Well, he did call the article “complete trash and utter lies” so I’d say that’s a denial.
OI agree.
After Carly interposed herself...Cruz answered the reporter and indicted that the National Enquirer story him committing adultery was garbage and total lies.
Well, he did call the article “complete trash and utter lies” so I’d say that’s a denial.
A veiled denial in legalese.
Sorry, but you need a little first-person usage in a denial.
Like this, without pictures in crayon— “ I have never cheated on Heidi “. And, then you sue whoever said you ever did, knowing they can not prove it.
If you are guilty, you do what Ted is doing and say “they” and “he” a lot, and “Look over there”...
It depends on what your definition of “denial” and/or “denounce” is.
No, I'd say those are lawyerly weasel words. A lot of people consider everything in any gossip tabloid to be "trash"--so that claim means nothing (or anything). "Lies" is a bit stronger, but could refer to anything written in the article, such as the number of women, the specific women who were pictured, or any detail. He didn't say straight up that they lied about him having affairs. He could have clearly and unequivocally said, "I have not cheated on my wife," but he chose not to do so.
Well, he did call the article “complete trash and utter lies” so I’d say that’s a denial.
Not when it comes out of a lawyer's mouth. And not when it comes out of a liar's mouth. And especially not when it comes out of a lyin' lawyer's mouth.
Cruz has a few 'tell' words. Like pResident Dumbo with notion, you have Saint Ted with utter. Does anyone think he or any President could "utterly destroy ISIS"? You can hurt them bad but nothing that matches that phrase of total absolute completeness. That is proof he uses that word in a not necessarily truthful context.
For Cruz, utter is a rehearsed, focus-group tested buzzword used in speeches. When he uses it, the statement should be taken as a scripted speech, and not necessarily containing honesty. The fact he used it after undoubtedly rehearsing this crisis response over the previous weekend means IMHO that it is not really a denial.
Subsequent proof is the refusal to answer the UK DailyMail reporters multiple times, reporters with much more integrity than our alleged free press, who have experience asking the right questions to well-practiced liars across the pond.
I'd set the chance of this thing being true, Ted Cruz affairs, at 90/10. And the only thing reducing it from 100% is the fact he is a conservative and that means there is a slim possibility that leftists like Soros created the entire backstory and fed it to Rubio.
However, let's be real. We already have Gingrich and Livingston and Haley, perverts like Hastert and Foley, and too many more to list. All of them were complete and ( pardon the pun ) utter surprises! So I don't get why Cruzers are so adamant that he could never do this. That is illogical. They all do it to us all the time.