Groveling Ted Cruz fails to convince Tucker Carlson that calling Jan. 6 'violent terrorist attack' w

[sneakypete]

Have folks noticed that this is the most common retort from Trumpers whenever they get butthurt?

It reminds me of AOC's claim any criticism of her is because people want to date her

@LMAO

The truth hurts,doesn't it,Comrade Bubba?

[catfish1957]

@LMAO

The truth hurts,doesn't it,Comrade Bubba?

If not kissing the orange ring consitutes the truth.....   so be it.

[LMAO]

@LMAO

The truth hurts,doesn't it,Comrade Bubba?

Huh?

That makes no sense

[sneakypete]

If not kissing the orange ring consitutes the truth.....   so be it.

@catfish1957

Class envy is never pretty,and we American's are supposed to be better than that.

[sneakypete]

Huh?

That makes no sense

@LMAO

Not surprised.

[libertybele]

Careless wealthy men might be sued a lot over silly stuff like this.... Trump has had a history of being careless, dating while married (grab em by the P****y etc.). Trump did hire a shady lawyer to try to hide stuff for him (and his friends/supporters once he became president). How did that work out for him? Heck, didn't that fake Christian (Fauwel Jr) use Trump's lawyer for the exact same thing Trump did? Birds of a feather do flock together it seems. Might explain a lot.

I also don't care for most folks personal sex life, but I certainly do give a hoot about the character of whom I vote for President. I have it in my tag line for goodness sake. It is called judging by fruits... You judged me as "class envy/jealousy"... and you didn't get it right, but I do want it pointed out that judgement was performed by you (same as the rest of us)... You just seem to have a problem when others that don't rightfully see eye to eye with you perform it.

There was the democrat that was sleeping with a Russian spy... He is still making waves the other day when he attacked conservatives. Perhaps we shouldn't care he was in bed with the enemy if we don't hold our politicians with any moral responsibility. Sounds silly to not care, to give passes to just our political friends. Or do we hold those we respect to a higher code of conduct, like we are doing to Cruz now.

@Sighlass You make a very good point.  I believe Cruz has always been held to a higher code of conduct.  He is well respected and rightfully so. He is the longest serving Solicitor General in TX, argued before the Supreme Court and won the landmark case of Heller (2A rights). No other sitting Senator has argued more cases before the Supreme Court then he has and as Senator he has done well calling out the lies of the leftists; McConnell and Sierra Club are just a few examples as well as his objection to Biden's votes.  He introduced Kate's law, and many other bills and has voiced objection on issues that he felt were unconstitutional.

His recent comments regarding Jan. 6 and terrorists have come under great scrutiny, and certainly if he was on the opposite of the aisle, not a second thought would have been given about those comments and that's what people have a problem with; Cruz is being held to a higher standard.

I have a deep respect for Senator Cruz, I have been a long time supporter. He interested me politically even before he took his Senate seat.  I have read both of his books, though I believe "A Time for Truth" reveals who he is inside and what makes him tick.

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt right now (I think perhaps his words could have been meant for Pelosi and others) and am waiting to see what he does next.

[corbe]

   If Ted somehow accomplishes tying the 'Terrorist' of J6 to the FBI, in his ability as a US Senator, a lot of people around here are gonna have egg on their face.




                        It's always the LONG Game.

    *Sure I'm a diehard, BUT you knew that.

[Kamaji]

   If Ted somehow accomplishes tying the 'Terrorist' of J6 to the FBI, in his ability as a US Senator, a lot of people around here are gonna have egg on their face.




                        It's always the LONG Game.

    *Sure I'm a diehard, BUT you knew that.

I hope he does, but after his attempt to walk his comment back, I don't think that was in the strategy.

[corbe]

   I'm willing to admit, at this point, that perhaps he's smokin' pot, again, like me.

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Sighlass You make a very good point.  I believe Cruz has always been held to a higher code of conduct.  He is well respected and rightfully so. He is the longest serving Solicitor General in TX, argued before the Supreme Court and won the landmark case of Heller (2A rights). No other sitting Senator has argued more cases before the Supreme Court then he has and as Senator he has done well calling out the lies of the leftists; McConnell and Sierra Club are just a few examples as well as his objection to Biden's votes.  He introduced Kate's law, and many other bills and has voiced objection on issues that he felt were unconstitutional.

His recent comments regarding Jan. 6 and terrorists have come under great scrutiny, and certainly if he was on the opposite of the aisle, not a second thought would have been given about those comments and that's what people have a problem with; Cruz is being held to a higher standard.

I have a deep respect for Senator Cruz, I have been a long time supporter. He interested me politically even before he took his Senate seat.  I have read both of his books, though I believe "A Time for Truth" reveals who he is inside and what makes him tick.

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt right now (I think perhaps his words could have been meant for Pelosi and others) and am waiting to see what he does next.

Cruz is held tp the standards he, himself, set. @libertybele

[libertybele]

   I'm willing to admit, at this point, that perhaps he's smokin' pot, again, like me.

I should have known he was smokin' again when he started growing his beard and he probably got another tattoo.

[bilo]

This is a losing ticket @libertybele   Cruz doesn't bring anything new or useful to the ticket ---  not accomplishment, ideas, energy or appeal.

And , there's too much bad blood between their supporters; the infighting alone would sink the ticket.

The good side to Cruz tarnishing his image with a really dumb comment is he might end up where he really belongs, the SCOTUS.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The good side to Cruz tarnishing his image with a really dumb comment is he might end up where he really belongs, the SCOTUS.

It wasn't a single really dumb comment ...  and yet he still tried to lie his way out of it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1479480627300818954

[Idiot]

It wasn't a single really dumb comment ...  and yet he still tried to lie his way out of it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1479480627300818954

Our country is falling apart around us and you are worried about ONE WORD a senator said?   

[Right_in_Virginia]

Our country is falling apart around us and you are worried about ONE WORD a senator said?   

Apparently you've a limited understanding of the true power of words ---- it's one of the primary lessons of law school.  I'm confident Cruz learned the lesson well.

He doesn't get a pass  --- no matter how many emojis are thrown around.

[corbe]

   I am just delighted that you Trumpers fears and animosity of Ted Cruz has finally come to something real, of subsistence.  It gives me hope that there maybe something afterall all in your Movement.l

[DB]

It wasn't a single really dumb comment ...  and yet he still tried to lie his way out of it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1479480627300818954

Not good. But to pretend Trump hasn't said a long list of really dumb things along with lying about it is no better.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Not good. But to pretend Trump hasn't said a long list of really dumb things along with lying about it is no better.

@DB

I don't consider what Cruz said to be "dumb" --- as in he made a mistake.  I've posted information on this thread showing he's always considered J6 to be a "terrorist" attack.  This is just the first time he's been called on it.

This reminds folks of the Senator's reaction during the primaries when he blamed Trump and his supporters for the violence that erupted from protestors before one of Trump's rallies  --- so brutal was the violence that Trump cancelled the rally to stop the attack on his supporters.  There were videos and photographs of Trump supporters being beaten bloody; but Cruz blamed them and Trump in an effort to gain a political advantage. 

Trusting Cruz is simply not an option.

[Killer Clouds]

@DB

I don't consider what Cruz said to be "dumb" --- as in he made a mistake.  I've posted information on this thread showing he's always considered J6 to be a "terrorist" attack.  This is just the first time he's been called on it.

This reminds folks of the Senator's reaction during the primaries when he blamed Trump and his supporters for the violence that erupted from protestors before one of Trump's rallies  --- so brutal was the violence that Trump cancelled the rally to stop the attack on his supporters.  There were videos and photographs of Trump supporters being beaten bloody; but Cruz blamed them and Trump in an effort to gain a political advantage. 

Trusting Cruz is simply not an option.

Cruz has shown his true colors and it will and should cost him.

[Smokin Joe]

HOW can you still believe he is a conservative...calling PATRIOT'S TERRORISTS?  YOU ARE A TERRORIST.  You want to talk about Trump supporters?  Ted just resorted to his real persona.  It seems you can't accept that.  POTUS TRUMP has been the same for over 50 years!   He loves America.  He works for free, to help America prosper.  FREEDOM.
BILL OF RIGHTS.

Let me lay it out for you.
Cruz's knowledge of the language is not in question, nor his intelligence. The term "terrorism" could, if he uses it be a rhetorical trap, to make sure the Democrats can't dodge it in the event that it can be proved that it was agents of the Federal Government, their informants, agitators and other co-conspirators who orchestrated the violence and illicit actions that happened at the Capitol.
Ray Epps has been outed, there are doubtless others. There were accounts of seven busloads of ANTIFAs getting off and donning MAGA gear (false flag operation). Many of us have suspected that the ringleaders and chief vandals were NOT Trump supporters, but couple that with police moving barricades and opening doors, this reeks of a set-up. Just the sort of event Pelosi, et. al. would love to have.

We have an alleged pipe bomber who hasn't been tracked down although the means to do so should be well within the abilities of people who can track down people across the country who were standing outside.

We have refusal to post National Guard Troops outside the Capitol, some six times.

There were advance teams setting up ropes on the scaffolding and terrace. Who were they?

Why have the 14,000+ hours of video been kept back, if there is nothing to find that would indicate some skullduggery and better yet, WHO conducted that activity throughout?

We only have, except for our own research, and the posted video and information from people who were there, the version of events the Mass Media want us to have, one that supports the "insurrection" (however lame that is) narrative. Cruz may have more, and I am reserving judgement to see what is produced.

If, however, it can be proven that the government orchestrated the worst of the whole thing, and by its actions entrapped people by promoting and facilitating the events of January 6, then who are the real terrorists? It would be a term, their term, and one that could not be avoided in discussion of those events going forward.

Something like that could cause quite a number of personnel changes in our government agencies, and even in the government itself.


In the event that is not the case, that it cannot be shown that the Government agencies and actors were not the main force behind those events, and that Cruz was aiming his remarks at the Trump supporters in the crowd who got caught up in the moment, then he has crapped in his mess kit by using the vernacular of the Democrats and pantywaist GOP turncoats.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Let me lay it out for you.
Cruz's knowledge of the language is not in question, nor his intelligence. The term "terrorism" could, if he uses it be a rhetorical trap, to make sure the Democrats can't dodge it in the event that it can be proved that it was agents of the Federal Government, their informants, agitators and other co-conspirators who orchestrated the violence and illicit actions that happened at the Capitol.
Ray Epps has been outed, there are doubtless others. There were accounts of seven busloads of ANTIFAs getting off and donning MAGA gear (false flag operation). Many of us have suspected that the ringleaders and chief vandals were NOT Trump supporters, but couple that with police moving barricades and opening doors, this reeks of a set-up. Just the sort of event Pelosi, et. al. would love to have.

We have an alleged pipe bomber who hasn't been tracked down although the means to do so should be well within the abilities of people who can track down people across the country who were standing outside.

We have refusal to post National Guard Troops outside the Capitol, some six times.

There were advance teams setting up ropes on the scaffolding and terrace. Who were they?

Why have the 14,000+ hours of video been kept back, if there is nothing to find that would indicate some skullduggery and better yet, WHO conducted that activity throughout?

We only have, except for our own research, and the posted video and information from people who were there, the version of events the Mass Media want us to have, one that supports the "insurrection" (however lame that is) narrative. Cruz may have more, and I am reserving judgement to see what is produced.

If, however, it can be proven that the government orchestrated the worst of the whole thing, and by its actions entrapped people by promoting and facilitating the events of January 6, then who are the real terrorists? It would be a term, their term, and one that could not be avoided in discussion of those events going forward.

Something like that could cause quite a number of personnel changes in our government agencies, and even in the government itself.


In the event that is not the case, that it cannot be shown that the Government agencies and actors were not the main force behind those events, and that Cruz was aiming his remarks at the Trump supporters in the crowd who got caught up in the moment, then he has crapped in his mess kit by using the vernacular of the Democrats and pantywaist GOP turncoats.

Nice summary and I do hope those who are responsible ultimately make it to jail.

Having said that, unfortunately there is little question that anyone watching Ted would likely conclude his remarks referred to those incarcerated already as he chose deliberately not to separate them from  terrorism during his speech.

[Idiot]

Let me lay it out for you.
Cruz's knowledge of the language is not in question, nor his intelligence. The term "terrorism" could, if he uses it be a rhetorical trap, to make sure the Democrats can't dodge it in the event that it can be proved that it was agents of the Federal Government, their informants, agitators and other co-conspirators who orchestrated the violence and illicit actions that happened at the Capitol.
Ray Epps has been outed, there are doubtless others. There were accounts of seven busloads of ANTIFAs getting off and donning MAGA gear (false flag operation). Many of us have suspected that the ringleaders and chief vandals were NOT Trump supporters, but couple that with police moving barricades and opening doors, this reeks of a set-up. Just the sort of event Pelosi, et. al. would love to have.

We have an alleged pipe bomber who hasn't been tracked down although the means to do so should be well within the abilities of people who can track down people across the country who were standing outside.

We have refusal to post National Guard Troops outside the Capitol, some six times.

There were advance teams setting up ropes on the scaffolding and terrace. Who were they?

Why have the 14,000+ hours of video been kept back, if there is nothing to find that would indicate some skullduggery and better yet, WHO conducted that activity throughout?

We only have, except for our own research, and the posted video and information from people who were there, the version of events the Mass Media want us to have, one that supports the "insurrection" (however lame that is) narrative. Cruz may have more, and I am reserving judgement to see what is produced.

If, however, it can be proven that the government orchestrated the worst of the whole thing, and by its actions entrapped people by promoting and facilitating the events of January 6, then who are the real terrorists? It would be a term, their term, and one that could not be avoided in discussion of those events going forward.

Something like that could cause quite a number of personnel changes in our government agencies, and even in the government itself.


In the event that is not the case, that it cannot be shown that the Government agencies and actors were not the main force behind those events, and that Cruz was aiming his remarks at the Trump supporters in the crowd who got caught up in the moment, then he has crapped in his mess kit by using the vernacular of the Democrats and pantywaist GOP turncoats.

[DefiantMassRINO]

How dare Rafael Eduardo Cruz malign those peaceful tourists who destroyed Federal property, injured law enforcement officers, and interfered with Congressional proceedings.

If the January 6th mass tresspassing incident at the Capitol was truly an ANTIFA false flag operation, then those arrested are ANTIFA terrorists.

[libertybele]

Let me lay it out for you.
Cruz's knowledge of the language is not in question, nor his intelligence. The term "terrorism" could, if he uses it be a rhetorical trap, to make sure the Democrats can't dodge it in the event that it can be proved that it was agents of the Federal Government, their informants, agitators and other co-conspirators who orchestrated the violence and illicit actions that happened at the Capitol.
Ray Epps has been outed, there are doubtless others. There were accounts of seven busloads of ANTIFAs getting off and donning MAGA gear (false flag operation). Many of us have suspected that the ringleaders and chief vandals were NOT Trump supporters, but couple that with police moving barricades and opening doors, this reeks of a set-up. Just the sort of event Pelosi, et. al. would love to have.

We have an alleged pipe bomber who hasn't been tracked down although the means to do so should be well within the abilities of people who can track down people across the country who were standing outside.

We have refusal to post National Guard Troops outside the Capitol, some six times.

There were advance teams setting up ropes on the scaffolding and terrace. Who were they?

Why have the 14,000+ hours of video been kept back, if there is nothing to find that would indicate some skullduggery and better yet, WHO conducted that activity throughout?

We only have, except for our own research, and the posted video and information from people who were there, the version of events the Mass Media want us to have, one that supports the "insurrection" (however lame that is) narrative. Cruz may have more, and I am reserving judgement to see what is produced.

If, however, it can be proven that the government orchestrated the worst of the whole thing, and by its actions entrapped people by promoting and facilitating the events of January 6, then who are the real terrorists? It would be a term, their term, and one that could not be avoided in discussion of those events going forward.

Something like that could cause quite a number of personnel changes in our government agencies, and even in the government itself.


In the event that is not the case, that it cannot be shown that the Government agencies and actors were not the main force behind those events, and that Cruz was aiming his remarks at the Trump supporters in the crowd who got caught up in the moment, then he has crapped in his mess kit by using the vernacular of the Democrats and pantywaist GOP turncoats.

As I stated up thread, I too believe that there is a possibility that the term of "terrorist" that Cruz used was aimed at the DEMS, intending to label those DEMS which possibly and likely includes members of Congress and the security detail who were in on the insurrection.  When Cruz's words hit the media and became a frenzy (especially to his base) there was no way that he could directly speak of whom he thought those 'terrorists' were on Carlson.  I think he and others have knowledge of what happened, but how do they go about with mere accusations? Investigations are being done by DEMS and a couple of RINO's, so they will in no way reveal that Pelosi and Pence (my opinion) were involved.

IF indeed Cruz was just going along with the narrative of terrorists to appease the DEMS, then we've lost a true conservative who has decided to go along rather than resist.  Personally, I find that unlikely, but his words raised an element of doubt. If that's the case, then the GOP continues to die (I think that they're dead anyways).

I think the man absolutely deserves the benefit of the doubt because of his conservative values and principles that he has stood behind for most of his life.

[corbe]

   Some have speculated~BS

The Real Problem With Ted Cruz’s Remarks

by JD Rucker  January 10, 2022 in Podcasts

<..snip..>

Some have speculated about what he was trying to accomplish. I don’t think he was trying to accomplish anything for himself, at least not by saying what he said. Instead, I believe he was either bribed (likely) or blackmailed into doing the bidding of the Republican Establishment, and more specifically the GOPe mega-donors who support RINOs and hate President Trump.

By “bribed,” I’m not saying he was paid off. He was bribed with the promise that if he invokes the word “terrorist” and steers the conversation the way they want it steered, then they would back him for the 2024 presidential nomination after they get Trump out of the way. What they didn’t tell him, or at least what he didn’t expect, is that he essentially ended any hope of being the nominee in the foreseeable future by causing such a stir with his words.

It’s conspicuous that he said it twice. I think that was a prerequisite of the demands made of him. They needed to get one of the most conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill to echo the “bipartisan” talking point that January 6 was really, really bad. That will go along with others pointing the finger at Trump for all of it occurring. They want him out of the way and they used Ted Cruz to try to make it happen.

https://noqreport.com/2022/01/10/the-real-problem-with-ted-cruzs-remarks/