April 8, 2016, - 6:18 am

Latest Ted Cruz Natl Enquirer Cover: Do You Believe There’s Any Truth to This? – UPDATED

By Debbie Schlussel



The latest issue of the National Enquirer has a cover full of stunning, salacious headlines against Ted Cruz. While it seems to me that most are likely BS, the Enquirer has a history of breaking credible stories the mainstream media won’t cover. What do you think?

Above is the cover of the latest issue of the National Enquirer, dated yesterday. As has been documented since the first sorta discredited Enquirer hit piece on Cruz last week, the tabloid’s owner David Pecker is close to Donald Trump (though it appears the story had been floated by the Marco Rubio camp when “Kinky Boots” Boobio Schmubio was still running). Ted Cruz never flat-out denied that he never cheated on his wife, but the “five women” story has been mostly discredited or denied.

While others dismiss the Enquirer as trash and not to be believed, you can’t disregard the fact that the publication broke stories in the last couple of decades that the mainstream media wouldn’t touch: the Jesse Jackson’s love child story, the John Edwards’ love child story, etc. Maybe one day they’ll do the Hillary Clinton love child story (my friend Adam Taxin calls her, “Chelsea Hubbell-Mezvinsky”).

On the other hand, I look at these headlines, and they don’t all pass the smell test. For one, there’s the “DC Madam” story that MSNBChlamydia’s Rachel “Pat” Maddow has been pimping for a while now. As you may recall, back in 2007, Washington, DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey was arrested and charged with racketeering for running a prostitution ring of “high-class call girls.” (She committed suicide in 2008, a couple of weeks after she was convicted.) When the news broke and part of her client list was disclosed, Republican U.S. Senator David Vitter was revealed to be among Palfrey’s repeat clients. But the entire list (which is actually a set of Verizon phone records of calls made to Palfrey’s hooker agency) was never released because a court order prohibited it.

Palfrey’s former lawyer, Montgomery Blair Sibley, has been seeking a reversal of that order. Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant that reversal.

Much of the news coverage of the list, including that by Maddow, implies that Ted Cruz is on it–including the blaring Enquirer headline, which outright asserts Cruz is on the list. I don’t believe it, and here’s why:

Those who’ve reportedly seen the list say Cruz isn’t on it, but that “four candidates” (for what office I don’t know, as it isn’t noted in the story) are. Also, Cruz wasn’t elected to the U.S. Senate until 2012. The list is from 2007 and earlier. Cruz was on the Bush legal team and spent several years in Washington. From 1999 to 2003, he worked at the Federal Trade Commission and at the Bush (In)Justice Department. But I think if he had used the prostitution service, it would have probably come out by now. (You never know, though, as longest-serving GOP Speaker of the House Denny Hastert nearly got away with being a serial child rapist.)

I think that maybe four candidates for other offices, like U.S. Senate and House, might be on the list. But I doubt there are any Presidential consequences. So, the Enquirer headline asserting that Cruz is on the list sounds like absolute BS to me.

As for the other headlines about “Ted’s affairs,” I think that stuff also would have come out by now, and we’d see actual names and proof. The women in last week’s Enquirer stories were weirdo, clingy Ted groupies, including overly flirty and completely unprofessional Amanda Carpenter (something’s completely off about her) and Trump spokeschick/Tea Party puck bunny Katrina Pierson. And while I think something odd and creepy was going on between former Cruz employee Carpenter and Cruz, I don’t believe he was sleeping with her. He just doesn’t seem the type (as weird as he is). She just seems like a desperate egomaniac who had a huge infatuation with him.

We need to see what’s inside the Enquirer stories behind these headlines (and most of those aren’t online). I haven’t gone to the supermarket yet to check out what’s inside and behind the cover.

What do you think?

**** UPDATE: Well, I guess my skepticism was well placed. Reader PolitiJim writes:

The top heading of the Enquirer is correct but the bottom is photoshopped. This is the cover for the issue coming out tomorrow with Elton John having a “threesome” not Cruz. . . .

Read the rest of his comment below in the comments section. He has a lot of interesting info indicating that Ted Cruz may, indeed, have been a john.


Tags: , , , , , , ,

40 Responses

What is the credible evidence that Ted Cruz did what he is accused of doing? Until there is credible evidence, then all is baseless slander.

A very serious sin, loshon hora,is it not? Or do we live in a time where “anything goes”? What happens to a community where loshon hora is rampant?

bobguzzardi on April 8, 2016 at 7:28 am

“Where there’s smoke there’s fire”.Maybe not a forest fire or even a bonfire. Maybe just a weenie roast?

Jerry G on April 8, 2016 at 8:40 am

I do notice that no one is suing the Enquirer yet.

Little Al on April 8, 2016 at 8:44 am

Can powerful men get with illegal/immoral behavior?

Yup. But they are more accountable to G-d than to society and it never ends well for them.

Sooner than later your deceit catches up with you.

From King David to presidential aspirant Ted Cruz, the famous haven’t always had storybook lives.

NormanF on April 8, 2016 at 9:38 am

Hey Deb.

The top heading of the Enquirer is correct but the bottom is photoshopped. This is the cover for the issue coming out tomorrow with Elton John having a “threesome” not Cruz.

That being said the hard facts are this. We have 7 reporters who have seen the video tape of Cruz and a female staffer visiting a hotel every Tue and Thur for weeks leaving at 2 am in the morning. We also know he has not sued the Enquirer.

His false prophet Glenn Beck began backtracking this past week allowing that he could understand if Cruz had a moral failure while he and Heidi were apart when he moved to Texas and she was in NYC attempting to subvert US sovereignty by creating a North American Union. (Ok, Beck didn’t say the last part). But the fact he suddenly allowed that it might be true, and that he would dump Cruz if the multiple mistress thing came out is very very telling. He has played hardball on every position of Cruz without flinching until this.

Also, we have a verified ex-Cruz staffer (http://bit.ly/CruzStaff) saying that not only was the staff told these allegations were true, but that Heidi knew. Heidi has not been seen since except for an obligatory human shield with her children at a townhall meeting in Wisconsin.

And to top it off, Gateway Pundit Jim Hoft, a fairly responsible reporter/blogger, openly admitted they have the DC Madam records which her attorney has already said WILL have an impact on the race. Given Wayne Madsen investigation into this years ago and his circumstantial conclusion (RADAR) that it must be Cruz – in all – I think it’s a given.

But this story will be much deeper. the Madam herself told many even if convicted she knew she was in for a huge Hollywood screenplay deal and a cush jail. No one believes she truly killed herself. And that wasn’t because a nerdy Texas Solicitor was cheating on his wife.

PolitiJim on April 8, 2016 at 9:40 am


    Nobody cares. The MSM will not report it, because they are blatantly using Cruz to – they hope – prevent Trump from getting to 1237 delegates.

    Of course, if Cruz ever did get the nomination (and I conservatively estimate the odds of that happening at about 1000-to-1 AGAINST), the floodgates would absolutely come CRASHING open on this story, and we’d hear about little else for 6 months straight.

    Joe on April 8, 2016 at 9:30 pm

    She wrote me that everyone knew about her list – the question was “why now” (election year, RNC/DNC – both). I was more interested in DNCers on her list. She lived in Vallejo, CA b4 moving back to FL. Made sure she said if found suicided etc. I was more interested in “pillow talk” about 9/11. As a blacklisted 9/11 investigated I contacted her about that. There was a lot of that “pillow talk”. And now, those 28 pages which (despite that perfidious traitor’s recent comments to the contrary) absolutely indict the Saudi’s and also link to US government officials (his cronies) re 9/11 -or 2 of whom are also on herlsit.

    Exposing Mr.KeepALidOnIt on May 2, 2016 at 2:57 pm

I’m sure the Dems know everything Cruz did or did not do. However, infidelity isn’t the big deal it once was. Also, the fact that Cruz has a mentally unstable spouse provides a sort of excuse for any betrayals.

Lastly, I don’t think the Dems would emphasize Ted’s infidelity. That would allow the Republicans to discuss the fact that Bill Clinton is a rapist. Not a cheat. A rapist.

adam on April 8, 2016 at 10:02 am

I think that neither Cruz or Trump will be the nominee. Neither will will on the first ballot. It seems possible that a “surprise” nominee will eventually emerge. The Republicans are pushing for Paul Ryan to be that guy. However, we all know that he’s an Islamopanderer and immigration advocate.

Mitch Daniels is a guy who was once discussed as a presidential candidate. Any thoughts on him or anyone else?

adam on April 8, 2016 at 10:06 am

    If Donald Trump enters the convention with the most bound delegates, then I will vote for him in November – even if I have to write in his name. Same goes for Cruz if he somehow miraculously closes his enormous ~ 275-delegate deficit to become the top vote-getter.

    The Republican who gets the most voters should be the Republican nominee. Not delegate games and backroom deals. Actual voters. Period. Full stop.

    Anyone else will lose.

    Joe _ on April 8, 2016 at 2:35 pm

Who in hades is Mitch Daniels? You don’t mean the RINO ex-govenor of Indiana, do you?

It had better be Cruz or Trump or Hillary will be president.
P.S. Hillary will never be indicted. The fix is in.

lexi on April 8, 2016 at 12:09 pm

What is seriously wrong with Ted Cruz mouth? It looks like it falls apart with no structure. Someone explain that mouth. I don’t think he has muscle structure around his mouth. Very weird and bizarre.

the chosen one on April 8, 2016 at 12:44 pm

    Nothing is wrong with his mouth. Do you have a DVR? If so, stop any program when people are talking. You get some really interesting facial expressions when you stop a video.

    JeffT on April 8, 2016 at 1:00 pm

The National Enquirer is like a broken clock. Right twice a day, but otherwise not that dependable.

JeffT on April 8, 2016 at 12:58 pm

I believe it. Remember the attack against Trump’s wife by that scum-sucking bottom-feeder Liz Mair (who was absolutely born male, but I digress) during the Utah caucus? Well! ‘Her’ scum group has the EXACT SAME MAILING ADDRESS as Cruz mistress Sarah Isgur Flores, who served as the Deputy Campaign Manager for Carly Fiorina. A big fat, cosmic coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Look, I voted for Cruz. But I voted on March 1st, back when he had a mathematical chance of being nominated. All sorts of filth and slime are now letting Cruz temporarily ‘borrow’ their support, solely to keep Trump below 1237. Cruz has no path to the nomination – none whatsoever. Roger Stone was right when he said that the nominee will be Donald Trump on the 1st ballot, or Paul Ryan (or somebody just like him) on the 4th ballot. There is no third option.

And if the Republicans are dumb enough to install some Giant Digital Judas like Paul Ryan, they will probably be able to scrape out a win in Utah if they work hard enough. They lose the other 49.

Joe on April 8, 2016 at 1:24 pm

    P.S. And make no mistake about the GOP’s intentions if they squat and plop out a Paul Ryan or Mitch Daniels nominee. If they do that, THEY DON’T EXPECT TO WIN – they just expect to prevent Trump from winning. Even if it means a Hillary victory.

    Don’t you wish all these Romney-Rubio-Ryan Cultists had worked half this ferociously to defeat *****OBAMA***** in 2012?

    At this point, Trump is the only GOP candidate who even MIGHT win the general election. The person who gets the most votes should get the nomination. Even if it’s a plurality. If it was good enough for McCain in 2008, it should be good enough for the party today. Any candidate who takes the nomination away through corrupt delegate games (as opposed to winning honestly) will be catastrophically damaged and unelectable in the fall.

    Figuratively speaking, imagine a foot race – just before the starting gun, someone runs in and amputates a runner’s legs. And arms. And head.

    Would you bet on that runner to win the foot race?

    Joe on April 8, 2016 at 3:15 pm

I am guessing Cruz on the 2nd ballot. DEM only condemn REPs sex scandals, because the DEMs politicians really care about women’s issues, so their personal behavior doesn’t matter, as long as they vote the correct PC way. Talk about an evil paradox.

The media will slander any REP politician, plus they are mostly hugely incompetent, Deb is one of the few I read that provides facts to back her conclusions.

DaveC on April 8, 2016 at 1:55 pm

Cruz, the panderer to anti-semites. When he talks about condemning New York Values such as money when he is in the Midwest, what else in the world can he be talking about.

While I am not an admirer of Geraldo Rivera or Jeffrey Toobin, they both deserve credit for identifying Cruz’s pandering to anti-semitism.

Little Al on April 8, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    I agree. Cruz, with his thinly veiled reference to “neocons”, is a despicable figure. He reminds me of Nixon. He’s just sleazy. There is no way he’s ever president.

    Sanders has been going full bore anti-Semite with his massively inflated figures on Gaza, 6 times more “innocents” killed than even Hamas has claimed. So, pandering to Jew-hatred is something he shares with Cruz.

    Trump hasn’t shown himself to be a Jew hater, at least as far as I know. Hillary is BFF with Sid and Max Blumenthal, and with girl-toy and Muslim Brotherhood rep Huma.

    Ryan is besties with Jihad Grover Norquist. Ryan wants to settle Muslim immigrants far and wide. No thanks.

    adam on April 9, 2016 at 12:32 pm

I’m a New Yorker, and recognize “New York values” right off the bat to be unbridled far-leftism as exemplified by Governor Cuomo and NYC Mayor de Blasio – pandering to all sorts of PC special-interest groups, from Muslims to LGBT’s to labor unions and so on, while driving the whole state (and city) down the toilet morally, financially and otherwise. One could see why that “New York values” comment could be construed as anti-Semitic – especially given Cruz’ buddy-buddiness with the likes of Saul Anuzis and Neil Bush, as noted on this site in other articles.

As for Dems, “women’s issues” is more or less code for abortion. As for the whole “women’s right to privacy” meme, that goes right out the window as far as those claiming to be “transgender” are concerned, especially in restrooms reserved for women.

ConcernedPatriot on April 8, 2016 at 2:56 pm

    The nomination is going to Trump or a Mitt Romney clone – get used to it. Cruz has no path to the nomination, and the odds that the party leaders would broker the convention for Cruz are about the same as the chances that they will make Bernie Sanders the Republican nominee.

    It’s Trump, or a guaranteed-loser like Romney. No third choice. Which side are YOU on? As for me, it’s #NeverBurglar all the way.

    Joe on April 8, 2016 at 3:13 pm

” Rachel “Pat” Maddow” Classic
“Chelsea Hubbell-Mezvinsky”

You are on fire today. Also if I’m not mistaken The Enquirer revealed Tiger Wood’s disease called Satyriasis. The paper maybe suspect at times, but it definitely has some winning truthful revelations and broke them first.

MrBigBrain on April 8, 2016 at 3:05 pm

Yes, the New York Liberals was multifaceted, and was addressed to New York’s political excesses as well as the implicit references to Jews and money.

But ‘New York Liberals’ is, itself, a code word for Jews. And there are plenty of anti-semites in the Republican Party, especially, but not only, in the Midwest.

If you want a chilling experience, read some of the comments on conservative websites regarding whether Cruz’s comment was anti-semitic. It is clear that large sections of conservatives have a reflexive attitude of defending whatever their candidate or favorite media clown says, regardless of merit.

I am very right-of-center, but I such the mindless responses of many on the right to be really repulsive.

Little Al on April 8, 2016 at 3:30 pm


    The fact that they deny it is anti-Semitic is NOT proof that it is in fact true.

    You are begging the question.

    Cruz’s problem is that he is nearing the point where it’ll be mathematically impossible for him to win the nomination outright. And unless he wins every single delegate in New York (and pretty much every state after it), he WILL be mathematically eliminated.

    This time it’s Trump or Romney/Ryan. That’s it. And it would be a Romney/Ryan candidate that was completely covered with the stench of corruption, dishonor, and failure. The Romney/Ryan candidate would carry Utah. Maybe.

    Joe on April 8, 2016 at 4:55 pm

      Two ships that never meet.

      Little Al on April 9, 2016 at 8:10 am

Even though I think that Cruz is not all that ethical or moral, I would not be inclined to believe in such accusation. He should be given the benefit of the doubt until there are more substantial accusations against him.

Worry on April 8, 2016 at 4:12 pm

As Debbie notes, the National Enquirer does have a fairly good record of nailing these sorts of exposes. Certainly, John Edwards, Tiger Woods, Charlie Sheen, Gary Hart, and Jessie Jackson would have to agree on that point, though in a few of these cases there was considerable disbelief at the time.

It would seem the appropriate thing for SCOTUS Chief Justice Roberts to have done was to actually review the evidence claimed “in camera” — if that is the proper legal term. The fact that he did not do so (nor have any other judges) suggests that there is considerable fear that story in the Enquirer is true, even if the phone records may not ultimately tie to Ted Cruz. Certainly, the data would not be so arcane that a reasonable search of the records, cross-referenced to Verizon’s records, would not readily identify whether or not the allegations are true. The public’s interest is not served when fear of the truth that could harm some special interests outweighs the public’s right to know in the determination of judicial decisions.

If the story does turn out to be true, the game would be over for Cruz, as he has attempted to position himself as a candidate worthy the Evangelical support. That support would vanish, along with his well-marketed “righteous” reputation.

Of course, it could turn out that Bill Clinton is also on that list, but nobody is going to be surprised if that were true, and, given the state of the nation, I doubt such a revelation would have any impact on prospective Hillary Clinton voters. But the same could not be said for Cruz’s constituency.

Ralph Adamo on April 8, 2016 at 5:24 pm

    Is Hillary Clinton on that list? Dead bodies are a Clinton trademark. Hillary will blame it on bubba.

    Chen on April 11, 2016 at 1:22 am

Right now the media is standing pat on exposing Ted Cruz. He serves every anti-Trump faction’s purposes by being the only real opposition to him. Believe you me if Cruz ever got the nomination it will be a nonstop barrage on all of Ted’s extramarital affairs, his NBC status, and his religious zealotry. By the time they finished with him he’d be lucky to win ten states against Hillary. Ted Cruz is a walking time bomb of scandal.

Lloyd Brooks on April 8, 2016 at 10:42 pm

Supermarket Tabloid Trash SOMEBODY had better hope there is truth and substance to this story or there is sorted to be some very expensive lawsuits filed I’m NOT exactly sure what lawyer has the wherewithal to be arguing against a lawyer that has successfully argued briefs before SCOTUS, but wish them well in this endeavour ……

Robert Waldron on April 9, 2016 at 6:38 am

Hey first off Im from Long Island and Im voting for the Big Man TRUMP…..Ted Snooze is a Creepy Mofo so if he got some Loving power to him ….but Im voting for the guy who represents the most..TTTTTT

Richard Czarniecki on April 11, 2016 at 12:16 am

Ted has been in the MSM’s sights for years now—I don’t think so. No one else has picked it up, which is not true of Edwards or Hastert.

Occam's Tool on April 11, 2016 at 1:05 am

This story is implausible because the allegations are that Cruz cheated on his wife with other women. If the allegations were that he cheated on her with another man, I would believe it.

Boats on April 11, 2016 at 2:40 pm

There are several names quoted in the article making such allegations…where are the lawsuits if said allegations are NOT true, and counter-arguments/proof can be defended?

I heard Ted’s father interviewed on a local AM radio station morning show about his book. From the sounds of it, Ted’s Dad sounded like he came straight from a Trump rally. Then he was asked about whom he supports this election…something to the effect, ‘We need a statesman now, and my son {Ted} is the right man for the job.’
…I guess, what do we expect from a father who loves his son.
Wasn’t the “DC Madame” interviewed shortly before her death saying something to the effect, ‘I am definitely not suicidal. I have no mental health issues. I am of sound mind. I am not under a physician’s care. I am not on drugs…’?

Sick_Boy on April 12, 2016 at 1:31 pm


Alfredo from Puerto Rico on April 13, 2016 at 4:50 pm

LOL!!! Not only that Sick Boy, but remember when a horrible looking Roy Cohn looked Mike Wallace dead in the eye on 60 Minutes and said flat out . . .

“I’m obviously not a well man, but I don’t have AIDS.”

Cohn died of AIDS about 15 minutes after he said that.

Well, . . .

not 15 minutes, except in analogy, but it wasn’t long after. LOL!!!

Alfredo from Puerto Rico on April 13, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    …and George H.W. Bush affirmed he wasn’t CIA, no new taxes etc.
    While Cohm was homosexual, apparently he help Trump “cut his teeth” in NYC, pardon the pun, ins and outs. I think Cohn’s public persona was fileted once he aquired HIV.

    Sick_Boy on April 18, 2016 at 2:06 pm

OT, but I’ve never completely forgiven Roy Cohn for causing so much political harm to Sen. McCarthy – a great man and a true patriot. All this hate-filled, ultra-left-wing sickness infecting the country today just shows how right McCarthy was about the Democrats in the 1950s.

Cohn totally misused his position – he should have just let the Army have his little BFF. McCarthy was far more important in the grand scheme of things.

Joe on April 13, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Is Ted Cruz (born December 1970) a U.S. citizen? (Reposting/amended version – sorry if you read this post earlier.)

Ted Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada in December 1970, five years before the end of the Vietnam war. His parents were Rafael Cruz, then a Cuban citizen, and Eleanor Darragh Cruz.

Rafael and Eleanor Cruz lived in Canada for quite a few years – the exact length of their residence is disturbingly unclear.

Quite possibly, Eleanor decided to become a Canadian citizen before his birth. Remember the Vietnam war was still raging in the late 1960s.

Upon swearing the Canadian oath, Eleanor would have lost her U.S. citizenship AUTOMATICALLY that very instant under U.S. law. However, U.S. authorities would not necessarily become aware of the issue and have assumed erroneously that Eleanor was still a U.S. citizen, and that her son “Ted” had become a U.S. citizen through his mother.

In fact, under pertinent U.S. law at the time of his birth, Ted would not be a U.S. citizen at all, and thus be wholly ineligible to be president.

If this had NOT happened, Ted could easily arrange for release of his mother’s records in Canada. The fact that he has not done so, and is vague about the details of his parents’ residence in Canada, is highly disturbing and likely incriminating.

Of course, senior RNC and DNC strategists (and hopefully some people on the Trump campaign) will have access to detailed information about Cruz. Most likely Cruz is merely serving as a stalking horse to take the nomination away from Trump. Perhaps we was promised a VP slot. (Will never happen, Ted.)

Guardian Angel on April 15, 2016 at 2:09 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field