HuffPo: Edwards may have lied to ABC about when he hired Hunter; Update: Surprise — Hunter says she won’t agree to a paternity test
posted at 5:51 pm on August 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I’m actually glad HuffPo is the site to scoop this, just to drive home the point that even the leftiest of left-wing sites is more willing than big media these days to bite on a good story that hurts its own side. Follow the timeline: Edwards and Hunter meet in early 2006; according to e-mails obtained by HuffPo, Hunter is cooing as early as April about a married man she visited in North Carolina; the first check from the campaign to Hunter’s, ahem, film company then goes out on July 5. Here’s how Edwards remembered it:
WOODRUFF: When you hired Ms. Hunter, that was back in 2006, the committee hired in July 2006, paid her $114,000 to make films for you. She did have a lot of experience. Uh was the affair going on when you hired her?
EDWARDS: No. No. And again, I always said this to you, I don’t think I’m going to go through the details of this, I already did it with Elizabeth– uh, she was hired to come in and produce films and that’s the reason she was hired.
WOODRUFF: But this had nothing to do with the fact that you were having an affair with her?
EDWARDS: Same answer. Same answer — no I did not.
WOODRUFF: So you hired her before it even started?
EDWARDS: That is correct.
In other words, his version implicitly is that she was hired on the merits and they became involved during the course of her work. HuffPo’s version, also implicitly, is that her campaign job was a sinecure provided by Edwards after they became involved, possibly as a love token, possibly as a way of buying her silence about the affair. Given the fact that she had basically no experience and didn’t even start her company until that spring, whose version is more plausible? Note also that the only reason we know about this exchange with Woodruff is from the partial transcript ABC put out; unless I missed something, the actual footage of it didn’t air on Nightline. Which means, bizarrely, they thought it was significant enough to include in the written version of the interview published on their website but not in the video version that ran on national television.
Speaking of which, remember the (admittedly easy) speculation in yesterday’s post about Edwards trying to bury the exclusive on a day when there’s a mountain of other big news? Surprise:
[Brian] Ross and his producers at ABC News had been insistently dogging Edwards for some time, uncovering the money trail from an Edwards’ campaign contributor, Fred Baron, to Hunter, who was installed in a $3 million house in Santa Barbara, Calif.
But Edwards insisted that the interview be exclusive to ABC’s late-night news program Nightline and that Bob Woodruff, not Ross, conduct the interview…
Edwards had hoped to control the news cycle by making his admission late on a Friday night when the country was watching the Olympics and the long weekend yawned ahead.
According to multiple sources, Edwards was apoplectic that ABC News broke the story on its website and began promoting it early on Friday, giving the rest of the media a chance to play catch-up and site ABC News’ report. (Representatives for Edwards did not return a call or e-mail for comment.)…
According to ABC News spokeswoman Natalie Raabe, it was agreed that “promotion of the interview could begin immediately after it was completed.” Additionally, she said, “quotations” could be used on Friday’s World News where Edwards’ words, not footage from the interview, were used via an on-screen graphic in a report fronted by Ross.
As for the baby, here’s a snippet from CNN yesterday in which a reporter from the Enquirer asks and then answers the question on everyone’s mind. I confess, I’m thrown by the fact that Edwards would offer publicly to take a paternity test; if he tries to weasel out of it now, for any reason, any few lingering doubts about the paternity will detonate. Better to have ducked the subject by saying he won’t participate in anything that might further inflame the story “for Elizabeth’s sake.” On the other hand, to believe that Andrew Young would move the mother of his love child into the same neighborhood — and possibly into the same house — as his actual family, you have to believe that he’s the most responsible adulterer who ever lived and his wife is the most understanding wronged spouse who ever lived. Which, in light of Fred Baron being the best friend who ever lived, would mean John Edwards is surrounded by a remarkably compassionate circle of people.
Purely speculative exit question: Why did Hunter choose to have the baby? If this is all as nefarious as it sounds, there must have been intense pressure to abort it from people with enough money to make it worth her while.
Update: I changed the headline from “lied” to “may have lied” because I notice HuffPo doesn’t explicitly accuse him of having deliberately misled ABC. Follow the logic of Sam Stein’s post, though, and the only way his mistake could be innocent is if his honest memory of when the affair started is off by six three months or more (and possibly as many as six or seven).
Update: No wonder he’s willing to take a paternity test. She isn’t:
Rielle Hunter, the former presidential campaign aide who had an affair with John Edwards, said yesterday that she will not pursue DNA testing to establish the paternity of her 5-month-old daughter, despite the former senator’s offer to participate in such a test.
In a statement provided to The Washington Post, Hunter said through her attorney that she would not take a genetic test “now or in the future.”
The attorney, Robert Gordon, called Hunter a “private” person who is “not running for public office” and would not comment further on the media frenzy engulfing her.
“She wishes to maintain her privacy and her daughter’s privacy,” he said in the statement. “Furthermore, Rielle will not participate in DNA testing or any other invasion of her or her daughter’s privacy now or in the future.”
How suspicious is this? Well, when Woodruff pressed him on the paternity test yesterday, Edwards said he’d be happy to take one — but then volunteered, strangely, “I’m only one side — I’m only one side of the test, but I’m happy to participate in one.” That actually piqued Woodruff’s curiosity enough to ask him whether Hunter said she doesn’t want to do a test (Edwards claimed he didn’t know). And now, a mere 24 hours later, as luck would have it she doesn’t want to do a test after all, leaving Silky blissfully off the hook. New exit question: How much did Hunter’s willing embrace of ignorance as to the paternity of her child cost Fred “The Best Friend Anyone’s Ever Had” Baron?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
Looks to me like Silky has got his hair in a knot!
singlemalt_18 on August 9, 2008 at 5:54 PM
I don’t know, but I’m glad she kept it. The lesson of this story for any future politician is *abort*abort*abort*. Who kept leaking all the info?
ninjapirate on August 9, 2008 at 6:02 PM
And hopefully Elizabeth will tie something else in a knot.
meci on August 9, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Possibly, and I want to emphasize only possibly, out of all the people involved in this smelly escapade, she was the only one who had uncomplicated and even somewhat understandable motives - she was in love. She certainly could have made things much tougher on Edwards than what she has done, which is to say, said nothing.
drunyan8315 on August 9, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Pants on fire…
Ordinary1 on August 9, 2008 at 6:05 PM
Even more interesting: What did Obama and when did he know it? Did he squeeze Edwards to stay in so Edwards would draw away votes from Hillary? (HT: Redstate)
Wethal on August 9, 2008 at 6:06 PM
You don’t do much dipsy dumpster diving at all at left wing sites do you AP?
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:09 PM
Edwards has clearly leaned none of the lessons from Watergate.
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:12 PM
EstebanEdwards: I have always depended on people being nicer than me, and I have never in my life been disappointed.MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:14 PM
Johny Dumpty tried to hide behind a wall,
Johny Dumpty had a great fall.
All the Left’s dings, And all the Left’s bats
Couldn’t put Johny together again!
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Ms. Hunter, who has custody of the child, may not consent to this test.
mred on August 9, 2008 at 6:22 PM
I’m pretty sure this story is going to get weirder. Why would anyone that has a sword over their head agree to meet the very same sword in the middle of the night? Like with the Chewbacca defense, it doesn’t make sense.
Did John really expect the MSM to protect him to this degree?
Rhinoboy on August 9, 2008 at 6:23 PM
I….did not….have…sexual…relations…with…that..woman….
OOPS!!!! Wrong SocialistDemocrat…(Cue in Led Zep’s “The Song Remains The Same”)………..and the socialists were counting on him for Attorney General, ha…haha…hahahhhahahahahahahahahahaha
adamsmith on August 9, 2008 at 6:23 PM
Because she could, and because now she has the world’s biggest rich hypocrite by the shlong/shvantz.
She’s in a real good position now, one she could possibly never have attained before. She was in the righ place, at a significant time in history, and met the perfect idiot.
She’s got more than 15 min. of fame, she’s got money, probably a cute baby, with a pretty, and pretty rich man.
But her most significant feather in the cap is the fact that she helped destroy the conventional media.
Please note that all these pluses do not, and should not excuse what she did.
Entelechy on August 9, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Edwards truly is a lying sack of shit. Incredible. To think that this man might have ended up as president, or vice president, is just mind-boggling. Let’s have a few less psychopaths running for president, mk?
Seixon on August 9, 2008 at 6:27 PM
The only victim here is the kid. Her father is a scumbag, and her mother is a dingbat.
madne0 on August 9, 2008 at 6:28 PM
Let it go
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
Just let me live my life
I can’t ever run and hide
With you I won’t compromise
Cause all of it you’ll never know
Gonna freak out, let it go
Gonna freak out, let it go
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:28 PM
To the “Surprise, Hunter won’t agree to the paternity test” - if she does, she’ll get a reduced sum of money per month. Plus, when Mrs. Edwards dies, he’ll never see/marry her.
Entelechy on August 9, 2008 at 6:28 PM
I’m glad you clarified at the end. These are some seriously sinister motives. I know women like that are out there, though…
Does anybody know how many kids (if any) Hunter had? Is this her only child? Because at 42, she was not looking at too many chances in the future.
Rhinoboy on August 9, 2008 at 6:30 PM
All the reasonings of men are not worth one sentiment of women.
- Voltaire
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Also, not agreeing to the test means that at least she loves him (as of compared to his claims). But it is too late. Her family and others already gave away who the daddy is. They’ll all go on Oprah and Larry King because they all need their 15 min. fix.
Entelechy on August 9, 2008 at 6:31 PM
See the latest update on this thread. Ka-ching! And, she’s got a perfect lever for the future in case Silky gets a little frisky. I’s say she has played her hand out well. I wonder how John likes being someone’s 401k.
a capella on August 9, 2008 at 6:31 PM
She won’t take a paternity test. She’s getting paid big bucks not to. What if she took the test and it wasn’t Edwards’ baby? She would get booted off the money train.
Guardian on August 9, 2008 at 6:32 PM
This new exit question may, in fact, be the answer to your previous exit question. No matter how you look at this story, it is horribly sad.
Weight of Glory on August 9, 2008 at 6:32 PM
I hate women because they always know where things are.
- Voltaire
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:32 PM
“I’s” s/b “I’d”.
a capella on August 9, 2008 at 6:32 PM
Heh, MB4. Men are a book, women are a library…
Rhinoboy on August 9, 2008 at 6:30 PM
Maybe she had it just because she really loves him.
Entelechy on August 9, 2008 at 6:34 PM
Nature has always had more force than education.
- Voltaire
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:40 PM
Very feasible. However, there is cause to think perhaps she had some irritation with him: his saying that there was ‘no need for a meeting’ and that he didn’t want her to go public.
Spirit of 1776 on August 9, 2008 at 6:41 PM
Haha, I’ll bet that cost a lot more than $114,000.
reaganaut on August 9, 2008 at 6:45 PM
Why does John Edwards envy Ted Kennedy?
.
.
.
Because he has got an ex-wife and a dead girl friend.
MB4 on August 9, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Speculation alert:
By refusing to allow a paternity test, Hunter leaves the certainty of Edwards’ paternity in doubt (it’s plausibly deniable — and he could lie to soften the impact of what he’s done — if he’s a lying sort of guy).
If, in his ice-cold heart, Edwards has reason to believe he is or might be the father, Hunter owns him.
He couldn’t afford to do anything that might piss her off, lest she decide to establish his paternity.
This could be the Mother of all Blackmails.
BLOC on August 9, 2008 at 6:48 PM
I don’t mean this to sound morbid, but assuming Elizabeth’s condition is as dire as they say, Silky can probably keep paying off the Mom until the illness runs it’s course. At that point all sorts off possibilities come to mind, but one thing that occurs right away is that this little girl is going to start asking questions about who her Daddy is a lot sooner than most in this situation when she starts becoming aware of the story surrounding her existence.
RW_theoriginal on August 9, 2008 at 6:50 PM
Then we shall hence forth refer to her child as “the baby whose own father refuses to acknowledge publicly.” It’s not like we didn’t predict that the gimmick to him offering to take the test was her refusal to allow the child tested.
I’d like to know what the source of the funds to pay her to make these videos?
Blake on August 9, 2008 at 6:50 PM
I don’t think Edwards would go through this charade if he wasn’t the father. And it would be very easy for him to have a paternity test under different names to verify it was his child before this big lie got any bigger.
Blake on August 9, 2008 at 6:54 PM
Conference calls can change minds.
He didn’t want a paternity test until this blew up in his face.
So, after a conference call with his baby momma, of course she wouldn’t agree to one.
Lie + lie = truth.
madmonkphotog on August 9, 2008 at 6:55 PM
For the same reason that Monica kept the dress: evidence
CookeyD on August 9, 2008 at 6:58 PM
Or that he’s paying her very, very well.
AZCoyote on August 9, 2008 at 6:59 PM
Then perhaps she shouldn’t have had an affair with a presidential candidate whose wife is dying of cancer.
CookeyD on August 9, 2008 at 7:01 PM
Yep, you laid that out pretty well-follow the money. Hunter got rich young and holds a noose in her hands.
allrsn on August 9, 2008 at 7:01 PM
This snippet from the Wa-Po article is sadly amusing:
He doesn’t know if he has recently held a baby in a hotel room? He doesn’t know if the t-shirt looks familiar?
obladioblada on August 9, 2008 at 7:03 PM
He had to convince her not to go public a few weeks ago, but now, as for the paternity test, it is her decision to keep it private, while Edwards professes to want the test done and made public.
He’s starting to sound like Casey Anthony.
mikeyboss on August 9, 2008 at 7:07 PM
I wonder if there will be tabloid reporters (or wannabe reporters) going through Hunter’s trash looking for diapers, etc. with the baby’s DNA. And how long before somebody gets it?
AZCoyote on August 9, 2008 at 7:07 PM
He’ll blame his wife , or Kerry , or his kids.
Walkin talking live turd in a hairpiece.
Texyank on August 9, 2008 at 7:09 PM
She cannot stop a paternity test if he wanted one.
If he claimed the kid that is.
ArmyAunt on August 9, 2008 at 7:12 PM
My money is on the sister. And you can bet if it’s her, she’ll find a way to swab the kid and get it to the Enquirer. Then, if they don’t have one already, they’ll lift a sample from Edwards and run the test.
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:15 PM
*snoring*
Send_Me on August 9, 2008 at 7:16 PM
I wonder how many of them are his? He might have to go back to chasing ambulances and scare up a few more million.
RW_theoriginal on August 9, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Just find out who does his hair, and get a strand.
Wethal on August 9, 2008 at 7:19 PM
She was reportedly unemployed when she spotted Edwards (whom she recognized as the multi-millionaire 2004 Democratic VP nominee) in that hotel bar in NY. She was an over-40 (now 44) year-old divorcee with a checkered past and a not-too-promising future. Perhaps she liked the idea of having a guaranteed income stream for the next couple of decades? It seems to have worked out well for her so far; she is reportedly living in a $4+ million house and getting $15,000 a month for her living expenses. What would she be getting now if she’d had an abortion, and Edwards could plausibly deny ever having known her? You do the math.
AZCoyote on August 9, 2008 at 7:20 PM
I guess this knocks Hillary out of the 2012 Democrat spot.
Cheating on your cancer-stricken wife definitely gets more Dem points than merely being cheated on.
misterpeasea on August 9, 2008 at 7:23 PM
You can’t do that. One, it would be an invasion of the child’s privacy. Two, tests have to have a chain of custody.
Blake on August 9, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Lots.
I wonder, considering that Frances is basically a saliva spewing machine for at least another six months, that end of the DNA testing is pretty much a piece of cake. How careful does the Pony have to be to prevent the comparison from being made by an independent investigator hired by some sibling close to the someone involved in the case?
Dusty on August 9, 2008 at 7:24 PM
If this turns out to be the case: i.e., Edwards paid hunter for being his girlfriend, and not to really to campaign videos… Edwards is in serious jeopardy of criminal prosecution….
Who’s going to broach this first in the MSM?
Er… no one…
seanrobins on August 9, 2008 at 7:24 PM
You think the Enquirer cares? This isn’t for a suit. This is for a story. If Edwards wants to sue he’s free to do so, but he’ll have to prove the story wrong, which he can’t do.
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:26 PM
A real man would want to know if he had an obligation to support a child.
A real woman would demand it.
But these aren’t real men and women. They’re democrats.
jeff_from_mpls on August 9, 2008 at 7:26 PM
Givin that there is now no dispute that she and Edwards had sex… Edwards, if he took action, could easily get a family court to order the DNA testing… hunter does not have the liberty to refuse if a putative father demands a paternity test. No question.
But he won’t…he’ll obfuscate, and she’ll cooperate with the plan to avoid the DNA testing…. It’s all part of what he’s paying her for.
seanrobins on August 9, 2008 at 7:27 PM
If you heard Barry Levin from the Enquirer last night on H&C it would all make more sense. She loves Edwards and thinks she’s going to marry him when Elizabeth passes on.
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:27 PM
[TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:15 PM]
Yeah, my outside guess it we’ll know definitively before the end of September whether it is Silky’s or not.
Dusty on August 9, 2008 at 7:29 PM
I didn’t know that. Oh boy, is she in for a rude surprise. Poor thing.
jeff_from_mpls on August 9, 2008 at 7:29 PM
There’s no privacy expectation in trash that you put out on the street. As to needing to establish a chain of custody, that’s true if you’re trying to get it admitted as evidence in court — but not if you’re just trying to get it on the front page of the National Enquirer.
AZCoyote on August 9, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Yup, that’s how I knew she wasn’t going to agree to a DNA test. She loves him. She’s protecting him. She thinks she’s going to marry him.
I bet the sister is more clear headed and realizes her sister is being played for a fool so she figured she’d take care of Edwards by tipping off the Enquirer all these many months - just a hunch but I bet many of us have seen this sort of thing happen ourselves…
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:35 PM
Is there nothing better to talk about than this? Are the seven stories right now on the front page of HotAir enough? Maybe we need ten. How about an even dozen? This is definitely a topic we need to run to ground…
Send_Me on August 9, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Is anyone else amazed at the cover story the Edwards camp came up with for the baby’s paternity? They paint Hunter as a slut who started at the top doing Silky Pony, and working her way down to Andrew Young (and who knows how many others in the organization). She might as well be a groupie for Aerosmith, getting passed down the line after doing Steven Tyler and ending up getting pregnant by a roadie who sets up speakers. Edwards couldn’t be the Dad because by then, he’d kicked her to the curb and she was happily doing other guys in the band. Pretty disgusting.
heddly_lamar on August 9, 2008 at 7:39 PM
John Edwards’ a$$hole is so tight right now you couldn’t drive a straight pin in it with a jackhammer.
FishFearMe on August 9, 2008 at 7:39 PM
Everybody knows, eight is enough.
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:40 PM
I can’t believe that Edwards thinks that he’ll get away with all these lies.
- affair only lasted short while in 2006
- baby not his
- knows nothing about payments to Rielle
- knows nothing about arrangement to put Rielle up in $3M home in Santa Barbara
- would be glad to take paternity test (cue Rielle)
I hope the 20,000 donors to his campaign of over $50M are satisfied with him. Money well spent, I’m sure. (*cough* To keep Rielle from talking *cough*)
Seixon on August 9, 2008 at 7:43 PM
It’s not so much Obama’s potential Vice President slapped his dying wife in the face.
The real story here is that the democrat party should have been a shoe-in for the 2008 elections, but the party gave the keys to the radicals, the adolescents, and we’re watching the effects of this once-great party trying to run the show without adults.
So far I’d say it’s been good times!
jeff_from_mpls on August 9, 2008 at 7:43 PM
Well, we could have gotten this all out of the way over the course of the last 10 months, but a certain someone, and a legion of certain others, had other plans.
Seixon on August 9, 2008 at 7:45 PM
How often does a woman that is protecting her man out of love and expectations of a future marriage once his wife is out of the picture reward his going on TV telling the world he doesn’t and didn’t love her with a lawyer’s note saying she wouldn’t allow a paternity test?
RW_theoriginal on August 9, 2008 at 7:45 PM
You know, it just occurred to me, Silky must be a great lover (and by lover I mean in the broadest sense) or he’s a scary mofo because the two woman are thus far standing by him. That’s kinda rare I think.
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 7:51 PM
Oh this is just the beginning. Again, I didn’t know she was still in the stardust phase, and that’s too bad. But girls who sleep around with married men always learn that when he finally spills the beans to wifey about you, he tells her that he felt sorry for you, that he pities you, and spent time with you to help you from feeling like the total loser he knew you were.
Or in Bill Clinton’s case with Monica, he’ll pour acid on your face on live television, telling the press that you were a stalker! Granted, Bill Clinton was something really special, and John Edwards probably can’t live up to his legendary tactics. But the point is, wait till this woman hears quotes Edwards made about her behind her back; they’re out there, just wait. It’ll sink in, and she’ll grasp how evil this man is, and the democrat party will have claimed yet another victim. I hope she doesn’t go all Marilyn Monroe on him.
jeff_from_mpls on August 9, 2008 at 7:53 PM
His = Edwards’ hair. Hair left at a salon is abandoned property. As are dirty diapers. No property right or privacy expectation.
And, as AZCoyote, notes, this is not for material that would make it past the rules of evidence, just into the pages of NE.
Wethal on August 9, 2008 at 7:55 PM
This is true. Chain of custody is not a problem, though, you just have to document it.
As for privacy, I could be wrong but isn’t it not considered to be a breach of privacy if anything is found to be thrown away, left on a restaurant table in a mall. etc?
Dusty on August 9, 2008 at 7:55 PM
Doesn’t the Huff&Puff piece say Rielle called him her love lips?
Lawyers always love to play with timelines, but it seems that Silky is really trying to squeeze this one down from both ends. I just hope the antique media is really ticked off enough to go after this story now.
RW_theoriginal on August 9, 2008 at 7:59 PM
As to the prospect of a stealth paternity test, I have a strong hunch that the National Enquirer has already secured the services of a first-rate genetic lab. They seem quite confident in their allegation.
And as others have mentioned, this test wouldn’t have to meet rules of evidence in court. They would merely put the ball in Edwards’ court — so to speak — forcing him to clear his name, or leave the public stage in disgrace forever.
Of course, there would still be questions about how Obama could be so damn oblivious to the deep character faults of so many close associates.
jeff_from_mpls on August 9, 2008 at 8:00 PM
Here, how about following this story of a good man doing great things for his country instead, rather than talking incessantly about a pitiful adulterer?
Send_Me on August 9, 2008 at 8:01 PM
On the flip side she could just be a gold digger perfectly happy with the money and I guess there’s a remote chance she knows the baby isn’t his and won’t take the test just to make the questions dog him.
RW_theoriginal on August 9, 2008 at 8:03 PM
“To the “Surprise, Hunter won’t agree to the paternity test” - if she does, she’ll get a reduced sum of money per month. Plus, when Mrs. Edwards dies, he’ll never see/marry her.”
I agree with this comment. I think he is dangling the “after Elizabeth is…” carrot. Read the Newsweek piece describing her and her antipathy toward Eliz. - This woman is IN LOVE with JE, and she is hoping it will all work out…eventually… Poor deluded thing. I think the baby IS his. He has spent the last 2 1/2 weeks working this all out with her. HE KNEW she would say NO to a paternity test, and THAT is why he said he would take one with such confidence…
djl130 on August 9, 2008 at 8:07 PM
Am I the only one here making noise about the one aspect of this whole sorrid mess that the media is trying to lightly brush over?
This dog Edwards was having an affair WHILE HIS WIFE WAS BEING TREATED FOR CANCER!!!!!
Never mind all the attempts to cover over the timeline and all that other smokescreen stuff!
This clown was having an affair WHILE HIS WIFE WAS BEING TREATED FOR CANCER!!!!
Why is hardly anyone going after him just on this aspect alone?!!!
pilamaye on August 9, 2008 at 8:07 PM
If the NE knew the rooms, the time/s of the hotel visits, who’d be in them, who was in them, pictures, etc. they probably already have hairs (of some kind), or other items from the baby and J. Edwards.
The National Enquiror holds more keys than they’ve ‘deflowered’ yet.
Entelechy on August 9, 2008 at 8:09 PM
I don’t know when or how but all of this is going to come back and bite Mr. Edwards in the butt. I think for the most part people try not to get to involved with others’ private lives but this man took money from people who wanted him to be their president. People don’t like to be lied to. This man is incredibly shady.
Cindy Munford on August 9, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Hurry put on Fox. They are replaying H&C right now with Levine.
TheBigOldDog on August 9, 2008 at 8:14 PM
What a coincidence!
Because it’s just the tip of the iceberg…his coverup and the MSM complicity in the coverup is the story that has national implications. Plus, his wife seems OK with it.
AUINSC on August 9, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Oh, I’m sure SHE knows who the father is…it’s for her to know and us to find out…but, just like the OJ case, we already know who the culprit is, deep in our black, evil, wingnut hearts.
AUINSC on August 9, 2008 at 8:20 PM
Because that is what she is being paid to do. She very well could be a surrogate for Elisabeth.
Remember the Edwards lost a child. Son Wade was born in 1979, and daughter Cate born in 1982. Wade was killed in an auto accident in 1996. So after 15 or so years of shooting blanks the Edwards get back in the baby making business. Daughter Emma Claire was born in 1998, and son Jack in 2000. Finally a replacement male heir. Elisabeth can rest now.
John is so full of himself that just maybe he adopted the royal heir and a spare concept. And could that plan still be in play. The baby girl was born on Feb. 27TH. Four months later, mommy’s recovered and ready for round two. He visits with her in June and again one month later in July. Could it be these are the dates she was ovulating on, and John was there to plant his seed? Still trying for that spare male heir. Paternity to be revealed later.
meci on August 9, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Blimey, our own Diana, Charles and Camilla.
Re/ the pointing to his heart and saying “Elizabeth is in here”, that used to work with idiot juries when brain-damaged babies were in there. (most likely through no fault of the OB doctor, as science has proven). I remember when he started to come on the national scene and my man Rush said this man would be worse than Clinton.
Marcus on August 9, 2008 at 8:24 PM
I linked to a Redstate article above, and this quote gives a fascinating scenario about how Obama knew and used it as leverage:
Wethal on August 9, 2008 at 8:26 PM
That certainly applies in this case. In many of the others, I sincerely think he doesn’t feel they have character faults.
Dusty on August 9, 2008 at 8:28 PM
Edwards’ strategy is backfiring. His game just helps give the story legs. If the money trail and/or the paternity are still unclear during the convention, the Dems will be sweating bullets.
Dream scenario #1:
Larry Flint pays Hunter BIG bucks to go forward with the paternity test.
Dream scenario #2 (hat tip to Colombo):
An interviewer, ON CAMERA, breaks the news to Edwards that Hunter has changed her mind and the test can begin.
What a doofus.
Please, God, please keep this going all fall.
Pythagoras on August 9, 2008 at 8:37 PM
It would not be too difficult for an investigate journalist to get DNA from Edwards and Hunter, then publish the results or a paternity test.
More popcorn, please…..
Right_of_Attila on August 9, 2008 at 8:38 PM
As I recall, the NE broke the story on Rev. Jesse’s love child just before Jesse was to lead some big protest in FLA over the recount. Perhaps the NE will have a similar impeccable sense of timing as regards Democratic fortunes?
Wethal on August 9, 2008 at 8:43 PM
She was paid enough, apparently, to protect Edwards. I imagine there will be plenty of payments in the future.
Also, if she wanted to live a private life, she shouldn’t have had an affair with a married politician whose wife has cancer. There are words for woman who accept payment for these services.
katieanne on August 9, 2008 at 8:44 PM
Perhaps Rielle Hunter declined the DNA test for a good cause. Maybe she’s not sure the baby is hers.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on August 9, 2008 at 8:45 PM
What might the payoff need to be to keep Rielle silent regarding paterity? Well Teddy Kennedy’s payoff to Mary Jo Kopechne’s parents to prevent an autopsy (proving suffocation as cause of death, while Teddy sobered up) was close to $100,000. So maybe half a million after adjusting for inflation. Although the consequences of paternity are not so dire as a murder conviction.
JerryF on August 9, 2008 at 8:47 PM
What about the bimbo?!
She knew that Edwards was a married man.
She knew he had children at home.
She knew that his wife has incurable cancer.
Yet she still decided to do the nasty with Silky Pony.
Yes, Edwards is a low-life dirtbag scum of the earth. But this bimbo is no better, and doesn’t deserve the pass she’s getting.
IrishEi on August 9, 2008 at 8:52 PM
Pythagoras on August 9, 2008 at 8:37 PM
I had forgotten good old Larry Flynt, two problems with that idea. 1.) I think Edwards is paying more. 2.) Larry is only interested in Republican politicians to bust.
Your second scenario would be fun to try, even if it wasn’t true. One picture is worth a thousand words and I bet the facial expression would be one great picture.
Cindy Munford on August 9, 2008 at 8:52 PM
JerryF on August 9, 2008 at 8:47 PM
I bet that’s just a drop in the bucket, plus the possibility of becoming Mrs. Edwards,II is probably a big incentive also.
Cindy Munford on August 9, 2008 at 8:54 PM
That’s a good point…who knows who else Silky has been with.
AUINSC on August 9, 2008 at 8:55 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »