You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Sen. Cruz in Full Backstabber Mode: President Trump Of Using ‘Irresponsible Rhetoric'
2021-02-02
[OANN] One of the Trump administration's staunchest allies has turned his back on the President. During the most recent episode of "The Verdict with Ted Cruz" last week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) accused President Trump of "irresponsible rhetoric."

Cruz went on to back down on previous claims that rampant voter fraud changed the results of the election.

"He said over and over again, he won by a landslide, there was massive fraud, it was all stolen everywhere," Cruz stated. "That evidence, the campaign did not prove that in any court. To make a determination about an election it has to be based on the evidence, and so simply saying the result you want, that’s not responsible and you’ve never heard me use language like that."

Several weeks ago, Cruz lead the push to expose voter fraud in battleground states. Some are saying his remarks could be seen as a betrayal.



Check out the brutal replies to Teddy's acceptance of fraud

Related:
Ted Cruz: 2021-02-01 Democrats ready to go it alone on next round of coronavirus aid
Ted Cruz: 2021-01-28 What to do with Trump terrorists
Ted Cruz: 2021-01-23 A bipartisan group of senators is urging Biden's win be certified
Posted by:Woodrow

#22  Woodrow, I think my comment speak for themselves. I'm a fan to Trump but he doesn't walk on water. A mistake is a mistake.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2021-02-02 23:46  

#21  Woodrow. Would you give us your slate of "acceptable" candidates?
Posted by: Frank G   2021-02-02 20:18  

#20  IIRC, it was told the evidence would be presented during the confirmation process, but then "Capital Riot".

Doesn't seem to be an opinion either on the middle of the night confirmation procedure. No I'm not suggesting Xiden is illegitimate because procedures. Yes I agree extraordinary claims need matching evidence.

What I am pointing out is that there were multiple attempts to present evidence, and all cases were rejected by the various courts, up to and including twice by The Supreme Court. And deplatformed. And blacklisted.

The closest they got was some sort of pretend Grand Jury for Guiliani.

If The Play is to be regarded as legally binding, then any evidence presented by Team Trump must also be regarded as legally binding.

And who knows, I've been fooled by what a speaker intends and how it looks as text before, and there are hits out for Cruz, who I have more than generally agreed with over the years. I mean, how to your accuse someone of an incitement to violence without mentioning motive?
Posted by: swksvolFF   2021-02-02 18:08  

#19  #11 I'm still a fan of Cruz. Talking about the landslide victory combined with lawsuits that never actually claimed major fraud sounds irresponsible to me.

Big fan of Rinos at the deep state zoo?
Posted by: Woodrow   2021-02-02 17:16  

#18  swksvolFF, this guys suggests Rudy didn't intend to present the big evidence but just samples of dead voters.

Could just be a hit piece but if true it explains a lot.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2021-02-02 16:38  

#17  Could be the olde institution protects itself deal.

Be a bit embarrassing if during their play, one of the accusers pleads the 5th.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2021-02-02 15:26  

#16  Fanatic assholes are now trying to force out a goo conservative from Congress only to see them replaced with a Democrat. Perdue and Loeffler were not solid as Cruz and yet you asshole fanatics say it out and got 6 years of Issof and 2 years minimum of an outright socialist in their place.

Stop being stupid. You’re destroying a constitutional conservative and what will you get in his place? Idiots like you will be the death of this nation.

I have a question: what did Cruz say that was incorrect? Trump’s people made big claims but have yet to produce admissible legal evidence that show the SCOPE for such claims. Prove your case or shut the fuck up.

There are multiple cases to be made, in multiple places, but your paranoid delusional accusations of a massive conspiracy are resulting in the dismissal of the real work of real actions against the real fraudulent actors who are a all at various local positions. Until and unless you can credibly produce evidence of a conspiracy AND the capos that run it, you’re wasting time and credibility. Go after these criminals like the mafia: start at the bottom and peel it back until you get the bosses.

And stop destroying allies. Disagreements are not “backstabbing” or “betrayal”, unless you have suspended all of your intellectual capabilities and are acting like a progressive, silencing and threatening anyone that differs in even the smallest way with your rigid dogma and loyalty demands.
Posted by: Greater the Anonymous5721   2021-02-02 15:21  

#15  Disappointing, but not unexpected. Appears to be some sort of Kommandobefehl (take no prisoners order), quietly being passed among the ranks.
Posted by: Besoeker   2021-02-02 13:09  

#14  Always knew it. One look at his rat face is enough.
Posted by: Dron66046   2021-02-02 12:59  

#13  Something something no court would take the case so no evidence presented.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2021-02-02 11:46  

#12  Here is an interesting point. The Congress and Senate are judging the president. Clearly the judges are not imp[atrial, since they have said he must be tried and found guilty. Interesting how someone who is a judge can convict pre trial. All of the senators that were out loud about his trial and conviction need to be put on the stand and made to answer for their actions, pre trial.
Posted by: 49 Pan   2021-02-02 11:35  

#11  I'm still a fan of Cruz. Talking about the landslide victory combined with lawsuits that never actually claimed major fraud sounds irresponsible to me.

I blame Rudy for this but Trump can't escape blame as he was the one in charge.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2021-02-02 11:15  

#10  These guys barely won the last re-elections. Plus I suspect their staff are catching a lot of hell via leftist phone calls and starts to mutiny. Sad state of the times.
Posted by: Ebbomoger Speaking for Boskone4589   2021-02-02 11:14  

#9  Both Cruz and Crenshaw have been major disappointments. I hope they get primaried by real Americans.
Posted by: Silentbrick   2021-02-02 10:28  

#8  When you see an abrupt about face like this, you have to wonder what happened in the past few days (think Roberts and ObamaCare"
Posted by: Mercutio   2021-02-02 09:30  

#7  This is the same guy who was gonna argue Trump's voter fraud case in front of the Supreme Court, right? Did he bother to explain that?

$10 says he's still holding a grudge against Trump for that very unflattering picture of Cruz's wife his campaign ran against him.

Either way, serious dick move here - kiss 2024 goodbye, for starters.
Posted by: Raj   2021-02-02 08:48  

#6  Al Gore and the Left, reference Bush 'selected no elected' circa 2001. Not to mention Ms Smarty Pants, reference Trump, 'illegitimate' , something something about a dossier paid for by her own campaign.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2021-02-02 06:24  

#5  I see Texas really is becoming more "blue" with each passing day.
Posted by: Clem   2021-02-02 05:44  

#4  The Iran Review Act gave the nuclear deal the needed legislative support and lowered the ratification threshold from 2/3 of the Senate to 1/3 of either house needed to sustain a veto against a Resolution of Disapproval.

The IRA prepared the stage for failure theater played by Republicans and some 'pro-Israel' Democrats who could formally vote against a nuclear Iran without endangering Obama's scheme.
Posted by: Elmerert Hupens2660   2021-02-02 05:39  

#3  Trump =/= Republican Party.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2021-02-02 05:30  

#2  Those 98 votes were in opposition to Obama's Iran deal. That's why Obama never submitted it to the Senate.

The Senate bill would require a competed deal to be submitted to Congress, which could then vote to approve or disapprove the nuclear deal within 30 days. Sanctions on Iran could not be lifted during this consideration.
Posted by: Wholulet Thigum4957   2021-02-02 01:29  

#1  Cruz was one of the 98 Senators who voted in favor of the de-facto ratification of Obama's Iran deal that would give Iran access to nuclear weapons after a waiting period even if all sides honored the terms.

When decisions that counted had to be made he voted to support Obama.
Posted by: Elmerert Hupens2660   2021-02-02 01:04  

00:00