ETL
Vague posts about your superior knowledge are not particularly informative or convincing.
The folks making the argument that Amanda Carpenter was his mistress are putting forward some objective information and then drawing conclusions from this circumstantial evidence. Not proof but it sure looks kind of hard to explain as innocent actions of married man who is supposed to be very bright.
The folks defending Cruz are using invective and any sort of disingenuous method to avoid responding to the issues raised. Indeed one could say they are deliberately attempting to insult those on the other side of the fence to avoid dealing with the real issue of: are these charges true?
For example not one of the Cruz defenders has dealt with the far more damaging issue of the 500,000 dollar payment to Carla’s PAC, and Its subsequent payments to the supposed mistress.
Not to say Cruz is guilty and he should be given the benefit of the doubt, but his defenders are not doing him any good.
Exactly. Cruz, his father, and it appears some followers have fallen for a very sick twisted interpretation of the Bible by man. Watch the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqpndmBUdX8