March 26, 2016

"Please, ladies, I don't wanna talk about the National Enquirer report. Let's talk about... Wisconsin!"

Said CNN's Kate Bolduan, trying to get control of a discussion between Amanda Carpenter (former communications director for Sen. Ted Cruz) and Adriana Cohen (a Boston Herald columnist):



Did Bolduan not know she was setting this up? Carpenter was saying that the candidates should move on from the back-and-forth over their wives. Bolduan prompted Cohen, who was known to support Donald Trump, about whether it's time to move on, and Cohen dropped the bomb it's hard to believe Bolduan didn't know was coming:
“Absolutely, I think we should move on,” Cohen said, “and where we should move to is the National Enquirer story that has reported that Ted Cruz has allegedly had affairs with at least five mistresses — including, you’ve been named, Amanda... You were named, Amanda... Will you denounce this story or will you confront it?” 
Carpenter called it "tabloid trash," but I'd be suspicious if she stopped there. She does not. She also said it's all "categorically false."

By the way, where did the Cruz adultery story come from? I'm seeing that Cruz is blaming Trump, but what basis does he have for that accusation? According to sources talking to The Daily Beast, the story came from allies of Marco Rubio (but not the Rubio campaign itself).  One source, at Breitbart (which slants in favor of Trump), said that "an operative allied with Marco Rubio—but not associated with his official campaign—showed the publication a compilation video of Cruz and a woman other than his wife coming out of the Capitol Grille restaurant and a hotel on Tuesdays and Thursdays."

Every place other than The Enquirer rejected the story as too thin. I don't know the details of what was in the compilation video, but if it was the mere presence of Cruz and a woman together in a restaurant or in the public areas of a hotel, it's ridiculous to make inferences of an affair. The fact that there are 5 women underlines the weakness of the evidence. Cruz quite properly works with women, and women as well as men should be interacting with him. These rumors of affairs are not just unfair to the man, they limit the professional success of women. It's thoroughly sexist to see a woman with a man and assume they are together for the sex.

96 comments:

Birkel said...

Well put, Althouse.

Hagar said...

I am suspecting this is aimed at both Trump and Cruz.

Sebastian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sebastian said...

"it's ridiculous to make inferences of an affair . . . These rumors of affairs are not just unfair to the man, they limit the professional success of women. It's thoroughly sexist to see a woman with a man and assume they are together for the sex." Yes, this appears to be a case of sleazy mud-slinging. No, limiting the professional success of women is not the major issue here. Yes, assuming in general they are together for the sex is well, not sexist exactly -- sexyist? No, dismissing inferences and assumptions in general is also wrong -- their ridiculosity and sexistness depends on the circumstances.

rhhardin said...

These rumors of affairs are not just unfair to the man, they limit the professional success of women.

Why are they called affairs if it's unfair?

Tey call women the fair sex.

And Cruz's wife is no beauty expressionwise, to judge from the single photo I've seen of her. This babe looks pretty friendly.

You've got to go on the odds.

Birkel said...

After Cruz wins Wisconsin will be the most interesting part of this campaign.

Virgil Hilts said...

Ann, why do you think Drudge is avoiding the story? Maybe he has sources saying its complete hogwash. I also do not think Trump is behind it. Would be a stupid play.

rhhardin said...

It's thoroughly sexist to see a woman with a man and assume they are together for the sex.

It might be bondage.

pm317 said...

How often do we see him with his male counterparts coming out of restaurants and hotels, on Mondays and Wednesdays?

Birkel said...

rhhardin:

Google is your friend.

Are the odds that Ted Cruz has mad game? Is that the way to bet? GTFOOH

Birkel said...

pm317:

What did your comment mean? Please explain.

Tank said...

Doesn't the Enquirer have a reputation (of being right) regarding these kinds of stories? Wouldn't they otherwise be Gawkered by now?

Mark Levin spent half his show the other night tying Trump to this via his (Trump's) friendship with management at the Enquirer.

Luke Lea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

The charge of sexism doesn't do much outside of academia, where it remains the highest sin owing to eating of the tree of knowledge, these days.

Sexism means noticing stuff that you're forbidden to notice.

Birkel said...

No, Tank. The National Enquirer has been right infrequently. They are wrong much more often. They have been successfully sued many times.

But reporting "there are rumors" is sleazy and ALSO, likely not libelous.

wildswan said...

Dog bites man
Cruz appeals to evangelicals - mainstream media circulates National Enquirer story about Cruz and 5 mistresses.

MathMom said...

Why would a recognizable senator and a woman who are having an affair, be seen coming out of a hotel, together, on a regular schedule? Especially a senator who, by all accounts, people in Washington would loooooove to discredit and be done with? Isn't the idea to hide the affair? She goes out the front, he goes out the side door?

Come on.

Bill Clinton was always admitted by a back door to hotels where he had a babe stashed. I would expect Cruz to have at least that much subterfuge in him. He's a pretty smart guy. That's only the first reason why I doubt Cruz has even one, let alone five(!) affairs.

I heard yesterday, maybe from Rush Limbaugh, that it's hard to believe this story, because it's hard to imagine Cruz with his clothes off, ever, even to sleep. :o)

Lucien said...

So who was it who stuck with the Rielle Hunter love child story? Edwards couldn't possibly have done such a thing to Saint Elizabeth, right?

(Where's Mickey Kaus when you need him?)

traditionalguy said...

IIR, the proof of adultery ( back when it mattered) was mere proof that #1) a man and woman spent time alone together in a room and #2) they had an inclination to have sexual conversation. That's ALL folks. And 2 is presumed by realists unless one of them is a relative or elderly.

It does help when the woman meets the man at a Beverly Hills Hotel and has their love child in the room with her.

This is a downer to realize that a sneaky lawyerTed did #1, but lacked any #2 mojo. We expect more from our Presidents.

MathMom said...

Tank -

How many times has the Enquirer reported that Sarah Palin has had affairs, and indeed that Todd was filing divorce papers, and that Hillary Clinton would be dead in six months from brain cancer (but to be fair, she still has two weeks to live by that prediction).

Hmmmmm?

Laslo Spatula said...

I do not want to picture Ted's Orgasm Face.

I do, however, want all of you to picture Ted's Orgasm Face.

There.

I am Laslo.

Luke Lea said...

But then why didn't Cruz deny the allegations in the "smear" outright instead of calling it "garbage" and attacking where it came from? An implicit admission that he may have been unfaithful to his wife, on multiple occasions possibly. Would be more forgivable, of course, were he not such a bible-thumper.

aritai said...

From a land far far away. We put children off limits in all these forms of competition. So Mr. Cruz or allies will embarrass for political advantage a 10 year old daughter in front of her classmates by drawing attention to her mother's job from some time ago. Why not call her trailer trash as Ms. C. does? Really classy and sexist thing to do Romney, and whomever you support. You got your one warning, wager the gloves come off now. Wager Romney calls himself a Mormon still. If they will eat children, what else will they stoop to? Hiding behind some ministers skirt's claiming to be more moral than the rest of us, vote for me, I'm the better evangelical. I'm keeping a special cell next to mine warm in H@ll for he and the rest of them.

Birkel said...

traditionalguy:

So you have proof of time alone between Ted Cruz and these five women? Or you believe there were pictures taken in public that you fever-dream proves alone time?

Maybe tell me how Cubans are likely to do sexual things but Scots-Irish are better somehow. That seems like your go-to move.

mccullough said...

Cruz should be grateful the Enquirer said it was women and not men he was having affairs with.

Birkel said...

That's just mean, Laslo.

Scoundrel! Cad!

LMAO

Birkel said...

Luke Lea:

You are lying about what Cruz said in his full-throated denial. He might have lied too.

But your lie is obvious.

Birkel said...

Luke Lea: "An implicit admission that he may..."

A self-refuting lie, no less.

Michael K said...

It is discouraging to see this coming out this late. Levin, of course, will try to tie this to Trump, especially as Trump had threatened revelations about Cruz's wife's career as a Goldman Sach's insider with a political job before that. I doubt he was threatening this which would create the mess it has.

Is the story aimed at both in a sort of "pox on both your houses?" It could be coming from Bush and allies to poison both outsiders at once. A Rubio ally might have Bush connections.

Enquirer has not been this reckless that I have seen.

Fabi said...

I know that when I see Ted, I think "playa"! He's got them lined up around the block! Probable pick-up line "Hey baby, have I told you about the time I shut down the federal government?"

PJ said...

"It's thoroughly sexist to see a woman with a man and assume they are together for the sex."

Is it just me, or is that an interesting "the"?

virgil xenophon said...

"It might be bondage."


LOL, rhhardin ins the thread (so far)

And as for the L-Man, well, thanks for that, I was just about to sit down to a breakfast now ruined. I should hunt you down like a dog and beat you within an inch of your life for that. NO man should ever be subject to such horrible visions. :o)

virgil xenophon said...

*"wins"

Birkel said...

Michael K:

Do you have a quote from Trump that justifies your belief that Trump was going to expose the well-known fact that Heidi Cruz was employed at Goldman Sachs? Or are you just pretending that was the threat?

Trump's "threat" was so vague as to cover nothing and everything. Anybody who claims to know what Trump meant on that or any other subject is operating on faith.

pm317 said...

Well, does this explain Heidi's mini breakdown when she was found distraught sitting on the grass at a busy intersection? To be fair, from what I have read, I like Heidi better and I wish she was the one running. So, Althouse, we are not where we are when it comes to women prospering and taken seriously in their careers. They still have to give way to their obnoxious male partners to go first. But as Heidi said recently, she can confidently claim, 'I and Ted are running" and nobody would complain, hurray, two for one! Where have we heard that before?

Birkel said...

pm317:

What other conspiracy theories do you have?

pm317 said...

Cruz should be grateful the Enquirer said it was women and not men he was having affairs with.

Looks like the demigod is smarter than that.

virgil xenophon said...

Point of grammar/syntax :

Should have I have written "be made subject to" or, alternatively, "be subjected to" ? Advice from the commentariat, please..

Tank said...

MathMom said...

Tank -

How many times has the Enquirer reported that Sarah Palin has had affairs...


I don't actually read the Enquirer so ........????????

D. B. Light said...

It's a brilliant move by Rubio, really. It hurts both Trump and Cruz and makes it more difficult for either of them to assemble a pre-convention majority of delegates. If neither of them has a majority, then Cruz's bloc of committed delegates gives him leverage to extract all sorts of goodies in exchange for an endorsement.

traditionalguy said...

Seriously, I doubt Ted has the masculinity to seduce a woman unless he gets her to close her eyes and think about Gawd's will for him to have all power...you know like the seduction method Ted, his daddy, Glen Beck, and many cult preachers are putting out to the dimwitted this election cycle.

pm317 said...

Now the hacker group Anonymous has got into the act!

William said...

Identity is destiny. The name of the Enquirer CEO is Pecker. The Beast article states that Pecker is a friend of Trump and slants his articles in Trump's favor.......The Beast reports on slanted press stories. Dog bites dog........I didn't think that the first sex scandal would involve Cruz. The years have taken their toll on Bill Clinton.

Michael said...

Why would anyone watch these three women or give one shit about their opinions? Cable has brought us to this bizarre moment.

EDH said...

What struck me about the clip was the moderator's absolute insistence that only things reported on by CNN can or should be discussed.

M Jordan said...

All these guffaws about Cruz being unable to seduce a woman ... have not ye heard, "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac"?

Birches said...

Doesn't the Enquirer have a reputation (of being right) regarding these kinds of stories? Wouldn't they otherwise be Gawkered by now?

According to a tweet storm yesterday, all the investigative journalists are at in touch now,including the ones that broke the John Edwards story. They were the ones to break the Josh Duggar story. She said she believed this Cruz story false.

rehajm said...

Until such time that slime is no longer an effective diluent of opponent support.

Phil 3:14 said...

Assuming a magazine's articles are geared toward core readership and their values I guess this says that Trumpkins are avid National Enquirer readers.

Fabi said...

M Jordan makes a good point -- Kissinger always had a beauty on his arm and he looked like a troll.

Paul Zrimsek said...

An accusation of adultery against a Republican that's too thin even for the NYT is thin indeed.

Titus said...

The CNN Anchor's hair is hideous.

M Jordan said...

"Kissinger always had a beauty on his arm and he looked like a troll."

Kissinger demanded at state dinners that he be seated next to a "big-titted woman." But that can't be true because Donald Trump invented vulgarity.

Chuck said...


There's a curious unfairness in the "Cruz Affairs" tabloid story. Unfair, not in the gender-conflict way that Althouse suggests, but unfair in the Trump vs. Cruz aspect.

Because rumors of an affair would only work against Cruz and his supporters, right? Rumors of an affair would damage Trump about as much as a story about a Trump business going into bankruptcy, or Trump referring to women as pieces of ass, and asserting that he only sleeps with world-class pieces of ass. Right?

It is awfully hard, to hurt or embarrass someone with a long history of appearances on the Howard Stern Show.

The post-truth, post-morality, post-embarrassment world.

MathMom said...

Tank -

You don't shop for groceries either? It screams at you from the checkout stand.

BDNYC said...

This whole sordid story illustrates why people who oppose Citizens United ought to think harder about the issue of political spending. What's the actual difference between a pro-Cruz PAC, which is registered and regulated, and a pro-Trump tabloid, which is not? If Citizens United is overturned, will the National Enquirer be free to speak for or against candidates? Same question applies for any other media company, like the New York Times or the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal. Or CNN. Or Fox News. Or Gawker.

It bears repeating that the remedy is more speech, not less.

Fabi said...

I hadn't heard that one, M Jordan -- I won't hold that against Henry, though.

AprilApple said...

The truth about Citizens United.


(for confused lib-pals)

AprilApple said...

Trump and his twitter groupies pimped this story. Trump has his grubby mitts all over it.

The National Enquirer just endorsed Trump, for crying out loud.

AprilApple said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AprilApple said...

@ Ann

"Cruz quite properly works with women, and women as well as men should be interacting with him. These rumors of affairs are not just unfair to the man, they limit the professional success of women. It's thoroughly sexist to see a woman with a man and assume they are together for the sex."

This.

walter said...

MathMom said...I heard yesterday, maybe from Rush Limbaugh, that it's hard to believe this story, because it's hard to imagine Cruz with his clothes off, ever, even to sleep. :o)
--
Bill probably kept his pants on...probably figured into his sexual relations definition.

Blogger Laslo Spatula said...
I do not want to picture Ted's Orgasm Face.
--
Ah..but Trump's would be "the best!". But there will be a lot of orange linens

I think the Enquirer rumor was made to make Mary Glynn's head explode.
.

jaed said...

Doesn't the Enquirer have a reputation (of being right) regarding these kinds of stories? Wouldn't they otherwise be Gawkered by now?

You have to look at the exact wording in Enquirer stories. Since they lost a big libel case (Carol Burnett in the 80s, I think), they're very careful about how they word things. If the story is false, they'll use weasel words throughout:
"[Allegation], sources have told us."
"The rumors are flying about [allegation]."
"[Target said to have [done something to do with allegation]."
"[Entity] is investigating [allegation]."
"All of Washington DC is buzzing about the latest developments in [allegation]."

All the assertions will be qualified very carefully. Typically, none of the sources will have names. And they'll always include some phrase like "the incredible charges" or "the unbelievable story", because while these adjectives are usually used as intensifiers, they can also be taken literally. "See, we said right in the first paragraph that the story wasn't credible, wasn't believable!" All these things have potential legal significance if someone takes them to court over a story.

We knew the Edwards story was true because it included none of this weasel-wordage. We know this one is false because it includes all of it.

walter said...

"sexist to see a woman with a man and assume they are together for the sex."

A little Altparse: "the sex"? You mean that should be incidental? ;)

JCC said...

I agree with the OP. This is sleaze, probably untrue, and in any event, certainly unproven. It disparages women in that it suggests that women can only successfully work with men if there's sex involved, which is complete crap.

This is done for Trump's benefit, and he certainly isn't condemning it. But after all, at heart, he's a National Enquirer kind of a guy.

I cannot believe that Donald Trump is being considered a serious candidate for President of the United States. And he's running against a habitual liar & sociopathic millionaire or a socialist lost in the 60's who thinks Chavez was a misunderstood waif with the key to economic happiness.

We're doomed.

dreams said...

Still.

"The National Enquirer of course had the contacts and the resources to flush out the story. Broadsheet journalists sneer, but Tiger Wood, Gary Hart and John Edwards do not."

http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2016/03/cruz-cover-up.html?spref=tw

Joe said...

Hey Ted, Gary Hart has a boat you can use... never mind.

AprilApple said...

JCC - You nailed it. We are doomed.

dreams said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dreams said...

To prove there isn't any truth to these salacious charges, Cruz should issue a dare to the media to try and prove them correct. Yeah, thats's a plan.

walter said...

"Get the full list of ladies in Ted Cruz’s Mistress File — only in the new National ENQUIRER, on newsstands now!"
(support Pecker)

David said...

Who knows? I don't. But power does strange things to power hungry men. Especially power hungry men who are assholes to begin with. That explains John Edwards. Beyond this, I note the strong consensus among his peers that Cruz is an asshole. Stay tuned.

dreams said...

I wonder if those who criticized Trump on his attack of libel law can appreciate another perspective.

jdniner said...

Lets distill the candidates down to minor crimes.
1. Hilary would be the closet alcoholic that shoplifts and denies it when caught.
2. Bernie would be the pot smoking graffiti vandal by night and college professor by day.
3. Ted would be the boy scout who worries too much about his jay walking habit.
4. Trump would be...

Chuck said...

dreams said...
I wonder if those who criticized Trump on his attack of libel law can appreciate another perspective.


That never even occurred to me. And now that you've raised it, it still doesn't even register. Although I fully appreciate how it works in Trump world. Where the law is just a tool to get done what you want done. Silence your critics, get your casino parking structure built, kill and intimidate terrorists.

So as someone who bitterly criticized Trump on his laughable butchering of libel law concepts, I'd say that your comment adds to my appreciation of the Trumpkin point of view.

John Henry said...

As I understand it, there are a series of photos of Cruz leaving the hotel with a woman every Monday and Wednesday night. Not just once but multiple times and regularly. As many have noted, this does not mean anything by itself. It does seem like something that would be hard for Cruz to deny and I am not clear that he is denying it.

So, assuming that he actually has been photographed leaving the hotel with women, he owes it to us to clear up what he was doing. Perhaps it was a series of lectures on the Constitution, election strategy sessions, choir practice or a hundred other legitimate reasons.

Cruz could put this all to rest by coming out and saying "Yes, every Mon and Wed night we meet to..."

That he does not say what he is doing, that he seems to be denying the photographic evidence (which I have not seen) certainly lends itself to the appearance of skulduggery.

Certainly would not be the first time something like this has happened. Gary Hart with his monkey business, Herman Cain, John Edwards and lots of others. First we always hear strong denials. Then we get "Yeah, well, I didn't think anyone would notice the baby. I am very sorry. Yada, yada, yada."

If nothing unseemly was going on, Cruz, tell us what was going on. You just make it worse.

John Henry

John Henry said...

Most, if not all, of the original 17 candidates have not really dropped out completely, they have "suspended" their campaigns.

My understanding was that this has something to do with contributions, paying campaign debts and so on.

But if a Rand Paul suspends his campaign, I would think that means that he can jump back in with a minimum of fuss.

If this issue winds up bumping Cruz, might we expect to see some of the other candidates un-suspend their campaigns?

John Henry

jdniner said...

I meet a woman every two weeks on a schedule in a restaurant. We are old friends with a one time sexual attraction we never fulfilled and it evolved into helping each other out. We talk about life, give advice, joke. I do still find her more sexually attractive then most women I meet. But she'll kick my ass if I joke about it. She has it compartmentalized. Got married. See immense problems if there are no boundaries.

With woman broadly in the workplace I would think you could expect men and women to network.

Her husband knows we meet regularly. She tells him the conversations.

Birkel said...

John Henry:

I agree with you. Cruz must deny he is a warlock publicly. Otherwise, we must acknowledge he is a warlock.

Anybody have a guillotine handy? Or at least a public stockade?

walter said...

I guess he needs to follow the "Graham rule".

walter said...

Or the trump mantra "it really doesn't matter what they write as long as you've got a young and beautiful piece of ass"

Chuck said...

John Henry;

What if Cruz's answer is, "Yeah I was taking photos of them with almost no clothes on, and selling them to British GQ. The girls got paid, and so did I..." ?

I suppose it's okay if people with serious moral codes want to wring their hands about this.

The Trump people can't, because there's no serious moral code on their side.

gadfly said...

Meanwhile, over at Ace of Spades HQ:

I should also point out the National Enquirer does not claim Ted Cruz has had an affair; it claims that there are claims. It does not report they've confirmed he's had affairs; it says, instead, it can report there are "reports."

Read it for yourself: They're alleging there are allegations:


"And the new issue of The National ENQUIRER -- on newsstands now -- reveals how the reports say the staunch Republican is hiding FIVE different mistresses!

'Private detectives are digging into at least five affairs Ted Cruz supposedly had,' claimed a Washington insider.

'The leaked details are an attempt to destroy what's left of his White House campaign!'"

Well that sure sounds buttoned-up and solidly sourced to me.

gadfly said...

@John Henry said...

As I understand it, there are a series of photos of Cruz leaving the hotel with a woman every Monday and Wednesday night. Not just once but multiple times and regularly. As many have noted, this does not mean anything by itself. It does seem like something that would be hard for Cruz to deny and I am not clear that he is denying it.

So you regularly read and believe what is written in the National Enquirer? Using such impeccable logic let me contribute that it may not be coincidental that the Enquirer's publisher is someone named "Pecker" who is a buddy of Donald - and Trump is rumored to use a just slightly smaller than large condom, so there you have it.

walter said...

"the National Enquirer does not claim Ted Cruz has had an affair; it claims that there are claims."

That's classic Trumpian allegation style. i.e. "Just sayin"

Birkel said...

John Henry:

Any word yet on Ted Cruz being a warlock?

Laslo Spatula said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Laslo Spatula said...

I believe it without needing anymore proof.

Cruz carries himself as a Guy who fucks more than one woman.

You really didn't notice?

Body Language.

Facial expressions -- even with That Face.

You don't get that air of confidence without banging someone younger and better-looking than his wife.

I sprinkle Reality everywhere I go.

I am Laslo.

(Reposted without the errant blank space)

Birkel said...

Laslo:

Or doing it before you got married. The knowledge and attitude stay even after a wonderful woman earns all the affections of such a man. (Granted, stereotypes exist for a reason.)

Laslo Spatula said...

Laslo's Sexual Alegbra:

Fuck one woman and you are fucking one woman.

Fuck two women and a third will enter the equation.

Fuck three women and you get a fourth.

Fuck four women and you get six. I don't know why five is skipped, it just works that way.

Fuck six women and you can have twelve, if you want them. Because if you can get six how hard is it to get another six?

Fuck twelve women and the Baker's Dozen comes easy.

But the thirteenth woman always fucks it up.

Because Thirteen is an unlucky number.

Especially if she IS thirteen.


I am Laslo.

Birkel said...

"Great guy" (according to Donald Trump) Jeffrey Epstein could not be reached for comment on Laslo's last comment.

Mark said...

It's going to be hard for Cruz to moralize about Bill Clinton after this.

Takes a very big arrow out of Teds quiver.

Birkel said...

Yes, Mark. The lies of others are very important to people like you.

Mark is rumored to have sex with animals in some quarters, it is alleged.

damikesc said...

Mark, small problem.

One is alleged to have done it. One is KNOWN, factually ,to have done it

John Henry said...

I had understood that the pictures of Cruz leaving the hotel regularly with the ladies had been published. I though that their existence was not in dispute.

If there are no pictures, or at least any pictures yet, I rescind my previous comments abut Cruz needing to address them.

Birkel, I never expected there to be any news about Cruz being a warlock. No idea where that came from.

Cruz seems like a pretty liberal senator whose policies and especially his strict interpretation of the Constitution I could get behind 100%. My only concern about Cruz is whether he is a "natural born citizen" and the issues that could raise determining whether he is or is not.

John Henry

Birkel said...

John Henry:

You demanded Cruz more fully declare himself innocent. That is what the prosecutors did at the Salem Witch Trials.

I assume, reasonably so, that you wish to prosecute (persecute?) Ted Cruz as a warlock. Was that not your intent when you put the burden of proof on the subject of reports of rumors?

And quit flailing about Cruz. Courts have heard the cases and rejected the tortured reading of the natural born clause. Multiple suits have been dismissed as without merit.