Ted Cruz: An Uncanny Valley Bag of Evacuation Tries To Sell Jan. 6 as Terrorism

 

Today, it is clear Sen. Ted Cruz decided he is running for president. He thought that by showing up to this Jan. 6 shammitte and calling what happened a terrorist attack, it would boost his chances. This kind of idiot miscalculation shows he is clearly a graduate of the Ivy League. This level of miscalculation betrays that Cruz is nothing but a worthless, sleazy politician with a presentation that is as unnerving as 911 phone call recordings. He doesn’t care about the base, and this has been clear from so many leaders of the Republican Party. Look at Rep. Dan Crenshaw. He was pushing a bill the other day that is nothing but giveaways to big tech. He fights for them and not the base that is perennially abused by these trash companies. Crenshaw is nothing more than Sen. Lindsey Graham with an eye patch.

They did not recover so much as a plastic butter knife from that so called “insurrection.” Former President Donald Trump offered to shore up the National Guard and the Capitol Police, and the mayors of the District of Columbia both said no! Why are we pretending this was a terrorist attack? Then there is this.

We have known for a long time that there was no coordination. It was an uncoordinated terrorist attack? How does that work? A bunch of random people from all over the country all decided individually they would do acts of terror with no weapons to achieve their shared political objective. This is why former President Barack Obama was so intent on keeping the 2012 Benghazi attack a spontaneous demonstration. You see, Democrats get to call rockets launched at our embassy by Al Qaeda and U.S. Navy SEALs and an ambassador murdered “spontaneous demonstrations.” A bunch of terrorists were randomly walking with rocket launchers near our embassy on the totally random date of 9/11 and murdered our personnel. Spontaneous demonstration! A bunch of people wandered around the capital for a couple hours and didn’t bring so much as a water pistol with no coordinated premeditation. Terrorist attack!

Why isn’t the paragraph above the line endlessly repeated by the GOP? Why doesn’t the GOP endlessly call President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris terrorist enablers and co-conspirators for fighting to get the Black Lives Matter and Antifa losers who burned down cities, looted, and killed bail? Our cities being burned down caused far more damage to our nation by every measure than a guy putting some mud flakes kicked off from his sneakers on top of Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s desk.

And why are the Democrats doing this? Why are they trying to sell Jan. 6 way past its expiration date as an issue anyone cares about? Because they have no agenda. They have no president. They have no accomplishments. They have nothing! So, they are running on if you vote for the GOP, you are a terrorist like the terrorists who caused Jan. 6. That is the only reason the Democrats are milking this until election day. And what does Cruz do? Yeah, it was a terrorist attack. I sound sober and reasonable, independents! Vote for me! No thanks. And the only reason we have to put up with this nonsense is because of the GOP and politicians like Cruz.

Imagine if we had a real party that was investigating Democratic National Committee involvement in the riots. Imagine if we had a real party that was not interested in letting Democrats get away with calling Al Qaeda launching a rocket and murdering one of our top representatives a spontaneous demonstration but Grandma Jo a terrorist! It would be a much different situation. Where are the state GOP reps launching committee investigations into DNC participation in and incitement regarding their cities in their states being burned down? Why aren’t the media’s texts being subpoenaed during those dog days of summer by state committees? Let us get a look at what real incitement looks like leading up to election day. Let us get a gander at what real coordination looks like in order to drive a left-wing narrative on TV about Trump.

We put up with all the indignity of the Democrats because we have a party that routinely will never punch back and punch back hard. The Democrats would not dare pull this kind of crap if they knew they would get it back tenfold. They do know they will get guys like Cruz who will fan the flames of their narrative and give them legitimacy to keep their strategy going as best they can. What they should get is committee investigations launched against the DNC in every GOP-controlled chamber where there was a hint of rioting or political violence in the name of left-wing causes. But the DNC will never get that as retaliation. They know it. And so we the base have to put up with all of it. I am a Texan, and I will never vote for Ted Cruz ever again.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 63 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    The context is his questioning of the Capitol police chief. I can see that he might have been currying favour with the witness in order to elicit testimony that would impugn Pelosi’s handling of matters – and I suspect there is something big and rotten being covered up there – but he didn’t have to use that particular form of words. The fact that it didn’t ring sufficient alarm bells in his brain before it made it out of his mouth is, to me, evidence that he has fatally lost touch.

    • #31
  2. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    genferei (View Comment):

    The context is his questioning of the Capitol police chief. I can see that he might have been currying favour with the witness in order to elicit testimony that would impugn Pelosi’s handling of matters – and I suspect there is something big and rotten being covered up there – but he didn’t have to use that particular form of words. The fact that it didn’t ring sufficient alarm bells in his brain before it made it out of his mouth is, to me, evidence that he has fatally lost touch.

    Fatally, huh?  One careless turn of phrase is fatal?

    This is so bizarre to me.  Cruz is one of the best that we have.  Do you really think that the path to victory is to read Ted Cruz out of the conservative movement?

    Look, it’s perfectly fine to criticize his choice of terms.  The catastrophizing is getting tiresome, to me.

    • #32
  3. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    BDB (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    I always come back to as the clearest, most egregious, least excusable thing Trump did in his 2016 run or in his presidency was when he called Cruz’s father a conspirator in the JFK assassination. Cruz had a right to swear and curse Trump.

    Agree. Trump was my guy, and I have no problem hitting him with a rolled-up newspaper when he soils the carpet.

    Likewise. Now somebody needs to swat Cruz one time. All these guys need regular keeping in line.

    • #33
  4. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    genferei (View Comment):

    The context is his questioning of the Capitol police chief. I can see that he might have been currying favour with the witness in order to elicit testimony that would impugn Pelosi’s handling of matters – and I suspect there is something big and rotten being covered up there – but he didn’t have to use that particular form of words. The fact that it didn’t ring sufficient alarm bells in his brain before it made it out of his mouth is, to me, evidence that he has fatally lost touch.

    Fatally, huh? One careless turn of phrase is fatal?

    This is so bizarre to me. Cruz is one of the best that we have. Do you really think that the path to victory is to read Ted Cruz out of the conservative movement?

    Look, it’s perfectly fine to criticize his choice of terms. The catastrophizing is getting tiresome, to me.

    This is a debating society, not a star chamber. There is no ‘reading someone out of the conservative movement’ that power isn’t held by anyone which is why we will continue to be punished for Trump (wrongly) and punished by Cruz (vilely).  

    The most anyone can do is throw shade and vote for someone else. And I think Cruz has earned both of those and more. 

    But that’s all we got because that’s all there is. 

    • #34
  5. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    genferei (View Comment):

    The context is his questioning of the Capitol police chief. I can see that he might have been currying favour with the witness in order to elicit testimony that would impugn Pelosi’s handling of matters – and I suspect there is something big and rotten being covered up there – but he didn’t have to use that particular form of words. The fact that it didn’t ring sufficient alarm bells in his brain before it made it out of his mouth is, to me, evidence that he has fatally lost touch.

    Fatally, huh? One careless turn of phrase is fatal?

    This is so bizarre to me. Cruz is one of the best that we have. Do you really think that the path to victory is to read Ted Cruz out of the conservative movement?

    Look, it’s perfectly fine to criticize his choice of terms. The catastrophizing is getting tiresome, to me.

    I looked at my watch during a debate and lost the presidency of my student union, so yes, it happens.

    • #35
  6. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    TBA (View Comment):
    The most anyone can do is throw shade and vote for someone else. And I think Cruz has earned both of those and more. 

    Depending on the alternatives…Cruz might still be the best option.  I am looking at the Governor’s race in TX in March and the choices aren’t wonderful.  They aren’t bad per se, but I would not call them good.

    • #36
  7. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):
    The most anyone can do is throw shade and vote for someone else. And I think Cruz has earned both of those and more.

    Depending on the alternatives…Cruz might still be the best option. I am looking at the Governor’s race in TX in March and the choices aren’t wonderful. They aren’t bad per se, but I would not call them good.

    I’ll check back if he wins the presidential primary; I have no intention of tanking our party’s chances by being a Never [              ]. 

    Because I’m not that kind of selfish [redacted].  

    • #37
  8. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    TBA (View Comment):

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):
    The most anyone can do is throw shade and vote for someone else. And I think Cruz has earned both of those and more.

    Depending on the alternatives…Cruz might still be the best option. I am looking at the Governor’s race in TX in March and the choices aren’t wonderful. They aren’t bad per se, but I would not call them good.

    I’ll check back if he wins the presidential primary; I have no intention of tanking our party’s chances by being a Never [ ].

    Because I’m not that kind of selfish [redacted].

    I’m thinking more of him as Senator.  If he runs for President again I might vote for him, or I might not, depending on who else runs.

     

    • #38
  9. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):
    The most anyone can do is throw shade and vote for someone else. And I think Cruz has earned both of those and more.

    Depending on the alternatives…Cruz might still be the best option. I am looking at the Governor’s race in TX in March and the choices aren’t wonderful. They aren’t bad per se, but I would not call them good.

    I’ll check back if he wins the presidential primary; I have no intention of tanking our party’s chances by being a Never [ ].

    Because I’m not that kind of selfish [redacted].

    I’m thinking more of him as Senator. If he runs for President again I might vote for him, or I might not, depending on who else runs.

     

    He’s Texas’ problem. 

    • #39
  10. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    I saw Ted on Tucker Carlson tonight; tapdancing furiously.  I think he’s just now catching on to what he said.

    In other words, just another Washington schmuck.

    • #40
  11. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Cruz came on Tucker tonight and offered the “I made a mistake” defense. More particularly he said he always calls people who assault police “terrorists” but realized that using it again in the hearing created an opening for Democrats to smear the people at the Capitol who did not assault the police. Tucker challenged Cruz that even calling people who assault police (something Tucker does not support in anay way) “terrorists” is a misuse of the word. In other words Cruz politicizes a particular crime all the time, so when he aids a broader politicization than he intended, we should give him a pass. 

    Shark. Jumped. 

     

    • #41
  12. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    After seeing him on Tucker, I’ll give him partial credit for recognizing that he done effed up. I would have preferred something more straightforward. “I was wrong to characterize it as a terrorist attack. That was excessive and hyperbolic.” I would have ever so much more respect for a politician who admitted a mistake instead of “What you heard me say with my words was not what I intended for you to understand. But he seems to at least recognize that he made a mistake, even if he doesn’t quite admit it.

    • #42
  13. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    After seeing him on Tucker, I’ll give him partial credit for recognizing that he done effed up. I would have preferred something more straightforward. “I was wrong to characterize it as a terrorist attack. That was excessive and hyperbolic.” I would have ever so much more respect for a politician who admitted a mistake instead of “What you heard me say with my words was not what I intended for you to understand. But he seems to at least recognize that he made a mistake, even if he doesn’t quite admit it.

    Yes. Fundamentally it is an egregious smear and/or a redefinition of “terrorism” which the left desperately wants to re-define as any act against the government (when it is in control of Democrats).

     

    They would put every Trump supporter in prison if they could – or at least in a re-education camp.

    To be less hyperbolic. Our law enforcement agencies, down to many local police precincts and up to the FBI are politicizing any protest or push-back against government edicts and clearly seek to criminalize dissent (dissent against Democrats and their policies that is)

    Does Cruz not understand this?  

    He’s off the market as far as I’m concerned. 

    • #43
  14. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    After seeing him on Tucker, I’ll give him partial credit for recognizing that he done effed up. I would have preferred something more straightforward. “I was wrong to characterize it as a terrorist attack. That was excessive and hyperbolic.” I would have ever so much more respect for a politician who admitted a mistake instead of “What you heard me say with my words was not what I intended for you to understand. But he seems to at least recognize that he made a mistake, even if he doesn’t quite admit it.

    I suspect he got thousands of angry calls and emails today. I sent him one. That’s what told him he screwed up. I don’t think he has good political instincts. He’s too aware of his own cleverness. He’s a slightly more savvy Alan Keyes.

    • #44
  15. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    I just watched Cruz’s explanation on Tucker – ughhh!!! He made it worse, dug that hole deeper.

    That was painful. 

    • #45
  16. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Just saw the segment. If he’s calling people who assault police “terrorists” for ten years. he’s just been hoisted by his own knee-jerk petard.

    Because people who assault police are not necessarily terrorists and the word has a real meaning, which Ted has been destroying for a decade under the radar he now admits. 

    If we are to have a country that gives law enforcement special privileges to go after terrorists and use extra-constitutional powers as well, then throwing around these definitions – even for acts Antifa committed in many cases – is despicable. We are having a massive albeit under-the-radar debate over how broadly the Intel agencies can define terrorism. Now, political dissidents are defined as terrorists so the deep state can go after them. This is Stasi-like activity in the United States!

    Does Ted Cruz know how easy it is to be charged with assaulting a police officer? If you are being arrested and get the wrong cop and/or don’t comply properly, or somehow in a struggle and that results in the slightest injury to the officer, you will be charged with assaulting an officer. Now whether how much that deserves prosecution depends on the circumstances, but it’s certainly not terrorism. 

    • #46
  17. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Franco (View Comment):

    Just saw the segment. If he’s calling people who assault police “terrorists” for ten years. he’s just been hoisted by his own knee-jerk petard.

    Because people who assault police are not necessarily terrorists and the word has a real meaning, which Ted has been destroying for a decade under the radar he now admits.

    If we are to have a country that gives law enforcement special privileges to go after terrorists and use extra-constitutional powers as well, then throwing around these definitions – even for acts Antifa committed in many cases – is despicable. We are having a massive albeit under-the-radar debate over how broadly the Intel agencies can define terrorism. Now, political dissidents are defined as terrorists so the deep state can go after them. This is Stasi-like activity in the United States!

    Does Ted Cruz know how easy it is to be charged with assaulting a police officer? If you are being arrested and get the wrong cop and/or don’t comply properly, or somehow in a struggle and that results in the slightest injury to the officer, you will be charged with assaulting an officer. Now whether how much that deserves prosecution depends on the circumstances, but it’s certainly not terrorism.

    I’d like to see judges come down of false claims of officer assault.

    Added: And stupid/weak claims of same.

    • #47
  18. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Just watched the clip.  Stomach-churning.

    I stand by my suspicion that he’s buying Maverick insurance.

    • #48
  19. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Just imagine how quickly he would have stumbled and stammered into Tucker’s view if he hadn’t been flame-sprayed by furious folks like us.  Only credible threats get attention.

    • #49
  20. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    It’s getting easier and easier to tell which members of the Congress are honorable and which are turncoat swamp creatures. 

    If they’re fighting for the J6 political prisoners, and recognize the election was stolen they’re uncompromised. If not, then they’re bought. 

    • #50
  21. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    It’s getting easier and easier to tell which members of the Congress are honorable and which are turncoat swamp creatures.

    If they’re fighting for the J6 political prisoners, and recognize the election was stolen they’re uncompromised. If not, then they’re bought.

    @vinceguerra, excellent point. Every politician needs to be asked two questions and they need to get both right: (1) do you support credible elections (making vote counting transparent, voter rolls up to date and  restricted to eligible voters, positive verification of voter identity)? and (2) are J6 accused entitled to due process (presumption of innocence, effective counsel, speedy trial, proportionate sentencing, fair treatment pending trial)?

    • #51
  22. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Among the junk mail I received yesterday were fund-raising requests from NRSC, Cruz, and Crenshaw. I responded appropriately to each. 

    • #52
  23. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    Django (View Comment):

    Among the junk mail I received yesterday were fund-raising requests from NRSC, Cruz, and Crenshaw. I responded appropriately to each.

    Many years ago there was anger against the GOP and when they requested a donation they got a check for $0.09 with the memo reading “Not Another Dime”.  I wonder if I should find my checkbook again for various politicians who seem to think that they don’t need to actually represent us, but rather what they want?

    • #53
  24. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    It’s getting easier and easier to tell which members of the Congress are honorable and which are turncoat swamp creatures.

    If they’re fighting for the J6 political prisoners, and recognize the election was stolen they’re uncompromised. If not, then they’re bought.

    Those members of Congress should be easy to count; probably on the back of an envelope.  Forgive my cynicism.

    • #54
  25. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    It’s getting easier and easier to tell which members of the Congress are honorable and which are turncoat swamp creatures.

    If they’re fighting for the J6 political prisoners, and recognize the election was stolen they’re uncompromised. If not, then they’re bought.

    Those members of Congress should be easy to count; probably on the back of an envelope. Forgive my cynicism.

    I’m up to 0. I’ll let you know when I get to 1. 

    • #55
  26. DonG (CAGW is a hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a hoax)
    @DonG

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    I would have preferred that he hadn’t used the term “violent terrorist attack” and had rather used something like “riot,” but referring to some of the rioting as a “terrorist attack” is accurate, in my view. 

    Not every protest is an act of terrorism.  It needs to be willful, planned violence and have a political goal.  Protesting corrupt elections is not a political goal.  Sorry, “terrorism” does not apply to J6. 

    Contrast that with BLM and anti-FA that burn and destroy cities to bring about a Communism revolution.  There is clearly planned violence with a clear political goal. 

    • #56
  27. DonG (CAGW is a hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a hoax)
    @DonG

    Flicker (View Comment):
    I always come back to as the clearest, most egregious, least excusable thing Trump did in his 2016 run or in his presidency was when he called Cruz’s father a conspirator in the JFK assassination. 

    It is ironic that Cruz chose to parrot the talking points of today’s communists.  I wonder how papa Cruz would feel about Teddy throwing in with the commies?

    • #57
  28. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DonG (CAGW is a hoax) (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    I always come back to as the clearest, most egregious, least excusable thing Trump did in his 2016 run or in his presidency was when he called Cruz’s father a conspirator in the JFK assassination.

    It is ironic that Cruz chose to parrot the talking points of today’s communists. I wonder how papa Cruz would feel about Teddy throwing in with the commies?

    Notice I didn’t say it was inexcusable, just the least excusable thing he did.  Frankly, I thought it was dumb, and showed what I thought at the time was fear of Cruz beating him — lashing out blindly, kind of.  One thing it did, though, is show how cross-footed Cruz was in his response.  It seemed to take forever for him to decide that an emotional “How dare you, you slime, accuse my father?!”  It seemed to really knock him back on his heels.  Not there’s anything really wrong with that, as it was slanderous, despite Trump saying “Hey, I’m just saying what I heard!”

    At least Cruz didn’t make fun of the size of Trump’s hands and make what I consider to be bizarre sexual suggestions regarding Trump’s manliness, which is what I think ended Rubio’s chances.  I mean, that was stupid, and I think it did more to tarnish Rubio than to dominate Trump.

    It was an interesting primary.

    • #58
  29. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    It’s getting easier and easier to tell which members of the Congress are honorable and which are turncoat swamp creatures.

    If they’re fighting for the J6 political prisoners, and recognize the election was stolen they’re uncompromised. If not, then they’re bought.

    Those members of Congress should be easy to count; probably on the back of an envelope. Forgive my cynicism.

    I’m up to 0. I’ll let you know when I get to 1.

    Aren’t MTG and Gosar on the list? I thought I read that somewhere. 

    • #59
  30. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Flicker (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a hoax) (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    I always come back to as the clearest, most egregious, least excusable thing Trump did in his 2016 run or in his presidency was when he called Cruz’s father a conspirator in the JFK assassination.

    It is ironic that Cruz chose to parrot the talking points of today’s communists. I wonder how papa Cruz would feel about Teddy throwing in with the commies?

    Notice I didn’t say it was inexcusable, just the least excusable thing he did. Frankly, I thought it was dumb, and showed what I thought at the time was fear of Cruz beating him — lashing out blindly, kind of. One thing it did, though, is show how cross-footed Cruz was in his response. It seemed to take forever for him to decide that an emotional “How dare you, you slime, accuse my father?!” It seemed to really knock him back on his heels. Not there’s anything really wrong with that, as it was slanderous, despite Trump saying “Hey, I’m just saying what I heard!”

    At least Cruz didn’t make fun of the size of Trump’s hands and make what I consider to be bizarre sexual suggestions regarding Trump’s manliness, which is what I think ended Rubio’s chances. I mean, that was stupid, and I think it did more to tarnish Rubio than to dominate Trump.

    It was an interesting primary.

    It was. 

    I like Trump and I’d have him again. 

    But these guys were trying to wrestle with a pig and they looked inept while Trump looked like – and became – a winner. 

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.