Technically, if they leverage everything that they can drop...which no one sane would do.
Their actual capital they can use is hardly anything close to that from what I understand.
Ugh. Look, the magic thing about publicly traded companies is that they have to disclose these things on a regular basis. The other thing is that words like "cash and cash equivalents" have a real meaning- these are assets that either in cash or are considered the equivalent. You don't have to write, "From what I understand," you can actually just quickly look it up.
That said, it doesn't appear you are interested in the facts- look, companies are not individuals buying a house. Companies don't get mortgages. Disney, when they purchased Fox (for example) didn't open up Rocket Mortgage on their iPhone to see how they could afford a $71.3 billion "mortgage." It's somewhat bizarre that this is the argument you are making, given that Apple:
1. Has notoriously, and for a long time, had a mountain of cash, to the extent where they finally had to start dividends. Like ... unheard of amounts of cash. How mountainous? It's public, every quarter.
2. Is a company worth $2.3 trillion right now, which is (checking math) a huge amount more than Disney. Okay, it's more than 13 times bigger. Which ... yeah. This isn't a merger of equals. And Disney's price includes a lot of things Apple wouldn't purchase (see, e.g., the Disney purchase of Fox).
3. Also? I made the reference to the cash because Apple could do it- but that's not how deals are structured ... for a lot of reasons. Tax reasons (Apple and Disney are both good at avoiding those) and also because it is usually beneficial to creatively structure it- that's why they pay the M&A guys the big bucks.
The reason Apple won't buy Disney really boils down to the following (roughly in order of importance, with the last being by far the most important):
A. Apple doesn't buy other companies like this. They either make targeted acquisitions (such as various investments and acquisitions to get their chips in-house) or small ones. The largest, but far, was Beats for $3 billion. It's a cultural thing- they generally don't like to on-board a bunch of new people.
B. The actual deal would be really complicated. There is absolutely no way that Apple would want to purchase major components of Disney- the linear networks (aka, ABC, ESPN, etc.), the Parks and Entertainment (which has a lot of employees, physical assets, and international contractual relationships as well as merch) as well as other specific components. They would be in it for the IP and (to a much lesser extent) DTC operations. This isn't impossible to do, but it would be incredibly hard to untangle and get value.
C. Given the current regulatory climate in DC (see, e.g., Activision and Microsoft) and Brussels (see, e.g., everything) I don't think Apple wants a deal like this on anyone's radar.
So, yeah, there are a lot of exceptionally good reasons why the strategic rumors about Apple are completely wrong and likely floated for a purpose. But "Companies are just people that buy mortgages," is not one of them.