Cruz fined $35K by FEC for Keeping Voters in the Dark About Over $1 Million in Loans

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill




BY TAL AXELROD - 03/15/19 03:24 PM EDT

The Federal Exchange Commission (FEC) fined Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) $35,000 for failing to accurately disclose loans to his 2012 Senate bid from Citibank and Goldman Sachs.

The fine stems from a 2016 complaint filed by the Campaign Legal Center (CLC) over a loans totaling $1,064,000. The FEC found that Cruz’s reporting violated a campaign finance statute.

“Candidates should take seriously their legal requirement to disclose where their campaign money comes from. Today’s announcement is an acknowledgement that Cruz’s campaign deprived voters of that critical information.” the CLC said in a statement.

“In the homestretch of a high-profile election, voters were misled about Cruz’s personal and campaign finances. This is particularly harmful given that financial issues were at issue in the campaign and could have factored into voters’ decision-making at the ballot box.”

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/434291-cruz-fined-35k-by-fec-for-keeping-voters-in-the-dark-about-over-1-million-in

[OneBlueDotBama]

1. Federal "Exchange" Commission?

Are the editors having a late Friday liquid lunch?

[red dog 1]

2. It's already been corrected by The Hill

[Sucha NastyWoman]

3. What horrible consequences!

I’m sure if I were running I would certainly disclose all loans so that I never had to pay a $35,000 fine seven years later, compared to millions raised for my campaign.

[angrychair]

4. Picture perfect example

of how absurd election laws are.

He is fined $35,000, 3 yrs later and way after the fact, for his illegal use of over a million dollars in one of the closest Senate races in a long time.

No other repercussions or implications.

Fucking ridiculous.

[diva77]

5. +1000 This! So many of our laws having to do with elections are weak or never enforced, or

unenforceable. Usually, it is the rethugs who are the beneficiaries.

[not fooled]

8. And caught only because

an outside group filed a complaint.

[cstanleytech]

6. FEC is a sick joke.

[Mendocino]

7. Heidi Cruz

worked for Goldman Sachs. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

[TrollBuster9090]

10. As far as I know, she still does work for Goldman Sachs. Doesn't she?

And isn't that a conflict of interest? (I mean, YES. OBVIOUSLY it's a conflict of interest. But there should be a law against it. Although, I have no doubt there isn't a law. Regardless of political party, Congress does everything it can to create their own job security.)

[nitpicker]

15. Still at GS

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

[TeamPooka]

9. The penalty should be $2 million

[nitpicker]

14. +1

Instead he got a wrist slap.

[TrollBuster9090]

11. Yeah, this is bullshit. Next the FEC will be fining Donald Trump $10,000 for failing to disclose

...for failing to disclose a $10,000,000 campaign contribution from Oleg Deripaska that was neatly laundered through the NRA.

The FEC is a TOTAL JOKE, and the voters are the punch line.


If Cruz's supporters knew he was being BANKROLLED by GOLDMAN SACHS, a few of them might have stayed home on election day, and that corrupt little worm might not still be the senator from Texas right now. Cruz DELIBERATELY misled his voters in order to win, and when that happens you should hold another election. Even North Carolina recognizes this, so I don't know why the FEC wouldn't.

[stuffmatters]

12. How "convenient" the FEC did not annouce this 5 months ago during Cruz/Beto campaign in 2018?.

Appears to me the FEC wanted to make sure voters did not know Cruz was bankrolled by Goldman Sachs in 2012 to aid & abet his reelection in 2018. In 2018 clearly the FEC itself supported Cruz and "deprived voters of that critical info" that could have swayed their vote away from Cruz REelection in his very narrow victory over Beto..

[Honeycombe8]

13. Looks like this case was just ruled on.

My guess (and it's just a guess) is that they don't make announcements on investigations that are in progress. Even if it had made announcement, the announcement would have been in 2016, which the investigation was opened.

[stuffmatters]

16. I guess I'm more cynical than you.2016 to Nov 2018, plenty of time to investigate a loan and lie.

It occurred in 2012 & I even remember Cruz denying the loan came from GS years before the official 2016 complaint to the FEC. The accusation that GS was bankrolling Cruz was in the ether during his first campaign. He campaigned twice & won twice claiming that he & Heidi mortgaged "all they had" for him to run. It was a favorite, constant and fundamental lie during both campaigns; even the FEC stated that disclosure of the true loan source (Goldman Sachs) could have cost Cruz election, swayed determining votes in both very close elections. To me it's alarming that the ruling was not made by the FEC (it takes 4 votes on this Commission of 3 GOP +3 Dems to get a ruling.)in time for voters to know the truth/protect voters well before a second election. It's either total incompetence or strategic & victorious slow walking IMHO.