Tag Archives: impeach Holder

For Cruz New York “values” San Francisco “values” and “Swanson values” are Negotiable

By Kevin “Coach” Collins

We’ve heard Ted Cruz detests “New York values.” What we’re not hearing about is his hypocritical “situational” approval of these values and the “values” of a similar location: San Francisco.  Nor have we heard about the Senator’s refusal to stand up and defend his New York and San Francisco “values” donors whose lives are threatened by the “values” of Pastor Kevin Swanson one of his convenient Iowa supporters.  

In 2009 when Cruz first decided to run for public office, he received a donation of $251,000 from Peter Thiel a San Francisco billionaire whose “values” include supporting gay marriage. Cruz wanted to run for Texas Attorney General but eventually ended his campaign.

So a billionaire from California, who just happens to be gay and supports gay marriage, decides to give the unknown Cruz what turned out to be 20% of his campaign war chest with no promises about  gay marriage?  There is no indication that Cruz returned the “San Francisco values” money to Thiel.

Last April Cruz sat in the home of a prominent “New York values” gay marriage supporting couple and received the minimum $2,700 allowed by law from each man. Since that would barely cover Cruz’s travel expenses it raises the question of how many other gay activists with “New York values” he spoke to and what they gave Cruz; but not what he promised them. Cruz has since said that gay marriage would not be a priority to him. They have apparently bought his silence on the issue.

Along the way Cruz stood on a stage in Iowa (November 6, 2015) with a Pastor Kevin Swanson who has regularly shown that his “values” include calling for Christians to execute gays.

It seems that Cruz likes New York and San Francisco “values” when they come with a check attached to them; and is okay with Swanson “values” if they help him in Iowa.

It’s doubtful Cruz will go back to New York or San Francisco to beg for more money; but couldn’t he just man up and condemn Swanson for his savage “murder gays values?” 

Maybe he will after the Iowa Caucuses. Swanson won’t be useful to him then.        








Cruz donors accused of money laundering, helping tax cheats, pro-amnesty revisionist history

By Kevin “Coach” Collins

It is doubtful that Ted Cruz supporters know these things about him. It is up to them to reconcile this information to continue supporting him.

Credit Suisse Group gave Cruz $33,442. CSG is under federal and international investigation as the money launderers for the crooks who ran FIFA the international soccer association.

 Cruz has taken cash from both sides of the amnesty issue. He has received $705, 657 from the pro-amnesty Club For Growth and both financial and volunteer support from Wallbuilders, an anti- amnesty Evangelical group whose founder, David Barton,  has written a book on Thomas Jefferson that is frankly ridiculous and justifiably mocked by Jeffersonian scholars.  

Goldman Sachs gave Cruz $69,350.  The pro-amnesty Goldman Sachs is under an FBI investigation that just started in June. It has a long history of dirty dealings and being a Democrat ATM. Is this money a “pay it forward” bribe to Cruz to save Goldman Sachs by having a “President Cruz” call the FBI off of his wife’s employer?  BTW Goldman Sachs gave a fat envelope to Mitch McConnell – aren’t they on opposite sides of everything? It seems not.

Morgan, Lewis gave Cruz $67,550. They are an Illinois law firm being sued for allegedly helping a client cover up illegal tax shelters. The media would keep asking Cruz if he would help them out of this mess once elected president.

As soon as it became apparent that Cruz would be the Republican nominee, the media would jump on these things and paint Cruz as a fringe person not representative of the “American mainstream,” who is willing to overlook his donor’s criminal activities to keep the cash flowing.

 It makes no difference what his supporters think, Cruz will have to defend Credit Suisse Group, Goldman Sachs, David Barton and the rest of this seedy bunch or lose their very big financial and volunteer support. 

When called upon – and he will be- to explain taking say Credit Suisse Group’s cash how will Cruz talk his way out of it?

 How will Cruz “walk through the rain drops” and reconcile his support from the anti-amnesty Wallbuilders and those of his open borders/ pro-amnesty other big money backers like these?    

Sullivan & Cromwell gave Cruz $58,900. S&C they are a Wall Street trial lawyer firm that specializes in defending the “Wolf of Wall Street” types. So is Cruz for them or us when it comes time to cracking down on S&C’s clients?

As we have seen lately, when a candidate is explaining himself he is not making progress and usually falls in the polls.

It remains to be seen whether Cruz’s supporters can overlook these contradictions in his campaign.  









Things Cruz would face as GOP nominee that Trump wouldn’t have to

 By Kevin “Coach” Collins

 It would be great to have Ted Cruz as our next president. So many things could be fixed and so much good could be done. It’s a very pleasant dream but nothing more.

There are a number of difficult problems Cruz would have to face as the Republican nominee that Donald Trump wouldn’t have deal with.

Ted Cruz

Cruz was born in Canada, to an American mother and a Cuban citizen father. Like it or not, Cruz would have to fight a continual battle to prove his eligibility. He only gave up his duel Canadian citizenship in May 2014 when the media called him on this. 

Trump has no such problem.

Cruz voted for the Coker Bill that made the Iran Nuke deal impossible to stop.  

Trump has always been very critical of the deal.

Cruz has been and would be totally dependent on donated money to run his campaign. It would be a tough uphill fight that would eat into his campaigning time.

Trump is self-financed and owes no one anything.  

Cruz would be constantly asked to explain how he would fix the economy and try to do so with few credentials in this area.  TRUMP AND CRUZ

Trump’s domestic long suit is the economy.

Cruz has come out against excluding Muslims which will make him the target should there be another Islamic lunatic attack.

Trump’s position will win out.  

While not doing well with Blacks and Hispanics would not necessarily be fatal to Cruz, given his ethnicity, he would be badgered into an “either pander or perish” position and be a loser either way. 

Currently Trump’s getting between 13% and 25% of Black support and 31% with Hispanics.  

The RNC can stop Cruz with a number of little things they could not get away with on Trump. They could schedule a Cruz appearance with people like John McCain and let Cruz explain saying No! They could “forget” to notify local Republican heroes or local media when Cruz was coming to town.   TRUMP AND CRUZ PIC

They could “forget” to send out campaign materials.

They could get big donors to go on record about why they were not supporting Cruz, thereby scaring off smaller heavy donors.     

Clearly none of that applies to Trump.

Cruz can be tied to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and Goldman Sachs through his wife Heidi’s membership and employment. As unfair as it would be, Cruz would have to continually explain these things when he has to be out campaigning.

Trump has no such problem. 

As member of the CFR, Heidi Cruz was a member of a Task Force that recommended Mexico, DONALD TRUMP 6America and Canada “…   should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic.”  This means no wall. Cruz would have to explain this contradiction over and over again.

Trump on the other hand is Mister Build a Wall with Mexico.


The horrors of Sharia Law described by an Australian Senator


By Kevin “Coach” Collins

Sharia’s thugs don’t get a green light to trample their victims everywhere. One of the places they don’t get a free ride is Australia. Jacqui Lambie, a down under Senator, spoke out about the dangers of Sharia Law last week and did so unequivocally.

Calling Sharia’s thugs “maniacs and depraved humans, Lambie said, “…they won’t stop committing cold blooded butchery and rapes until every woman in Australia wears a burqa.”     

But Lambie was just getting started. She continued her counter attack on Sharia’s supporters by blaming them for, “every major terrorist attack on the Western world. The 9/11s, the Bali bombings, Boston marathon bombings, recent beheadings and massacres have all been carried out by supporters of sharia law.”

The Senator has demanded that supporters of Sharia leave her country and pleaded with her countrymen and women to see the danger this malignant code of laws presents to any civilized nation. She called on Australia’s “innocents” to realize, “these thugs and extremists will not stop their acts of terrorism and depravity until their way of life, their culture and their law is imposed on Australia, indeed the whole world.”  

Not surprisingly she is facing criticism from even members of her own Party who are eager to suck up to these seventh century savages. The naive dunce who runs her Party called for unity saying, “We are a rich and diverse nation who enjoy a special country. [our] Challenge is dealing with budget and measures that attack the fabric of society. We must think about who and what we are and where we want to go. We have strong obligations towards each other. We have lots in common, we love our families, freedom and our efforts to help each other.” How nice! This jackass could be saying words written for him at a local mosque.

“We love our families.” Really? Than why are women treated like specialized farm animals under Sharia law?  “We love freedom.” Really Than why do these animals prowl around the world searching for victims to threaten with their “convert or die” attacks?  “[we make] efforts to help each other.” Really? Than why is it that the Islamic thugs who cause the pain and suffering of terrorist attacks have never contributed a penny to a relief effort?  After Super Storm Sandy (of course not caused by these savages) even the Buddhists who have a minuscule presence in New York City gave cash donations to victims; but not a single penny came from any of these mongrels!

 We as the civilized world can either recognize the danger of Sharia Law or sit back and wait for their swords to find our necks.  For now the choice is still ours. Where do you stand?



Learn the truth about Democrats.

Get your free PDF of Coach’s book “Crooks Thugs& Bigots: the lost, hidden and changed history of the Democrat Party.” Just ask at kcoachc@gmail.com

The ugly history of the Democrat Party: Part Four


By Kevin “Coach” Collins

Chapter Two: Democrat Presidents before the Civil War

ANDREW JACKSON 1828 to 1836

For many years the Democrat Party has presented itself as the common man’s Party. We have heard that the Democrats are for the little guy and always have been since the election of Andrew Jackson in 1828.

As the tall tale goes, “Old Hickory” as Jackson was called, was a “man’s man” who stood for the principles set down by America’s Founding Fathers.  In fact he actually had a legitimate claim to being part of the American Revolution; he was a member of the Continental Army as a 13 year old messenger who was captured and mistreated by the British.

What a great story! What a great man! What a great patriot! If only some of this were true, Jackson would be half the man that today’s duplicitous Democrats make him out to be.  

The real and forgotten story of “Old Hickory” is far more important than the fairy tales told about him at Democrat fundraisers.

The truth is that Andrew Jackson was a product of the treasonous Aaron Burr’s corrupt political machine which grew into the Democrat Party “in the 1820’s.”

N.B. Unlike the Republican Party which has an exact starting date, (March 20, 1854) even careful research cannot pin down an exact founding date for the Democrat Party. As with its current leader, the Democrat Party seems to have no definitive birth certificate.

Why no exact starting date for the Democrat Party can be found is a historical oddity, but one that is not hard to figure out. Any honest discussion of the roots of the Party would necessarily include the scheming and treachery of Aaron Burr – a man who, during the nascent years of our republic, almost single handedly destroyed America. Burr certainly felt little allegiance toward his home but held the widely hated British Crown in high esteem.

Jackson: an unindicted co-conspirator in Burr’s treason trial

When Burr was indicted for treason the evidence of his guilt centered on clear and overt acts….  On December 9, 1806 he had gathered a large force of men on an island in the Ohio River and readied them to march on New Orleans. Evidence developed at the time of his trial revealed that during the immediate months before his planned invasion of the western half of North America, he had stayed at Andrew Jackson’s home.

In September 1806 during a celebratory dinner while Burr was staying with him at the “Hermitage” as Jackson’s home was called, Jackson addressed Aaron Burr as a “good and trusty friend of Tennessee.”   Two months later, as the time for Burr to make his move grew near, he sent “Old Hickory” $3,500 with instructions to purchase five boats and equip them with military gear. Jackson did this and more. He recruited seventy five men for the “army” Burr would need to violently establish his new “country.”

Just prior to Burr’s attempt to divide the nation, Jackson is reported to have overheard a stranger talking about the impending treasonous attack. In a classic “Cover Your Ass” move, Jackson sent a message to Thomas Jefferson clearing himself and Burr and naming General James Wilkinson (a co-conspirator of Burr’s), as the real and only organizer of the plot.  

Jefferson bought only half of the line and had Burr indicted.

It is a matter of public record that Andrew Jackson was an unindicted co-conspirator in the treason case against Aaron Burr brought about by Jackson’s self-serving letter. Burr was acquitted on what were called technicalities at the time, but his reputation was forever damaged.

Jackson’s first inaugural party: the coarsening of the Presidency

To celebrate his inauguration in 1829, Jackson opened the White House to his supporters. The “People’s House” would host the people on his/their big day.

What ensued was a wild drunken party. An eyewitness account follows:  

“…..But what a scene did we witness! The Majesty of the People had disappeared, and a rabble, a mob, of boys, negros [sic], women, children, scrambling fighting, romping. What a pity what a pity! No arrangements had been made, no police officers placed on duty and the whole house had been inundated by the rabble mob. We came too late. The President, after having been literally nearly pressed to death and almost suffocated and torn to pieces by the people in their eagerness to shake hands with Old Hickory, had retreated through the back way or south front and had escaped to his lodgings at Gadsby’s…..


Note: Due to the strong interest readers of CiR have shown in this material this series will continue each Wednesday Friday and Sunday.

This material comes from my book, Crooks Thugs and Bigots: the Lost Hidden and Changed History of the Democrat Party, but if you cannot wait to read more of the history of the Democrat Party I’ll send you a free PDF of my book write me at  kcoachc@gmail.com