Edwards' interview
Sorry. I meant to post this one earlier and got busy.
John Edwards' full interview Friday night on "Nightine" raised more questions than it answered and was about as unconvincing as Pauly Shore playing Hamlet.
Edwards particularly raised suspicions in his explanation of why he was visiting Rielle Hunter in a Beverly Hills hotel.
It's also hard to believe he had no knowledge of payments to Hunter and campaign aide Andrew Young that were made by Fred Baron, chairman of Edwards' 2004 and 2008 finance committees, to Hunter and another former Edwards staffer, Andrew Young. Baron's says it was his personal money, not campaign money, that he used to make the payments.
It also seems very suspicious that Edwards has said he would submit to a paternity test even as Hunter insists she won't participate in one for "privacy" reasons. What privavy? She already agreed with Young's claims that he is the father. Why not confirm it and put the issue to rest?.
It is, of course, arguable that the baby's father is a moot issue -- that the more salient point is that Edwards put himself in a position to be a candidate for paternity, and lied about it.
No doubt a number of Democrats are thanking their lucky stars that Edwards didn't win the nomination and that he wasn't an early choice for VP.
This is bad. But it could have been disastrous.
.
Comments (8)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I just love it when one of those do-good libs
self destructs. Two of the three Democratic front-runners have now bit the dust - Obama took Hillary & Bill out of the picture and phony baloney John Edwards was done in by his very own Monica Lewinsky. Come November we'll be done with Kay Hagan & Barack Obama and with any type of luck Katie Couric will soon be replaced on the CBS Nightly News. Life is good.
Posted on August 12, 2008 10:16 AM
Plausible deniabiltiy
Plain and simple. He didnt know because no one told him. Those are the circle many politicians and lawyers travel in... unfortunately.
Posted on August 12, 2008 12:11 PM
Hey, this is a good news, bad news story for many Edwards supporters. The bad news is that he was caught with a woman. The good news is that he was caught with a woman!
Posted on August 12, 2008 1:48 PM
I don't think that spouse cheating is central to Democrats. I am not really surprise at this story. I thought John Edwards was selfish for continuing his campaign after it was announced that his wife cancer had resurfaced. It was also apparent that he used the office of the U.S Senate to run for the Office of President of the United States.
Don't be surprise if it turns out he fathered that child!
Posted on August 12, 2008 2:23 PM
There are several important lessons that this episode has brought to light:
(1) If your wife has cancer, go ahead and cheat on her, since no one really cares about the fine distinction about waiting until your wife's cancer is in remission.
(2) The press bears some responsibility, since we wouldn't have had to deal with Edwards so long if it had aggressively pursued the stories about his strong-arming Wal-Mart for a wii.
(3) Don't whine about the unreliability of supermarket tabloids if they are more reliable than you are.
(4) If you're finally forced to tell the truth, lie about the truth more convincingly than (as has been noted) Pauly Shore playing Hamlet.
(5) Use a condom, stupid.
Probably there are other important lessons as well, but I can't think of them right now.
Posted on August 12, 2008 3:05 PM
I think John Edwards is a low-life scum bag. He used us in NC to springboard to a run at the Presidency. He did nothing as our Senator.
Lets put aside politics. This disrespect to his dying wife is unforgivable. He's a piece of ....
You can't separate morality and ethics. He has none
Posted on August 12, 2008 3:42 PM
Brian444, you are 100% on the money. This guy should would have been nailed , long time ago, if he was a republican. Good Ole Boys have different rules.Take a look at Nancy Pelosi common sense plan for lowering gas. Paper were filled with Letters To The Editor, that came from the media Matters folks ( newspapers love these letters). The plan came out last Thursday. I only seen one paper that printed the plan, and not one LTE about it. Of course the plan is a joke. What else would you expect of her! That's why the papers have buried it! Her it is. More tax rebates, heating and air conditioners for the poor. More money for public work projects. More food stamps. Sleep well tonight our energy crisis is solved!
Posted on August 13, 2008 6:20 AM
It is interesting that the first thing this week that the News-Record reported on this story this week is a puff piece from AP about how Elizabeth Edwards struggled to deal with Johnny's admission of an affair. there is quite a bit more to this story, and the MSM is not reporting it. the Inquirer say that they have proof that Edwards met with Hunter at least three times after he told Elizabeth that the affair was over, and the affair started months before he hired her to his staff. Both are at odds with Johnny has said is the case.
The National Inquirer has more coming on this story about Johnny's corruption and possible violation of federal campaign finance laws. They say that they have proof that Johnny knew about the millions paid to Hunter and Young, and he engineered it. And, since the Inquirer has been the only credible reporting on this story, I believe them. If that is true, then Johnny could be in BIG trouble. So, why isn't the AP and the News-Record reporting on that. That is a story, but it takes motivation to expose a Democrat candidate for president, doesn't it?
John Edwards' story is not just about sex. It's about corruption and cover-up. It's a real story that is not being covered by the MSM, unless they try to find a moral equivalent with Republicans. But, in the end, the Republicans did not have the corruption that followed. Calling Johnny Reid an empty suit is an insult to coat hangers everywhere.
Posted on August 14, 2008 10:32 AM