Posted on 03/26/2016 8:01:15 PM PDT by Zakeet
How does that compare to no argument at all that Ted did this? Seriously, there is not one single piece of evidence here against Ted. Not a shred. Yet you slam a character witness for Amanda Carpenter. Shame on you.
I think you’re probably right, but has anyone else noticed how Ted’s suit jackets never seem to fit him very well?
Things that make you go hmmm...lol
Amanda Carpenter sister in law says everyone in her family knows it true, but you know better.
I’ll be apologizing a lot around here if it’s true lol.
i’m no ducker!!
i’ll be here to eat crow, though I don’t know where that expression came from.
I could down a platter of hot dogs :)
Well, except for statements from family members that this happened and the tattoo thing and the fact that we all know it’s freaking true, there really isn’t anything.
yeah man, not the best looking guy, but with power and an ego and if he’s as self centered as, unfortunately, it seems he might be, it’s possible.
Isn't that exactly what Bill Clinton did?
Literally eating a crow is traditionally seen as being distasteful; the crow is one of the birds listed in Leviticus chapter 11 as being unfit for eating. Scavenging carrion eaters have a long association with the battlefield, “They left the corpses behind for the raven, never was there greater slaughter in this island,” says the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Along with buzzards, rats, and other carrion-eating scavenging animals, there is a tradition in Western culture going back to at least the Middle Ages of seeing them as distasteful (even illegal at times) to eat,[5] and thus naturally humiliating if forced to consume against one’s will.
In the modern figurative sense of being proven wrong, eating crow probably first appeared in print in 1850, as an American humor piece about a rube farmer near Lake Mahopack, New York. The OED V2 says the story was first published as “Eating Crow” in San Francisco’s Daily Evening Picayune (Dec. 3, 1851),but two other early versions exist, one in The Knickerbocker (date unknown),and one in the Saturday Evening Post (Nov. 2, 1850) called “Can You Eat Crow?”.All tell a similar story: a slow-witted New York farmer is outfoxed by his (presumed urban) boarders; after they complain about the poor food being served, the farmer discounts the complaint by claiming he “kin eat anything”, and the boarders wonder if he can eat a crow. “I kin eat a crow!” the farmer says. The boarders take him up on the challenge but also secretly spike the crow with Scotch snuff. The story ends with the farmer saying: “I kin eat a crow, but I be darned if I hanker after it.” Although the humor might produce a weak smile today, it was probably a knee slapper by 19th-century standards, guaranteeing the story would be often retold in print and word of mouth, thus explaining, in part, the idiom’s origin. In 1854 Samuel Putnam Avery published a version called “Crow Eating” in his collection Mrs. Parkington’s Carpet-Bag of Fun.
A similar British idiom is to eat humble pie. The English phrase is something of a pun—”umbles” were the intestines, offal and other less valued meats of a deer. Pies made of this were known to be served to those of lesser class who did not eat at the king’s/lord’s/governor’s table. Another dish likely to be served with humble pie is rook pie (rooks being closely related to crows). “Pie” is also an antiquated term for the European magpie, a type of crow. There is a similarity with the American version of “umble”, since the Oxford English Dictionary defines crow as meaning “intestine or mesentery of an animal” and cites usages from the 17th century into the 19th century (e.g., Farley, Lond Art of Cookery: “the harslet, which consists of the liver, crow, kidneys, and skirts).”
The woman in the picture, whomever she is, is wearing a jacket that fits her and appears to have three-quarter sleeves. Since she’s on the slender side and Cruz isn’t, nor is he likely to have a three-quarter-sleeved jacket, it’s safe to say that isn’t his jacket. Even if it were, men have been known to lend women their jackets for entirely innocent reasons.
It’s amazing what some will accept as evidence.
Can you provide the link where her husband's sister says this? I find no source for this statement other than from Trump supporters here on Free Republic.
Bfl
Oh let’s have this scandal live on for years because your guy Trump is a prince of immorality. So, Cruz HAS to be immoral, too. He couldn’t be better than your Donald at anything could he old usafa94?
The Associated Press has to be in Hillary Clinton’s camp, yet here is a paragraph from the AP’s Saturday story in my Northern California newspaper:
“The Cruz story published this week in the tabloid described what it called rumors, PROVIDING NO EVIDENCE that Cruz had engaged in an extramarital affair. THE ONLY SOURCE quoted by name was a former Trump campaign adviser, Roger Stone, who said such “stories have been swirling around Cruz for some time” without offering any evidence they are true.”
SO LET’S RECAP: Trump has lived a rather immoral, sleazy life, dumping two wives for mistresses and then being a serial adulterer (by his own accounts in two books). So now Trump’s pal at the National Enquirer (the publisher) runs a sleazeball story attacking Cruz as having affairs and the only source quoted is Trump’s advocate, Roger Stone. WHO IN THE SANDHILL IS CIRCULATING THE RUMORS — none other than Roger Stone. The source of the attacks on Cruz keeps coming back to Trump — what a doubly sleazy guy.
Documented where? The ONLY source I can find for this is from Trump supporters here at Free Republic. The story started here.
Wow. What a cool read.
Thanks man :)
The Humble Pie thing was cool too.
“stories have been swirling around Cruz for some time”
There’s nothing to take issue with here: this is a true statement. Then then story goes on to cover the very stories in question, which have been discussed by Rubio people and other GOP operatives and the press under the hashtag #TheThing on twitter publicly, and who else even knows privately, for months now.
So, you can get all high and mighty about it if you want to, but all evidence suggests this had nothing to with Trump, the Melania ad, or anything else. It’s all Cruz and nothing but the Cruz, and his denial of the allegations was weaksauce and his profession of innocence/fidelity was non-existent.
Oh sure, pal, Trump had nothing to do with this information (WINK, WINK, WINK). You just keep believing in your guy. He doesn’t have a touchback amnesty, he never lied about his $1 million fine for hiring Polish workers, etc., etc.
The Associated Press has to be in Hillary Clinton’s camp, yet here is a paragraph from the AP’s Saturday story in my Northern California newspaper:
“The Cruz story published this week in the tabloid described what it called rumors, PROVIDING NO EVIDENCE that Cruz had engaged in an extramarital affair. THE ONLY SOURCE quoted by name was a former Trump campaign adviser, Roger Stone, who said such “stories have been swirling around Cruz for some time” without offering any evidence they are true.”
SO LET’S RECAP: Trump has lived a rather immoral, sleazy life, dumping two wives for mistresses and then being a serial adulterer (by his own accounts in two books). So now Trump’s pal at the National Enquirer (the publisher) runs a sleazeball story attacking Cruz as having affairs and the only source quoted is Trump’s advocate, Roger Stone. WHO IN THE SANDHILL IS CIRCULATING THE RUMORS — none other than Roger Stone. The source of the attacks on Cruz keeps coming back to Trump — what a doubly sleazy guy.
yep, as the season heats up, we’re getting a large shipment of crows, and humble pies in stock for the sad affair of the current primary.
what a freaking disaster. like girls fighting on twitter over a boy.
Sure thing. You say Rubio is swirling the rumors. Trump’s pal’s publication comes out with the story — and quotes Trump’s guy, Roger Stone.
Who else is good ole Roger talking to? I say Roger Stone is the source of many of the swirling rumors. And I’ll get as high and mighty as I please, since you’re defending the two-time wife dumper and serial adulterer.
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.