[ontap]

Still telling the lie....Cruz’s Campaign had nothing to do with that picture!!!

[Pravious]

“Still telling the lie....Cruz’s Campaign had nothing to do with that picture!!!”

I thought someone found out that the money to purchase the photo came from Cruz’s campaign manager. Is that untrue?

[glock rocks]

Wink wink nudge nudge, Bob’s your uncle.

[mac_truck]

Did Cruz ever disavow the attack on Trump’s wife?

I never heard it...

[Aria]

right....the guy who benefited, the guy who sent out voter violation notices in Iowa, the guy who told caucus voters that Carson had quit when he had not...a coordination with Amanda Carpenter apparently...yeah, he had NOTHING to do with the photo of Melania saying “Vote Cruz”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXnAO3MFLB8

[canuck_conservative]

Still telling the lie....Cruz’s Campaign had nothing to do with that picture!!!

Reporters could ask Ted if it was true ... but then Carly would just step in and say the question was irrelevant, then try to change the subject

Ted Cruz, the oh-so-honest Christian candidate

[Ozark Tom]

Whom benefited? If a PAC doesn't accurately represent Cruz to the people, why would he ever allow such political messaging to go unchallenged, unless he were in silent agreement? If you allow someone to speak for you, and they misspeak unchallenged, then you may as well own the words as if they came from your own lips.

Anyone could now form a political organization tacitly in support of Ted Cruz, put out any extreme message---assertions consequently damaging to his campaign, yet people would accept this as being political speech concocted to allow plausible deniability for Cruz.

The precedent has now been set that other voices may speak for Cruz's benefit; yet, he will disavow, wink wink, any connection to his campaign. If a message appeared, seemingly supportive of the campaign; yet, so vitriolic and over the line as to drive away supporters, how would he recover the initiative? Who would now accept his dissent without thinking, wink wink.