Roger Stone on Cruz Sex Scandal: Ted Cruz Won’t Sue “Because the Allegations Are Largely True”

The Gateweay Pundit ^ | March 27, 2016 | Jim Hoft

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Ted Cruz and the ‘Cuban Mistress Crisis’–
The National Enquirer published a story last week accusing Texas Senator Ted Cruz of multiple extramarital affairs.

On Friday Ted Cruz blamed Donald Trump and his former consultant Roger Stone for the National Enquirer article on his alleged extramarital affairs.

Ted Cruz Cruz told reporters in Wisconsin the story was “all lies.” Cruz then went on to blame the article on Donald Trump and his “henchmen.” Cruz argued Roger Stone has been forwarding the article today on the internet. He thinks Trump campaign is behind this story. Cruz also said the publisher of the National Enquirer is a friend of Donald Trump’s.

[greene66]

I’ve always been amazed that Roger Stone has lived as long as he has without someone putting a bullet in him.

I don’t think he’d last so long down here in these parts.

[frankenMonkey]

No, he did not.
“The article is false.”
“I have never cheated on my wife”
“I will take legal action immediately.”

Seventeen words that have yet to come out of his mouth.
Even a constitutional lawyer should be able to handle that.

[spel_grammer_an_punct_polise]

You said/typed, paraphrased, “Nobody beats the NE in a slander lawsuit.”

I countered your word, “Nobody”. ;-)

It is not my place to do any searches to counter your latest argument. ;-)

I WIN! ;-)

[Dark Knight]

Sue who? NE? It does not get to the root of the allegation. Sue Trump...How? People have forgotten how logic or politics work. Make the assertion, your obligation is to prove it. Logic. Get a person to claim you had sex with a cow...just to hear you deny it in the press. Politics.

DK

[uncbob]

They are true and more about to drop. This has more than two shoes And you know this because you have psychic abilities?

NE is interested in attracting readers

Hard to believe they would lay it all out in just one article

[af_vet_1981]

Well, there is a smoking gun, a March 8th appearance on FOX where a Cruz operative says - I think we need to stop talking about the Men in this race - and start talking about the Women, we need to look at Heidi versus Trump’s naked Foreign wife. Now that’s what happened, there is Video - it was on Neil Cavutto.

Once I saw the transcript for that I knew the trigger for the Mormon campaign against Melania. I would still like to know who bought the rights, if anyone, to use those photos in the Cruz campaign for Utah.

[PghBaldy]

Another reason to not sue is it just keeps the issue alive. Doesn’t really matter if he is guilty or not, the story will be repeated over and over. As it is, it has barely been covered as the media is covering for the “outsider” Cruz.

[PghBaldy]

Cruz even had the gall to say that on Good Friday.

[X-spurt]

And Roger is so well known as an unbiased champion of honor and truth.

[X-spurt]

So now, being able to parse “depending on what the meaning of IS, is” well enough to slip though the legal “truth” loophole sometimes, its an honorable trait? Where were you with Slick needed the help?

[X-spurt]

Like all else Trump, your declaration is a pretty far fetched one.

Occam’s Razor “Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.”

Occam would be amazed at the assumptions being made to rationalize belief in any such Cruz Affairs tale. The only evidence thus far has been outright denials by two women falsely named.

[X-spurt]

It damn sure was not GQ, they held no rights. Conde Nast does, except “those” photos were made public domain earlier this year.

Any BS you read about anyone buying the rights from GQ are simple BS.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Impossible. I’ve always heard that Trump is really dumb, and could never pull one over on a Harvard debate team star.

[Right-wing Librarian]

I was just thinking the opposite of what you wrote : )

We NEED this long election cycle because the candidates true natures come out when they go through the process over a period of time, and people can observe how they act and react.

Many people who were for a particular candidate now regret that vote/support and have switched to another candidate.

[Right-wing Librarian]

I was wondering:

If Ted Cruz is the devout Christian he says he is, and he is innocent, WHY doesn’t he just come right out and plainly say: “I have been faithful to my wife throughout our entire marriage.”

If one is innocent, this should be no problem, no hesitation to make this statement. The whole matter would be cleared up FAST, if he were honestly telling the truth, and is a faithful husband.

I don’t understand why he doesn’t do this. What innocent person wouldn’t hesitate to, in no uncertain terms, flatly deny the allegations? No 10 minute lawyer-speak “deflect and project” answer, just “plain talk” denial statement.

Now, maybe he has done this and I have missed it.

[Right-wing Librarian]

>>It should be easy enough to prove and or disprove as he is accused of paying for plane ride to Maryland and rental car so she could drive to Alexandria. and the NSA would have all phone conversations. Easy Peasy to prove or disprove if that's what the PTB wanted to do. But really, if you or I or anyone was being falsely accused, wouldn't the immediate reaction be to flatly deny it? "I did NOT do ". Has Cruz done this yet? If not, why not?

[Bob434]

[[It damn sure was not GQ, they held no rights. Conde Nast does, except “those” photos were made public domain earlier this year.

Any BS you read about anyone buying the rights from GQ are simple BS.]]

Bears repeating because the GQ fella making the statement that they were purchased is lying if this is true- Condi Nast said noone had a right to use they photos- because he alone holds the rights to them and gave noone permission to use them- GQ has been i nthe business a long time and would have known NOT to use or issue the photos to someone else without the express permission of Condi- GQ isn’t i n the business of copywrite infringement- they aren’t stupid, and woudl risk being sued out of existence by illegally selling something they had no right to sell

[Bob434]

[[Occam would be amazed at the assumptions being made to rationalize belief in any such Cruz Affairs tale. The only evidence thus far has been outright denials by two women falsely named.]]

And rumors of ‘tapes’ of Cruz going in and coming out of a building with women (which incidentally has a restaurant and is used by many to conduct business over dinner evidently)

That’s all that is really known at this point- A scandal rag prints rumors- shows only two faces who turn aroudn and deny they had affairs- and some hotel/restaurant videotape of cruz entering and exiting the building

Oh, and let’s not forget the super duper damning ‘evidence’ of matching tattoes that ruz and amanda got - why this is just plenty of evieence to destroy a man and his family over- s/

[UCANSEE2]

OK. I put on my secret decoder ring, and my tinfoil hat, and tuned my TV in to an unused channel, but I still don’t understand a word you are saying.

[UCANSEE2]

Let me ask you this.

What man, over 30 years old, gets a couple of TEMPORARY TATTOOS , gives one to a coworker, and puts the other on his own arm. Then gives his suit jacket to that coworker, who then takes a selfie of the tattoo and the jacket from the bathroom of a newsroom, while he goes out to the newsroom sans jacket, instead of wearing a jacket like everyone else is and does ?

I have some grand nieces that think temporary tattoos are cool, but they are only 8 years old.