Click here to see the video of Ted Cruz reading William Travis’ letter from the Alamo.
Cruz undercuts and assails Republican congressional leadership on the strategy of tying Homeland Security funding to stopping President OBama’s “amnesty” for certain illegal immigrants.
Click here to read the full March 2, 2015 article from WND.com and see the video of Ted Cruz discussing the way congressional Republicans should have taken a different non-essential agency hostage.
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, strongly suggested the fix was in from the beginning by GOP leaders to sabotage the fight against Obama’s amnesty, saying, “The cake was baked from the start.”
The senator said that was evident to him immediately when GOP leaders chose a bill funding the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, as the vehicle to try to stop the amnesty President Obama granted to five-million illegal immigrants by executive order in November.
Cruz made the observations while speaking to a small group of reporters across the street from the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, on Thursday.
WND kicked off the conversation by asking: Why won’t GOP leaders fight amnesty?
If the GOP leadership had really wanted to stop amnesty, Cruz explained, they would not have attached the provision defunding Obama’s amnesty to the DHS funding bill.
They would have attached it to a bill defunding the Environmental Protection Agency, “or some other non-essential agency.”
He described such agencies as “hostages the GOP could afford to hold.”
Ted Cruz does not regret his role in the 2013 government shutdown, he just wishes he had spent more time explaining his strategy to “elite opinion makers.”
Click here to read the full February 27, 2015 story from Politico (quoted in part below).
Ted Cruz said Friday that “the single biggest mistake” he made during the fight that led to a federal government shutdown in 2013 was not spending enough time explaining his strategy “to elite opinion makers.”
The Texas senator presented himself in an after-dinner speech at the Club for Growth’s annual meeting here as the most ideologically pure candidate in the 2016 Republican presidential field.
If he could relive those fateful weeks before the government in 2013, Cruz was asked after a stem-winder of a speech, would he pursue the same “take-no-prisoners” approach?
“By and large, yes,” he answered. “But I do think I made some mistakes. The single biggest mistake during the Obamacare defund find that I think I made was that I and our allies did not spend enough time explaining the specific strategy to elite opinion makers. There was confusion that made it less effective.”
The conservative hero who led Congress into a 2013 government shutdown is falling flat says Heidi Przybla in Bloomberg Politics.
The conservative hero who led Congress into a 2013 government shutdown over Obamacare is falling flat with his latest demonstration over President Barack Obama’s immigration orders.
Just as the field of Republican presidential aspirants grows, the Texas senator is trying to burnish his conservative credentials. In his most high-profile push, Cruz is trying to goad his Senate colleagues into blocking the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as attorney general and other nominees to force the president to reverse his immigration executive orders.
Here’s the problem: no one seems to be paying much attention.
Even Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, Cruz’s homestate colleague who plans to oppose Lynch’s nomination, says her vote should not be held up. Republicans are instead waging the battle over immigration with a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security.
Cruz’s cold streak stretches back to at least December, when he failed to rally his colleagues, some of whom were forced to divert planes back to Washington, around an unusual Saturday procedural vote to oppose Obama on immigration that held up a $1.1 trillion spending bill.
Even some of the most vocal critics of Obama’s orders covering about five million immigrants, like Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, rejected Cruz’s effort and did not try to hide it. “You should have an end goal in sight if you’re going to do these types of things and I don’t see an end goal other than irritating a lot of people,” Hatch said.
Afterwards, Cruz apologized for the inconveniences caused to his colleagues, according to sources familiar with a Republican policy luncheon on Dec. 16.
“They’re trying to marginalize him for sure,” said Brad Blakeman, a senior staff member in President George W. Bush’s administration. “There has to be some kind of penalty for not being a team player.”
For Cruz, being on the outs with his party leaders isn’t necessarily a bad thing. His unpopularity in Washington just seems to boost his standing with the Tea Party base.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s strategy of blocking a vote on President Barack Obama’s attorney general nominee until the White House relents on immigration executive actions ran into a brick wall Wednesday: his own GOP colleagues.
Republican senators dismissed Cruz’s proposal for denying Loretta Lynch a confirmation vote in the Judiciary Committee and on the Senate floor as part of the Texas firebrand’s strategy to use “every procedural tool” at the Senate’s disposal to override Obama’s actions, which could affect nearly 5 million undocumented immigrants.
Disagreement with Cruz’s latest tactic was voiced by Republicans who both support and oppose Lynch’s nomination to succeed Attorney General Eric Holder, and came despite the fact that other ways of expressing GOP opposition to the immigration moves have hit roadblocks.
“Republicans have been complaining about Eric Holder for a long time; this is an opportunity to make that change,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who plans to vote for Lynch. “I don’t think we should delay it at all. I think we ought to get her over there and get her working.”
A bill funding the Department of Homeland Security failed in the Senate Tuesday because it would block the president’s executive action on deportations. The question now is, what will Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell try next?
The department runs out of money on Feb. 27. Texas senator and potential presidential candidate Ted Cruz insists DHS not get any money unless Republicans get to undo the president’s immigration policies. That places McConnell in a dilemma — how does he placate Cruz and his allies while avoiding a shutdown of the agency?
Republican Cruz has vowed he will stop at nothing to block the president’s executive action on immigration. And when you ask him exactly how he intends to do that, he says it’s already in writing. Go look it up.
“I wrote a long op-ed two months ago, laying [out] precisely what we should do. We should use the power of confirmations and we should use the power of the purse,” Cruz said as he slipped into an elevator at the Capitol.
His op-ed argues those are the two ways to defeat the president’s executive action. Block all nominations, except those vital to national security. And deny funding for Obama’s plan to defer deportations for some 5 million immigrants living here illegally.
Problem for Cruz is, he can’t actually make either proposal happen.
“If you’re a coalition of one or five, you can gum up the works for a little bit of time, but it’s very hard to grind the Senate to a halt,” said Sarah Binder of the Brookings Institution.
Traditionally, the Senate does give individual senators some leverage. For example, Cruz could object to holding votes on nominations, or object to a bill that funds the Department of Homeland Security but doesn’t undercut the president’s immigration policies. However, it’s ultimately up to the Senate majority leader to decide what actually reaches the floor.
“Mitch McConnell obviously has a whole range of incentives and a whole range of goals that he has as leader. He’s not necessarily going to see eye to eye strictly with what Sen. Cruz wants to do,” says Binder.
So Cruz has thrown down the gauntlet, leaving it up to McConnell to make the next move on the president’s executive action. Last December on the Senate floor, Cruz said he’d give his leader the benefit of the doubt for now — and added this warning.
“I would note that a whole lot of citizens across this country feel a little bit like Charlie Brown with Lucy and the football, where in fight after fight, leadership and Congress says, ‘We’ll fight next time. Not this time.’ “
Confirmation hearings for Loretta Lynch, President Obama’s nominee to replace Eric Holder, got underway this week. One of her inquisitors was Senator Ted Cruz (R – Tex) who had plenty of questions, many related to the performance of the current Attorney General and how her approach might differ, if at all. The conversation would, in my opinion, be described as polite and professional, while still being confrontational. This first section (which starts in the first couple of minutes in the video below) deals with the limits of discretion in prosecution.
With regard to the limits of executive power, Sen. Cruz asked, “Let me ask about your understanding of prosecutorial discretion. Would it allow a subsequent president… to state that there are other laws that the administration will not enforce – labor laws, environmental laws – would it allow a president to say every existing federal labor law shall heretofore not apply to the state of Texas because I am using my prosecutorial discretion to refuse to enforce those laws? In your judgment, would that be constitutional?”
Nominee Lynch responded, “Again, I would have to know what legal basis was being proposed for that.”
Sen. Cruz continued, “I find it remarkable that you are unable to answer that question. I can answer it straightforward. It would be patently unconstitutional for any subsequent president to refuse to enforce the tax laws, or the labor laws, or the immigration laws for the very same reason that President Obama’s actions refusing to enforce immigration laws are unconstitutional. And it is discouraging that a nominee who hopes to serve as attorney general will not give a straightforward answer to that question.”