"Ted Cruz Didn’t Disclose Loan From Goldman Sachs for His First Senate Campaign"

[$tevie]

I can't decide if this is a "bad thing" or if it is just something that looks bad but will ultimately turn out to be not a big deal.

It does make him seem a bit disingenuous, though, doesn't it?

There would have been nothing improper about Mr. Cruz obtaining bank loans for his campaign, as long as they were disclosed. But such a disclosure might have conveyed the wrong impression for his candidacy.

Mr. Cruz, a conservative former Texas solicitor general, was campaigning as a populist firebrand who criticized Wall Street bailouts and the influence of big banks in Washington. It is a theme he has carried into his bid for the Republican nomination for president.

Earlier this year, when asked about the political clout of Goldman Sachs in particular, he replied, “Like many other players on Wall Street and big business, they seek out and get special favors from government.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/us/pol...tion=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=57236604&pgtype=article

[hal]

I doubt it would lead to anything more than a minor fine, BUT the optics are horrible! Great material for TV adverts. If he goes on to be the nominee, he won't be able to use Clinton's WS connections against her and that's one of his biggest weapons.

[Lemon Drop]

Cruz is married to a managing director of Goldman Sachs, currently on leave to help him run for office. He's no stranger to Wall Street. IMO she's the brains of that operation and probably the one who should be running for office.
Given all that goes along with financing national campaigns I don't think it's a huge deal unless she did something unethical as an insider, then he can blame it on her.

[Ombligo]

It won't hurt him.

The average Cruz supporter thinks Goldman Saks is really:

[Speedy]

LOL.

Ombligo wrote:
It won't hurt him.

The average Cruz supporter thinks Goldman Saks is really:

[pdq]

$tevie wrote:
It does make him seem a bit disingenuous, though, doesn't it?

Teddy Cruz, disingenuous? Say it ain't so, eh?

[$tevie]

But wait! There's more!
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/16/us/pol...artner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

The Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, already facing scrutiny for not disclosing a Goldman Sachs loan he used for his 2012 Senate campaign, also failed to disclose a second loan, from Citibank, for the same race, according to a letter he sent Thursday to federal election officials.

The one-page letter said that the “underlying source” of money for a series of personal loans Mr. Cruz made to his Senate campaign in Texas included both bank loans, which totaled as much as $1 million. Both loans were “inadvertently omitted” from the required filings, the letter said. Previously, Mr. Cruz has only acknowledged using the loan from Goldman for his campaign.

The latest disclosure casts further doubt on his oft-stated story of having liquidated his entire family savings of slightly more than $1 million to fuel a come-from-behind win in the Republican primary. The tale has become part of a campaign narrative of a populist, scrappy Mr. Cruz putting everything on the line to overcome a wealthy establishment opponent.