Comments on: Edwards getting a bad rap on Enquirer photo?

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Enquirer: Meet Rielle Hunter’s baby

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Enquirer: Meet Rielle Hunter’s baby — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:11:35 +0000

[...] the baby in the earlier blurry photo they published (note the hair), but since I think Edwards was photoshopped into that one, there’s no reason to believe the baby wasn’t photoshopped [...]

By: seejanemom

seejanemom — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:47:39 +0000

Survey says…

GUILTY!

How ’bout this??? We trade the forged National Guard documents against a Lear Jet Republican for the fuzzy lust child photos of Lear Jet Liberal?

Fair?

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Edwards’s campaign finance chairman: Sure, I’ve been giving money to Rielle Hunter

Sat, 09 Aug 2008 00:36:35 +0000

[...] of photoshopping the now infamous picture of Edwards with the baby — which might be the most plausible thing he said during the interview. Thank goodness this is now settled, all I’s dotted and [...]

By: AprilOrit

AprilOrit — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:45:32 +0000

I bet she was paid by the Enquirer to put the camera there…

She’s the type to play both sides of the fence.

By: AprilOrit

AprilOrit — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:34:15 +0000

Whether these photos are legit or not, I tend to believe this story is true for three reasons.

1. The NE knows that Edwards is a litigation happy scumbag trial attorney and they went forward with the story anyway.

2. Edwards has yet to file suit for libel.

3. If Silky was innocent, he would already have released blood test results to prove it.

Wingo on August 7, 2008 at 1:11 PM

I agree, it’s been very quiet, not a peep.

Did he streak his hair??

By: National Enquirer Claims Photos of John Edwards and his Love Child Frances Quinn Hunter | Scared Monkeys

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:21:38 +0000

[...] it is 100% confirmed that John Edwards was at the hotel. Now the question he must ask is why. Is the above pic real or faux, who knows. The fact that the MSM refuses to cover the story because they are claiming to be [...]

By: Wingo

Wingo — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:11:22 +0000

Whether these photos are legit or not, I tend to believe this story is true for three reasons.

1. The NE knows that Edwards is a litigation happy scumbag trial attorney and they went forward with the story anyway.

2. Edwards has yet to file suit for libel.

3. If Silky was innocent, he would already have released blood test results to prove it.

By: MirCat

MirCat — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:02:24 +0000

What does Prince Charles have to say about this?

- The Cat

By: Kini

Kini — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 05:49:36 +0000

Hmmm, blurry hair would still look perfect…., doesn’t look perfect…

By: OneGyT

OneGyT — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:44:54 +0000

Or is the Enquirer just messing with our heads?

By: Diogenes of Sinope

Diogenes of Sinope — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:16:30 +0000

Allah- Room service and a $100 is all the Enquirer needed to get this pic.

By: mikeyboss

mikeyboss — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:29:56 +0000

Someone commented on another site that the text says the photo of Edwards closing the curtains is from last year in NY.

By: malkinmania

malkinmania — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:25:43 +0000

What must his wife be thinking?? She allowed him to use her cancer as a campaign funds generator and this is how he pays her back?
Ill never forget, on Edwards website, he had a link to email a card to his wife to wish her well. As soon as you hit the button to send, an email flew into your inbox soliciting donations to the campaign. All it was, was a bounce to solicit.

By: seanrobins

seanrobins — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:48:42 +0000

Has anybody here plunked down the $$$ and picked up a physical copy of the paper, which I imagine has more pix? And remember, the Enquirer is not likely to blow its entire wad (excuse me) on one issue. There’ll be followups with more photos.

By: Dawnsblood

Dawnsblood — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:23:27 +0000

The Dems are already demanding Edwards explain before he loses a Convention spot.

By: WoosterOh

WoosterOh — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 23:02:12 +0000

Then you could still have the adjacent window blind open…through which the picture was taken.

Vigilante on August 6, 2008 at 6:56 PM

The rendezvous happed at like 9:30 PM, the Sun had set.

By: Vigilante

Vigilante — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:56:19 +0000

It could be a corner room, which would explain why there is a closed window blind behind him. Then you could still have the adjacent window blind open…through which the picture was taken.

And remember the confrontation with the Enquirer didn’t happen until after the rendezvous, so he may have thought that he snuck in unnoticed.

By: landlines

landlines — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:55:29 +0000

This smells like the latest Liberal Trick:

1. Leak a fake photo,
2. get others to buy into it,
3. and then when it’s exposed as a fake, blame the Conservatives for spreading a lie!

By: malkinmania

malkinmania — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:41:15 +0000

and his neck in the smaller pic is about a foot long!

By: malkinmania

malkinmania — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:39:29 +0000

I believe thats a spycam shot. A picture would appear that way if it took a wide angle shot and was cropped. If the Enquirer knew the exact date and who will drive them both to the Hilton, then they have an insider thats probably getting paid handsomely to have planted it, probably low level hotel employee who was approached by NE. What bothers me is on the blurry pic, theres several wide bleachy streaks on Silkys hair. Also the smaller clear pic, daggone it looks like a hospital gown and he’s holding an IV line, and the ‘yellow’ marking in back of him, doesnt look like a hotel room. Any follow up thoughts??

By: Marcus

Marcus — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:35:24 +0000

Someone made a nice point that when the Marla Maples/Ivanna Trump/Donald Trump confrontation in Aspen on the ski slopes took place the press was there and the question was “how did they know?!” Turns out Marla the Mistress had pre-arranged it. Seems mistresses sometimes don’t act accordingly.

Okay, then — how’d they get a camera into the room in the first place?

Gee, darned if I know who might have snapped it. Did her change purse weigh more when she left the hotel than when entering?

By: Serr8d

Serr8d — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:13:54 +0000

I should send 'em this one.

By: WoosterOh

WoosterOh — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:10:39 +0000

The only thing I can say is why would the Enquirer use a fake photo?

They were in the lead, they owned the story, if the print a fake, they will lose what little credibility they had.

I will go as far to say, if I was Edwards, I would leak a photo from that night to the Enquirer, but in reality, it was a photo of mean and my last child with my wife.

Enquirer is just stupid enough to take the bait.

By: Hendo

Hendo — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:52:19 +0000

Can you take a photo through those little spy holes in doors – from the outside?

By: tree hugging sister

tree hugging sister — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:28:03 +0000

It can’t be him.

The guy in that photo has unkept hair.

So it’s not the John Edwards you thought you knew?