Posted on 03/26/2016 8:01:15 PM PDT by Zakeet
PDFs of the National Enquirer article about Ted Cruz having five affairs were sent to me by a friend on Wednesday evening. When he sent it, my buddy reminded me that the National Enquirer has been right about this kind of stuff before, like in the case of former Senator Edwards.
I read the article about the Cruz affairs, but for many reasons including the fact that Roger Stone, Trump friend and "hit man" was quoted in the story paid it no heed (although it did make me wonder if Stone is the one who planted the story).
My friend was correct when he said the supermarket tabloid has been proven right at times, but the National Enquirer has been wrong more than it's been right. 
Consider stories such as Hillary Clinton has brain cancer (it may seem that way but her only mental disease is extreme liberalism), Angelina Jolie was down to 83 pounds and near death (there was a recent picture of her in the latest Vanity Fair and she looks pretty hot for a dead lady), and of course Michelle Obama’s planned divorce because the president has been with 12 different women (with all the time he is taking to ruin the country he has little time to sleep around). Face it this is the magazine that has said Faith Hill and Tim McGraw were getting divorced so many times that I am sure the still happily married couple must be beginning to doubt themselves.
But on Friday the Cruz story erupted, and things I should have noticed when I first read the story on Wednesday came to light.
For example, three of the five women have been identified, one of the women Amanda Carpenter I know personally. Not that we are good friends but she is more of a friend to some of my good friends. And from everything I know about Amanda, everything I’ve read about her, and from posts on her Facebook page about her family, I feel comfortable betting big money on the fact that Amanda has never cheated on her husband with Ted Cruz, or any one else.
Amanda vehemently denied the story on CNN today (see the video below). Another of the five women who have been identified is Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson who has denied the accusations and a third who has been identified is former Carly Fiorina staffer Sarah Isgur Flores who hasn't denied it yet, but I am sure it's coming.
The Enquirer piece neglected to mention that National Enquirer owner David Pecker is a close friend of Trump's and this is not the first time the magazine tried to destroy a Trump rival.
This past October 7th issue, on the same cover that announced Ben Afflack and Jennifer Lopez were once again an item (no one told them), the 
National Enquirer promoted a story about how Ben Carson butchered a child’s brain. Inside they published a story about Dr. Ben Carson (who just so happened to be catching up to Donald Trump in the polls) called "Bungling Surgeon Ben Carson Left Sponge in Patient’s Brain!" (which btw sounds like the title of a great horror film). Per the article, Carson "brandished a scalpel like a meat cleaver!" (meat cleaver? Who knew he did circumcisions). The article said he botched surgeries leaving patients disfigured and in pain. According to the author of the piece "Judging by White House wannabe Ben Carson's track record as a neurosurgeon, his presidential campaign should be declared dead on arrival!"
When Carly Fiorina had an excellent debate in September and began to rise in the polls the Enquirer ran an article called, "Homewrecker Carly Fiorina Lied About Druggie Daughter" 
That story however, didn’t make the cover because of more important stories such as "Joan Rivers Death Cover Up," "Dolly Parton's 6-year Affair" and of course, "Tom Selleck's $25 Million Divorce Shocker."
Why would the Enquirer run a hit pieces on Donald Trump’s opponents when they just so happened to be creeping up in the polls on “The Donald?” According to an October 2015 issue of New York Magazine:
Trump and Enquirer CEO David Pecker have been friends for years. "They're very close," said a source close to the Enquirer. In July 2013, Trump even tweeted that Pecker should become CEO of Time magazine, which at the time was being spun off from its corporate parent, Time Warner. "He'd make it exciting and win awards!"
My favorite story coming out of this bogus scandal is that Breitbart.com had the story but former editor Ben Shapiro killed it. Think about that one for a second. They are talking about the guy who recently quit his position at Brietbart because he couldn't get management to support reporter Michelle Fields who was attacked by Trump's campaign manager. If Ben Shapiro had that kind of power at Breitbart wouldn't he have gotten them to treat Michelle Fields better so he wouldn't have felt he had to resign?
It is very difficult to prove a negative, especially when the story is about five affairs that never happened. But for all the reasons stated above I believe this National Enquirer tale is nothing more than a political smear.
I don't know it was placed by Trump operatives or whether, there were simply no aliens from a different planet working at a Kosher ice cream shoppe in Secaucus N.J. for the Enquirer to write about this week, causing David Pecker to order his staff to come up with a false rumor about Trump's only real remaining opponent to fill the magazine's pages.
In the end this is a familiar story; strong conservative women are having their reputation and dignity impugned (which coincidently is the type of attack the Trump team likes best, just ask Megyn Kelly, Cheri Jacobus, or Carly Fiorina just to name a few).
My college Joe Newby has much more on this story at his site, The Conservative Firing Line. But first watch the video of Amanda Carpenter on CNN this morning.
What gets me is how widely known this story was in the campaign and media circles as #TheThing, and then the media seemingly let Cruz come out and place this at Trump's feet.
I don't think Cruz survives for long and we can then move on to Trump vs. Kasich. Now, maybe I am wrong and Cruz is shown to be completely innocent, but if so, then this surely will play out way different than what we have seen in the past.
Have any proof whatsoever on the photo purchase? You are simply spewing lies or the fantasies in your mind from the Trump version of hopeychangy fever...
Clearly, you cannot discern the moral difference between the Biblical teaching against foul lanaguage and coarse speech, and post-modern liberals feiging outrage that others can express their views.
"Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving."
Ephesians 5:4
Attempting to lump me in with the safe space fascists is a pathetic attempt on your part, and not worthy of the FR forum.
The point. You missed it.
The electoral campaign has gone personal and nasty. Attacks on family members have emerged including criminally intended threats against Donald Trump’s family members.
But you all are omitting in your comments what’s behind these personal attacks and criminally intended threats and in so doing are being used as unwitting dupes. The Clinton machine is criminal and nasty and you can bet they are pulling strings here.
Consider the following post about how the democrats are positioning against Ted Cruz:
“Jeff Dinetz writing for ‘The Lid’ conveniently forgets that democrats and their media attack dogs would be all over this story 24/7, repeating so often that it would become a reality lie in all democrats minds, minds that would never let go of it and never be swayed otherwise.”
“Further, as the Cruz team would ramp up the dirty. sordid history of Scumbag Bill, the democrats would parade the alleged, truest, fact-twisted truth-lie of women having affairs with the Cubadian holy-roller Teddy Swaggart on every broadcast and print media outlet non-stop until it became a part of the permanent political narrative of 2016.”
“So go ahead Dinetz, go ahead and present your case for Cruz. you may be right but it won’t matter much and in fact, it will only keep the allegations in the public eye longer thus doing more damage than was ever intended.”
I don’t even bother to go to the Drudge report on weekends. - no action. Especially on holidays.
but wait...
Didn’t David Kendall use to be the major attorney for The Enquirer” ? and
isn’t David Kendall the attorney for the Clintons’, specifically Hillary ? and
Isn’t Trump easier to beat than Cruz in the general election ?
So, to sum up, (with apologies to the Godfather) Rubio is a pimp. He never cudda out fought Cruz. But I didn’t know until this very day, that it was Hillary all along.
You are definitely right. We will see every tactic the Obama team used to defend him against the legitimate concerns about the authenticity of the documents Obama provided to “prove” he was qualified for office. We will even see a few more creative tactics like this using Melania's photos to stir up Trump to help obfuscate Cruz's womanizing. The problem Cruz has is that in his case the media is not really on his side and will not go out of their way to defend him. If just one of the women comes forward with some type of tearful admission... it is basically all over.
If Cruz is anything like the serial womanizers that I have known there are most likely dozens of women and not just five or eight or whatever the official number is today or tomorrow. So women could start coming forward that no one currently has a clue about.
The bottom line is that there are investigators hired by many different interested parties who are vetting these accusations against Cruz. There is simply too much at stake. If confirmatory evidence such as tapes, videos, surveillance pictures, sworn testimonies etc become available and are believable, Cruz is done politically as a Presidential candidate and Senator, Trump will win the nomination on the first ballot. The next big political question will be if Obama allows Hillary to run or has her indicted. His worry is that a triumphant Trump may indict some of his commissars in IRS and Justice. If they turn states evidence, talk and have proof, it would be very uncomfortable for Obama and ruin his post Presidency. He may sacrifice Hillary in return for an ironclad promise from Trump not to prosecute.
This story has been brewing for weeks if not longer.
Rubio’s people just couldn’t get it out there in time to save him.
Blame Trump. Kind of like HRC blaming unnamed VRC for Bills troubles.
I hope you’re right.
A woman on Fox News this morning confirmed that the story has been in the media’s hands for “months” now. She also confirmed that it was initially shopped around by both Rubio’s people and some “anti-Trump” people. She said the anti-Trump people were ALSO anti-Cruz people, but they were definitely not pro-Trump people. She also said it was unclear how the info got into the hands of the National Enquirer, but it has been in the hands of media for months, so it is not new news.
Amanda Carpenter, one of the alleged women, deleted everything from her Twitter feed prior to March 1, 2016. A couple days ago, she had posts going back to at least April 1, 2014 (the tattoo posts), which I saw myself.
Here’s Cruz’s motivation:
https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/712371719399411713
“Take over the world. World domination. You know, rule everything. Rich, powerful. That sort of stuff.”
Your link only repeats the claim. It quotes no one by name. That dog won’t hunt.
The PAC that used the photo was not a Cruz surrogate. Their top contributor was an Obama supporter. This has been pointed out again and again and again with links to back it up, yet Trump supporters continue to flat out lie about it.
It seems he should sue the PAC. Since the candidates are not allowed to be involved with the PACs, he is unlikely to sue any candidate.
Do you have a link stating who the photographer is going to sue? Anything? Any evidence at all other than Trump supporters making it up as they go?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3414234/posts?page=188#188
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.