Posted on 04/02/2016 6:34:46 AM PDT by CreviceTool
Despite no proof and lots of denials, the story refuses to die...It’s been a week since the National Enquirer reported that “pervy Ted Cruz” was “caught cheating” with five unnamed women. Cruz and two of the women who have since been identified have vehemently denied the allegations, and no one has presented any evidence. Yet the sordid story has made its mark, even in this sordid campaign season.
(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...
LOL.
1. CBS
2. NBC
3. ABC
4. MSNBC
5. CNN
Wikipedia: "After George W. Bush took office, Cruz served as an Associate Deputy Attorney General in the U.S. Justice Department and as the Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission."
Until 2003, upon whence #LusTed flitted back to Tejas...
If that is the page that was posted here a couple of days ago, that thing is so badly and obviously doctored that even Dan Rather wouldn’t rely on it. There were at least 4 different font styles used, often in the same row and column or even the same title. Font sizes were all over the place, and while most cell bill will show where the calling or called phone number is listed, none that I have seen will show where the phone actually was at the time the call was made. You can get that information with a subpoena, but they don’t put it on your bill, because it really isn’t your business where the person you call happens to be at the time you call them.
You always complain, yet you never includes Sidebar Moderator. Just like a Tedlim...
Oh, and - bump.
No I don't. That's a lie.
Just today out of 17 years.
As I said....
The Enquirer was right about John Edwards.
Yes, and Jesse Jackson. I’m pretty sure it was by accident.
My sister in law sent it to me and I told her that the date on the statement looked like it had been doctored. My understanding is that the phone records of the DC Madam are not supposed to go public til tomorrow. Apparently the lawyer has them uploaded on the net with an auto countdown timer or something.
Interesting......especially because he never names Cruz amd never says it is a presidential candidate.
Just today out of 17 years.
As I said...."
Ok. Bamp.
1. Trump baby-wipes
2. Trump fresh-wipes
3. Trump moist-wipes
4. Trump clean-wipes
5. Trump a$$-wipes…….
I agree that this is poorly scanned and probably a herring. On another note, how does one get forwarded INTO the Ashley Madison database, for this was the Cruz explanation from LAST SUMMER. @press for any senator will get unsolicited tryst offers, so the suspicion of the staff would not be aroused. And only Cruz would know what’s funk and what’s Madison.
Got a link for that?
I think we need to ask Blake Shelton here. If he is truly hiding 9 flirt partners from Gwen, then Cruz is having 5 affairs. But if the Enquirer is wrong about Blake, they could be wrong about Cruz too. Blake Shelton, please pick up the white courtesy phone...
There are a number of articles on this expenditure. This one is the oldest (June of last year). Evidently, this payment may be connected to one of the alleged Cruz sex partners being a Fiorina staffer and that it’s hush money. I guess you will have to read through it and judge for yourself. $500k is a lot of money to be exchanged between adversaries I’d say!
Well, that's interesting:
It could simply be, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I.e., we've got an extra $500k. We can either spend it developing and running our own attack ads, or we can let Aunt Carly deploy it to amplify what she's already got. And she can be ambassador to wherever she wants!
IOW, there are other explanations besides hush money.
Cruz should consider himself lucky he hasn’t brushed up against Michelle Fields...
(6) Low end Trump Freepers who choose to perpetuate tawdry tabloid garbage.
“IOW, there are other explanations besides hush money.”
Tnat is certainly true, but it would seem worthy of an explanation particularly in view of the fact that according to the FEC, it’s illegal to make those kinds of transfers, or at least that’s how I take their investigation into the matter. Personally, I believe if we are ever to have honest elections, we need to take all the money “donated” by anyone other than an individual out of the process. The PACs and the Unions need to go, and there needs to be legal supervision to make sure no one cheats. The problem is that the big-bucks folks and the MSM “like” how it is right now because they get to choose our nominees and make a ton of money while they’re doing it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
