I agree. But it could be the other way because the info was veiled. You don’t know nor do I, nor does it matter. Donald warned two weeks ago at rallies that he might have to go to war with Ted Cruz and this is Iowa we are speaking of, where Ted is doing well. So it’s not surprising that Donald would respond in a way that is more gentle than other responses.
Whether Cruz attacked or not, the information is out there and the Iowan evangelicals have the information whether it is good info or not.
Cruz questions Trump’s ‘judgment’. This is likely a false statement, but it doesn’t matter because it’s out there. If it is falsely attributed to Cruz, then Ted needs to step up and say it’s false. He did not do so and he refused to address it when asked. So it’s out there among the evangelical groups. Donald must address it in some fastion because he is talking to these evangelicals directly. So he draws a small distinction over an alleged attack.
In law, when allegations are made in declarations, they must be responded to. Whether the declaration substance is true, valid, relevant or not, it matters not. What matters is to respond to each and every allegation no matter what quality the allegation holds. That’s what you’re seeing here. Each allegation is viewed as an attack. It matters not if there is proof of the allegation, it must be responded to as if it was a genuine attack.
Trump knows what he’s doing. He could have tore into Cruz but he fired only warning shots. He announced in the press to Ted to tell him to his face that his judgment was suspect. Ted did not do so. The challenge in the press was not directed so much to Cruz as it was to the press who raised the issue. But Donald had to respond.
And when you think of it, Trump handled it masterfully. Here’s a press attack on Donald’s character that is attributed to Ted Cruz. Donald knows that Ted did not say it publically so the analysis is simple:
Either Ted said it.
Or Ted didn’t say it.
TELL ME TO MY FACE is the answer to the sneak attack. Come out in the open and show yourself, whether that ‘self’ is the press or Ted.
And then promote to the Iowans that your evangelical background is more traditionally arranged than that of Ted’s father, not because Ted is not a genuine evangelical (he is) but to impress upon the evangelicals a small distinction that reinforces your shared background with them.
All of the above is perfectly logical, masterful and appropriate. Ted is not damaged unless he damages himself, but he’s too smart for that. So the issue fades, Trump’s judgment is cleared, and a memory of his evangelical roots is created for Iowan evangelical caucus goers.