Trump won't release the NYT tapes where he states that his platform is a farce. Why not? It's a huge win for him and he says he loves "winning" - he'd get to prove the NYT to be a bunch of liars and destroy them. He claims to enjoy doing this, so why not do it? He does it every other time someone calls him out, he does it with his lawsuits. Why not NYT?
Yes this was fishy. Look to see it released after the primary is over. You can see him moderating his rhetoric already getting ready for the general election.
Trump was under withering attack last night and he held strong. I was quite impressed. He could have done things better, but he held strong.
>>66222474
DELETE THIS
It's fucking nothing, Cruz is desperate
Wasn't it Buzzfeed that said what was on the tapes, not NYT?
>>66222963
>>66222953
Trump himself said in the debate he won't authorize their release.
>>66222474
What fucking New York Times tapes? Somebody please explain this to me.
I doubt it's anything of substance and it's just a compliance test by Trump's opponents, but I've really only heard a few sentences about it. All of which from Cruz.
Cuz Trump is "flexible", let's face it
He flip flopped on H1B visas, and he flip flopped on deporting illegals- he won't deport all of them, just the bad ones now
>>66223003
But wasn't it Buzzfeed that said what was on the tapes, not NYT?
>>66223061
Doesn't matter who it is. Trump acknowledges its existence and said himself he will not authorize the release.
It doesn't even matter
Being a flexible flip flopper helps him versus Clinton
Floating voters don't want someone doctrinaire like Cruz
NYT says tapes dont exist
>>66223025
see here: >>66223003
TRUMP ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR EXISTENCE IN THE DEBATE AND REFUSED TO AUTHORIZE THEIR RELEASE
What is so hard about this to understand
>>66223061
>>66223230
Source?
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/editor-ny-times-not-sitting-on-a-news-story-with-trump-tapes/article/2584720?custom_click=rss
Couldnt find the nyt article from last night saying the same thing. They must have changed the title or taken it down.
But in short the tapes are fucking nothing
>>66223230
This, the editor came out and said that they weren't sitting on the story and there is nothing of interest..
Nyt article, they changed it since last night.. With a transcript of the tapes...
http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/publiceditor/2016/03/02/trumps-off-the-record-remarks-new-york-times-went-public/
>>66223267
He acknowledge them in the fox interview after Super Tuesday and Hannity apparently heard the tape itself because he said it was about negotiating the wall in which trump agreed and said everything is negotiable
>>66223267
But where did this story even begin?
Is Cruz listening to Buzzfeed if it began there?
I get why he wouldn't release it, because regardless if he did say he lied on the tapes, which I doubt that he tell a fucking news outlet that he was fucking lying, then obviously it would be bad.
If he didn't say anything detrimental to his campaign and releases them he looks like a pushover.
>>66223472
Then why wouldn't Trump authorize their release? He acknowledged their existence?
You're not making any fucking sense. How can you even justify reasoning or supporting this obviously shady bullshit.
>>66223230
>>66223474
Except Trump himself confirmed that they existed
>>66223735
he never confirmed they exist he just said if they did he wouldnt release them because he respects off the record
>>66223909
How convenient
>>66223909
He acknowledged their existence though
>>66223643
If they don't exist then why didn't he just say they don't exist?
>>66223909
Well that's fuckin stupid
>>66223953
I mean if he said something was on the record and made it on the record then that shows he can't keep his word.
I'm sure the NYT would love to break a story about Trump being a huge liar or whatever and they would have gotten leaked somehow if that was the case.
I just want to know where this retarded ass story began. It's not even a good debate point really.
>>66224183
>said something was off the record and made it on the record
ftfm
How is an interview with video and multiple people in the room "off the record"?
>>66223909
> pulling for excuses this hard
It's literally nothing.
If it was something, Jew York Times would have found a way to conveniently "leak" it and blame it on some fall guy in the mail room who is expendable.
They're just bluffing because they're out of ammo at this point.
>>66224183
>I'm sure the NYT would love to break a story about Trump being a huge liar or whatever and they would have gotten leaked somehow
I think so too. Maybe he said some bad words and just doesnt want to deal with the media.
>>66222474
>Trump bending at the knee ever
Not going to happen MittBeckCruzRubio shill
>>66224183
>I just want to know where this retarded ass story began
It's irrelevant and a moot point. The implication of the story is what's important.
It's not a good debate point that someone admits their entire platform is a farce to stoop the masses into electing them president? I'll no longer be responding to your posts, they're senseless and desperate.
>>66224378
Well if it's because the editor said it was off the record and Trump goes ahead and releases them it breaks his end of the agreement you know.
It shows he cant keep his word if he does that and that he's willing to do break his agreement because other people said he should.
>>66222474
take a dump on trump here:
>>66222065
:)
Part of the tapes are already released and Trump just repeated his positions for the most part. I wouldn't worry too much about the tapes so long as Sessions and Queen Ann are there to straighten Trump out if he fucks up.
>>66224519
Good point
>>66224450
>It's irrelevant and a moot point.
You're fucking retarded and this post just goes to show how desperate you actually are.
Where the story came from is extremely relevant. If you would give a breakdown of it, maybe more people would take you seriously instead of saying DUDE TAPES LMAO you could present a well articulated breakdown of what is going on.
Instead when I'm making posting and asking sheerly out of curiosity you call me senseless and desperate. Get fucked.
>>66223706
To keep people talking about it, you faggot.
Have you not been paying attention this whole election cycle?
He said that off the record so he could destroy their journalist credibility when they release it like he knows they want to.
