6 Blatant Ted Cruz Lies about Marco Rubio

There are two claims Cruz and his campaign have made about Rubio’s Univision interview (The translated transcript of the relevant portion of the Univision interview is below the analysis):

1) Rubio said different things about amnesty in Spanish and in English. This is meant to portray as untrustworthy and otherize him because he can speak Spanish.

Here are two articles showing Rubio has said the same exact thing in English both before and after the interview, thus Cruz is clearly lying here.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2015-11-04/rubio-says-he-d-end-program-for-immigration-dreamers-

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/msnbc-quick-cuts/57239063#57239063

How did this lie come about? In an article immediately following the interview, Breitbart’s Matt Boyle claimed “Rubio answered that DACA will end only when a legislative substitute with the exact same or similar policy prescriptions — a legislative amnesty for illegal alien minors — is implemented.” As you can see in question 2 below, Rubio specifically said the reverse. He says that the program it going to have to end regardless of whether immigration reform is approved.

2) “Marco Rubio has gone on Univision and said in Spanish, ‘No, no, I wouldn’t rescind amnesty,”

That’s a direct quote from Cruz that he has repeated several times. As you can see from the Univision transcript, Rubio actually says the exact reverse. This is just a lie. Cruz has adjusted this at times to say Rubio wouldn’t get rid of Obama’s executive amnesty on “day one,” but even that is not accurate as Rubio has always held that he would get rid of DAPA (which hasn’t taken effect and is being held up by the courts) on day one.

Full translation:

Ramos: As you know, it has always been hard for Republicans to get the Hispanic vote. I wanted to talk with you about very concrete issues that affect Hispanics directly. I would like to start with the issue of deferred action and DACA. If you made it to the White House, would you keep the DACA program; that is, Deferred Action for the Dreamers, and would you keep President Barack Obama’s executive action, which would benefit more than four million undocumented people?

Rubio: Well, DACA is going to have to end at some point. I wouldn’t undo it immediately. The reason is that there are already people who have that permission, who are working, who are studying, and I don’t think it would be fair to cancel it suddenly. But I do think it is going to have to end. And, God willing, it’s going to end because immigration reform is going to pass. DAPA hasn’t yet taken effect, and I think it has impeded progress on immigration, on immigration reform. And since that program hasn’t taken effect yet, I would cancel it. But DACA, I think it is important; it can’t be cancelled suddenly because there are already people who are benefitting from it. But it is going to have to end. It cannot be the permanent policy of the United States. And I don’t think that’s what they’re asking for, either. I think that everyone prefers immigration reform.

Ramos: But then, to clarify, you would end DACA once immigration reform is approved. But what happens, Senator, if there is no immigration reform? Would you cancel DACA anyway?

Rubio: At some point it’s going to have to end. That is, it cannot continue to be the permanent policy of the United States. I do think that if I wind up being president, it will be possible to achieve new immigration reform. It won’t be possible for it to be comprehensive; that is, they are not going to be able to do everything in one massive bill. We already tried that a couple of years ago. We have seen that the political support isn’t there, and I think we’ve spent a lot of time on this process when we could have started moving forward through the three steps that I advocated. Unfortunately, a lot of time has been wasted on that. It has become an even more controversial issue; harder to move forward on that issue. But I still say that it’s important to modernize our system, and that means improving the way we enforce it in the future, to modernize the immigration system so that it’s not so costly and bureaucratic. And we have to deal with 12 million human beings who are already here. And nobody, nobody is advocating a plan to deport 12 million human beings. So that issue has to be dealt with, as well.

3) Cruz claims that Rubio “supports citizenship for 12 million people here illegally” (Debate) and “advocates amnesty for criminals who are here illegally” (http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/cruz-distorts-rubios-immigration-stance/)

As noted in the factcheck link above, this is clearly false. The assumption here is that Rubio advocates for citizenship for every illegal currently here, but even the dreaded Gang of Eight bill would have not allowed anything near that. Rubio has always said that anyone that is here illegally and convicted of another felony must be deported and given the requirements before anyone could possible obtain citizenship, the number that would actually ever reach that point is much smaller than 12 million.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/cruz-distorts-rubios-immigration-stance/

4) Cruz has claimed that Rubio supports Cap and Trade.

This claim, based on an edited video, actually came from Charlie Crist (D) in 2010 and was rightly called a dishonest smear by conservatives at the time. Cruz currently repeats it on his website with the same intentionally edited video.

Reality: The extended video tells a different story. Rubio was asking them to come up with a plan but not to implement it in order to undermine Charlie Crist’s plan to impose Cap & Trade on Florida. Rubio specifically says that the solutions to environmental problems should come from the private sector in the video. Rubio successfully led the fight to stop Crist.

Even liberal fact checkers at Politifact found that Rubio was telling the truth about never having supported Cap and Trade.

James Inhofe, known as the leading Congressional fighter against Cap and Trade, has endorsed Rubio and said about this charge: “To suggest that Marco supported cap-and-trade in Florida is absurd. Not only did Marco block Charlie Crist’s radical environmental agenda, but he has stood with me every step of the way to stop President Obama’s job-killing energy policies, including cap-and-trade.”

5) Cruz claimed the National Organization of Marriage endorsed him and “said it cannot support Donald Trump or Marco Rubio because both of them are unwilling to defend traditional marriage”

Anyone who has heard Rubio talk about traditional marriage knows the last part to be false but the lie is even more obvious when you look at what the National Organization for Marriage said when they endorsed Cruz:

“The decision to endorse in the Republican primary race was a very difficult one,” Brown said. “There are many tremendous candidates remaining who have made support for marriage a pillar of their careers in public service, including Sen. Rick Santorum, Gov. Mike Huckabee, Dr. Ben Carson and Sen. Marco Rubio. We realize that our endorsement of Sen. Cruz will be very disappointing to them. Should any of these candidates emerge as the Republican nominee we would enthusiastically support them.”

6) Cruz claimed that Rubio did not want to use Congress’s “constitutional authority to defund Planned Parenthood,” thereby trying to suggest Rubio was weak on the issue.

In reality, Rubio has actually voted for and supported spending bills that defunded Planned Parenthood and standalone bills that defunded the organization. This was such a blatantly dishonest attack that the most prominent pro-life organization in the country, the National Right to Life, actually called out Cruz for his “inaccurate and misleading” attacks:

“Marco Rubio voted to defund Planned Parenthood before Ted Cruz ever got to the U.S. Senate. Since Ted Cruz joined the U.S. Senate, both he and Sen. Rubio have voted the same on every roll call that National Right to Life regards as pertinent to defunding Planned Parenthood”

None of this even goes into Cruz’s dishonesty about his own record or his countless flip-flops on recent issues. Cruz’s strategy of praising Trump for 6 months has backfired and he is running out of time to rack up delegates before primaries in unfavorable states begin, which has led to these desperate tactics. Voters see through these obvious lies and Cruz has no one to blame but himself for the backlash he is currently facing

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.