Can ANYONE on this blog who thinks there’s EVIDENCE against Cruz actually describe what it is that is SO convincing?
All I’ve heard is parroting of the National Enquirer for God’s sake.
Are you really interested? If so, read the Twitter exchange of love lyrics between him and Amanda Carpenter. I don’t know what song (I’m pretty sure they are quoting song lyrics) lyrics they are “singing” to each other on Twitter, but this is really suspicious. You don’t DO that with someone who isn’t your wife.
They were pretty obviously to me referencing a romantic interlude they had related to song lyrics. When you then add up her use of the term “Daddy Cruz” for him, then their (yes, temporary) matching his-and-hers tattoos, with the video of him and her routinely coming out of a hotel together, well, I think an honest, objective person would say “Yep, there’s hanky-panky goin’ on.” Couple THAT to the fact that he doesn’t outright deny an affair (the “Enquirer story is garbage”-—yes, in the Clintonesque world of lawyers, that can be true without denying key parts), the fact that asked straight out if he has been unfaithful he refused to answer but let Snarly jump in, and that he has hidden his wife . . . I’d say that’s a pretty strong circumstantial case. Yes, circumstantial, but the appearance of impropriety is pretty strong there.