Alternate Reality: What if Hillary Clinton were Ted Cruz?

 

I know the DNC is over and Hillary is the nominee. As I sit here and think about all the exuberant supporters who wildly endorse her (movie stars, political stars, illegal immigrants, etc.), I wonder what would happen if they saw her through my eyes. What if they looked at her with a Constitutionalist, Rule of Law, mindset and worldview? Would they still be able to endorse her and have a clear conscience? Could they honestly say they pulled the lever for her based on his/her principles?

I would like to pose a hypothetical, political situation: Imagine an alternate reality where Hillary Clinton swapped places with Ted Cruz. I am only asking that we allow our current feelings toward each remain, and then reevaluate those feelings at the end. Would each of their accomplishments and/or scandals be enough to bring us to today’s political standings. Would Hillary Clinton have been denied the nomination in the DNC by a bloviating charlatan, and Ted Cruz have wrapped up the nomination even with a rigged system and RNC email scandal toppling the aging upstart?

th

I have taken some of Hillary Clinton’s statement regarding just one of the scandals she’s embroiled in, the email scandal, and replaced her name with Ted Cruz’s name. Using only her actual statements and testimony of FBI director James Comey regarding her statements, it is my theory that the desired outcome of the media, pundits, and public would be massively different seeing them attributed to Ted Cruz. Those who blindly support and endorse Hillary Clinton, would not do the same for Ted Cruz, although he would have engaged in exactly the same violations and had the same achievements. Orwell nailed it in Animal Farm, “[…] all animals are equal, some are more equal than others.”

Let’s begin.

Here are a list of Ted Cruz’s previous remarks about the email allegations:

“When I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two,” Mr. Cruz said in March. “Looking back, it would’ve been better if I’d simply used a second email account and carried a second phone.” Mr. Cruz said that since a vast majority of his work emails went to government employees at their government addresses, they would be archived by the government.
“Again, looking back, it would’ve been better for me to use two separate phones and two email accounts. I thought using one device would be simpler, and obviously, it hasn’t worked out that way.”
“There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements.”
“We went through a thorough process to identify all of my work-related emails and delivered them to the State Department,” he said. “I have absolute confidence that everything that could be in any way connected to work is now in the possession of the State Department.”
“When we were asked to help the State Department make sure they had everything from other secretaries of state, not just me, I’m the one who said, O.K., great, I will go through them again. And we provided all of them.”
“We went through a thorough process to identify all of my work-related emails and delivered them to the State Department,” he said. “I have absolute confidence that everything that could be in any way connected to work is now in the possession of the State Department.”

Now that you have re-familiarized yourself with some claims by Secretary Cruz, here are the findings that the FBI presented:
________________________________________________________________________

Director Comey was called before Congress to give account of the FBI’s findings. Here is the exchange in which Trey Gowdy asked him a series of questions regarding the aforementioned claims:

Gowdy: “Secretary Cruz said there was nothing marked classified on her emails, either sent or received. Is that true?”

Comey: “That’s not true, there were a small number of portion markings on, I think, three of the documents.”

Gowdy:”Secretary Cruz said, ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email, there is no classified material.’ Was that true?”

Comey: “There was classified material emailed.”

Gowdy: “Secretary Cruz said she used just one device. Was that true?”

Comey: “She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as secretary of state.”

Gowdy: “Secretary Cruz said all work-related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?”

Comey: “No, we found work-related emails, thousands, that were not returned.”

___________________________________________________________________________

Are you still sold on a candidate who engaged in this behavior of deception and collusion to be one of our trusted leader? Do you think Secretary Cruz should be allowed to still run for president? Would you let him run for dog catcher in your town? Most likely, you are enraged and want him disbarred, excommunicated, banished, and sent to the guillotine. But when it’s Hillary Clinton, she has some sort of diplomatic immunity.

For some Ted Cruz being a man will make the comparison uneven, and it is a big deal to be the first women President. So, what about Carly Fiorina? Or Mia Love? Or Nikki Haley? Or Condoleezza Rice? Would any of those women changed your mind about a person committing blatant security violations with such dishonesty be fit for President? I highly doubt it. Hillary gets a pass because she is Hillary, the same way Donald Trump gets a pass on his buffoonery because of his name. This is not supposed to be a popularity contest, but job interview by the most qualified and most deserving candidate. Yet, we have devolved into brain dead imbeciles, who say, “Trump’s gonna make America great again…I dunno how but he said he would.” Guess our parents were right, TV did rot our brains after all.

What would you think about your friends and other who supported Mr. Cruz and his nomination to run for President? I am certain that the character of these individuals would come into question, and you may want to rethink some friendships.

The truth is when our “guy” is in, regardless of his/her principles, we have huge blinders on and cannot see their wrong doings as anything but oversights and/or honest mistakes. Secretary Clinton’s intricate email system, multiple devices, and private servers were not oversights, and were too complicated to be a convenience. It took planning, intent, and willful disobedience to circumvent the government servers and email accounts required by federal law. Which begs the question, should the FBI director should be indicted himself for being complicit in the covering up of multiple felonies? One can only dream of a land where lawmakers and government agents are beholden to the same consequences that their constituents are for the same violations.

Convention of the States anyone? How about a political party purge? How about term limits for Congress? Something has to give…I have a feeling it is going to be our rights before it is their position and power. Come what may, let it not be our morals, principles, and conscience that gives way. When we act out of fear, desperation, or anger we rarely make great decisions.

Viva Revolution!! A revolution to reinstate the laws of the land and to rediscover our inalienable rights. #voteyourconscience #standforprinciplesorfallforfools