The Establishment Loves Cruz, Right?

[gdpetti]

John Boehner Calls Ted Cruz "A Miserable Son Of A Bitch, Lucifer In The Flesh"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/28/2016 14:54 -0400

Is the establishment's fervent hatred of Donald Trump starting a U-turn? It's still too early to know, however at least one core Republican, former house speaker John Boehner, has made it very clear he is not a fan of Ted Cruz. At all. So much so that according to NBC the former Republican House Speaker told an audience at Stanford University Wednesday that the Texas senator is "Lucifer in the flesh" and a "miserable son of a bitch."

When asked about the 2016 presidential candidate at a forum hosted by Stanford in Government and the Stanford Speakers Bureau, Boehner drew laughter for making a face of disgust, according to the Stanford Daily.

"Lucifer in the flesh," Boehner said cited by the paper. "I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life."

Boehner's shocking statement came because he was urged by the event's moderator, Professor David M. Kennedy, to be frank because the event was not being broadcasted. Perhaps Boehner did not realize people were still taking notes.

Curiously, and an indication that the GOP faithful may be turning in their support for Trump, the former Ohio lawmaker had kinder words for his "texting buddy" Donald Trump, with whom Boehner has played golf with for "years."

And a surprising admission: Boehner said he'd vote for Donald Trump in the general election if he were the Republican nominee, but he would not vote for Ted Cruz.

Actually we take that back: the establishment is turning in their support of Trump.

Boehner also said John Kasich was a "friend" too, although he suggested that the relationship takes "more effort" than others. "[Kasich] requires more effort on my behalf than all my other friends … but he's still my friend, and I love him," Boehner said.

As the Hill reminds us, Cruz was a thorn in Boehner's side during several standoffs with the Obama administration, and some of his actions likely cost Boehner support from his own conference. Cruz met with House members of the conservative Freedom Caucus — an unusual move for a freshman senator — in 2013 and pushed them to fight to defund ObamaCare. The effort eventually led to a government shutdown that hurt the GOP. Boehner reportedly called Cruz a “jackass” over the issue.

At Stanford, a Boehner unburdened by the shackles of the office reportedly garnered laughter and smiles from the attendees as he struck a more informal tone than in most of his past previous appearances.

==============
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-28/john-boehner-calls-ted-cruz-miserable-son-bitch-lucifer-flesh

 

[gdpetti]

Oh, lookie, lookie, here's another one: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-28/did-bernie-sanders-just-go-full-establishment

Did Bernie Sanders Just Go Full Establishment?

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/28/2016 12:51 -0400
Submitted by Michaela Whitton via TheAntiMedia.org,

Comments made by Bernie Sanders this week may just have blindsided and disillusioned swathes of his support base.

Some of those with higher expectations of the ‘peacenik’ candidate breathed a collective sigh of disappointment after he endorsed Obama’s extrajudicial drone assassination program.

At the same time, the Democratic candidate backed the recent deployment of 250 U.S. troops to further death and destruction in Syria. During the town hall meeting at Philadelphia’s National Constitution centre, he told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes that the people of the United States have a right to defend themselves. The warmongering endorsement, which could have easily slid under the radar, was slotted into a much wider discussion that included vote-winners like Planned Parenthood, violence against women, marijuana, and gun control.

Despite acknowledging he would do everything to avoid perpetual war in the Middle East, when asked if he would he keep the government’s secret “kill list” if he were to become President, the “progressive” candidate was unhesitant:

“Look. Terrorism is a very serious issue. There are people out there who want to kill Americans, who want to attack this country, and I think we have a lot of right to defend ourselves,” he said.

Asked if he thinks the current method in which the White House decides which suspected terrorists are added to the ‘kill list’ is constitutional and legal, he added:

“In general I do, yes.”

While some Bernie supporters came to the slow and painful realisation that there are no saviours, others took to Twitter and accused him of being a quasi-socialist warmonger and brutal imperialist.

It appears that soon, the only ones ‘feeling the Bern’ will be the families killed by the drone programme that he fully supports.

===================

And this is the establishment complaining about Trump?!

 

[gdpetti]

And the gift keeps giving... the insanity must not stop!

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-28/ted-lucifer-cruz-responds-john-boehner


Ted "Lucifer" Cruz Responds To John Boehner

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/28/2016 12:17 -0400



It didn't take long for a suddenly dejected by the establishment Ted Cruz to respond to John Boehner's allegation that the presidential candidate is "Lucifer in the flesh" and that he has "never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life."

According to The Hill, Cruz dismissed the harsh criticism, brushing off the remarks from the establishment figure. Cruz shared a pair of tweets labeling the criticism an "endorsement" coming from Boehner.

This is the biggest Ted Cruz endorsement ever. https://t.co/U5ODfoq9e7

— Michael Berry (@MichaelBerrySho) April 28, 2016

Best endorsement for Cruz yet. The establishment loathes the man. https://t.co/n5TjKkkPK8

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) April 28, 2016

His rhetorical question was who would stand up to Washington, Trump or Cruz.

Tell me again who will stand up to Washington? Trump, who's Boehner's "texting and golfing buddy," or Carly & me? https://t.co/qvYPSaTEV7

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) April 28, 2016

Washington may be a toss up, but when it comes to who would not stand up to Goldman Sachs, the answer is clear.

===========
That last phrase "the answer is clear" is a link to this: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-15/why-senator-cruz-undisclosed-goldman-loan-real-problem

Why Senator Cruz' Undisclosed Goldman Loan Is A Real Problem
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/15/2016 13:21 -0400

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?

===================
===================



====
So, 2016 Jesse Ventura/Cynthia McKinney is starting to look like a calk walk, no?