Posted on 03/28/2016 4:11:45 PM PDT by conservativejoy
NBC anchor Chuck Todd isn’t buying the National Enquirer hit piece on Ted Cruz. On the March 27 edition of Meet the Press, Todd commented that “there’s more evidence that ties Trump to planting the story, than there is to the story itself tying anything to Cruz.”
Todd also accused Trump of taking a page out of the “LBJ playbook.” Discussing the story with NBC chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell, Todd retorted that “Trump is almost trying to borrow a page from the LBJ playbook, when he put out a statement on the National Enquirer – let me put it up here. He basically said, ‘I hope that story's not true,’ but also trying to fan the flames. Hey, look, the National Enquirer got it right on Edwards, got it right on O.J. Simpson, I hope they’re wrong about – and then he throws in ‘lyin’ Ted Cruz’. This is – this is a sort of ‘make him deny it’ type of LBJ thing.”
NBC has consistently done a superior job of pointing out the many reasons to doubt the Enquirer story. In her reporting on Friday's NBC Nightly News and Saturday's Today show, NBC correspondent Hallie Jackson went further than her ABC and CBS colleagues in alerting viewers to the tabloid’s utter lack of evidence, its past boosting of Trump, and the categorical denials of two of the women linked to Cruz in the story.
On ABC's This Week, fill-in moderator Jonathan Karl did not match Todd's explicit skepticism of the Enquirer piece, but twice pressed Trump himself on the story:
JONATHAN KARL: Do you categorically guarantee that nobody on your campaign, nobody tied to your campaign, had anything to do with this National Enquirer story?
TRUMP: Totally. I had nothing to do with it....
KARL: But let me ask you, this story, this that we see in the National Enquirer, this kind of rumor mongering, should this kind of thing just be off limits? Do you condemn this story?
TRUMP: I don't care. I mean really I don't care. The National Enquirer did a story. It was their story. It wasn't my story. It was about Ted Cruz. I have no idea whether it was right or not.
Overall, ABC's This Week gave the sleazy tabloid story 2 minutes, 47 seconds of airtime, compared with 1 minute, 36 seconds on Meet the Press.
CBS’s Face the Nation didn’t touch on the controversy at all, which is consistent with CBS News’s recent history of giving much less air time (2 minutes) to this story on the morning and evening new shows over the weekend than either ABC or NBC did (7 and 6 minutes, respectively).
Transcript from Meet the Press on March 27:
CHUCK TODD: Hallie, this all came in Cruz world a little bit – you know – my this escalated quickly.
HALLIE JACKSON: Yeah.
TODD: But I guess, sort of, what happened here? And how did this go from this, I guess, a Super PAC's digital ad get turned into what it got turned into.
JACKSON: Right. And to look at the progression, as you noted, of what we've seen this week, Tuesday we're talking about this terror attack and candidates' responses to it, Saturday we're talking about the National Enquirer and the tabloid cover story that's out there. I think that this shows Donald Trump is able to shift the conversation with a single tweet. And the tweet that came out retweeting this image of Heidi Cruz next to Melania trump was stunning to, I think, the Cruz campaign. I think Ted Cruz was stunned and very emotional about this even before you started talking about the Enquirer story. And, I think that one of the things that Ted Cruz has been hit on he seems a little bit rehearsed, sometimes, a little bit inauthentic, that's a knock against him. Right now, he is emotional, he’s mad, and he’s showing it.
...
TODD: But it is, and Andrea, final thing, what was amazing, Trump is almost trying to borrow a page from the LBJ playbook, when he put out a statement on the National Enquirer – let me put it up here. He basically said, I hope that story's not true, but also trying to fan the flames. Hey, look, the National Enquirer got it right on Edwards, got it right on OJ Simpson, I hope they’re wrong about – and then he throws in ‘lyin’ Ted Cruz’. This is – this is a sort of ‘make him deny it’ type of LBJ thing.
ANDREA MITCHELL: Exactly. And, of course, as Hallie’s been reporting, and as Katy's been reporting he’s got a very close relationship with the people of National Enquirer. They are really – and they’ve endorsed him, so –
TODD: There's more evidence that ties Trump to planting the story than there is to the story itself tying anything to Cruz.
MITCHELL: Like, I hope this is not true, and then tell me everything about it. It has been a remarkable, extraordinary period and, as I say, at a time when he should be vulnerable on foreign policy.
Why now do it NOW??
Unfortunately Trump hasn’t been putting himself up as some moral paragon or wearing the Bible on his sleeve. When someone pretends to be spotless things tend to stick a little harder.
Though when seeing NBC try to stake out some position as a judge of moral character it gets into MadTV territory. And the fact that NBC is simply going to take the tack ordered by their bosses at the DNC adds another dimension of disingenuousness.
Why now do it NOW??
Because no one but Trump would want to sue during a campaign. Duh!
Weak.
First of all, the owner of the NE is a close friend of the Clintons.
Second, the story was being shopped by a pro-Rubio person/persons.
Third we know that the Cruz camp was aware of the pro-Rubio person/persons shopping this story around since January.
Fourth, Roger Stone is quoted in the NE story, but not as the source of the rumor. He made comments on the rumors.
He is not officially with the Trump campaign since last August.
So, while you see dots, I don’t see dots.
I am still asking where Todd’s evidence is for Todd’s statement.
You have not provided it.
Agreed.
And Carly was quite an attack dog tonight for Cruz, when Cruz was questioned on the NE story tonight.
I would like to know why Carly's received a half million dollars from a Cruz PAC.
Seems neither Cruz nor Fiorina are interested in answering that question.
I am not angry at all.
I questioned Todd’s “evidence”, which was not in the article.
Apparently, Todd cannot provide such evidence, and neither can anyone on the Cruz side of the equation.
Cruz doubled down on his assertion again tonight without any proof whatsoever, that Trump was behind the NE story and that his “henchman” were behind it.
Seems to me Ted should be going after the NE for publishing a false story.
Any idea why that might not be happening?
NBC is about as trustworthy as Hillary.
I agree that Hillary would not want to face Trump in the General.
Hillary has no shame and will go to the gutter with Cruz in a NY minute, and Cruz will not succeed without going nuclear on Cankles.
Cruz has already given her a pass, content to not challenge the 20 year old Democrat lie that there is a GOP war on women.
Only Donald Trump had the guts to face down Hillary AND Bill, and shut their pieholes on the fake “war on women”.
Personally, whatever the truth is, that is what I want. Then I can make a decision on what to do about it.
Darned if I don't get the feeling sometimes that Soros is behind this whole thing--divide and conquer...
Boomerang.
Agree. This will come back to hit F Chuck Todd square in the @zz.
Amazingly, they expect that old saw to work on Trump, but want to give Hillary a pass on her wholesale compromising of national security 2,000 times, a far more serious charge.
Yeah, that’s what I meant. [eye roll]
I’m beginning to wonder if everything Ted Cruz did in the Senate was just Kabuki Theater.
Better late, than never.
Welcome to the party, pal.
As a former cRuz supporter, it was a painful transition, once my eyes were opened to his ‘going through the motions’ and repeated antics/stories/speeches.
I realized, finally, that the guy has done NOTHING ever for anyone, but himself. He’s never created a job, made a payroll, etc. Just lived off of the govt trough.
No more lawyers, freshman Senators or PAC paid hacks. We’ve had quite enough of that.
Well that settles that. 30,000 people who have no evidence to support their position voted on something they know nothing about and you think this is stone from the Mount. You are not even a one watter.
I notice they don’t say what the ‘evidence ‘ against Trump is. At all.
EXACTLY! none at all. sleazy pretend journalists.
Yet again how is Cruz going to win the Nomination when he is going against Trump’s overwhelming strength in NY, NJ, CA, WA, Ore, PA? Please explain how that can be?
Even more puzzling is how a guy who has gotten a third of the votes from a semi-conservative electorate going to win with votes from a semi-socialistic one?
Seriously explain how either and both of these can occur.
I was a huge admirer of Cruz and wondered why my best friend and my younger son spoke of him with such disdain.
He revealed his true nature by pretending the constitution didn’t mean what it said, joining CNN’s KKK lie and then screwing up with regard to the Chicago riot.
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.