“MADAM’S BLACK BOOK” REFERENCED ONLINE

by Sharon Rondeau

(Apr. 6, 2016) — On the upper-right corner of the cover of the April 11, 2016 National ENQUIRER is the caption, “Furious Wife Confronts Cheating Cruz!” with a photo of Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz.

Two weeks ago, the ENQUIRER published a story alleging that Cruz has been unfaithful to his wife, Heidi, with five women whose faces were pixelated and whose names were not revealed.

Cruz has denied the claims when confronted but does not appear to have filed a defamation lawsuit against the publication, which has been sued before. However, the NE accurately reported that former presidential candidate John Edwards was unfaithful to his wife, Elizabeth, with a young woman with whom he fathered a child and that 1988 presidential candidate Gary Hart was involved with a woman not his wife.

Thus far, it does not appear that any of the five women speculated to have been involved with Cruz have filed a lawsuit.

On page 14 of the April 11 edition is an article titled “Cruises Wife Explodes Over Cheating Claims!” with the subtitle, “Heidi wants answers from Ted as ENQUIRER story rocks the world” relating to the cover caption.

The second paragraph of the article reads, “In a blockbuster story in our previous issue, The National ENQUIRER reported rumors were swirling that conservative Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, 45, may have enjoyed the company of at least five mistresses!”  A photo of the cover in which the first article appeared is reprinted at the center-bottom of the page as an inset along with the article, which spanned two pages in the March 23 edition of the ENQUIRER.

The April 11 story continues, “While the heart-tempered Canadian-born father of two denied any sexual shenanigans, a family pal told The ENQUIRER that the candidate’s wife, Heidi, 43, has privately confronted Ted about the salacious rumors.”

Last week, Heidi Cruz was scheduled to appear at several campaign events in New Jersey but canceled them, stating that she would visit the Garden State at a later time.

A third and possibly as-yet unavailable ENQUIRER story appears on the electronic version of a different issue about which rumors had swirled on the Internet on Monday and Tuesday: that Cruz patronized the services of the “DC Madam,” whose remaining phone records have been barred from release by a judge in Washington, DC since May 2007.

“Ted Cruz Named in Madam’s Black Book!” reads the online headline at the top of the cover of that issue.  The photo at the right of the article title is of former DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey, who operated the reportedly highly-priced escort service for nearly a decade and whose clients included high-ranking military members, a State Department official, and Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, among others.

The March 23 story is also featured at NE’s website approximately halfway down the page as it appears on Wednesday.

The Daily Wire, edited by Ben Shapiro, reported that Christians have gravitated to Cruz because of his “genuine belief in the power of prayer and his pastoral inclinations.”

—————–

Editor’s Note: The Post & Email strives to publish news of high quality and in-depth research rather than the all-too-common tabloid headlines found both in print and online. We are following the National ENQUIRER’s reportage of Cruz as it may speak to his character, honesty, and potential for blackmail if he were to be elected the nation’s next chief executive. Given that Cruz held Canadian citizenship for most of his life, including after having been elected to the U.S. Senate from Texas, and the fact that he has refused to release any documentation on his claimed status as a United States citizen from birth, The Post & Email has questions about whether or not he has been completely “transparent” with the American people.

Join the Conversation

9 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. At this point, it’s all speculation. I could dig deeper into the Verizon recs but will not. Mr. Sibley has never said explicitly that Senator Cruz is in the phone records. Anything the Enquirer writes should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

  2. Maybe this will end the speculation:

    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-04-07/other-dc-madam-associates-discuss-potential-election-bombshell

    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-31/dc-madams-attorney-says-election-bombshell-already-online

    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-28/dc-madams-attorney-says-call-log-bombshell-could-upend-presidential-race

    From the first article: “One of the researchers, muckracking journalist and hypocrisy-hunting private eye Dan Moldea, says he shredded his copy but that he’s certain four candidates were not on the subpoenaed list. He says he would remember the names of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, Ohio Gov. John Kasich (then a former congressman) and businessman Donald Trump.

    Matt Janovic, who recalls Palfrey offering him a research gig after reading one of his blog posts, says he still has copies of case records stored in a filing cabinet in the basement of his Indiana home. Janovic says he searched a digital copy of the Verizon response, which he says contains names and detailed information about 815 phone numbers, and did not see Sen. Ted Cruz’s name.”

    Furthermore, the restraining order was first issued when Sibley threatened to release them before trial.

    From the first article: “Sibley’s right to hold the records, however, has derailed his legal bid to lift the 2007 restraining order, which was issued when he threatened to release records ahead of trial. Then-U.S. District Judge Richard Roberts in January instructed a clerk not to accept Sibley’s motion requesting reconsideration of the restraining order, writing: “Why Sibley would have possession of subpoenaed records in a case from which he has been terminated and why he would not instead have turned all copies of them over to the defendant’s continuing counsel of record is not set forth in the motion.”

    Simply put, the records were obtained via subpoena and do not belong to Sibley. He should not even have copies of the records as he was required to turn all records over to the new attorneys when Palfrey terminated him prior to trial.

    Even if he maintained copies of the records, he is still bound by attorney client privilege which would bar him from releasing any information without the client’s approval.

    This is not a conspiracy. This is simply the court enforcing the law.

    And I think the P&E would be better off referencing US News and World Report than the National Enquirer.

    1. U.S. News & World Report has been referenced frequently by The Post & Email on this developing story. Also included in the April 7 article you referenced is:

      “Sibley’s claim to hold an election bombshell isn’t necessarily voided by the seemingly incongruous accounts about the Verizon response, as the purportedly detailed subpoena response may contain information not appreciated at face value. And the pool of what Sibley says are about 5,000 previously unreleased unique phone numbers remains mysterious and potentially explosive

      It is possible that names of people holding highly-placed government positions are on the list, and the question is whether or not the public has a right to know.

      The National Enquirer is making two separate claims: that Cruz has had numerous affairs with women while married while running as a Christian “conservative,” and that his name may appear on the DC Madam’s client list. We have also interviewed Sibley, a firsthand witness, just as USN&WR has.

  3. If Sibley wanted the info to be out there he could every easily accomplish that. He could pass the info to National Enquirer anonymously and they would publish it. The court might suspect Sibley as the source but there would be no evidence pointing the finger at him. And what could the court do if he violated the order? Revoke his license? They have already done that.

  4. Bobbi,

    You don’t see anything but “speculation” because the courts are covering for the politicians that are in the Black Book. If the judge allowed the release of the information the evidence would be available for everyone to see.

  5. Bobbi is correct. Speculation and gossip. If Sibley had anything he would have released it by now.

    Cruz was Solicitor General of Texas from 2003 through 2008. It is hard to believe that he would be using an escort service in Washington D.C. during that period.

    Although he did work for the Bush administration from 2000 through 2003, I don’t think he would have escaped scrutiny for over 10 years if he had been involved with anyone from the Palfrey’s organization. He would have been outed just like David Vitter.

    Palfrey died long before Cruz returned to Washington as a senator in 2013.