Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RoosterRedux

Terrible advice by DeLay. I didn’t read the whole lurid story, but from what I saw, the National Enquirer played the old game of reporting that rumors say “x,y,z”. Since various sources aver they were approached by political operatives pushing the Cruz affair story, N.E. has an affirmative defense (reporting that there were rumors was factual, whether the rumors were true or not). Cruz would lose a libel case, even if he never had sex in his life, and afford the media opportunities to rehash the whole thing. And libel suits can backfire badly — reference Oscar Wilde.

Advice from a non-Cruz fan who hates sleaze, (assuming Cruz knows he’s not guilty):
1) Deny it vigorously and unequivocally;
2) Demand that anyone who maintains otherwise either present their evidence by noon tomorrow; or, take their slanderous dirty-tricks back into their snake pits and pull the holes in after them.
3) Any questions?


66 posted on 03/29/2016 12:28:57 PM PDT by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Chewbarkah
2) Demand that anyone who maintains otherwise either present their evidence by noon tomorrow; or, take their slanderous dirty-tricks back into their snake pits and pull the holes in after them.

The Gary Hart defense. How did that work out for Sen. Hart?

83 posted on 03/29/2016 12:48:11 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson