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.
Haven’t you listened to Rush enough to know that polls like that are there to CREATE an opinion not reflect one?
This is childishly simple.
Trump’s “negatives” mean noting compared to the pitiful crowds she draws and the huge crowds he does. Those are the real FACTS. Another is that the Democrat turnout is dismal and dropping fast, only Bernie has any enthusiastic crowds. Another FACT is that Trump has brought MILLIONS back into the electoral game. One more FACT is that Republican turnouts have been much higher than 2012. But you can bet your butt on the FACT that the polls do not use turnout models from now but from 2012. Another FACT is that working class Democrats (Reagan Democrats) are voting for Trump.
It is also a FACT that I can cherry pick a population sample and get ANY result I want, that is exactly what is happening with these propaganda attempts.
If he were so beatable the Democratmedia would not be in a state of panic to defeat him. That is another FACT.
I never said you had to believe that his negatives are higher than Hillary’s. I’m just telling you they are
And I know the drill. Polls that show Trump doing well are gospel.Any that show him doing poorly are propaganda,
Polls are not perfect of course . But they are more scientific than the number of people who are at a certain rally.
Polls are determined by the populations selected to poll. Any showing Hillary winning are absurd on their faces and the Democrats have admitted such for the reasons I stated and you ignore. They are VERY worried about running her up against him and probably won’t.
What evidence Todd? I know there is evidence that Rubio was planting this cheating husband story everywhere. But then again sweet innocent Cruz is a Saint. NOT. All the evidence shows that Cruz et. al. are slimy snakes not to be honored but to be cast aside.
Watch this despicable video from beginning to end. It is dated March 8, 2016. It is the complete interview on the Fox Business Channel between Cavuto, a Rubio Supporter and another “Saintly” Cruz Supporter, Andrea McWilliams.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALErcfr7jQ0&feature=youtu.be
This is the original complete Cavuto Interview and Andrea McWilliams is identified and introduced to the audience as a Cruz Supporter. Notice the dirty tricks Cruz, et.al. played on Rubio first and how Cruz et.al. set-up the Melania attack? Unfreakinbelievable!!!!! Cruz's Supporter Andrea McWilliams set the stage for the Melanie ad perfectly just 12/13 days before the Utah vote March 22, 2016. McWilliams purposeful and vile in her comments beginning about 4:20 into the interview. Remember this is March 8, 2016 - 14 days before the Utah vote. Scandalous!!!! And her comment that Melania is foreign born when Cruz was born in Canada is beyond the pale. What an embarrassment. Reagan et. al. never ever acted this way!
And yes, I know what Rush has said about polls. He said that in 2012. He didn’t believe the polls and pointed to the TEA Party victory in 2010 and the Chik Fil A backlash as why he felt the polls were wrong. But the polls were right.
And as far as rally size, here’s an article from that period
http://bobmannblog.com/2012/10/29/beware-the-crowdsmanship-when-it-comes-to-campaign-rallies-does-size-matter/
Here’s what Rush was saying in 2012. I love Rush but he missed this one badly.he sounds a little bit like you;)
“I so profoundly disagree with that but simply in common sense, not scientifically. I’m not a pollster, I’m just a commonsense observer. I look at what caused the massive 2010 Republican turnout and then I ask myself, has anything changed since 2010? Yeah, it’s gotten worse. The enthusiasm that got people out in 2010 I’m seeing at every Mitt Romney rally. I’m seeing Bill Clinton going into places they ought not have to go. Colin Powell, I guess, ladies and gentlemen, Colin Powell is Obama’s firewall in Pennsylvania. Those are the ads that Obama’s running in Pennsylvania today. Colin Powell, the titular head of the Republican Party. You’ve got Bill Clinton going to all of these places. You’ve got Bruce Springsteen playing concerts in all these places. You got everybody but Obama out there trying to gender up some sort of enthusiasm for him.
Meanwhile, Romney’s drawing crowds of 20,000, 25,000, 30,000, 15,000. The enthusiasm that we all saw in 2010 is there. The same issues that existed in 2010 exist today. There hasn’t been anything that’s gotten better. There hasn’t been one change in the nation’s direction that would cause people who were fit to be tied in 2010 to say, “You know what? I’m glad I did that, but everything’s okay now. At least we’re heading the right direction now, think I’m gonna go back to my traditional voting pattern.” That hasn’t happened. Now, that’s just common sense. That’s simply my common sense. I’ve got nothing scientific to back me up on this. All I know is that maybe two pollsters, and one of them is Dick Morris, bothers to factor 2010 into any of this. They’re all doing 2008.”
Now, I will agree alot can happen between now and Nov and what polls say now may or may not match what happens in Nov. But you can’t just dismiss them because you don’t like what they say. But if I had to make a bet, if the election was held today, Hillary wins
I don’t dismiss them because I don’t like what they say. I dismiss them when they don’t pass the smell test and are clearly self-serving of the Agenda of the Left.
Let me ask the questions:
Who do you think would better protect the country?
Who do you think would stop ILLEGALISM?
Who do you think would be less likely to compromise security?
Who do you think understands the nature of terrorism better?
Who do you think has more understanding of job creation?
Who would remove political correctness as a standard?
Who would stand shoulder to shoulder with our military?
Support Law enforcement? Understand Foreign trade? Who is more believable? Less corrupt?
Now you are not going to tell me that Hillary would get the majority in ANY of those questions? Are you?
It is simply false that Romney drew crowds similar to Trump’s in the primaries. There was NOTHING like them. He might have had a few big ones but the enthusiasm and intensity were not there and the Left was not in the slightest worried.
I feared that the Irreconcilables would sabotage him and, by all indications, they did.
Trump has a solid anchor of conservatives who understand his place in this fight. But, since he can and has expanded beyond that anchor, he will beat Hillary like a rented mule. Old women are her principle support according to the exit polls, everyone else pretty much can’t stand her.
Now you are not going to tell me that Hillary would get the majority in ANY of those questions? Are you?
http://whotv.com/2016/03/24/cnnorc-poll-clinton-tops-trump-on-presidential-traits/
Oh the days of 2012 when many said the same things about the polls. They were wrong, they were pushing an agenda, they didn’t match what they were seeing....
Hannity also said Trump had nothing to do with this. Another campaign was pushing this story three to four months earlier. So Todd is an ass for the Democrats trying to make a Cruz problem Donald’s problem.
Look, in summary you nor I can predict what will happen in Nov or even the campaign in the general IF Trump gets the nomination. I bet Trump is aware of these polls but figures he’ll try to change them after the bruising fight of a primary.
The question is, what if they don’t change? Unlike his supporters, Trump won’t dismiss them. Publicly, he will. Privately he wont. What will he do then?
You can only tell people Hillary is crooked so many times
“2ndDivisionVet., I expected better from you. Really. : ( “
This is the attitude flowing from the top down in the Trump campaign that concerns me for November. If he and we just keep along the current path and style of campaigning and November 9th we wake up saying we expected better from the 55% of voters who didn’t vote for our nominee, what have we gained?
That chip on your shoulder getting heavy?
Why would Trump implicate Ms. Pierson, especially as she has been a competent surrogate on the talking head shows for him?
Makes. No. Sense.
Agree.
And I think today will not be a very good day for Cruz.
Too many things are about to intersect.
That's hilarious. Unintentional. But hilarious.
FYI, what dirty tricks has Trump played? Trump may be in your face but he is not an insidious snake like Cruz!
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.