Posted on 03/27/2016 2:17:14 PM PDT by Red Steel
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Sunday slammed rival Ted Cruz for the recent ad produced by an anti-Trump super-PAC featuring a photo of Trump's wife posing nude.
"From what I hear, he and his campaign went out and bought the cover shoot. Melania did a cover story for 'GQ,' a very strong modeling picture. No big deal," Trump said on ABC's "This Week."
"But it was a cover story for 'GQ,' a big magazine. And it was, you know, fine. And from what I hear, somebody bought the rights to it and he was the one or his campaign bought the rights and they gave it to the super PAC."
Trump said Cruz knew about the ad, adding he started the latest fight between the two. Last week, Trump threatened to "spill the beans" on Cruz's wife in response to the ad featuring Melania Trump. He then shared a tweet featuring a photo of his wife next to a photo of Cruz's wife, stating, "A picture is worth a thousands words."
Cruz has denied knowing anything about the ad, and called it deplorable on Sunday.
But Trump said the super PAC that produced the ad is "very friendly to Ted Cruz."
"He knew all about it, 100 percent," he said.
"There's no way in a million years that super PAC did that without his absolute knowledge."
“Yep! that is confirmed that the Cruz campaign manger got the pictures.”
Where’s the reference? Where did you read that. What’s the original source? What are the details?
This is rumor, allegation, gossip, hoax.
You actually hope that someone is behaving in a way that will hurt their marriage and scar their young children? Really?
Well said.
The point is not that the picture was published. The point is that Cruz attempted to use Melania Trump as a target of shame and derision. What he was saying was, "This woman is a slut, and if you don't want her husband to be in the White House, you had better vote for me."
Your position is that Melania should not have posed for a picture for which she would later be ashamed isn't even part of the issue.
You see, when you Cruzers get all self-righteous and holier-than-thou, all you do is piss a lot of people off. I mean, your boy is a hypocrite and a liar, his wife is a Goldman-Sachs campaign funnel, and he's being backed by the GOP establishment while running as an "outsider."
Why should we believe that Cruz is who he says he is?
Looks like he already did.
So you have no evidence to back up your claim. Yet you accuse Cruz of having a problem with the truth? That is quite telling.
There is no, none, nada, zippo evidence establishing that Cruz had a damn thing to do with putting the picture of Trumps wife on an ad. Why do you guys persist in that lie?
I don't know if he did or not. But for a "nudie"...it's pretty modest.
“When did Cruz say Melania isn’t fit to be first lady. “
When they emblazoned “Or you could vote for Cruz” onto the pic.
'They' meaning someone other than Cruz, right? Enough with the lies already. Don't you Trump supporters ever quit?
I’ve read that in various threads over the past few days but didn’t give it much credence. But I’m beginning to think it’s true. This “thing” has apparently been known about for months and Cruz may have been trying to get out ahead of it becoming front page news.
Hey it’s all over the place that Cruz can’t tell the truth. This is telling. Cruz blames Trump no little girl Cruz, it was out there with Rubio blabbing about it and Media outlets sitting on it.
“Daily Beast: Rubio allies shopped Cruz affair rumors to the media”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3413914/posts
Lying is what they do. It's pathological.
She has already owned it. She and Donald never sealed those pictures like Cruz has donw with his records. He needs to unseal them and own something for once in his wretched life.
Seems Melania and Trump’s kids have far more affection for him than Cruz family.
This "negative evidence" often requires more extensive research to prove than does the presentation of "positive existence." But it is still possible. Therefore, if one empirically declares that something does not exists at all, one must be prepared to prove it through (a) presenting a range of any media wherein the item might typically be found but is not, or (b) find published empirical evidence that clearly refutes the existence of the item (an example of which is the 'cooked' data supporting global warming- yes it's there, but the real data does not support it). This is research 101.
So to summarize, I stand by my challenge for empirical proof.
“Can you give me his cell number?”
917-756-8000
They are simply drinking the energized red kool-aid now. After the election they will be drinking the Jim Jones purple drink.
And they will be blaming me because their Democrat lost to the other Democrat in November.
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.