Home / Culture and Society / Anatomy of a Smear: Heidi Cruz and the “North American Union”

Anatomy of a Smear: Heidi Cruz and the “North American Union”

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest14Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I’m sure there are similar stories about dirty campaign tricks from all over the country, but I’m here in Texas and have a particular interest in the kind of smears which have been surfacing in our Republican Senatorial primary. It’s an interesting race between an insider who started out with a presumed lock on the seat being vacated by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and an large field of candidates representing various interests and grassroots groups from whom an impressive leading challenger has emerged with a real surge of popular support.

Not surprisingly, when an anointed insider candidate like Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, who has nearly unlimited money at his command, feels threatened by an insurgent campaign, his reaction is to go negative as big as he can, and Dewhurst has gone after former Solicitor General Ted Cruz with both barrels. He has been running very negative attack ads for several weeks, spending $1 million a week and clearly planning to spend even more in the month remaining in the primary.

What makes this particular negative campaign interesting is that Dewhurst seems to be taking his cues from a third-tier candidate named Glenn Addison who began a negative campaign against Cruz early in the primary. Though there’s no real evidence, some have suspected that Addison may have been acting as a shill for Dewhurst the whole time, but the peculiar nature of his accusations suggest that his attacks on Cruz may have started as a kind of personal vendetta. The attacks are interesting because they all center around a conspiratorial, paleoconservative perspective characteristic of the John Birch Society.

The Bircher-style smears basically come down to taking various things from Cruz’ background and suggesting that he’s part of a conspiracy of the global elite and perhaps even some sort of closet international socialist. From Addison they merely seemed peculiar, but with Dewhurst’s money behind them and reaching a much wider audience they are a lot uglier and more disturbing.

I could go after the ridiculousness of tainting Cruz because his immigrant father fought with Castro as a teenager in Cuba, or because his law firm defended a Chinese tire company in a patent suit, or because he has taken some campaign money from arch-devil of the conspiracy fringe Goldman-Sachs. None of these other attacks make any sense, but there’s one attack which I find more offensive and which is right up my ally because of my past writings on the subject.

You see, it turns out that according to a whisper campaign coming from Dewhurst or Addison or perhaps direct from the John Birch Society, Ted Cruz’ wife is one of the architects of the dreaded “North American Union.” The JBS is the most likely original source in a now-deleted article in the online version of their New American magazine called “Faux Neo-Conservatives Defend North American Union.”

As it turns out, Cruz’ wife Heidi is an international investment banker who was invited to be part of a working group at the Council on Foreign Relations which reviewed a notorious 2005 paper called “Building a North American Community” which was largely authored by Robert Pastor and is the presumed origin of the idea of the North American Union, though Pastor has repeatedly denied that it contains anything like that.

Although the proposals in the paper are a mild call for general hemispheric economic cooperation with no formal structure, the conspiracy-inclined have interpreted it as a sinister conspiracy to destroy American sovereignty and combine us into a single union with Canada and Mexico. They are inherently suspicious of the Council on Foreign Relations, despite its repeated claims to be politically neutral and solely interested in studying issues objectively. It has become a lynchpin in globalist conspiracy theories and anything associated with it immediately looks more sinister in some eyes.

The paper is basically benign, pointing to ways that the nations of North America could work together through free markets and reducing trade barriers to spread more success and raise up the economies of the poorer countries. In its concluding section it says:

“North America is different from other regions of the world and must find its own cooperative route forward. A new North American community should rely more on the market and less on bureaucracy, more on pragmatic solutions to shared problems than on grand schemes of confederation or union, such as those in Europe. We must maintain respect for each other’s national sovereignty.”

Which certainly doesn’t sound all that terrible, what with acknowledging how different North America is from Europe, promoting market solutions instead of government and explicitly rejecting the idea of a “confederation or union” while promoting respect for national sovereignty. It’s almost like the conspiracy theorists never read the document, or gave up after the title and wrote a fantasy version in their heads based solely on the title and their obsession with the CFR.

Admittedly, there are plenty of bad ideas in the report. It’s full of proposals for government managed trade and incentive programs and inter-governmental cooperation for regulation and security. It’s all stuff which makes sense if you think government is the way to solve problems, but not something which would resonate with true conservatives. Yet the big irony here is that it appears that Heidi Cruz doesn’t even agree with those aspects of the report for which she is being blamed.

Heidi Cruz’ role in all of this was as one of a large panel of readers and her sole identifiable contribution to the project is a one-paragraph response in the final appendix in which she says:

“We must emphasize the imperative that economic investment be led and perpetuated by the private sector. There is no force proven like the market for aligning incentives, sourcing capital, and producing results like financial markets and profit-making businesses. This is simply necessary to sustain a higher living standard for the poorest among us — truly the measure of our success. As such, investment fundsand financing mechanisms should be deemed attractive instruments by those committing the capital and should only be developed in conjunction with market participants.”

So basically, her role here is to say that free markets and free trade are the answer to greater regional prosperity. I find it hard to believe that any conservative or republican would disagree with this or condemn her for believing it, and it’s positively bizarre to see someone who is as much of a globalist insider as Dewhurst raising this sort of argument.

The whole idea that Heidi Cruz is part of some grand conspiracy is patently ridiculous. It’s guilt by association and by innuendo from people who don’t understand the CFR or the report which they so revile and who assume that anyone who may have been in a room with Robert Pastor or William Weld must be some sort of globalist stooge. The reality is that the CFR draws on a diverse pool of experts, most of whom have very little involvement in the organization and that its output, like this paper, tends to be in the form of general suggestions with no force behind them which no one ever really acts on. We certainly aren’t plunging headlong into any kind of regional union on the basis of one paper which no one seems to have read.

I chose this particular attack as an example because it is so blatantly baseless. There’s no conspiracy, explicitly no proposal for a North American Union in the source document, and it’s not even clear that Heidi Cruz was all that supportive of the conclusions of the report. It’s all a patchwork of irrational fear and ignorant assumptions with no substance to it whatever. Yet I still see many conservatives who might otherwise support Ted Cruz’ run for the Senate repeating this story at face value without ever having looked into the utter lack of truth behind it.

Something has made some conservatives awfully gullible and extremely suspicious. But you have to wonder why those suspicions aren’t directed at David Dewhurst, a man with connections to every kind of global interest, whose campaign is bought and paid for by big oil, bankers and trial lawyers, and who is basically trying to buy a seat in the Senate with a million dollars a week of negative ads based on BS which he assumes no one will bother to check out. That shouldn’t just make you suspicious. It should make you angry.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

Dave Nalle is Executive Director of the Texas Liberty Foundation, Chairman of the Center for Foreign and Defense Policy, South Central Regional Director for the Republican Liberty Caucus and an advisory board member at the Coalition to Reduce Spending. He was Texas State Director for the Gary Johnson Presidential campaign, an adviser to the Ted Cruz senatorial campaign, Communications Director for the Travis County Republican Party and National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He has also consulted on many political campaigns, specializing in messaging. Before focusing on political activism, he owned or was a partner in several businesses in the publishing industry and taught college-level history for 20 years.
  • “In its concluding section it says:”

    Oh, you tease. That part got left out from the looks of it.

  • Wow! As a registered Republican in Austin I hadn’t caught all this the only ads I’ve seen are the commercials and Dewhurt’s ads have been widely ignored in my home, at least by me. I personally like Tom Laperds (did I sell his name right) commercials that say he is a businessman not a career politician (Dewhurst and Cruz) a Lawyer (Cruz) or a sportscaster (????), but I realy don’t know anything about any of them and I haven’t seen any political mailings since I moved to Texas (except the ones that still trickle down from Kansas – where I had been very involved in the Republican Party).
    I want to know more about these candidates so I can vote for the one that will protect our Liberties when I go to vote May 29th in the primaries. Hopefully, if I don’t hear from each of the candidates I can at least find information in the media (including blogcritics) that might help me get informed.
    It’s like the Austin City Council and Mayors race. I understand there are 3 positions for council and I am familiar with only one of the candidates (Laura Presley) I don’t even know the incumbent she is running against. Likewise I know of Clay Defoe and Mayor Lee Lefingwell in the Mayors race. The other two positions I don’t know of any of the candidates. Who will I vote for? In those two spots it would probably have to be Donald Duck since despite my best efforts I don’t know who is running or what they stand for. In the spots I do know, I know hands down the candidates that are Campaigning for Liberty. Defoe and Presley and those two will have my vote on May 12, but the Senatorial primary on May 29th? I have no idea who to vote for.

  • You’ve perpetuated a trumped up charge with “I could go after [Ted Cruz] because his law firm defended a Chinese tire company in a patent suit.”

    In reality Cruz’ firm is representing said Chinese company tire company in an appeal of the patent suit that they lost. The original suit was defended by some other firm.

    Since I’m posting a comment on you article I am providing for the sake of the naysaying conspiracy minded, the paragraph from the CFL report you intended to quote:

    “North American integration has subtly created a domestic agenda that is continental in scope. The U.S. government is not organized to address this agenda imaginatively. Facing difficult trade-offs between private and North American interests, we tend to choose the private, parochial option. This explains the frustration of Canada and Mexico. To remedy this chronic problem, President Bush should appoint a special assistant onNorth AmericanAffairs to chair a Cabinet committee to recommend ways to breathe life into a NorthAmerican community. A presidential directive should support this by instructing the Cabinet to give preference to North America.”

  • Tim, I don’t perpetuate that trumped up charge, I just mention it to dismiss it while going after this other trumped up charge.

    And your quote wasn’t the one that I had originally put in there. I’ve now fixed the article.

    Dave

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Is the last paragraph in #3 what’s missing from the quote that was apparently meant to be inserted between the last two paragraphs of page 2?

    Good to see you’re still around, Dave. I’ve got one other question, and it’s an honest – by which I mean not ‘loaded’ – question: What’s the difference between a “globalist” and someone who supports free trade and free markets?

    Thanks –

  • Glenn, that’s an extremely complex question.

    From the perspective we’re dealing with in this instance “globalists” are part of a cabal of evil corporations, socialistic governments, international banks and NGOs who want to control the entire world and take away all of our rights and liberties through instruments like the IMF, UN, WTO, CFR, Federal Reserve, Bildebergers, etc.

    The group disliking these globalists actually breaks down into two sub-groups, one which is particularly concerned with Transnational Socialism – the NGOs and quasi governmental organizations – and one which is more concerned with global corporatism. But they sometimes share the paranoid kool aid.

    But yes, support for Free Trade is also a globalist movement, but it’s one which is seen as benign, except when it takes the form of “neoconservative” efforts to impose free trade through military force or large scale economic interventionism by government, or through managed trade agreements. That stuff starts to edge over into the evil kind of globalism.

    Really it all kind of makes my head hurt.

    Dave

    • Does the Trans Pacific Partnership create american manufacturing jobs? It’s coming next. Obama is working on it… Think NAFTA on steroids with illegal aliens as the workers….

      • John Burtis

        TPP will most assuredly result in an exit of US jobs to cheaper overseas markets and the TPP will give foreign firms the ability to sue US firms here for anything of note, something they have been denied thus far as they have had no standing. TPP aids Obama in his destruction of American business, the reduction of decent American jobs, the decrease in taxable incomes, and the continued growth of the dole – all elements of his Cloward-Piven strategy, which was first utilized to destroy the budget of John Lindsey, the first Republican mayor of NYC, by utterly swamping his budget with welfare recipients up the veritable kazoo.

  • Alan C

    Dave,
    I tuned in to read about Heidi Cruz, hoping you would provide a defense of her connections with the CFR and Goldman-Sachs. I’ve been looking forward to hearing the Cruz’s perspective on these allegations.

    Instead, I find a Nalle hatchet job maligning the John Birch society, smears against Glenn Addison, and hyperbole (arch-devil? c’mon…) aimed at opponents (such as Addison & JBS) of corporatism and bailouts. I guess personal attacks are only disallowed in the Comments section…

    I admit I only read the first page. Perhaps you do eventually offer a legit explanation for Heidi Cruz’s globalist and corporatist connections, but I cannot stomach any more. You do violence to the cause of liberty with your mockery of liberty candidates like Glenn Addison, and marginalization of entities (like JBS) who educate the public on eroding civil liberties and US sovereignty.

    • Desertcatn

      That bothered me also, JBS has been supportive of Ted Cruz.

  • The JBS doesn’t educate the public, they spread misinformation and promote paranoia. They have been trying to clean up their act, and I give them credit for that, but their attacks on the wrong targets for the wrong reasons are a big problem for the liberty movement. I feel no need to cut them any slack.

    You might want to read the rest of the article. I’m sure it will annoy you. As for defending her connections with the CFR and Goldmann-Sachs, why would those need to be defended to anyone who is halfway sensible? She’s an investment banker so she has worked with Goldmann-Sachs. It’s largely unavoidable and making an issue of it is just more idiotic paranoid BS. As for the CFR, it’s not the bogeyman the JBS and other nutters make it out to be. It isn’t secretive, it isn’t all-powerful and in the case discussed in the article it isn’t even proposing what it’s been accused of.

    And I’m proud to do a hatchet job on people who deserve to be chopped up.

    Dave

  • Glenn Contrarian

    (From a train somewhere west of Spokane)

    Thanks, Dave – I appreciate the answer. I may not like the answer, but you gave it straightly and I’ll respect it as I should. Besides, Most anybody that opposes the JB’S is a friend of mine.

    • Audrey Merrell

      the bushes are for the North american Union, All Mrs Cruz did was work for George W bush on the council on foreigen relations, but no longer does since GWB has been out of office. I really don’t think she was in any
      way supportive of the NAU.

      • John Burtis

        No, she just works for Goldman Sachs and is listed on the task force literature. But then we get into the Clinton/Cruz and the definition of “is”.

        • Restless0217

          So someone working for a company that you don’t like automatically puts one under suspicion for some nefarious activities????

          • OliverBx

            If she were a teller at a bank I would agree….however, comma…..

  • Jane Zeitgiest

    The question about globalists should make your head hurt Dave… you just don’t get it.
    Not once did you mention our constitution, THE LAW OF THIS LAND & the only thing protecting the people of this nation from over out of control government. THAT is what it’s all about.

    The Council on Foreign Relations is THE American front organization for the global agenda… their goal is to put an end to our national sovereignty. They work hand in hand with the United Nations, The Trilateral Commission and other one world governance organizations.
    Anyone who cares about the survival of our republic knows that the CFR and anyone supporting them is either ignorant to their goal or supports the end of our constitutional republic. Brilliant.

    • Martha Cortez

      Ted Cruz had fought against the UN and the World Court to defend Us sovereignty. All of this is nonsense.

      • OliverBx

        Yet he not only married it, his biggest adviser leads it….. hmmmmmm

  • Peter S. Chamberlain

    I started out tending to favor Dewhurst, but after his attacks on Cruz for such dreadful sins as being a lawyer, much less a good one who gets hired by clients to appeal after they lose a case, representing a Chinese company–that was long before Dewhurst falsely charged him with child abuse and driving a teen to suicide and all but linked him to the Penn State child abuse failure to report and cover-up crimes, and attacked his wife.

    I am very familiar with Kennedy v. Louisiana, a case I had very much wanted him to win where he only got four votes to permit the death penalty for child rapes (the politically popular Jessica’s Law which Dewhurst did support in Texas over some opposition) and, as a lawyer with trial and appellate experience, who had very unexpectedly come to find myself representing and having other privileged and confidential relationships with an awful lot of child and adult survivors of mostly incestuous child sexual abuse, some of whose immediate and near extended family member molesters I can’t name here, and others who failed and refused to protect such children, were palmed off on us in positions of trust by both political parties. I’ve lost a brother to suicide, sought and obtained treatment for suicidal depression myself, and survive by knowing and understanding more about clinical depression, etc., and the dynamics of suicide than most people, and have represented, and had other privileged and confidential relationships with, more children, teens, and adults who have attempted suicide than I can count. I had a long piece on suicide by young people in and after being in jail published in Texas Lawyer years ago. I had a client, the 18 year old “adult” teenage son of a retired sheriff, who killed himself shortly after I got him released on bail on a simple marijuana possession charge that I might have won and on which probation or a minimal sentence would have been expected. Even with my personal and professional expertise, none of us saw this coming. It is practically impossible to meet the legal burden to prove that the suicide was in fact proximately caused by the kind of misconduct with which Cruz’ client was even charged, especially when it occurs after release. What I also know, all too well, is that, after a suicide, the survivors suffer awful, but irrational, “if only . . . “ guilt, anguish, and pain, and many look for someone else, consciously or unconsciously, to blame to try to alleviate it.

    The omission of one recent federal law from an appendix in that case was, in my experience, an all too understandable error and omission for any of us who have ever done such legal research and know that these things are often badly indexed and hard to find in computerized or hard-book research, as shown by the fact that none of the several lawyers, or the Supreme Court justice and their top law clerks, a very honored position offered only to very top students which Cruz himself had held, picked up on this. Having actually read everything on file in the case, readily available on the Supreme Court’s own and other Web sites, etc., I know, and know that Dewhurst and his campaign and legal advisors knew or should have known, I also know that this omission had no effect whatsoever upon the outcome of the case, and that the Supreme Court effectively so held when it reopened but reaffirmed its majority holding and dissenting opinions after this omission was discovered.

    One of the majorities liberal Justices had previously written that the death penalty was always unconstitutional in modern times, so it is unlikely that this omission led to his vote against the law. The majority opinion explicitly stated that, in considering whether the death penalty for rape of one or more children was “cruel and unusual” and thus prohibited by the Eighth Amendment, which was the only issue the Supreme Court had accepted the case to review, their personal subjective “feelings” were the ultimate authority, and that the rape of one or more children was not serious enough to justify it (though they did reserve the question whether “crimes against the federal government,” a frighteningly broad category, might. They persisted in this and refused to reconsider their opinion when they did reopen the case briefly after this error was discovered. Anyone who thinks any of those five liberal Justices would have changed their mind in this case because that one additional law, thus held unconstitutional, had been listed in the original papers and argument would have to be a fool, and, in my view, anyone making that assertion in a political campaign is not only a fool but a liar.

    Ironically, Harvard Constitutional Law professor, experienced Supreme Court advocate, Obama advisor, and temporary Justice Department official under Obama, Lawrence Tribe, had concluded that law was Constitutional and should have been upheld, but upon a different, valid argument from the one primarily used by Cruz and accepted by the four dissenting Justices. Tribe’s position and alternative legal rationale had been widely publicized before the Court reopened the case due to the omission of citation of this new federal law, which would not control the Court, and liberal former University of Chicago Lecturer in Constitutional Law Barack Obama, who now holds a powerful but temporary government job, also stated publicly, without publishing his precise rationale, that he agreed with the result, permitting the states to provide for the death penalty for this crime or crimes, reached not by the liberal majority but by the four dissenting conservative Justices (confirmation of two of whom he had voted against as a Senator). It is too bad that they and Attorney General Eric Holder did not both pick up on the omission and weigh in with an amicus curiae brief supporting the law, which they would later say they thought was constitutional, before oral argument and the Court’s opinions.

    Dewhurst’s attacks on Cruz’ wife Heidi are not only irrational and unconscionable, but false, deceptive, and fraudulent. I have my own differences with the CFR but they do include many of the smartest experts in the country, and her role, which did not include voting on any of its political positions, was entirely proper. William F. Buckley, Jr., father of the conservative movement in my day, noted that John Birch Society founder and leader Welch’s accusation that President Eisenhower was a closet Communist was, among other things, absurd and “lunacy,” so if that’s the source of the alleged evidence against either Heidi or Ted Cruz, and some posters here have defended the JBS, that would be just one more proof that Dewhurst is a liar and a fool.

    Now there are some issues and questions I am concerned about, and some about whch I am somewhat of an expert, concerning which I have not been able to get answers from either candidate. I’ve never found a party or politician with whom I could agree 100%, and there have been bills of concern to me on which the same Christian religious beliefs, economic and legal education, and professional and life experience that make me a conservative, and thus a Republican, on most issues, and sometimes arcane legal expertise, led me to agree, publicly, with Ted Kennedy and Obama. I’m pro-life and know a lot about children, teens, child abuse, mental illness, suicide, health care, debt and bankruptcy, etc., and want my elected officials to understand, and if I contact them I expect them or a knowledgeable staff person to return my call. When I started fifty years ago, you could do a little volunteer work in a campaign and they would know you and take your calls, and now too many don’t know you and don’t have anything to do with you unless you make huge cash campaign contributions, and I don’t have the money.

  • James Lister
  • Jacquie

    CFR is part of the Lucifer worshipping NWO. So how can you say that anything or anyone on that criminal Task Force is NOT part of it?

    • Mostly because Lucifer doesn’t actually exist and never has…

      • Ali M-K

        I like your answers… very astute & grammatically accurate💭

      • Peter Pan

        hello how are you today?

      • So, the fact that some thing or some one doesn’t exist means it can’t be worshiped? Since when?

      • OliverBx

        Yes, he certainly does exist.

  • Marlene Dwyer

    Cruz and the whole gop are as dangerous as o and hill are..they all support and are involved in the nwo..smooth talking politicians..

    • EndTyrannyNow

      Marlene Dwyer: To lump Senator Cruz in with the rest of the G.O.P. is ludicrous. Look at his voting record. Check out his scorecard at conservativereview.com. Quit believing everything Trump Central is telling you. You are full of horseshit, Madam.

  • Nonna98

    SMH……the author apparently is a paid shrill for the NWO….nuff said

    • Mary Jo

      Read just who he is…….Executive director of the TEXAS LIBERTY FOUNDATION…state director for Gary Johnson…LIBERTARIAN.

      • wally12

        @Mary Jo: You should have gone a little farther in you comment. Libertarians are for most parts of the constitution and agree with many policies of conservatives which they share ideas and policies. Of course, the uninformed probably have made up their minds and lock their opinions into the steel trap and refuse to see the day light.

    • NymRod

      Please provide sources to support your false claim.

  • Elsa de Cheloneaux

    If the CFR were acting in the interests of America, we would see onshoring of jobs, increases in standards of living and a burgeoning middle class. But we don’t see that, do we?

    The CFR is a globalistic entity. The laws, language, borders and culture of the United States is simply not on its agenda.

    • John Burtis

      Then look at the other great boon to America – The Trans Pacific Partnership and ditto all of the above points to the TPP fraud of a hoax of a sham pushed by Obama and Kerry et al and Hillary, who was for it before she was against it.

  • C Monk

    Dave Nalle has deliberately lied to you all . Go to the CFR report itself and read the part of Heidi’s comment that Dave left off. Here..

    “I support the Task Force report and its recommendations aimed at
    building a safer and more prosperous North America. Economic prosperity and a world safe from terrorism and other security threats are
    no doubt inextricably linked. While governments play an invaluable
    role in both regards, we must emphasize…..”

    Heidi wrote that she supports the Report, Dave said she doesn’t support it. Who should you believe, Dave or your lyin’ eyes?

    • C Monk
    • Interesting

    • goldie

      You left off the rest of her statement…“We must emphasize the imperative that economic investment be led and perpetuated by the private sector. There is no force proven like the market for aligning incentives, sourcing capital, and producing results like financial markets and profit-making businesses. This is simply necessary to sustain a higher living standard for the poorest among us — truly the measure of our success. As such, investment fundsand financing mechanisms should be deemed attractive instruments by those committing the capital and should only be developed in conjunction with market participants.”

    • Beowulfe

      She qualified her support. She doesn’t support all of the report, she supports “its recommendations aimed at building a safer and more prosperous North America”. Learn to read, you fool.

    • Kathleen Marion

      Perhaps by not reading the article you missed the point or I should say fact that she only wrote one paragraph.

      We must emphasize the imperative that economic investment be led and perpetuated by the private sector. There is no force proven like the market for aligning incentives, sourcing capital, and producing results like financial markets and profit-making businesses. This is simply necessary to sustain a higher living standard for the poorest among us — truly the measure of our success. As such, investment fundsand financing mechanisms should be deemed attractive instruments by those committing the capital and should only be developed in conjunction with market participants.”

  • Is Political Establishment’s Mission to Merge Canada, USA and Mexico Into the North American Union?

    http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/04/04/can-you-handle-the-truth-ted-heidi-cruz-and-the-north-american-union/

  • I would argue that a true conservative would have nothing to do with the organization Ted Cruz himself called a pernicious nest of snakes. Elliot Abrams, who is currently advising Ted Cruz is a senior fellow at the CFR. So if Cruz believes the CFR is a pernicious nest of snakes, why did he tap one of their senior fellows to advise him on foreign policy? It’s a valid question.

    • Halftrack2

      Why did Trump in the debate name the Chief of the CFR as a man he would depend on for advice in foreign affairs?????

      • OliverBx

        Perhaps you should answer the question.

      • suzyshopper

        Yeah maybe the Trump supporters should answer your question, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting!!

        • tryingtopickaname

          Answer the question posed about Cruz instead of bypassing it with another question, please.

      • tryingtopickaname

        …and yet YOU can’t answer the question about Cruz.

  • wally12

    The only people who believe Cruz has an ulterior motive to advance some far out agenda are liberals. They haven’t believed that he has demonstrated he is a true conservative that has defended the constitution on numerous times in the Supreme Court. Of course, to the liberals that makes him suspect and the mud starts to fly hoping some will stick. No thank you liberal conspiracy theorists, I am not buying your crap. Go peddle it somewhere else.

    • What?

      Read my reply above. I am hardly liberal. What brought me here was someone would not answer my question with fact just your response, conspiracy theory.

      • wally12

        @What?: I am sorry that I mistook your comments as being liberal. My comments were directed at liberals. I am glad you are not one of them. Have a nice day.

      • Beowulfe

        Maybe not a liberal, but certainly a fool.

        • What?

          Just another conspiracy theory??

      • wally12

        @What: What the (H) are you taking about? My comment was dated 19 days ago and yours was dated 16 days ago. Tell me how my comment was even directed at you. You must have been sipping too much wine. Sober up and take some coffee and try again because you were not even in the conversation.

        • What?

          It sounded like a general comment for all. When I came here it was to find answers and the replies I received before I came here were always conspiracy theory not answers. So you sober up. Can’t stand wine, only for cooking.

    • OliverBx

      I’m as Conservative as can be and if Cruz was really a Conservative untainted by the establishment he would not have sided 100% with the Soros violence in Chicago. He is a snake who is too PC not only to change anything if he won, he’d cave to avoid looking like a racist just like Congress has kowtowed to Ozero the last 8 years. Cruz is a snake in the grass. Love the choice he had for SCOTUS, Roberts who gave Ozero whatever he wanted, Sorry, Cruz sucks.

      • wally12

        @OliverBx: So you are a conservative? That is great. Please continue to be. However, you also need to take a step back and really examine what each candidate says. Cruz wasn’t siding wit Soros. I don’t know what he said but it may have been some off hand remark about Trump to put Trump on the defensive. Trump does the same thing. It is called politics. Trump says a lot of things that upset me. He called Fiorina ugly. Remember he said “Look at that face” Now tell me if that isn’t dirty politics. He called into question that Carson wasn’t a qualified surgeon. Trump says many things that people over look because they are so in love with him. Don’t get me wrong, if Trump wins the nomination, I will vote for him even though he has many attributes that I done like. However, I do not want Hillary or Sanders to be elected. Have a nice day. .

        • Rowdy

          Cruz is not qualified to run he is NOT a NBC.

          If we follow our Constitution all our problems go away.

          • wally12

            @Rowdy: That is just your opinion along with those who disagree with Cruz. Cruz is a natural born citizen but I am sure you will never be convinced otherwise. End of discussion. have a nice day.

          • Rowdy

            No it is not just my opinion. It just so happens to also be the opinion of the Supreme court.

            Supreme Court Cases that define “Natural Born Citizen” as One
            Born on U.S. Soil to Citizen Parents –
            Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
            Shanks v DuPont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
            Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)
            Minor v Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
            United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
            Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)

            The supreme court has defined it succinctly five times and cited
            that definition over twenty five times. Trying to say the definition
            is uncertain is 240 years too late as that horse left the barn some
            thirty times since then.

            And if that isn’t good enough for you read correspondence between the founders, where they discuss the phrase and the reasons for specific words in order to clearly communicate what was meant. To bad modern theologians aren’t smart enough to understand it.

          • EndTyrannyNow

            Oooh. Dred Scott is a good opinion to include in your list (sarcasm). It just very clearly demonstrates how wrong SCOTUS can be and has been in the past.

          • Rowdy

            Yep your opinions rank so much higher than the SCOTUS. huh. Yep your opinion has more substance than those that wrote the Constitution. huh. And your opinion much more important than the will and opinion of the majority of the American people.

          • EndTyrannyNow

            Rowdy, with all due respect, the justices in black dresses on the SCOTUS put their panties on one leg at a time. And yes, I’ll say that even for the founders. I respect the founders tremendously — but they were not infallible.

          • Rowdy

            Yeah you betcha. I think I understand, this conversation is going nowhere. Your self centred, arrogant, attitude in an effort to defend your liberalistic affiliation, is exactly what we are fighting to keep out of our republic. Enough of you.

          • EndTyrannyNow

            “To bad modern theologians…”? What a moron.

          • Sally Jessie

            How Is Ted Cruz “Natural Born” When Senator Hirono Is “Naturalized”? Both Born In Under Same Circumstances

          • EndTyrannyNow

            Oh, horseshit!

  • What?

    When you see all the creepy agreements that have been passed NAFTA, the potential SPP that had a monetary issue with it (possible Amero) and now the TPP, is there any wonder that people question. To attribute it as to conspiracy theories is not only insulting but down right wrong and rude. If you don’t question you will not ever have results or answers to anything.

  • Nick Varnalis

    Nice spin

    • Riggs Marcia

      Heidi Cruz and Building The North American Community

      Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations in association with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Consejo

      Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales.

      http://www.cfr.org/canada/building-north-american-community/p8102

      Anyone who simply wants to anoint Ted Cruz as the next great conservative, without first vetting him, is part of the problem

      we have in this country, at least in my humble opinion. Those of us who refuse to admit that we have been fooled before are

      simply in denial.

      http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/04/04/can-you-handle-the-truth-ted-heidi-cruz-and-the-north-american-union/

      Ted Cruz voted for TPP

      The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a trade agreement among twelve Pacific Rim countries signed on 4 February 2016 in

      Auckland, New Zealand, after seven years of negotiations, which has not entered into force.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q16Y2J-TChM

      Jeff Sessions reveals the truth about TPA that Ted Cruz and Barack Obama are trying to hide

      http://theconservatarianreview.com/jeff-sessions-reveals-the-truth-about-tpa-that-ted-cruz-and-barack-obama-are-trying-to-

      hide/

      • Kathleen Marion

        First of all they haven’t even voted on the TPP! Ted Cruz voted against the TPA and has vowed to vote against TPP!

        • bless us all

          thanks for that simple but helpful clarification..

        • Halftrack2

          You should know Trump Sheeple are not interested in truth or facts….just follow the herd….

          • OliverBx

            Cruz is a snake who knowing full well that the riots in Chicago were all on Soros, Bernie, and the BLM chose to show his true colors and sided with them against Trump’s right to free speech.

          • NymRod

            If stupid were a crime you’d be a 1st degree felon.
            Does it hurt much to be painfully stupid?

        • NymRod

          Trump supporters are uninformed, misinformed, no information clueless voters incapable of recognizing the truth.

          If they were well informed voters they wouldn’t be Trump supporters.

      • Kyle Lyles

        Did you pick that lie up from the bottom side of Draft Dodging Donnie Trump’s desk when you down there during the Apprentice?

        • betilu

          YOU KNOW WE DID, FOOL THAT YOU ARE!

        • OliverBx

          Trump didn’t dodge any draft, but Cruz Daddy certainly did fight alongside Fidel Castro.

    • Ryan Ferretti

      It’s not spinning of truth to reveal the paragraphs Heidi wrote where she espouses free trade and free markets as solutions. The only thing spinning is your mind.

  • hoynest

    Dave Nalle is very ignorant or he is part of the problem whit all his experience in history and foreign affairs. Anyone who has done any research knows full well that the

    Council
    on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its counterpart The Trilateral Commission have been running American politics for many years and it’s main principle is David Rockefeller as well as financier. Heidi Cruz worked as a temporary member and her Dissenting Views at the end were mainly focused on Capitalism vs. government (more socialism). Her relationship for so long has raised a lot of questions and concerns. I don’t know hers and Ted Cruz’s real position on all of this, but it needs to be examined fairly. I do know what the Council
    on Foreign Relations and The Trilateral Commission’s position and they are the most dangerous group in America and the World.

    “The main purpose of
    the Council on Foreign Relations

    is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and

    national independence and submergence into an all powerful,

    one world government.”

    Rear Admiral Chester Ward US Navy (retired), CFR member for 16 years,
    Judge Advocate General of the Navy 1956-60

    • Kyle Lyles

      Get your Made in China “Make America So So Again” hats here! 50% of the proceeds go to the John Birch Society.

      • Jason Eisenstadt

        Laugh now turd boy. Eventually you’ll be living under the same conditions. No matter what, you won’t have the last laugh chief. Now Golf Foxtrot Yankee. Man, you look a little like Ashton Kutcher. Sorry to hear that.

    • Halftrack2

      Guess you missed the Trump slip up in the debate. When asked to name someone to advise him on foreign relations, he named the president of the CFR…..THAT’S why he refuses to debate again.. Can’t afford another slip of the tongue…

      • Jason Eisenstadt

        I did miss that. I hope you are wrong, because if true, you can have faith in the fact that the game is over and all hope is lost.

        However, that theory doesn’t explain the infinitely endless attempts by the RNC to dislodge Trump from leading in the primaries. If he was truly, “a plant” they would be saving their donor’s money and keeping it for Christmas.

        And what list would you have read from? Kissinger? Brezinski? fact is, if you are in the game of advising for geopolitical conquest, the major players are all on the same team. My guess is he threw a “less” inflammatory name like “Haass” – if that is in fact where he “slipped up.”

        You have nothing to lose. Vote for Trump and cross your fingers because it is pretty obvious what we will get with a Hillary {Wretch..}; Cruz or Sanders presidency. At least this time we are not having to choose between a “Terd sandwich” and a “giant douche.” (or a “Blood” or a “Crip” if the gang-banger metaphor resonates more)

      • susansmithNAG

        What Halftrack2 isn’t telling you is that during the debate when Mr. Trump was asked that question he mentioned 4 or 5 individuals names including the guy from the CFR. Mr. Trump, should he be elected will hear the opposition from citizens regarding not having a CFR individual as an advisor.

    • Linda League

      Yes everyone knows what the CFR is and that others have appeared on these committees also. I believe that John Bolton also appeared along with Heidi. This has gone around since the days of Dewhurst. As a Texan we are tired of hearing it.

  • Kingdaddy

    “North America is different from other regions of the world and must find its own cooperative route forward. A new North American community should rely more on the market and less on bureaucracy, more on pragmatic solutions to shared problems than on grand schemes of confederation or union, such as those in Europe. We must maintain respect for each other’s national sovereignty.”

    Exactly the tale told to Europeans when the Union was a trade agreement and look at what happened afterwards. Besides when a NAU happens [it will indeed] what happens to the US Constitution?

  • Sally Jessie

    This is some of what the report says… ~~~ Lay the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America.
    The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of
    dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the
    governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade
    within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border
    action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries
    at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of
    most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within
    North America. (p.10) ~~~ This is what Heidi said about the report… “I support the Task Force report and its recommendations aimed at
    building a safer and more prosperous North America. Economic prosperity
    and a world safe from terrorism and other security threats are no doubt
    inextricably linked. While governments play an invaluable role in both
    regards, we must emphasize the imperative that economic investment be
    led and perpetuated by the private sector. There is no force proven like
    the market for aligning incentives, sourcing capital, and producing
    results like financial markets and profit-making businesses. This is
    simply necessary to sustain a higher living standard for the poorest
    among us—truly the measure of our success. As such, investment funds and
    financing mechanisms should be deemed attractive instruments by those
    committing the capital and should only be developed in conjunction with
    market participants.” (p.33) ~~~ She fully supports the NAU and Ted has proven that he does also by supporting her and voting “YEA” for the TPP! Ted was also all for illegal immigration until last spring when he found it was going to cost him this election. Then he changed his mind BUT he wants to give 300,000 American’s jobs to foreigners through a ***500%*** increase in H-1B visas … THEY BOTH ARE FOR THE NAU!

    • Jason Eisenstadt

      {Wiping away tears}. God, that is the BEST post I have read in the last month!

      BRAVO!!!!

    • susansmithNAG

      Excellent job Sally – thank you for the additional insight to the North American Union/Community and the CFR’s agenda.

    • Sandra N Rowland
  • Jason Eisenstadt

    This guy is from Texas (Author) and a Cruz contributor. That Vice president over at Goldman-Sachs deserves every bit of attention that these accusations cause.

    Ted Cruz has organized his personal narrative around a fictitious portrait of
    himself as the ‘Humble Servant of Christ’ and the “grateful son” [real
    draft-dodger] of “America”.

    Nothing in his life denotes an iota of Christian sanctity; least of all his own
    arrogant, obnoxious behavior, bereft of compassion, or any form of
    empathy. As if that were not bad enough and even insulting to us,
    Americans, Cruz has been ENABLED by Heidi, his ‘devoted house
    frau’. Nothing exposes the hypocrisy of Ted as much as the background
    of his politically ambitious, financially rapacious Heidi who probably
    should have run for POTUS based on her own political ambitions.

    Please indulge me for a few descriptive riffs here. Her CFR file, which was
    quickly removed from my perusal, reveals some very interesting evidence
    denoting a potential personae akin to our beloved sociopath, Hillary
    Clinton.

    ▪ Heidi is a member of the globalists, CFR; where her research recommends that
    Mexico and Canada [Cruz’s birthplace/citizenry] should be amalgamated
    into one North American entity. She is a true Globalist, denying American Exceptionalism!

    ▪ Heidi served loyally to one of the most corrupt, inept Sec States, Condoleeza
    Rice; whom I could barely consider either intelligent or truthful. Condi was one of those “affirmative action candidates”, like Obama; who ascended up the “greasy pole” of Republicanism through her minority status at the expense of dismissing other more qualified candidates, who could have prevented 9/11.

    ▪ Heidi was a special assistant to Robert Zoelleck whom I knew quite well. He was/is a Bush Family loyalist whose performance both in the FANNIE MAE and housing crisis leaves his tenure open to questions of financial irregularities.

    ▪ Heidi is a Managing Director of Goldman Sachs. Nothing bespeaks a greater
    hypocrisy concerning the Cruzs’ “Christian Values” then that “esteemed”
    title which represents the worst type of avarice and political cronyism
    required to ascend the troughs of that corrupt NYC bank.

    Interestingly enough our Tartuffe (Cruz) stupidly attacked ‘NY Values’; when in fact, he and his wife were buried up to their chins in the manure represented by the
    dregs of two miscreant banks. Ted and Heidi owe Goldman, a mere $1M at
    the same time, they owe Citibank, another $500K. What more could be said
    about this modern-day Tartuffe husband/wife team—brilliantly described
    some five hundred years ago? Let us not forget that he is not a natural born citizen of America; despite the fact that his mentor Lawyer Alan Dershowitz, a NYC blowhard
    defends him ad infinitum while Alan is being indicted for sexual
    deviant behavior.

    Full article http://pieczenik.blogspot.com/2016/01/ted-cruz-tartuffe-modern-day-religious_18.html

    • Daniel Ramos

      If Cruz is beholden to GS because of Heidi, then Trump is beholden to Vladimir Putin because she is the daughter of a card carrying communist.

      You might also want to look up where Donald Trump owes millions if not billions to banks, as well as Steve calling up crazy conspiracies in order to promote himself. He was dismissed from the APA for one of them.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Pieczenik

      • susansmithNAG

        Mr. Trump is a business man and has been for decades OF COURSE he’s taken loans from banks. Obviously, you’ve never started a business or else you would know the difference between taking a business loan and accepting donations from lobbiest and special interest groups while campaigning for office. Do you actually read and understand what you write Daniel?

        • Daniel Ramos

          The fundamental flaw in your argument is not understanding or not caring to understand that the entire argument FOR Trump is that he is somehow an “outsider” who will fix the inherent corruption within Washington as if he was some kind of modern day corporate connected real life superman. The fact that he is so beholden to banks (or at the very least a shareholder to one) tends to rend asunder this rosy colored view that only the most ignorant or most connected to Trump will nevertheless defend. Which one are you?

          Do you actually bother to vet the nonsense that you choose to respond with, or does ignorance just come naturally to you?

          • susansmithNAG

            Obviously, you’ve never started a business or else you would know the difference between taking a business loan and accepting donations from lobbiest and special interest groups while campaigning for office. Do you actually read and understand what you write Daniel?

          • Daniel Ramos

            Obviously you haven’t either, since you seek to think mom and pop owning the local convenience store is the equivalent of a Gordon Gekkoish wall street type like Trump, so spare me your ignorant banality.

            Can you share an original thought that doesn’t originate from in betwixt Donald Trump’s anal cavity?

    • susansmithNAG

      When I researched Heidi Cruz my thoughts were the very same….another Hillary in the making. Power and money hungry and will stay with her husband just to promote her own future political career.

  • Daniel Ramos

    So many lies from the trolling Trump strumpets here. A mere stroll across the internet for historical research can disprove many of their more ridiculous claims.

    There is so much baggage that comes with Trump that one wonders why some people choose to ignore it in order to pile on to Cruz. Could it be because Donald and Hillary’s camps are both working to undermine Cruz, because they both feel he is the larger threat?

    Naw…it’s not like they’re friends or anything lol

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/03/02/13/31C54EF900000578-3472373-image-a-5_1456925740080.jpg

    • susansmithNAG

      You obviously don’t understand how business relationships work. You also prefer to leave your rose colored glasses on – who is the idiot?

      • Daniel Ramos

        Way to make excuses for Donald’s many convenient compromises with the democrats.

        Spare me your cheerleading banality. It stems from a mind too biased to understand reality as it is, rather than what you would have it be.

        • susansmithNAG

          What specific compromises has Mr. Trump made with Democrats?

          • Daniel Ramos

            Funding the same people who have pushed for amnesty like with the DREAM act.

          • whychooseaside

            He funded Cruz’s The Jobs, Growth and Freedom Fund

          • Daniel Ramos

            That still doesn’t make him golden for funding the enemy.

            Would you vote for an arms dealer that supplies both the US and Iran?

          • susansmithNAG

            Daniel, you can’t really compare donating to politicians, as a businessman, to arms dealers. But, since you brought it up did you donate to Ronald Reagan? Because it was during his term that the arms scandal took place. You see, there isn’t that much difference between Democrats, Liberals and Republicans since the “Ron Paul” Libertarians infiltrated the Republican Party in 2008 and 2012. The only difference is the length of their whiskers looking up at us from the sewer. I’m voting for Donald Trump because he isn’t one of them. Ted Cruz is once you take a hard look at his and Heidi’s backgrounds.

          • Daniel Ramos

            Why not? The same principles apply. Carly Fiorina was raked over the coals for sending US PC’s to Iran, and deservedly so. Why does Trump get a pass?
            I didn’t get a chance to donate to RR, but i’ve read enough on it to now he was exonerated of all charges in “Iran Contra” and it was Ollie North who took the blame. Furthermore it’s my belief George HW Bush was behind Iran Contra per his CIA connections and their “Air America” drug running operations. At the time Bush had just resigned as the CIA Director and it’s not out of the question to think he still had connection to upper level officials at the firm.

            Your beliefs regarding Reagan are as ignorant as the rest of what you’ve passed of as fact here.
            And as far as the Ron Paul libertarians are concerned, they along with the conservatives were both screwed out of Delegate representation in 2012, when Boehner announced the “official” rule change through nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
            IF you really are voting for DT, you’re only doing so because of personal feeling and NOT because of any legitimate conservative inspiration.
            He is a Rino and you are too if you make good on your promise.

          • susansmithNAG

            Daniel, as a businessman Mr. Trump gave donations to many politicians including Republicans, Dems, Independents. He donated millions to the Republican Governors Association as well as others. How many “Repubican/RINO” politicians have you donated or volunteered for who ended up voting for benefits/services/drivers licenses etc (amnesty) for illegal aliens at the local, state and federal level. I have unknowingly because many lied about it to get elected and then voted down the line with the Dems/Liberals.

          • Henry Stegner

            as a businessman…… i never gave donations to liberals.,

            that is a claim to hide behind

            trump knowingly backed those who pushed amnesty. claims they did it after he supported them? go research and see years of support from trump to lioberals who were pushing amnesty before he donated to them

          • susansmithNAG

            Go research the fact that he donated to BOTH parties and that BOTH parties have supported Amnesty much to the angst of citizens and legal immigrants. I’m sure he disagreed with many of the things both parties stand for but donated anyway. Now, if he had only donated to Dems, that would be a different story but that is not the case.

          • Daniel Ramos

            You’re only serving to excuse the fact that Trump donated to the very people that have helped exacerbate the immigration issue he is later hypocritically blaming them all on. You’re making excuses for him, probably because you want him to win so Hillary can beat him.
            I can admit to having made mistakes in the past, with Dole and Bush jr. That’s the difference with us, i can admit that voting for them was a mistake. You refuse to admit that a vote for a crony capitalist progressive who funded people behind the DREAM act is a mistake.
            I haven’t voted for anyone sinc ethen i didn’t personally vet. Unlike you, i actually do my research.

          • Trump buys politicians. He knows how the game is played from the inside. Who better to pull back the curtain?

  • Keltlady

    Who do you think controls the stock market ???? Give me a break SIR… you are living a lie. Peel back the onion layers and find the real truth.

  • susansmithNAG

    Interesting how the author failed to include the first line of the quote from Heidi Cruz which says she SUPPORTS the North American “Community”/Union. Becoming a North American Union does not mean getting rid of private businesses – it means the free flow of people and goods across borders. That’s how it started in the European Union too and you see what free flowing borders and goods has done for them. That is what citizens do NOT want – they want to retain their Sovereignty and it doesn’t matter what the stated “intent” is – it matters how it actually ends up. THAT’s the point.

    As far as the rest of the “conspiracy” packed insulting comments made the the author understand that this is just one more hack job designed by the establishment GOP and left wing George Soros thugs who do not want to see their gravy train of waste, fraud, abuse and corruption come to an end. And it will if Donald Trump becomes president.

    Unfortunately, not enough citizens and legal immigrants have taken the time to educate themselves on the serious conspiracy events that’s happened in our country. This author is attempting to silence anyone who believes in “conspiracies” when in reality our government has a long list of events and dead bodies to explain. Interesting that the President would have access to all of our governments investigation files. Be smart and vote for Donald J. Trump https://thesusansmithshow.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/ted-and-heidi-cruz-exposed-for-having-ties-to-wall-streetcfr/

    • Martha Cortez

      She did not include the word “union”. Big difference. The report states each of the governments would retain their own sovereignty. She supports the report for a safer and more prosperous Norh America. Didn’t say she agreed with anything else. Then she goes on to give her opinion on what would create an economically prosperous country.

      • susansmithNAG

        I repeat the CFR website shows her saying in the very first sentence that she SUPPORTS the North American Community. – Spin it however you wish, she said what she said.

  • Sandra N Rowland

    What do you account for the Lou Dobb’s report……https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dGej8uZtOs

  • Sam Fox

    This looks a Cruz cover up site. Heidi’s comment was NOT fully shared. The 1st sentence was redacted.

    In the last part of the Task Force’s report, “Additional and Dissenting Views,” Heidi S. Cruz wrote (pp. 33-34):

    “I support the Task Force report and its recommendations aimed at building a safer and more prosperous North America. Economic prosperity and a world safe from terrorism and other security threats are no doubt inextricably linked. While governments play an invaluable role in both regards, we must emphasize the imperative that economic investment be led and perpetuated by the private sector. There is no force proven like the market for aligning incentives, sourcing capital, and producing results like financial markets and profit-making businesses. This is simply necessary to sustain a higher living standard for the poorest among us—truly the measure of our success. As such, investment funds and financing mechanisms should be deemed attractive instruments by those committing the capital and should only be developed in conjunction with market participants.”

    More info can be found at the CFR site or DC Clothesline. At DC C look for

    Can You Handle The Truth Ted & Heidi Cruz & the North American Union

    Scroll the site & find a lot more info on the Cruzes.
    Also Truthstream Media North American Union [copy & paste that one in a search]
    I wonder if blogcritic knows that Ted Cruz calls those of us who want labels on GMO ‘food’ labels “anti-science zealots” Lots on that at Natural News.
    Thank you.
    SamFox

  • Tids1960

    Dave Nalle is Executive Director of the Texas Liberty Foundation, Chairman of the Center for Foreign and Defense Policy, South Central Regional Director for the Republican Liberty Caucus and an advisory board member at the Coalition to Reduce Spending. He was Texas State Director for the Gary Johnson Presidential campaign, an adviser to the Ted Cruz senatorial campaign, Communications Director for the Travis County Republican Party and National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus
    .
    I wonder if we’re going to be reading about Dave Nalle regarding the voter fraud that was reported in Texas… ?
    Any ONE ?

  • David