Posted on 04/06/2016 11:46:17 AM PDT by conservativejoy
Facts aren’t important to you?
What facts? So far all I’ve seen are innuendo and unsubstantiated rumors.
Right. Because SCOTUS typically concerns itself with motions currently before lower courts to release documents.
http://suckersonparade.blogspot.com/2016/04/baseless-adhominem-attacks-are-not-just.html
http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/did-trump-operative-push-cruz-sex-scandal-tale/
Oh so in the world of Trump supporters anything can be made up about someone running against him for president? I’m glad you let me in on you’re warped etho’s and screwed up logic.
I commented on one erroneous claim in your article. I refuted that claim.
No more, no less.
I thought you might be interested, but it appears that you don’t care.
Whatever.
Gotta believe that Roger Stone is somehow behind this. He is a dirty trickster in Trump’s corner AND a perv.
I don’t make the court procedural rules, I just report what happened.
“Remember the real reason for the Watergate break in? John Dean’s girl friend was a hooker for the DNC and he wanted to get ride of the evidence. So maybe this is a similar situation???”
John Dean married the Ho, er uh Mo. Dean threatened to sue Gordon Liddy for telling the story, but Liddy has the truth on his side and there was no lawsuit IIRC.
I understand that today the US Supreme Court sustained the injunction that makes it illegal for the attorney to release the list. Without it, of course, we have no way of verifying whether or not Ted Cruz’s telephone number was used to call the prostitutes.
It is a vast overstatement and mischaracterizatoon of the facts to claim that Cruz was shown not to have been involved with the prostitutes managed by the Washington madam.
Thanks for being objective!
Trump really doesn't care whether the accusations are true. He uses them to inflict damage--as much as possible. And as Alinsky pointed out, this strategy quite ordinarily works.
***
BTW, jospehm20, even though I have NO evidence that Trump was behind the National Enquirer thing, you also have you have NO evidence that Cruz was stupid enough to break the law by coordinating with a Super PAC. Heck, such coordination would be NEEDLESS and would therefore be a POINTLESS LEGAL RISK.
And since Trump is accusing Cruz of that very stupid and illegal act, you ought to worry that Trump is the really sleazy guy in the race.
How about if we replace "Cruz" with "Piranha"?
What Ted Bush did is lie to the people of Texas about self funding his senate campaign while actually funding it with sweetheart loans from GS and Citibank. The FEC has already asked Cruz to disclose the terms of those loans and he refuses to do so. That makes me suspect that Calgary Ted is hiding something. The FEC have not been after Trump for anything as far as I know. The fact is that Ted Bush is a slime ball with a history of violating FEC regulations. I would not be surprised if he is violating the rules again, given his history.
Make that "disbarred ex-lawyer."
“even though I have NO evidence that Trump was behind the National Enquirer thing, you also have you have NO evidence that Cruz was stupid enough to break the law by coordinating with a Super PAC.”
Which is what I said in my post, if you would care to read it. Only I don’t use annoying CAP-LOCK when I posted it.
Actually, you do NOT know who is on the DC Madam’s list as that list has not been made public.
You are falsely assuming that because one avenue of information isn’t conclusive that the list does not contain his name.
The list needs to be released, regardless of who it names. let the chips fall where they may. I’ll be surprised if it does not name RATs way more than PUBs, and highly pi$$ed off if it doesn’t (at the PUBs, not the list).
BTW, who would be stupid enough to obtain such services under their own identity?
The article claims that it has been “100% DEBUNKED!” That Cruz’s number was on the list. It has not been debunked at all. The evidence that could be used to debunk (DEBUNK!) the claim or to prove it, depending on what is there, cannot be released legally. It is a lie to say that the claim has been DEBUNKED! Even 1%, let alone 100%.
Cruz received a margin loan, not a "sweetheart" loan and filed necessary paperwork, save a required FEC disclosure, which he filed upon being notified by the FEC.
There is no reason he would have purposely neglected to file this paperwork, as he had already given public notice he had acquired 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.