Erick Erickson Website “Resurgent” Paid By Pro-Cruz/Anti-Trump “Our Principles PAC”…

Listen To Military Veteran Talk Radio

iHeart.SmythRadio.com

Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Posted by sundance

Thanks to the candidacy of Donald Trump the financial intersection of money and political opinion, as guided by the monetary motives therein, has brought some amazing revelations to the surface.

These financial/media relationships have largely, and historically, remained hidden.  They have damned sure never been publicly, clearly, and regularly stated so the consuming audience would know the presentation was fraught with financial conflict.

♦ The Senate Conservatives Fund (PAC) purchasing massive quantities ($400,000) of Mark Levin’s books in exchange for favorable candidacy political opinion.  Conveniently Hidden by the radio host who avoids mentioning the financial conflict created.

Then again, Levin never informed his audience of his family working within the Staff of Senator Ted Cruz either.  Does Levin’s endorsement, when contrast against the crony-constitutional advocacy, clarify with a little sunlight?  You decide.

♦ Or how about the Breitbart Media enterprise being run via an $11 million purchase from Billionaire Robert Mercer, who also funded Ted Cruz’s Super-PAC “Keep The Promise 1”, to the tune of $10 million.  Little overlooked facts, never openly shared for news consumers to determine source motive.   Pesky Sunlight

♦ Maybe the Ben Shapiro website “The Daily Wire“, being funded by the billionaire Wilks Brothers, Levi and Farris, in Texas.  Who also fund Ted Cruz and his Super-PAC “Keep The Promise”.  Shapiro never publicly disclosed the financial/content conflict, or the extent therein.  Could Shapiro support any other candidate other than who his content owners approved of?  Again, you decide.  (Yep, Pesky Sunlight)

♦ The Chairman of Glenn Beck’s Mercury One charity, David Barton, jointly running the Pro-Ted Cruz Super-PAC“Keep The Promise”; also never put into the sunlight by Glenn Beck or his various media enterprises so the consuming audience could filter presented political opinion through the filter of fiduciary connections.  More Pesky Sunlight

These are just a few of the politically motivated – financially dependent – revelations we probably would never have known about were it not for Donald Trump presenting a genuinely conservative America-First platform; and as a direct consequence, the faux-constitutionalists having to reverse opinion simply to retain income.

♦ So it perhaps shouldn’t come as a surprise to find out that Erick Erickson’s media venture “The Resurgent“, is taking Super-PAC money from the (formerly Scott Walker advocates and financial backers) Ricketts family of Wisconsin who fund OUR PRINCIPLES PAC to the tune of $3,000,000 in February alone.

FEC Monthly Filing ‘Amended’ Date 3/13/16

Look at where the money was spent (pdf linkand below):

View this document on Scribd

Yes, it appears there’s another conservative voice who can be added to the list of those whose opinions are conveniently tied to a financial incentive therein.

In addition to all of those in the Salem Media Communications network, along with Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Ben Shapiro, Erick Erickson and anyone who is hosted upon the various media enterprises they front for…. all paid shrills dependent upon political graft.

Interesting indeed how the intersection of financial dependency drives the political ideology of these modern “conservative voices”.   However, this does increasingly explain how those same voices will stand and cheer for Mr. No-Budget/Omnibus, House Speaker Paul Ryan.

“Smaller government”?  Yeah, sure.

Nolte: The Cultural and Media Reality of the ‘Cruz Crisis’

Steve Pope/Getty Images

by JOHN NOLTE7 Jan 20161,140

On his radio show Wednesday, Mark Levin called out Breitbart News over the issueSen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)’s citizenship, “[J]ust because [Donald Trump] says something doesn’t mean I have to agree with it like our friends over at Breitbart, who are going all kinds of crazy over the birther issue.” Levin, who knows plenty about the Constitution, believes the debate over Cruz’s eligibility to be president is “stupid.” But he adds, without realizing that this is the only point that matters, “Liberals love this stuff.”

First off, as cut and dried as Cruz’s citizenship issue might be to Levin, the trip to the “cut and dried” is objectively murky. My colleague Joel Pollak, who attended Harvard Law School,  lays it all out here. Pollak doesn’t question Cruz’s eligibility; he does, however, understand modern American politics and lays out a convincing case as to why the issue could eventually become a problem for Cruz.

As of right now, Ted Cruz has a legitimate chance at winning the Republican nomination, and because Levin is 100% correct when he says “liberals love this stuff,” my question is a simple one:

As “stupid” as this issue may be for Levin, do we want to litigate it in front of the American people today or three weeks before the general election, when Cruz is either our presidential or vice-presidential nominee? Because you have to be wearing blinders to believe that will not happen.

If Cruz is on the ticket, you can bet the farm that Democrats and the DC Media have already gamed out an October Surprise centered on creating a political storm over Cruz’s natural born status. Moreover, all it would take is one federal judge to hurl a massive monkey into that wrench.

Exhibit A: The Clintons are the Original Birthers. If they went after Obama over this issue, who doesn’t believe they will go after Cruz?

Exhibit B: High-profile Democrats arealready vowing to sue over Cruz’s eligibility.

Exhibit C: The White House proved yesterday that at the highest levels, Democrats are fully prepared to make this an issue.

Exhibit D: We’re still waiting for independent verification that Cruz’s mother was indeed an American citizen. Wouldn’t now be a good time to drop that shoe, however it falls?

Even if you side 100% with Levin on this issue, tell me how unrealistic it is to imagine a federal judge ruling on October 21, 2016, that Ted Cruz’s citizenship status is questionable. Cruz is running for president. We can’t just take his word on this.

If that happens, just like the phony late-October Casper Weinberger indictment that killed George H.W. Bush’s re-election momentum in 1992, we lose.

Trump is actually doing Cruz a huge favor. In Trump’s defense, he was asked about the Cruz issue, which  doesn’t mean his intentions are not mercenary, but it also means that the net-benefit has been to prematurely explode the DC Media’s planned October Surprise.

Even if it is “stupid,” so was accusing Romney of murder in 2012, of not paying his taxes, of blaming him for Todd Akin. But with the coordinated help of the entire DC Media-complex, that’s exactly what Democrats did. Nobody believed any of it, which was never the goal. The goal was to keep Romney off-message and on defense, and it worked.

How different would the 2000 election outcome have looked had a Donald Trump brought up George W. Bush’s drunk driving incident during the primary?

This may be cut and dried for Levin, but how does his opinion control the actions of Democrats and the media? How does his opinion change the fact that there is no independent verification that Cruz’s mother was an American citizen.

The national debate over Cruz’s eligibility *is* going to happen, and it must happen.

The only question, then, is *when* will this be litigated once and for all in front of the American people.

Who doesn’t think now is better than October?

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism, 2016 Presidential Race,Mark Levin, canada, Ted Cruz 2016, Birther,Natural Born Citizen, birtherism