An apology is by default, admission of guilt.
In effect, he said his staff willfully lied in an attempt to win the Iowa not really voting contest.
Lawyers have a problem with discerning the paradox involving-just because something is not illegal, is it the right thing to do?-offering an apology after the act is a blatant attempt to mitigate the repercussions.
Lawyers.
The sad thing is, with the voter intimidation tactic of mailing ‘violation’ warnings along with this purposeful deceit, only won him one delegate. He has 8, Rubio and Trump each have seven.
His organization will lie and intimidate for only one delegate.
Who knows what this lawyer is capable of when something is worth cheating for.
My immediate thought of the apology is that OK, let me see you put that toothpaste back in the tube.