Thursday, March 31, 2016

Cuban State Media: ‘Negro’ Obama ‘Incited Rebellion and Disorder’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com


by FRANCES MARTEL31 Mar 20163,637
The Havana Tribune, a state-controlled Cuban newspaper, has added insult to injury following Fidel Castro’s scathing criticism of President Barack Obama upon his departure from the island. In an editorial, the title of which refers to President Obama as “negro,” an opinion columnist has accused him of “inciting rebellion.”
The article is titled “Negro, ¿Tu Eres Sueco?” which roughly translates to “Black Man, Are You Dumb?” (The idiom “pretend to be a Swede” means to play dumb, hence the title is literally asking, “Are you Swedish?”) The author, who is black, goes on to condemn President Obama for meeting with Cuban pro-democracy activists and “subtly” suggesting that the Cuban Revolution needed to change. “Obama came, saw, but unfortunately, with the pretend gesture of lending a hand, tried to conquer,” Elias Argudín writes.
“[Obama] chose to criticize and subtly suggest … incitations to rebellion and disorder, without caring that he was on foreign ground. Without a doubt, Obama overplayed his hand,” he continues. “The least I can say is, Virulo-style: ‘Negro, are you dumb?'”
Argudín’s article later accuses President Obama of presiding over a racist country–mocking the calls for freedom in Cuba by stating, “Which freedom–the freedom enjoyed by white police to massacre and manhandle black people?”–and issue demands parroted straight from the Castro regime: the end of the “genocidal” embargo and giving the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, which has belonged to the United States since before Cuban independence, to the Castros.
Claims of rampant discrimination on the part of white police in the United States are common among the leaders and spokesmen of rogue communist states like ChinaNorth Korea, and Zimbabwe.
The column appears on the Havana Tribunewebsite with a March 23 dateline, though itappeared in the print edition of the newspaper on Monday and has begun to make the rounds online this week. It hasreceived intense criticism from Cuban-Americans on social media for its disrespect of the president and openly racist language.
Argudín has since written a follow-up article in which he claims he “did not expect” the negative feedback and apologizes “to those who may have been offended.” He then accuses his critics of “misunderstanding” his piece:
It is not necessary to be an advanced reader to note: I did not write a racist column. The word “negro” is mentioned twice, in the title and the phrase giving the article its name, which isn’t even mine. It is a reference to a comedy work. Journalism has its rules. It also allows some licenses. Among the demands of the job there is a very important one: capture the reader’s attention from the title.

Argudín’s piece has, nonetheless, highlighted the rampant discrimination against Afro-Cubans that has existed throughout the history of the Revolution. As the leaders of the communist Revolution were all white–and at least one was an avowed racistfew Afro-Cubans currently hold positions of power in Cuba, though an estimated 60 percent of the nation is black.
In a video declaration in 2015, Ladies in White dissident leader Berta Soler explains that, of known political prisoners, 60 percent are black. Black people are often forced to live in segregated neighborhoods and kept far away from tourism industry jobs (except prostitution). “To the government, the black person is a thief, a bandit, a troublemaker,” Soler argues, noting that the Cuban people are significantly less racist than the regime. “Interracial marriage is resulting in fewer black people. … This is a problem for the government,” she notes.

In a series about racism in Cuba, The Rootnotes a common phrase used by revolutionaries: “Negrada–which means, literally, a group of black people–came to signify a screw-up, a f*cked-up affair. ¡Que negrada! became as common as hustling foreigners.”
The inevitable use of what, in the United States, is considered a racial slur (though Cubans often use negro as a term of endearment), is the latest indignity in a trip to Cuba laden with them, from the slight of Raúl Castro failing to greet President Obama upon landing in Havana to Castro openly denying the presence of political prisoners in Cuba, only to have President Obama later “welcome” his criticism on America. The elder Fidel Castro, or someone claiming to be him, weighed in with a scathing column in the national publication Granma this week, in which he accused President Obama of being racist towards Native Americans and refused his call to normalization: “We do not need the Empire to gift us anything.”
Read More Stories About:

Trump sit down with rnc

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/31/trump-meets-with-rnc-chief-in-dc-days-after-backing-out-pledge.html

Exclusive: 21 Generals Lead ISIS War the U.S. Denies Fighting

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com


www.thedailybeast.com
Brass Ball03.31.16 5:10 AM ETThere are only 5,000 U.S. troops in Iraq—about what a colonel usually commands. But for this ISIS war, as many as 21 generals have been deployed. Why?
In the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State, the U.S. military is notably short on soldiers, but apparently not on generals.
There are at least 12 U.S. generals in Iraq, a stunningly high number for a war that, if you believe the White House talking points, doesn’t involve American troops in combat. And that number is, if anything, a conservative estimate, not taking into account the flag officers running the U.S. air war, the admirals helping wage the war from the sea, or their superiors back at the Pentagon.
At U.S. headquarters inside Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone, even majors and colonels frequently find themselves saluting superiors at a pace that outranks the Pentagon and certainly any normal military installation. With about 5,000 troops deployed to Iraq and Syria ISIS war, that means there’s a general for every 416 troops, give or take. To compare, there are some captains in the U.S. Army in charge of that many people.
Moreover, many of those generals come with staffs and bureaucracy that some argue slows decision-making against an agile terror group.
The Obama administration has frequently argued that the U.S. maintains a so-called light footprint in Iraq to reassure the American public that its military is not back in Iraq. Indeed, at times, the United States has not acknowledged where it has deployed troops until one of them died.
But if the U.S. footprint is so small, why does the war demand so many generals?
There is the three-star general in charge of the war, Army Gen. Sean MacFarland, and his two deputies, one of whom is in Iraq at any given time. There is the two-star Army general in charge of the ground war, Army Maj. Gen. Gary Volesky, and his two deputies, who also travel between Iraq and Kuwait. There is the two-star general in charge of security cooperation—things like military sales—and his deputy.
Then there are the one-star generals in charge of intelligence, operations, future operations, targeting, and theater support.
There also are an untold number of Special Forces commanders in the battlefield whom the military does not speak publicly about; the dozen figure presumes at least one one-star Special Forces general.
And that is just the beginning of the top-heavy war fight. That figure doesn’t include the bevy of generals stationed in places like Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar to support the mission. Nor does it count the three-star Air Force general and his two-star deputy in charge of U.S. Air Forces Central Command, which is headquartered at Shaw Air Force Base, South Carolina. Then there is a three-star Marine in charge of Marine Corps Forces Central Command, based out of MacDill Air Force, Florida, and his deputy and their Navy counterparts. All three commands are responsible for the Middle East.
Finally, there are a number of generals from the other roughly 60 coalition countries. The Daily Beast knows of three who support the U.S. generals—from Australia and the United Kingdom.
Once all those additional generals are included, there are at least 21 flag officers in Iraq, a number even military officials concede is conservative, as there likely are other coalition generals and possibly other Special Forces commanders.
Officially, there are only 3,870 U.S. troops, or the equivalent of a heavy brigade, which is usually led by a colonel. One colonel.
As The Daily Beast first reported, however, there are actually more than 5,000 troops, still far short of a footprint that would usually demand a score of generals.
Defense officials defended the deployment of so many generals to The Daily Beast. In a war where there are so many different types of fighters, these officials said, you need generals to coordinate. Today’s warfighter is more lethal, thanks to improved technology, and therefore needs a commander with the appropriate authority to sign off authority on the use of that power. The intelligence reaching the front lines is so complex, it demands the talents of a one-star general, defense officials argued to The Daily Beast.
Get The Beast In Your Inbox!Daily DigestStart and finish your day with the smartest, sharpest takes from The Daily Beast Cheat SheetA speedy, smart summary of news and must-reads from The Daily Beast and across the WebBy clicking "Subscribe," you agree to have read the Terms of Useand Privacy PolicySubscribeThank You!You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason
(Of course, it’s odd to brag about such lethality when the Defense Department has said repeatedly that American troops were “not in an active combat mission” in Iraq.)
These officials also say it is only fitting that Iraqi military leaders engage with a U.S. counterpart of the same rank.
“When you look at what they do and what they are in command of and how they provide support, I think it is justifiable,” one defense official explained to The Daily Beast.
Some defenders offer a more simplistic answer—the U.S. military has always used this structure to deploy generals to places like Iraq.
There are as a rule two types of generals in the U.S. military—those who command troops and those who support the fight. The military argues that in Iraq, the U.S. needs far more of the latter than the former. The Iraqi troops, led by Iraqi generals, should shape the front lines, they said.
But critics argue that such dependency on U.S. generals in areas outside the battlefield not only suggests a lack of Iraqi skills but also obfuscates the U.S. effort.
“Having this many generals and flag officers gives the appearance of commitment without the substance of commitment,” Christopher Harmer, a naval analyst at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War, explained to The Daily Beast.
After World War II, the Vietnam War, and the Cold War, the U.S. military downsized its rank and file troops but did not shrink the size of its general and flag officer corps proportionally. The result is a long-standing criticism of a top-heavy military that some argue is costly and not as effective.
A May 2013 U.S. Government Accountability Office report, for example, concluded that “mission and headquarters support-costs at the combatant commands more than doubled from fiscal years 2007 through 2012, to about $1.1 billion.”
Several past defense secretaries have tried to cut the number of generals. Former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel tried to reduce the number of general officers and civilians by 20 percent but wasn’t on the job long enough to make it happen. Robert Gates, the defense secretary during the peak of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, proposed eliminating 50 generals and admirals.
If Gates’s efforts succeeded, it is not obvious in today’s military. In addition to all those generals in the Middle East, there are dozens of others at U.S. Central Command in Tampa, which is in charge of the Middle East, and at the Pentagon who also support the U.S. effort in Iraq and Syria—so many that it is impossible to say just how many generals are part of the U.S. war effort.
On Wednesday, two of the leading four-star generals of the war stateside took new command positions. Army Gen. Joseph Votel, the outgoing special operations commander, became the new head of U.S. Central Command, which oversees the Middle East. Army Gen. Raymond “Tony” Thomas is Votel’s special operations replacement.
Soon, they’ll be visiting the front lines in Iraq—and adding to the number of American generals on the ground in the ISIS war.
COMMENTS

Library of Congress to Eliminate Terms ‘Illegal Alien’ and ‘Alien’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com


Office of US Rep Henry Cuellar
by CAROLINE MAY31 Mar 2016292
The Library of Congress is dropping the terms “illegal alien” and “alien” from its subject headings after a group of college students and the American Library Association protested the words’ usage.
As early as May, the Library of Congress will begin revising its subject headings and replacing “Aliens” with “Noncitizens” and heading references to “Illegal aliens” with “Noncitizens” and “Unauthorized immigration.”
“[The Policy and Standards Division of the Library of Congress] concluded that the meaning of Aliens is often misunderstood and should be revised to Noncitizens, and that the phrase illegal aliens has become pejorative,” the Library explained in its Executive Summary about the changes.
“The heading Illegal aliens will therefore be cancelled and replaced by two headings, Noncitizens and Unauthorized immigration, which may be assigned together to describe resources about people who illegally reside in a country,” it added.
The Dartmouth Coalition for Immigration Reform, Equality and DREAMers (CoFIRED), a Dartmouth student group that has been pressing for the change, declared the move a victory for their cause and called on additional institutions to cease using use term “illegal” to describe illegal immigrants.
“We call on both politicians and media outlets to follow the precedent set by the Library of Congress,” Dennise Hernandez, Co­Director of CoFIRED, said in a statement. “It is way past time that we all recognize that referring to immigrants as “illegal” is an offensive, dehumanizing term and that there is no excuse to continue using it.”
Recently the trend has been to eliminate references to “illegal aliens.” Last year California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law legislation to remove the term “alien” from the state’s labor code. 
Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX)
12%
 introduced legislation this Congress that would eliminate the terms “alien” and “illegal alien” from federal statute and agency materials.
Read More Stories About:

Ann Coulter: It’s Only Trump

Listen To Military Veteran Talk Radio

The only question for Republicans is: Which candidate can win states that Mitt Romney lost?

Start with the fact that, before any vote is cast on Election Day, the Democrats have already won between 90 and 98 percent of the black vote and 60 to 75 percent of the Hispanic and Asian vote. Unless Republicans run the table on the white vote, they lose.
If there’s still hope, it lies with Trump and only Trump. Donald Trump will do better with black and Hispanic voters than any other Republican. But it’s with white voters that he really opens up the electoral map.
A Republican Party that wasn’t intent on committing suicide would know that. But Stuart Stevens, the guy who lost a winnable presidential election in 2012, says it’s impossible for Republicans to get one more white vote — and the media are trying to convince the GOP that he’s right.
Stevens says Romney tapped out every last white voter and still lost, so he says Republicans are looking for “the Lost Tribes of the Amazon” hoping to win more white votes: “In 1980, Ronald Reagan won 56 percent of white voters and won a landslide victory of 44 states. In 2012, Mitt Romney won 59 percent of whites and lost with 24 states.”
Apparently, no one’s told Stevens about the 50-state Electoral College. The national white vote is irrelevant. Presidential elections are won by winning states. (Only someone who got his ass kicked running an eminently electable candidate might not know this.)
Excluding third parties and breaking it down to a two-man race, Mitt Romney won 88 percent of the white vote in Mississippi, but only 40 percent of the white vote in Massachusetts. What sense does it make to talk about his national percentage of the white vote with disparities like that?
Romney lost the white vote to Obama in five crucial swing states: Maine (42 percent of the white vote), Minnesota (47 percent), New Hampshire (48 percent), Iowa (48 percent) and Wisconsin (49 percent). He only narrowly beat Obama’s white vote in other important swing states — Illinois (51 percent), Colorado (52 percent), Michigan (53 percent), Ohio (54 percent) and Pennsylvania (54 percent).
Increasing the white vote in these states gives Trump any number of paths to victory.
If Trump wins only the same states as Romney, but adds Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois — where Romney’s white vote was below his national average — Trump wins with 280 electoral votes. (Romney wasn’t an ideal candidate in the industrial Midwest.)
Trump could lose any one of those states and make up for it by winning Minnesota and Wisconsin — where Romney actually lost the white vote. Or he could lose two of those states but add victories in places outside the Rust Belt, where Romney’s white vote was also below average, such as Colorado, Iowa, Maine and New Hampshire. (In 1992, Ross Perot came in second in Maine, beating George Bush.)
I haven’t even mentioned Florida, where Trump recently trounced Stuart Stevens’ dream candidate,
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
79%
, a sitting senator — and a Cuban! — in a 20-point rout. Republican primary voters outnumbered Democratic primary voters in that election by more than half a million votes. If Trump wins Florida, he needs to win only two or three of the 10 states where Romney either lost the white vote outright or won a smaller percentage of it than he did nationally.
Stevens’ analysis assumes that there will be no new voters — and, again, there isn’t a mammal on the North American landmass who knows less about winning presidential elections than Stuart Stevens.
It’s as if we’re only allowed to divvy up the pile of voters from 2012. Unless you voted in 2012, you can’t vote in 2016! Use it or lose it, buddy.
That’s not how it works.
Trump is saying he’ll bring in lots of new people, as he has throughout the primaries. In the Florida GOP primary, for example, Trump got nearly half a million more votes than Romney did in 2012 — and about half a million new people voted. Trump may be wrong, but it’s insane to say that it’s impossible for him to bring out new voters.
What’s impossible is for any Republican candidate, other than Trump, to win a single state Romney lost.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
97%
’s corny speaking style is creepy to anyone who doesn’t already agree with everything he says. He’s the less likable, more hard-edged version of Romney. Every other Republican is, one way or another, a less attractive version of Romney. Maybe 50 years of Third World immigration means it’s too late, and even Trump can’t win. But it’s an absolute certainty that any other Republican will lose.
COPYRIGHT 2016 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Daily Beast: Glenn Beck’s Defamation Lawsuit ‘Could Blow Up Ted Cruz’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com


by BREITBART NEWS30 Mar 20162,218
Betsy Woodruff writes in the Daily Beast that Glenn Beck who is “one of 
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
97%
’s most high profile surrogates,” could end up becoming “a rolling PR nightmare” for Cruz when Beck “heads to court this summer for allegedly defaming a victim of the Boston Marathon bombing.”
[Glenn Beck] currently faces a defamation lawsuit—because he doubled and tripled down on charges that a victim of a terrorist attack was actually the real terrorist.
And now, previously unnoticed court filings show his defamation lawsuit might get exciting—and just as the presidential race hits a boiling point. Filings also show that the mediation process, which could have resulted in a settlement, has been terminated.
[…]
The facts of the case are, well, not that surprising if you know anything about Glenn Beck. In the wake of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing terrorist attack that left six people dead, Beck claimed that one of the victims—Saudi national Abdulrahman Alharbi, who was injured in the attack—was actually in on it.
“You know who the Saudi is?” Beck confidently proclaimed in one broadcast a few weeks after the attacks. “He’s the money man. He’s the guy who paid for it.”
Beck also urged his listeners to alert their congressmen about the matter.
[…]
The problem for Beck? Not every person from Saudi Arabia is a participant in a terrorist plot. Authorities investigated Alharbi and subsequently cleared him of any involvement—but it was not lightning-fast enough to keep Beck from telling his millions-strong audience that Alharbi was a crypto-terrorist.

Woodruff also explains the extent of Beck’s close association with the Cruz campaign:
Beck and Cruz have campaigned side-by-side across the early primary states. Beck accompanied Cruz for the last few days of the Iowa caucuses, where Cruz snagged a game-changing win.
During their Iowa swing together, Cruz could barely control his affection for Beck.
“What an extraordinary, visionary, passionate thinker,” he gushed at one Iowa stop.
In a radio broadcast earlier this month, Beck complained that he has spent a lot of money paying his own way to campaign for Cruz.
“This has cost me about $300,000 to go on the road for as long as I have,” he said, according to the Christian Postreported. “$300,000 out of my pocket. Those are not donations. This is out of what I’ve personally lost because I’m not on the job, so that’s what it’s cost me by not being at the facilities in Dallas. We’ve lost $300,000.”
Beck also stumped for the senator in Arizona and Utah. In the lead-up to that trip, he told listeners that they needed to campaign for the senator because we may be facing divine judgment.
“Ezekiel talks about these times and says basically everyone in their own way, you are a watchman on the tower, you are a watchman at the gate,” he said. And the blood of the people who could have been saved—now think of this—because we’re talking about the rights of all mankind. If America goes down—this isn’t hyperbole any more, this isn’t like a famous Reagan speech that he gave—this is real.”

Read the rest here.
Read More Stories About:

Cruz email confirmation on the AshleyMadison.com database

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Cruz email confirmation on the AshleyMadison.com database


*Information accessed via: https://ashley.cynic.al/
Our case study into this issue was just performed (9.21pm CST March 27, 2016) and although the sign up process could have been altered, it is a possibility that someone else did use the email address of Senator Cruz to occupy the account.  On the flip side to that disclosure, the questions is:
Why would someone use his email address and then not have access to the website if they ever needed a password change?  Actually, why ever do it at all?

Summary:
Do we know with certainty that Ted Cruz created this account?  We cannot answer.  This could have been done by an aide, staffer or other working with Ted Cruz with access to that email address without his knowledge.
Do we believe that Ted Cruz created and/or had access to utilize this account?  You better believe we do!
Cruz email confirmation on the AshleyMadison.com database

#CruzAshleyMadison trending.  Ya know, just for fun.

**UPDATE 3/27/2016 9:36pm CST**

We don’t pretend to know Government protocol for email.  We only know not to get any advice from Hillary Clinton on that matter.  We’ve just went through an entire sign up process on the AshleyMadison.com website and our findings are below.

  1.  Sign up was straight forward.  We entered our information and ticked the we agree with the terms of service check box and were off and away.
  2. We received our account creation email.  However, there was no account activation link or confirmation link.  Here is the fine print in the bottom of the “Welcome to Day 1 of your Ashley Madison experience”.

Please do not reply to this email message. It was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming email. It won’t reach us. For questions or concerns, please visit our “Contact Us” page: https://www.ashleymadison.com/*CONTACTPAGE
You are receiving this Email Notification because you or someone using your email address has signed up as a member to our service. The email address we have on file for profile number [000000000] is: ***************@********
If you have received this email in error, or if you wish to delete your account or unsubscribe from Email Notifications, please choose one of the options below:
Unsubscribe from Email Notifications | Delete Account
USA and Canada Address:
PO Box 67027
Toronto, ON Canada M4P 1E4
International Address:
9 Karpensiou, 2021 Nicosia
Cyprus


So back to our opening statement, it would be odd for sure that nobody heard about an attempt of some deviant to attempt to use Ted Cruz’s email address.  It would almost be obvious that he would have came out in a BIG, BOLD statement against the use of his private Government email and also had an opportunity to blast the unsavory website that promotes infidelity,
Below is a video EXPOSING the NATIONAL ENQUIRER story


CRUZ CAMP WHISTLE BLOWER EXPOSES “EVIL” CAMPAIGN TACTICS!

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio


Cruz camp insider washes his hands from the dirtiest campaign in his entire political career.  The underhanded tactics are out of control.  Listen to Bill Still’s report on the Cruz ‘cult like’ campaign and those who are involved from an insider who is now coming clean.
Published on Mar 30, 2016
By Bill Still


With Heidi Cruz missing in action, a significant Cruz insider – let’s call him John Doe – started cleansing his spirit of what apparently is a more evil Cruz campaign than most of us imagined.
At the outset, we are convinced that John Doe is legit. We have seen his employment letter on Cruz campaign stationary. He makes north of $3500 per week.
When this is all over, it is John Doe the nation has to thank for being brave enough to come forward. Right now, the only thing that concerns him is that he doesn’t want to get a reputation for being a whistleblower.
He stresses that he has been in this business for over 20 years and this is the first campaign that was so dirty that he just has to spill the beans on them.
John has been tweeting under the handle Stop Ted Cruz for several weeks now. He tweeted to Ann Coulter on Feb. 11:
[Tweet Feb 11] “I used to work for Ted Cruz and now look at my Twitter handle the guy is a huge liar.”
Then John Doe offers proof of his employment as communications director:
[Tweet, Feb. 12]


“…follow for DM of proof that I worked on campaign as comm director.
But let’s now jump up to March 10. John claims that the night of the Iowa caucus, the operation against Ben Carson was not accidental and not put together on the fly. It had been thoroughly planned out starting two weeks before. It was:
[Tweet, March 10 ]
“…a plan that was hatched on January 15th for the record.”
Trump supporter Melanie Lauren tweeted back:
[ March 10]
“What, the robo calls were planned on Jan. 15th?”
John Doe responded:
[Tweet, March 10]
“…the plan for caucus night was made 2 weeks prior.”
Then my wife tweeted out:
“…I believe it is was too well coordinated to have been on the spot”
Next Melanie Lauren asked:
“What was he like in person, day to day?”
John Doe responded:
“…he just panders to whoever he is talking to after a while it wears thin and many staffers quit. Lookup Don Fairly (my friend)”
That was the last we heard from John Doe. No one knew if he was for real, or just some internet troll trying to plant confusion. Then suddenly, after nearly a 6 week absence, on March 26, John Doe reappeared.
“Since a few people have asked the other campaigns I’ve worked on: GW Bush, Rick Scott, Rubio (senate), Nikki Haley, Santorum ’12, Tom Cotton”
[Tweet, Mar. 28]
“The strategy by the Cruz Campaign is pretty obvious: trying to bring Trump down has failed so now let’s bring down his staff and family.”
Then, this disturbing tweet on March 28:
“They are setting Trump up for a red wedding style betrayal we need to be in Cleveland ready.”
The Red Wedding is apparently a reference to an episode in “Game of Thrones”.
The meaning is that they intend to take Trump down in some nefarious way at the convention in Cleveland.
John Doe then tweeted:
[March 29]
“The cruz camp wouldn’t expect defectors like me because the campaign is run similarly to Jones Town”.
As he explained to us personally, even though Cruz is lying constantly and doing all sorts of dirty deeds, the staff is told that only he – Cruz – is a true conservative and since the ends are noble – namely Cruz becoming the President – then any means can be excused. The staff knows this is wrong, but they are afraid to question it.
We also talked to John Doe over a private connection. He talked about what led him to quit the Cruz campaign. He explained that it was over this very complex plan hatched by none other than Amanda Carpenter – a former Cruzer, who had been hired by CNN.
Carpenter rolled out the idea on or about Jan. 15, 2016 – 17 days before the Caucus. The plan was able to manipulate Carson out of delegates that should have voted for him and sent them mostly to Cruz.
“The basic story is I have worked on republican campaigns since I graduated from ….. 24 years ago. Not once have I quit a campaign even when I had disagreements with strategy, language, anything really.”
“I had to quit the Cruz campaign after in Mid January I was flown from South Carolina to Iowa for the home stretch before the Iowa Caucus.”
“Once in Iowa I was instructed to make calls and monitor other volunteers making calls – hundreds of calls a day. Lying about Trump as well as Senator Rubio.”
“I bit my tongue at first knowing it was wrong. Then 2 weeks prior to the Iowa Caucus myself and a few other Cruz top campaign aids were in a room and we received the results of our internal poll.”
“Trump was leading Cruz second and Ben Carson 3rd with a shockingly high amount of support – meaning much more support than what CNN/Fox had him at.”
“The kicker was that a majority of Carson supporters had Cruz as their second choice.”
“At that time the plan to tell people Ben Carson was dropping out of the race on caucus day was hatched. Coordinated with former Cruz Op Amanda Carpenter at CNN. Actually, this operation was her idea initially.  I strongly opposed this, but they decided they were going to do it anyways so I quit January 18th.”
My wife, Beth responded:
“Wow, not surprised at all – he always did seem slimy to us and I have always said it was more like a cult.”
“You mentioned that it seemed like Jonestown. In what way?“
John Doe: “Just in the way that almost everyone knew the Ben Carson thing was coming. Everyone knew it was wrong but no one said anything because Cruz has them all convinced he is some conservative God and anything he suggests is for the betterment of society.”
Beth Still:
“My husband wants to know if he can use this information and should he say from a reliable source, or characterize it in another way, or if not we certainly understand.”
“Yes you can use the info just don’t want it getting back to me. I’m actually off to …. next week to start working as …. for [another campaign].”
“Call me a Cruz operative with 24 years of political experience. You can use the picture of my offer letter from the campaign just blur out the name ….”
And finally, we asked John Doe if there was anything to the allegations in the National Enquirer about Cruz having mistresses.
“It’s 100% true that he has affairs. All top-level staffers got an email directly from Heidi Cruz saying that she knew about it and it was ok, and for us to not concern ourselves with it.”
I’m still reporting from Washington.
Good day.- Bill Still

Dear , this is UNREAL. I don't have anywhere else to turn -- so I'm turning to you.



Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio


Ted Cruz Personal Email -- May Include Privileged Communication

Dear , this is UNREAL. I don't have anywhere else to turn -- so I'm turning to you.
"Once in a lifetime," is not a strong enough phrase to describe the importance of this moment and amount of pressure our campaign is under right now.
AND I don't have anywhere else to turn -- so I'm turning to you.
I need to ask you for a personal favor -- even though it may come at great personal expense.
With only hours before tomorrow's MIDNIGHT FEC deadline -- and just a few days before the Wisconsin primary (perhaps the most important primary before the RNC nominating convention) -- I need your help now more than ever.
I'm going to do my part -- to take on Donald Trump -- and show all of America that I'm the one candidate who will defeat Donald Trump, who will defeat Hillary Clinton in November, and who will reverse the years of destruction from Obama -- restoring our country to its founding, conservative principles.
But I really need you to do your part too...
You see: my campaign faces its biggest challenge in only a few hours, and I know we can win if I have the resources.
But as of this morning, I am $219,326 short of what I need for my FEC deadline.
Will you do your part right now -- before tomorrow night's deadline -- by making a $35, $50, or $100 special gift?
I hope you know me well enough by now to know that I wouldn't ask if it weren't vitally important and that I wouldn't ask you this favor if I wasn't willing to make the same deep sacrifices myself.
Please let me briefly explain because I'm running out of time.
Running for President of the United States has come at a steep price with relentless attacks coming from all sides on my family, my marriage, and worst of all, attacks against my young children.
It is only by the grace of God, the prayers of my friends and family -- my dad is a prayer warrior -- and the continued support of people just like you have I been able to endure such deep personal sacrifices.
, this battle I fight daily is a responsibility not to be taken lightly.
But, if I'm being honest, I must share something with you...
Every single time we have a victory for the campaign or that we see a bump in the polls -- the negative attacks double and triple against us.
Between Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, the liberal media, and the Washington Cartel, there is not one moment where they are not savagely attacking me. And , by extension of our shared conservative values, they're attacking YOU too.
Rest assured -- no matter how hard they try to drag my name through the mud, I will not give in to them.
But now, I really need you to make your own personal sacrifice for this campaign -- click here to make a special sacrificial donation of $35, $50, or even $10 if you can afford it.
You see: the sacrifices I'm making for our campaign are deep and personal. I'm proud and even honored to be making them on your behalf, but today, before the most important deadline that we face at MIDNIGHT tomorrow, I need to hear back from you personally.
To make it as quick and easy as possible for you to respond, I've asked my team to put together the secure links below.
You can use them to make an instant, secure gift to support me when I need it most:
I WILL HELP WITH $3 BEFORE MIDNIGHT >>>
I WILL HELP WITH $35 BEFORE MIDNIGHT >>>
I WILL HELP WITH $100 BEFORE MIDNIGHT >>>
I WILL HELP WITH $250 BEFORE MIDNIGHT >>>
I WILL HELP WITH $1000 BEFORE MIDNIGHT >>>
Please, time is critical.
, I hope to hear back from you before tomorrow's deadline passes.
For liberty,

Ted Cruz 
PAID FOR BY CRUZ FOR PRESIDENT
www.tedcruz.org Copyright © 2016 All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

149 S. Barrington Ave. #401
Los Angeles CA 90049
USA

FDA authorizes expanded use of medical abortion pill

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Published March 30, 2016

FoxNews.com

Facebook Twitter livefyre Email

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has kicked up a potential abortion hornet’s nest with states that impose restrictions on a common abortion-inducing drug, approving a new label for the medication that relaxes guidelines for using it.

ADVERTISEMENT

The FDA notified the manufacturer of Mifeprex, a drug previously known as RU-486, in a letter on Tuesday that the drug is safe and effective for terminating a pregnancy in accordance with the new label. Also known as mifepristone, the synthetic steroid drug is used in combination with another drug, misoprostol, to end a pregnancy.

Under the new label, a smaller dose of Mifeprex can be used significantly later in the pregnancy — up to 70 days of gestation, from 49 days.

The decision could rankle lawmakers in states that required the drugs to be used in accordance with the original labels. Critics complained those labels were outdated and restrictive. 

More on this...

Abortion Pill Via Telemedicine Seen Safe, Effective

Abortion pill leads to murder charge after fetus dies

Dr. Manny: Video of woman filming her own abortion fails to tell the whole story

Abortion rights groups say the FDA change will now affect laws in Ohio, North Dakota and Texas that prohibited "off-label" uses of the drug. Similar laws are on hold in Arizona, Arkansas and Oklahoma.

The National Right to Life Committee argued that the FDA changes would not increase safety for women.

“In the end, it is obvious that the FDA's new protocol serves only the interests of the abortion industry by expanding their base of potential customers, increasing their profit margin, and reducing the level of staff and amount of resources they have to devote to the patient,” Randall K. O'Bannon, National Right to Life director of education and research, said in a statement. “It is clear whose interests it is the FDA is serving. It isn't the women, and it isn't the babies.”

The new label rules will make it easier to use the drug. Not only do they widen the window for using it, but according to the New York Times, they reduce the number of trips women have to make to a doctor from three to two in most states.

Under the new label, the drug dosage has been reduced from 600 milligrams to 200 as well. According to The New York Times, the previous dosage had been deemed too high by most medical societies and abortion rights advocates said it increased the cost and side effects of the procedure.

The drug, formerly known as RU-486, induces miscarriage when used with misoprostol.

“This is a huge step in increasing access to medication abortion and it comports with the scientific evidence,” Elizabeth Nash, a senior state issues associate at the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks women’s reproductive health issues, told The New York Times. She said that medication abortions accounted for about a quarter of all abortions in 2011, the last year measured by the institute.

According to a statement by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the organization was “pleased that the updated FDA-approved regimen for mifepristone reflects the current available scientific evidence and best practices.”

Additionally, The New York Times reported the group saying, “medication abortion has been subject to legislative attacks in various states across the country, including mandated regimens that do not reflect the current scientific evidence. We hope that these states take the FDA label into account.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Donald Trump proposes abortion ban, punishment for women who undergo procedure

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Donald Trump said Wednesday that abortions should be banned and that there "has to be some form of punishment" for women who undergo the procedure.

In a pre-taped segment for an MSNBC town hall that will air Wednesday night, host Chris Matthews asked the GOP frontrunner if women should be punished for having abortions.

"I would say it's a very serious problem and it's a problem that we have to decide on," Trump initially said.

Asked what his proposal to ban abortion means, Trump said "I am against. I am pro-life. Yes. I am pro-life." But Trump failed to explain how he would actually ban the procedure.

"You know, you'll go back to a position like they had where people perhaps will go to illegal places," he said when asked how he would outlaw it. "But you have to ban it."

Play VIDEO

Trump defends aide charged with battery

Matthews eventually asked Trump if he believes in punishment for abortion as a principle "The answer is there has to be some form of punishment," Trump said. "For the women [who have abortions]?" Matthews followed up. "Yes," Trump responded.

Matthews then asked Trump, "10 days or 10 years" and Trump said, "I don't know. That, I don't know," adding that this is a "very complicated position."

After the clip of that segment aired, Trump issued a statement of clarification.

"This issue is unclear and should be put back into the states for determination. Like Ronald Reagan, I am pro- life with exceptions, which I have outlined numerous times," Trump said.

Hillary Clinton immediately weighed in on Trump's remarks on Twitter.

During a pre-taped interview that will also air during MSNBC's town hall, host Chuck Todd asked anti-abortion Ohio governor John Kasich if he would punish women who get abortions.

"Absolutely not," Kasich said. "I do have exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother but of course women shouldn't be punished. Look, you know -- I think probably Donald Trump will figure out a way to say that he didn't say it or he was misquoted or whatever but I don't think so. I don't think that's an appropriate response and it's a difficult enough situation then to try to punish somebody."

Asked how abortion could ever be banned, Kasich said, "I think it's rape, incest, life of the mother, and you build some restrictions around it, but I think you have to be very careful in the way you do it. We're a long way from there."

Trump has admitted during this presidential election that he had once been pro-abortion, but is now strongly anti-abortion. While his opponents, however, have blasted Planned Parenthood, Trump has actually defended the organization for some of the other health services it provides to women.

Just last month, Ted Cruz released a campaign ad that targeted Trump's previous position on abortion. It used footage from an interview Trump did on "Meet the Press" in 1999 where he says, ""I'm very pro-choice" and says he would not ban partial-birth abortions.

© 2016 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Lewandowski prosecutor outed as Hillary supporter

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

www.wnd.com
NEW YORK – The Florida prosecutor who brought battery charges against Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, supports Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president.
An article published by the Palm Beach Post on Nov. 17, 2015, has been circulating since Tuesday evening because it lists Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg as a member 150-member Florida Leadership Council, which was established by the Democratic Party to promote Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy.
The article states that Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg and Tax Collector Anne Gannon “are also part of Clinton’s Florida team.”
Mike Cernovich, writing Tuesday in the blog DangerAndPlay.com, cited the Palm Beach Post article in arguing the charges against Lewandowski were politically motivated. He contended “there was no assault,” because reporter Michelle Fields “was heading towards Trump and was brushed away due to security concerns.”
Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg’s office hasn’t yet weighed in on what it will do, Bob McGovern reported in the Boston Herald on Wednesday.
“That’s probably because this high-profile case will be tough to prove in court. In Florida, you have to show that Lewandowski ‘actually and intentionally’ touched Fields against her will.”
McGovern wrote that the “ball is in Aronberg’s court now.”
“And even though he’s a well-known Hillary Clinton supporter, those who know Aronberg’s office say there is little reason to believe he’ll try to score political points by throwing the book at Lewandowski.”
The official website for the Office of State Attorney for the 15th Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Floridanotes Aronberg, elected state attorney for the 15th Judicial Circuit in November 2012, is a former assistant attorney general, a White House fellow in 2000 and a Florida state senator.
“Dave Aronberg was born in Miami,” the Palm Beach County website continues. “He attended public schools before going on to graduate with honors from Harvard College and Harvard Law School. After graduation, he worked in the litigation department of a large South Florida law firm while also working closely with then-Insurance Commissioner Bill Nelson to investigate European insurance companies that refused to honor World War II-era policies sold to victims of the Holocaust.
“In 2010, Aronberg returned to the Florida Attorney General’s Office as a special prosecutor for prescription drug trafficking,” the website continues. “In his role as the Attorney General’s ‘Drug Czar,’ Aronberg led an anti-pill mill initiative that helped clean up the pain clinic industry and reduced the record number of people dying each day from oxycodone abuse.”
A Newsmax TV interview April 7, 2015, pitted Aronberg against Sid Dinerstein, chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, regarding how the antagonism between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would impact Florida voters.
See the report:
Former Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields filed assault charges against Lewandowski this week, alleging the campaign manager roughed her to the point of bruising her arm. She claims video of the incident proves she was wrongfully handled.
Trump, meanwhile, has defended Lewandowski, saying the video actually clears his campaign manager of wrongdoing. The candidate suggests Fields is using Florida law – which defines assault as just about any type of unwanted physical contact – for a political or personal agenda.
In a tweet, Trump wrote, as WND previously reported: “Wow, Corey Lewandowski, my campaign manager and a very decent man, was just charged with assaulting a reporter. Look at tapes – nothing there!”
One unnamed Secret Service agent, meanwhile, has given a different version of events, saying in a statement to the London Daily Mail that Fields “crossed in between agents and our protectee after being told not to,” and touched Trump first, WND reported.
COMMENTS

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

After Taxpayer Bailout, General Motors Plans Rollout Of Chinese-Built Buicks In America

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by DUSTIN STOCKTON29 Mar 2016127
In 2016, General Motors will roll out for the first time in the United States a new model of Buick built exclusively in China: the Buick Envision.
It’s the first time the iconic American auto manufacturer will sell cars built in China in the United States since receiving a sizable taxpayer-funded bailout at the end of the George W. Bush administration and beginning of the Barack Obama administration.
The Buick Envision–which was available in China for purchase as far back as 2014–will make its official debut in the United States in the summer of 2016.
The Buick Envision bills itself “a luxury crossover designed to turn heads and welcome you in.”
A quick search of “Buick Envision” leads to the Buick Envision’s website where one can explore all the features and design of the vehicle. The website doesn’t appear to make any reference to the fact that the Envision is manufactured in China.
The issue of U.S. auto manufacturers moving production facilities overseas has taken a center stage this presidential election, with the rise of both billionaire Donald Trump in the Republican Party and of 
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
16%
 of Vermont in the Democratic Party.
Trump has drawn attention to GM competitor Ford for the company’s decision to move manufacturing to Mexico, but Ford wasn’t the recipient of a taxpayer-funded bailout. Sanders, meanwhile, has used his opposition to the bailouts to show that he isn’t influenced by crony capitalism–all while former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has tried to take credit for saving the auto industry with her support of the bailout.
Breitbart News reached out to American Jobs Alliance to get its reaction to GM’s decision to import Chinese-produced cars. “When the taxpayers bailed out General Motors, we were told it was all about saving jobs in America. Now GM turns around and throws Americans under the wheels of Buicks made in China. Where does it stop? Will General Motors build Cadillacs, Chevys and GMC trucks in China next?” Curtis Ellis executive director American Jobs Alliance told Breitbart News.
General Motors has also announced plans to sell a Chinese manufactured hybrid Cadillac, the CT6 in American markets.
“Flint was known for decades as Buick City. It’s now jobless, bankrupt and destitute,” Ellis continued.
That’s inevitable if America is stripped of jobs and industry. 
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
56%
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
44%
 and Barack Obama promise more of the same with the TransPacific Partnership, another globalist trade deal like the ones that destroyed Flint and thousands of communities across America. This must stop. We must put America and Americans first again. What’s good for GM should be good for America, not China.

Rick Manning, President of Americans for Limited Government, blasted GM’s decision in a statement to Breitbart News.
When the Bush Administration bailed out GM there was an implicit agreement that they would build cars here.  GM’s decision to manufacture vehicles in China was an insult, but it takes real chutzpah to import those very cars to compete against American made autos that don’t necessarily have a US companies nameplate. This is an inexcusable slap in the face of American workers and taxpayers. And people wonder why blue-collar workers support Trump?

Read More Stories About:

Breaking: Secret Service attempted to stop Michelle Fields from touching Donald Trump

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

US Political Editor for Daily Mail reported the following update via Twitter: "UPDATE: Member of Trump's Secret Service detail confirms Fields touched Trump twice and was warned to stop, before Lewandowski intervened"

Surveillance video released by law enforcement
video

17 Men Reportedly Heard Chanting, Firing Off Shots In Apple Valley Detained, Released

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

losangeles.cbslocal.com

APPLE VALLEY (CBSLA.com) — Federal and local law enforcement authorities Tuesday are investigating after 17 men were detained for reportedly firing off hundreds of rounds in a remote part of Apple Valley.

San Bernardino County Sheriff’s deputies and an FBI agent were among the units that detained the men – reportedly all of Middle Eastern descent – who were camping out in the Deep Creek Hot Springs area Sunday morning, authorities said.

Feds & local law enforcement investigating after 17 men, reportedly Middle Eastern, fired 100s of rounds in Apple Valley. @KNX1070

— Margaret Carrero (@KNXmargaret)March 29, 2016

A 911 caller reported hearing over 100 shots fired and seeing five to seven men wearing turbans and shooting “assault rifles, handguns, and shotguns,” according to a Sheriff’s Department statement.

A county sheriff’s helicopter located the men walking near a creek with backpacks “and other items”, The Los Angeles Times reported.

Officials say the men were cooperative as they were detained and searched.

Several handguns, a rifle, and a shotgun were found at the scene, but a records check found all the weapons were registered with the exception of the rifle, which reportedly didn’t have a serial number because it was purchased in parts, an FBI spokesperson told The Times.

Police scanner traffic posted online by the Victor Valley News Group described “a large group of subjects wearing turbans and chanting” at the scene.

“They were up all night chanting ‘Allah akbar’-type stuff,” an unidentified officer is heard saying on the audio recording.

None of the hikers interviewed by Sheriff’s investigators say they witnessed any shots being fired, according to Sheriff’s officials.

A photo of the arrests was posted by the Victor Valley News Group but were not immediately confirmed by authorities.

All 17 men were eventually released because Sheriff’s investigators say they had no outstanding warrants or criminal histories.

“There was no evidence found that a crime had been committed by any of the subjects who were detained and they were released,” a Sheriff’s spokesperson said.

The FBI may conduct further interviews with the men to determine if any crimes were committed, The Times reported.

COMMENTS

Monday, March 28, 2016

Idaho Governor Signs Bill: 2nd Amendment Is Your Concealed Carry Permit

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio


Joe Raedle/Getty Images
by AWR HAWKINS28 Mar 2016204
On March 25 Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed permitless concealed carry legislation which makes the Second Amendment the official carry permit for state residents 21 years and older.
Open carry of a handgun for self-defense was already legal in Idaho and proponents of the permitless concealed carry legislation–Senate Bill 1389–argued that a law-abiding citizen openly carrying a gun ran the risk of the breaking the law if his jacket, shirt, or other article of clothing inadvertently covered the firearm. SB 1389 removes this risk by recognizing the right to carry openly or concealed without a permit.
The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 27-8 and passed the House by a vote of 54-15.
Breitbart News previously reported that SB 1389 preserves the concealed permitting process for those who still a want a license for the benefits of reciprocity with other states.
According to KTVB, Governor Otter released a letter on March 25 which said, “I’m a gun owner, a hunter and a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association. I have consistently championed our citizens’ gun rights throughout my years in public office, and I do so again today in signing Senate Bill 1389 into law.” He also used the letter to stress his conviction that SB 1389 “is consistent with the U.S. Constitution,” and encouraged those who will carry without a permit to be sure they are trained in the proper use of firearms.
Idaho now joins Alaska, Arizona, Kansas, Maine, Montana, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia in allowing open carry or concealed carry without a permit.
The law abolishing the need for a concealed carry permit goes into effect in Idaho on July 1, 2016.
AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
Read More Stories About:

Trump Hires Reagan, Ford Delegate Manager to Stave Off Establishment Convention Hopes

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by MATTHEW BOYLE28 Mar 2016Washington, DC117
In the hopes of staving off the GOP establishment’s efforts to block his nomination at a contested convention, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump hired a new delegate manager who has successfully led similar convention battles over the past several decades.
Trump has hired delegate manager Paul Manafort to lead his GOP convention efforts and shore up enough delegates to ensure he wins the nomination on the first ballot at the GOP presidential convention in Cleveland in July. Manafort is well known in GOP circles because in 1976, on behalf of then President Gerald Ford—who ascended to the presidency without being elected because of Richard Nixon’s Watergate-driven resignation—Manafort successfully fended off future president Ronald Reagan in a delegate battle that may end up looking a lot like 2016. Thanks to Manafort’s work for Ford that year, the incumbent president barely held on to the party’s nomination, beating back Reagan’s challenge.
But four years later, when Reagan faced a similar but less complicated delegate battle in 1980, he hired Manafort to lead his successful delegate fight at the convention that year.
Reagan, of course, would go on to win the nomination and then win the White House back for Republicans from the failing Carter.
Manafort also played a leading role in the 1988 GOP convention, which nominated then future President George H.W. Bush, and in the 1996 convention which nominated then Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole as the GOP presidential nominee. Dole would go on to lose the general election to incumbent Democratic President Bill Clinton.
“Yes,” Trump told the New York Times when asked to confirm the news he hired Manafort. “It is true.”
Trump’s hire of Manafort, the Times’ Maggie Haberman and Alex Burns wrote, “is a sign that Mr. Trump is intensifying his focus on delegate wrangling as his opponents mount a tenacious effort to deny him the 1,237 delegates he would need to secure the Republican nomination.”
Haberman and Burns wrote:
Under those circumstances, Mr. Trump’s opponents hope they can wrest that prize away from him in a contested convention.
Bringing Mr. Manafort on board may shore up Mr. Trump’s operation in an area where his opponents currently see him as vulnerable. In an alarming tactical setback for Mr. Trump, the Wall Street Journal reported last week that he may harvest fewer delegates from his primary win in Louisiana than Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), whose campaign has aggressively picked off delegates who are uncommitted or apportioned to candidates no longer in the race. Too many missteps of that kind could force Mr. Trump unnecessarily into a Cleveland floor fight.

Similar reports in recent days have cropped up in Missouri, South Dakota, South Carolina, and many other states where Trump has dominated with the public but still infuriates party insiders. The addition of Manafort to his team decreases the likelihood that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Ohio Gov. John Kasich, any other campaign who has since suspended, or the party itself can pull off major delegate shenanigans in Cleveland.
Trump has been aiming to pivot to the general election sooner rather than later, in large part because his only two remaining competitors—Cruz and Kasich—can’t realistically beat him without a contested convention. Cruz would have to reach nearly 90 percent of the party’s remaining outstanding delegates to get there, a virtually insurmountable feat, while it’s already mathematically impossible for Kasich to get there.
Anti-Trump forces inside the GOP have hung all their hopes on a contested convention, and Trump’s Manafort hire could stave off those efforts. A fierce battle lay ahead over the next several days heading into next Tuesday’s Wisconsin GOP primary where different polls show the candidates bunched up competing closely within the margin of error, some with Cruz in front and some with Trump in front. A Trump win in the Badger State would devastate the so-called “Never Trump” group, whereas a Trump loss to Cruz would embolden his critics.
Then two weeks later it is Trump’s home state of New York, where the real estate magnate is expected to dominate. After that, the rest of the eastern seaboard—Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and Maryland—votes before the end of April. In May, Indiana, Nebraska, West Virginia, Oregon, and Washington State hold nominating contests before the final votes are cast before the July convention on June 7 in California, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, and South Dakota.
Theoretically, Trump could wrap everything up before or on June 7—but it’s a tough road ahead. There are also hundreds of delegates who are entirely uncommitted walking into the convention whom Trump could get to vote for him—something Manafort is undoubtedly already working on achieving.
“The move [hiring Manafort] is freighted with political symbolism: After the 1980 election, Mr. Manafort was among the young-gun Reagan operatives who founded one of Washington’s best-known political consulting and lobbying shops,” Haberman and Burns wrote in the Times. “His principal business partners were Roger J. Stone Jr., a longtime Trump confidant who frequently advocates for the campaign on television, and Charles R. Black Jr. Mr. Kasich unveiled Mr. Black as an adviser earlier this month, in an announcement intended to convey his readiness for a contested convention – effectively making Mr. Black and Mr. Manafort, allies dating back to the 1970s, direct competitors in the 2016 race.”
Read More Stories About: