is by no means certain that he will.
One thing I noticed, though. New Yorker GOP'ers like him. Not so much Cruz.
Wasn't it supposed to be the other way around? No? I guess that was yesterday's line.
He's dropping everything to spend time in New York. It is a sign of trouble.
How much time did Cruz spend in Texas? It was a foregone conclusion here.
I wish I didn't vote for the dude back then. He didn't get it in the primary, and if he's the nominee, he won't get it then either.
If he doesn't win a majority, he is going to lose a lot of delegates. He needs 'em all. He has to win statewide, and in each district. It is by no means certain that he will.
One thing I noticed, though. New Yorker GOP'ers like him. Not so much Cruz.
Wasn't it supposed to be the other way around? No? I guess that was yesterday's line.
He's dropping everything to spend time in New York. It is a sign of trouble.
How much time did Cruz spend in Texas? It was a foregone conclusion here.
I wish I didn't vote for the dude back then. He didn't get it in the primary, and if he's the nominee, he won't get it then either.
A disturbing thought while floating upon the vast wasteland once known as America
A rather harsh title, you might note. The condition though seems that way to me. A lot of blogs and info sources that I trusted are now on my fecal roster. How did this all happen?
The distrust in institutions has been documented elsewhere... Not unique to myself, this phenomenon.
There may well an inquisition to how such a dirty thing could have happened to us all, but I suspect that it will always fail to find the cause. The reason for that is that the TRUTH isn't being sought. No, the way it would be done instead is to find a scapegoat, and to place the blame squarely upon his unfortunate head.
That is what makes America a wasteland. There is no respect for truth, so anything goes. This isn't a revelation, I've mentioned it almost from the beginning of this blog, five and a half years ago.
What makes it seem worse now is that it is turning into a conviction for me. An utterly unswervingly true fact.
Lies cannot stand upon their own. All they are good for is to gain advantage. In the end, this is what is solely being sought, not in the kinds of things that can be good for something greater than the advantage being sought by the liar. It must bring collapse for it cannot stand upon its own.
The distrust in institutions has been documented elsewhere... Not unique to myself, this phenomenon.
There may well an inquisition to how such a dirty thing could have happened to us all, but I suspect that it will always fail to find the cause. The reason for that is that the TRUTH isn't being sought. No, the way it would be done instead is to find a scapegoat, and to place the blame squarely upon his unfortunate head.
That is what makes America a wasteland. There is no respect for truth, so anything goes. This isn't a revelation, I've mentioned it almost from the beginning of this blog, five and a half years ago.
What makes it seem worse now is that it is turning into a conviction for me. An utterly unswervingly true fact.
Lies cannot stand upon their own. All they are good for is to gain advantage. In the end, this is what is solely being sought, not in the kinds of things that can be good for something greater than the advantage being sought by the liar. It must bring collapse for it cannot stand upon its own.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
Changed the header
With all the garbage going down lately, I went deep into the blog for something that expresses the theme as well as anything else.
I understand Mark Twain became very pessimistic at the end of his life. Yeah, I can see why. Things have been on a downward trajectory for a long time.
One other thing to say....
You cannot count on churches to pull the country out of its spiritual crisis. The reason is that they are likely to be corrupted by money. I think Mark Twain seemed to understand this when he said the farmer preachers were the best. I think it is because they don't depend so much on money. They grow their own crops and so they can say what is in their hearts. If they depended upon money, then they would have to alter what they said in order to please those who hold the purse strings.
I understand Mark Twain became very pessimistic at the end of his life. Yeah, I can see why. Things have been on a downward trajectory for a long time.
One other thing to say....
You cannot count on churches to pull the country out of its spiritual crisis. The reason is that they are likely to be corrupted by money. I think Mark Twain seemed to understand this when he said the farmer preachers were the best. I think it is because they don't depend so much on money. They grow their own crops and so they can say what is in their hearts. If they depended upon money, then they would have to alter what they said in order to please those who hold the purse strings.
This kind of thing is disappointing
A lot of these guys are authors that I used to read regularly. It just seems like they cannot get it right for whatever reason.
Edward Morrissey used to have a blog called Captain's Quarters. I liked it and read it often. But here he is now saying junk like this:
Trump didn't say that he would punish women who had an abortion. The hypothetical question was posed about an anti-abortion law being passed, and he agreed that in such a scenario that punishment would have to occur if such a law were to be passed. Is Morrissey too dense to understand the difference between what would happen in a hypothetical scenario, and one in which Trump would seek to put into place as government policy? Surely he is not that dense. Or is he dense at all?
The way he poses this makes it look like Trump wants to punish women for having abortions. Contrast this to what the Cruz campaign was saying in attacking Trump for supporting abortion twenty years ago. Neither of these statements are right. Neither could be right simultaneously. He cannot be a pro-life zealot and a pro-abortion zealot at the same time. But that is what his critics were attempting to get people to believe. And it worked. They managed to get everybody mad at him for what he didn't say.
Trump's statements are being distorted, and I suspect that this is intentional. There is a word for this-- lying.
He then goes on to blame Trump for demolishing his own support. No. That's not what happened. His support was demolished by a non-stop anti-Trump bash-a-thon.
Capt. Ed, I hardly knew ye. You never know about people.
I read this article expecting that he would warn the GOP about what they just did to Trump. Silly me.
Edward Morrissey used to have a blog called Captain's Quarters. I liked it and read it often. But here he is now saying junk like this:
...then fumbled an abortion question in a manner not seen since Todd Akin, saying he would punish women who had an abortion, prompting pro-life groups around the country to denounce Trump.
Trump didn't say that he would punish women who had an abortion. The hypothetical question was posed about an anti-abortion law being passed, and he agreed that in such a scenario that punishment would have to occur if such a law were to be passed. Is Morrissey too dense to understand the difference between what would happen in a hypothetical scenario, and one in which Trump would seek to put into place as government policy? Surely he is not that dense. Or is he dense at all?
The way he poses this makes it look like Trump wants to punish women for having abortions. Contrast this to what the Cruz campaign was saying in attacking Trump for supporting abortion twenty years ago. Neither of these statements are right. Neither could be right simultaneously. He cannot be a pro-life zealot and a pro-abortion zealot at the same time. But that is what his critics were attempting to get people to believe. And it worked. They managed to get everybody mad at him for what he didn't say.
Trump's statements are being distorted, and I suspect that this is intentional. There is a word for this-- lying.
He then goes on to blame Trump for demolishing his own support. No. That's not what happened. His support was demolished by a non-stop anti-Trump bash-a-thon.
Capt. Ed, I hardly knew ye. You never know about people.
I read this article expecting that he would warn the GOP about what they just did to Trump. Silly me.
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Limbaugh says Cruz is "broadening his base"
Yeah, I don't doubt it a bit. He's being changed, as opposed to changing others. They're changing him, not him changing them. Got that?
I'm not joining the Limbaugh Cruz-Fan-Boy club.
I'm not joining the Limbaugh Cruz-Fan-Boy club.
Why I support Trump
For me, it was always about country. Trump said: no borders, no country. Will Trump build the wall? Maybe not, but I can almost guarantee that Cruz won't. Maybe Cruz would if he were to be pushed hard enough. But I suspect the wall is not a priority with him. Trump would have to bring considerable energy to get it done. Cruz would never do that.
Trump may be a little misguided about trade. I don't know one way or another. I suspect that some things need to be examined, though. In my study of the thorium energy proposition, it seems that our government's policy is directed towards ceding China the market for rare earths. For wherever you find thorium, you will likely find rare earths. The USA has plenty of thorium deposits. There's no excuse for that to happen. The mindless fear of radiation has given the anti-nukes the upper hand in not only stopping molten-salt reactors, but doing the so-called green propositions that will require rare earths. For example, the Tesla uses rare earths for its autos. It will require a champion to turn this around. Maybe Trump can be that champion.
I think Trump can keep his pledge to keep taxes low, but that may be a throwaway line. For me, it isn't a priority. For me, to raise taxes on corporations would be a good idea. They are getting too big for their britches, anyway. Note how they are pressuring states in changing their policies. These policies could have the support of the people, you see. They aren't to be allowed to do that. They do it too much anyway with their money. Generally, low taxes are better. But these should be for the people, not corporations. Trump is generally on the right track here. He needs to do better.
The muslim thing? It was a sensible proposal. Our government's policies aren't sensible. If we get people in office who are so much like the ones we already have, then how can these things change?
On the whole, Trump would do best for the country. That's the important thing. Therefore, the wall is paramount, rest, not so much. The rest can be bargained, but it can't be bargained with the people who are running things now. They have to be thrown out.
Trump may be a little misguided about trade. I don't know one way or another. I suspect that some things need to be examined, though. In my study of the thorium energy proposition, it seems that our government's policy is directed towards ceding China the market for rare earths. For wherever you find thorium, you will likely find rare earths. The USA has plenty of thorium deposits. There's no excuse for that to happen. The mindless fear of radiation has given the anti-nukes the upper hand in not only stopping molten-salt reactors, but doing the so-called green propositions that will require rare earths. For example, the Tesla uses rare earths for its autos. It will require a champion to turn this around. Maybe Trump can be that champion.
I think Trump can keep his pledge to keep taxes low, but that may be a throwaway line. For me, it isn't a priority. For me, to raise taxes on corporations would be a good idea. They are getting too big for their britches, anyway. Note how they are pressuring states in changing their policies. These policies could have the support of the people, you see. They aren't to be allowed to do that. They do it too much anyway with their money. Generally, low taxes are better. But these should be for the people, not corporations. Trump is generally on the right track here. He needs to do better.
The muslim thing? It was a sensible proposal. Our government's policies aren't sensible. If we get people in office who are so much like the ones we already have, then how can these things change?
On the whole, Trump would do best for the country. That's the important thing. Therefore, the wall is paramount, rest, not so much. The rest can be bargained, but it can't be bargained with the people who are running things now. They have to be thrown out.
New featured post section
On left sidebar. I wanted to feature more than one post, but blogger won't let me.
I chose what I chose in hopes that it may spur additional reading. There were 3 posts like it, all back to back, as I recall.
I suppose they can be combined into one big post, but I will leave it as is.
I chose what I chose in hopes that it may spur additional reading. There were 3 posts like it, all back to back, as I recall.
I suppose they can be combined into one big post, but I will leave it as is.
Palin's speech in Wisconsin
Yesterday, I wrote about the shallow nature of the public. To blame the public may be a bit unjust, but look who won last night. Didn't the Establishment want Cruz to win? And why? Do people really want the Establishment to win? Why do they want Cruz over Trump?
Why, why, why. You have to ask why.
Now for the video below. Much was made about the lack of applause. The author missed 1 line, which was about the cheeseheads. If you don't know what a "cheesehead" is, then the speech may have seemed nonsensical, and the rest written off as such. It is nonsensical only to someone who doesn't understand, or the claim was false, perhaps in a malicious way. But the speech was definitely not nonsensical, as was claimed by the Wapo writer. I watched the whole thing. It was a populist speech. True, there were only 4 applause lines, as opposed to the 3 that the Wapo writer claimed. However, it is still an error to claim only 3. He also mangled the quote. At least one. I suspect that it may have been deliberate, in order to make Palin look ridiculous. That in combination with the misquotes.
Reminds me of the scene in Brave New World. We are getting more and more like that dystopian future, in which the "controllers" can make someone or anyone look ridiculous at their whim. If they can make Palin look ridiculous, they can make Trump look ridiculous. If they can make Trump look ridiculous, they can certainly make Cruz look ridiculous.
In the movie, the word "why" was frowned upon. At least those people asked. Do people today even bother to ask?
Maybe I should have gone more into this yesterday. But would it have made any difference?
Why, why, why. You have to ask why.
Now for the video below. Much was made about the lack of applause. The author missed 1 line, which was about the cheeseheads. If you don't know what a "cheesehead" is, then the speech may have seemed nonsensical, and the rest written off as such. It is nonsensical only to someone who doesn't understand, or the claim was false, perhaps in a malicious way. But the speech was definitely not nonsensical, as was claimed by the Wapo writer. I watched the whole thing. It was a populist speech. True, there were only 4 applause lines, as opposed to the 3 that the Wapo writer claimed. However, it is still an error to claim only 3. He also mangled the quote. At least one. I suspect that it may have been deliberate, in order to make Palin look ridiculous. That in combination with the misquotes.
Reminds me of the scene in Brave New World. We are getting more and more like that dystopian future, in which the "controllers" can make someone or anyone look ridiculous at their whim. If they can make Palin look ridiculous, they can make Trump look ridiculous. If they can make Trump look ridiculous, they can certainly make Cruz look ridiculous.
In the movie, the word "why" was frowned upon. At least those people asked. Do people today even bother to ask?
Maybe I should have gone more into this yesterday. But would it have made any difference?
Cruz's complaint
Cruz complained that Trump received a lot of free publicity. He claimed an amazing number, which I think may have been exaggerated. It seems to me, though, that the publicity has gone negative, and it is favoring Cruz now. For how long?
Do these Cruz supporters think that Cruz is going to be able to withstand the barrage that Trump has had to withstand? Cruz will receive it, especially if he is perceived as the leader. He may well be the first to admit it. The front runner gets the heat. On the other hand, it's the underdog who gets some sympathy and help, like Cruz got. Especially if it all seems unfair, like Cruz's complaint seemed to indicate. Now the ones that supposedly helped Trump are now the ones helping Cruz. Trump says "unfair!", and he's right. How long will Cruz enjoy the favor of those who are now helping him?
The outcome in Wisconsin bugs me. Are people really that easy to manipulate?
Do these Cruz supporters think that Cruz is going to be able to withstand the barrage that Trump has had to withstand? Cruz will receive it, especially if he is perceived as the leader. He may well be the first to admit it. The front runner gets the heat. On the other hand, it's the underdog who gets some sympathy and help, like Cruz got. Especially if it all seems unfair, like Cruz's complaint seemed to indicate. Now the ones that supposedly helped Trump are now the ones helping Cruz. Trump says "unfair!", and he's right. How long will Cruz enjoy the favor of those who are now helping him?
The outcome in Wisconsin bugs me. Are people really that easy to manipulate?
Cruz victory is bad news
I know, I know. I'm in the minority. But if Cruz is so, so good, then why does he need falsehoods to win?
This only confirms what I wrote before, that democracy won't be able to solve problems like this. You have to have a diligent and thoughtful public who can counter the machinations of the powers-that-be. People are too shallow to get beyond the paper-thin rhetoric.
Just thought of something. Maybe they don't think Cruz is so good, but that Trump is bad.
To counter this, Trump could try something different, but I get the impression that he won't. He could have put away Cruz last night, but he didn't. If there's any valid reason for his defeat, it is that one.
This only confirms what I wrote before, that democracy won't be able to solve problems like this. You have to have a diligent and thoughtful public who can counter the machinations of the powers-that-be. People are too shallow to get beyond the paper-thin rhetoric.
Just thought of something. Maybe they don't think Cruz is so good, but that Trump is bad.
To counter this, Trump could try something different, but I get the impression that he won't. He could have put away Cruz last night, but he didn't. If there's any valid reason for his defeat, it is that one.
Tuesday, April 5, 2016
If this doesn't wake you up, then it can't be done
Limbaugh said something amazing. He's the quote, lifted off his website:
Did he mean to say that all these so-called conservatives care about is fundraising? That they'd rather lose, because in losing, they can raise more money? Is that what it is about, then, is the money? Not in defeating Hillary, per se?
You have to a ask yourselves that. If you cannot, or won't, then you cannot be reached. No argument can reach you because whatever reason you are doing what you are doing, it has nothing to do with defeating the left.
'Cause I am here to tell you that there are some in the conservative movement who will not be unhappy at all if Hillary Clinton becomes president because they can keep their fundraising up.
Did he mean to say that all these so-called conservatives care about is fundraising? That they'd rather lose, because in losing, they can raise more money? Is that what it is about, then, is the money? Not in defeating Hillary, per se?
You have to a ask yourselves that. If you cannot, or won't, then you cannot be reached. No argument can reach you because whatever reason you are doing what you are doing, it has nothing to do with defeating the left.
I dunno, I guess certain people are just shallow
As mentioned several times, it is non-stop Trump bashing out there.
But if anybody bothered to fact check NEWS SOURCES, one might be stunned at the inaccuracies.
Stop and consider that for a moment. The need for fact checking a news source.
I got into the report on Sarah Palin's speech, which is criticized for what exactly I don't know, but before I could get a couple minutes into the YouTube video, I found at least two errors. It is typical of what I've been finding in the anti-Trump bash-a-thon.
So, I am wondering. Fundamental things, like basic quotes are wrong. Did the author actually listen to the speech? As for his readers, do they read more than the headline? Perhaps not. But this is from a major news source. You should expect a high degree of professionalism, not a non-story littered with errors. No, these aren't typos. These are actual important points of fact. So, it is either lazy, hyper biased, or just plain out-and-out lying.
People know that the media is biased, so I am hoping this stuff will get dismissed. Hopefully the majority isn't this... ( I can't think of the word, maybe stupid.)
But what if it isn't? Can people be that shallow and refuse to do their homework?
We'll see. None of the critics seems to be able to get their stories straight. At least, none of the ones I've seen. Seems like every time I dig into them, I find a whole lotta nothing.
But if anybody bothered to fact check NEWS SOURCES, one might be stunned at the inaccuracies.
Stop and consider that for a moment. The need for fact checking a news source.
I got into the report on Sarah Palin's speech, which is criticized for what exactly I don't know, but before I could get a couple minutes into the YouTube video, I found at least two errors. It is typical of what I've been finding in the anti-Trump bash-a-thon.
So, I am wondering. Fundamental things, like basic quotes are wrong. Did the author actually listen to the speech? As for his readers, do they read more than the headline? Perhaps not. But this is from a major news source. You should expect a high degree of professionalism, not a non-story littered with errors. No, these aren't typos. These are actual important points of fact. So, it is either lazy, hyper biased, or just plain out-and-out lying.
People know that the media is biased, so I am hoping this stuff will get dismissed. Hopefully the majority isn't this... ( I can't think of the word, maybe stupid.)
But what if it isn't? Can people be that shallow and refuse to do their homework?
We'll see. None of the critics seems to be able to get their stories straight. At least, none of the ones I've seen. Seems like every time I dig into them, I find a whole lotta nothing.
Monday, April 4, 2016
Weak
So, I'm supposed to make decisions based upon whether someone will like me for it? Secondly, anybody can say anything on the internet. Thirdly, the ones making the insults in public are you guys. These insults may be fake, like you guys.
I'd figure these guys would have more than this. They got nothing. This is pathetic.
I'd figure these guys would have more than this. They got nothing. This is pathetic.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
Tiberius Syndrome
This post from about four years ago, was later dubbed by me as the Tiberius Syndrome. It reflects a type of poor leadership that eventually destroyed the Roman Empire.
Why is it poor leadership? A good leader should be the type of leader who puts the interest of others before self. Now, this idea isn't new. But it often gets twisted right back into the TS. Hence, you have leaders who pretend to do what is good for all, yet serve primarily their own interests, as Tiberius did in ancient Rome. The people are lucky if they get a leader who truly leads his people well.
Democracy isn't an answer for it. What is? The scary thing is that there may not be an answer. Even the best run countries eventually fall prey to leaders who run their countries right into the ground. Without the leadership, the people are doomed.
It may well be the case that western civilization has had a good run, but that run is coming to an end.
Unless a solution is found, things will get worse until it collapses. It will be a lot like Rome, because it is afflicted with the same problem, and no solution has been found.
Rome had checks and balances. Rome had elements of democracy. Rome had a Republic. It all failed. History is merely repeating itself. There is nothing new under the sun
The song is optimistic, but optimism doesn't last.
Why is it poor leadership? A good leader should be the type of leader who puts the interest of others before self. Now, this idea isn't new. But it often gets twisted right back into the TS. Hence, you have leaders who pretend to do what is good for all, yet serve primarily their own interests, as Tiberius did in ancient Rome. The people are lucky if they get a leader who truly leads his people well.
Democracy isn't an answer for it. What is? The scary thing is that there may not be an answer. Even the best run countries eventually fall prey to leaders who run their countries right into the ground. Without the leadership, the people are doomed.
It may well be the case that western civilization has had a good run, but that run is coming to an end.
Unless a solution is found, things will get worse until it collapses. It will be a lot like Rome, because it is afflicted with the same problem, and no solution has been found.
Rome had checks and balances. Rome had elements of democracy. Rome had a Republic. It all failed. History is merely repeating itself. There is nothing new under the sun
The song is optimistic, but optimism doesn't last.
Don't wanna go National Enquirer here, but...
There are more reports coming out on Ted Cruz, and this time, there may be something that means something. On the other hand, maybe it doesn't.
The link above shows some phone logs of a DC madam, which another post on another site, who claims that these phone numbers on the log belong to the Knight In Shining Armor, Teddie Cruz.
There are links to support the story, and it made the news link list on Memorandum, so that's good enough for me to start writing.
There is something known as the Thing, which may be pics of Cruz with certain women not his wife.
More coming? Probably. The more I dig, the more I find.
Cruz could be on his way out. This has legs, no pun intended. The same story also appears to involve Sen. Vitter of Louisiana. There were far more records than his, but those records were suppressed.
Update:
Here's a link in defense of Cruz. But the defense doesn't clear him, in my opinion. It only introduces some doubt.
It is also blaming Trump again. That hasn't been established, either.
What the defense comes down to is whether or not the numbers can be traced to Cruz If they can't, then Cruz may be safe. But there may be more lurking out there.
Another tactic this defense uses is the matter of personal dislike. I have grown to dislike Cruz because he is amplifying the attacks of those who I question, and the attacks lack substance.
The link above shows some phone logs of a DC madam, which another post on another site, who claims that these phone numbers on the log belong to the Knight In Shining Armor, Teddie Cruz.
There are links to support the story, and it made the news link list on Memorandum, so that's good enough for me to start writing.
There is something known as the Thing, which may be pics of Cruz with certain women not his wife.
More coming? Probably. The more I dig, the more I find.
Cruz could be on his way out. This has legs, no pun intended. The same story also appears to involve Sen. Vitter of Louisiana. There were far more records than his, but those records were suppressed.
Update:
Here's a link in defense of Cruz. But the defense doesn't clear him, in my opinion. It only introduces some doubt.
It is also blaming Trump again. That hasn't been established, either.
What the defense comes down to is whether or not the numbers can be traced to Cruz If they can't, then Cruz may be safe. But there may be more lurking out there.
Another tactic this defense uses is the matter of personal dislike. I have grown to dislike Cruz because he is amplifying the attacks of those who I question, and the attacks lack substance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)