Trump commits very dishonesty hes been accusing Cruz of

Trump commits the very dishonesty he’s been accusing Cruz of. Watch Trump telling voters in Nevada that Cruz has left the state and therefore doesn’t deserve their support, when in fact Cruz was in the state still campaigning.

This post was last modified on January 26, 2021

J.P. Travis: Born and raised in Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1976 graduate of University of Michigan, father, grandfather, husband, founder and CEO of Travelyn Publishing (http://www.travelynpublishing.com/), and passionate anti-government believer in individual liberty.

View Comments (24)

  • This reads like more media bias against Trump. He never mention Cruz by name when he said some candidates had left the state, all he said was "these guys" gave their little speeches then left.

    • And now YOU are lying. He didn't say "some" candidates had left, he didn't say "these guys," he says "these other guys they're ALL gone." When you have to twist yourself into knots and misrepresent what the man said in order to avoid admitting he lied, it's time to question your support.

  • I won't be voting for Trump, but after 8 years of one SOB as POTUS, perhaps we can have one who "our" SOB for a change.

    • Why do you never address the situation under discussion? Did Trump say Cruz had left the state when Cruz was still in the state, or not?

      • Nope, listen to the video that was posted with the article. Trump very clearly said "these guys" have left the state, he never said which candidates had left by name.

        • Yes, that's what he said. Specifically, he said, "These other guys, they're all gone." But Cruz was still in the state, still talking to voters, still campaigning. This wouldn't be a big deal except Trump is running around like a kindergartner calling Cruz a liar for saying Carson had left Iowa and was quitting (which Cruz actually had a sound basis for believing since CNN reported exactly that). I would say I'm interested in how you justify Trump's lying, but I'm not. People who swallow swill and call it wine don't interest me.

          • But, it wasn't Cruz that said it, it was the MSM (CNN) and Cruz's spokesman, who is a RNC shill, AND who was fired.

  • Ya know, I DO like Cruz and I've been hearing lots of good things about him on our local Boston radio show (Jeff Kuhner, Boston's bulldozer, clearing away the liberal bull, look up his shows on WRKO.com or by name on Facebook) since long before any of Cruz presidential aspirations were even whispered about elsewhere.

    He is touted high and low as being a man of principle,a conservative's conservative, and the closest man we'll see in our lifetime to Ronald Reagan, especially when some conservative pundit points at how we "moved to the middle" with Romney & McCain, and would have done better fielding a REAL conservative: such as Cruz.

    I will go even farther, and stipulate Cruz is probably even MORE conservative than Reagan.

    However.

    Ronald Reagan had a personality and a charisma that was dam near magical. He didn't sweep to two landslide victories on the basis of his strict-constructionist analysis of the Second Amendment, or the Eighth. He STEAMROLLED the Demonrats with his personality and vision, the way he could move an audience. Even his foes conceded that.

    Ted Cruz, you are no Ronald Reagan.

    Yes, Cruz would be an excellent president -- if he can win it. Recent polls now show all three Republican potentials beating Broom Hilly -- narrowly. Of the three, Cruz would probably be the best president, but in my own opinion, the least likely to win it. Ideally, we would have a candidate with the brassy, bombastic appeal of Trump, the flash of Rubio, and the brilliance of Cruz. But ya know what? We aint got that.

    Ya know what else we aint got? A snowball's chance in hell for this country if another ffkng Demonrat gets elected. It's DONE.

    ANY Republican is better than ANY Demonrat, period, full stop, end transmission. And by God after watching and hearing what happened in 08 and 12, I promise to PERSONALLY come around and cockpunch any sanctimonious snot who sits home on election day and helps elect another Demonrat because the Republican candidate doesn't meet his own exacting standards of political purity.

    • you know, if everyone who says "I like Cruz but I don't think he can win" would vote for him instead of giving in to that hand-wringing worry, he would actually win.

      • Watching the Kelly File and she is interviewing all the Rep candidates except Trump, who had a conflict. My wife said she couldn't stand Cruz's voice. I told her that he is our best chance to save this country.

    • The only poll I've seen on who stands the better chance of winning in the general, says that Cruz does better than Rubio or Trump. Granted, none of those polls are worth a bucket of warm spit, but I don't see where you get the idea that Cruz can't win. If you're saying we need a bombastic, lying, pseudo-conservative mop-top whose only rallying point is a position against immigration that he NEVER ACTUALLY HAD UNTIL HE DECIDED TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT, a position which seems to be the EXACT OPPOSITE OF EVERYTHING HE EVER SAID ABOUT IMMIGRATION BEFORE THAT POINT, I'd just as soon lose the general election. I'd rather go down in flames with a modicum of integrity than go down in flames looking like a sucker. I'm sick of RINOs making me look like a sucker. It ain't gonna happen again.

    • Of course not. That whole thing in Iowa was an invention of the media. CNN made the report, Cruz and Rubio BOTH used it, but then only Cruz got blamed after CNN corrected itself. Now then, on what basis other than sheer dishonesty did Trump say Cruz had left Nevada? I'd love to hear his excuse.

        • The link has a freakin' video of him saying it. For crying out loud, I can lead you to the water but I can't make you drink.

      • Yet CNN gave Cruz a untrue on stating what CNN said. Even has one of their bimbos come out swinging at Cruz about him knocking CNN. SMDH.