Sunday, August 17, 2008

John Edwards Affair: John, Elizabeth Edwards, Rielle Hunter, Fred Baron Latest News

Your Ad Here

Lawyers on Lawyers, Closing Statement, MSM Cooties, Birds of a Feather and Clear-Eyed Liberals

John Edwards, Rielle Hunter, Fred Baron: Items of interest, gleaned over the weekend concerning the John Edwards scandal, not to be addressed in any of the stories DBKP has in the works for the next 36 hours.

The Closer

Doug Ross sums up John Edwards' Closing Statement to the public. Doug sprinkles serious comments and questions couched in droll commentary. A sample:

And I certainly had no idea that my friend and patron Fred Baron had relocated Ms. Hunter from North Carolina to California. And paid for Andrew Young to move too.

Or that he paid her $14 grand for her video footage after the campaign had already paid her $100,000 for the same videotapes.

[Background information: Access over 90 DBKP stories from December on the John Edwards scandal: DBKP John Edwards Love Child Scandal Library.]

Questions from lawyers (Overlawyered) to lawyers (John Edwards & Fred Baron)

Overlawyered's Walter Olsen does the useful service of Coordinating the Edwards Story.

Overlawyered's been asking questions that the MSM should have been asking of lawyers--not associated with the Edwards' campaign--for the last nine months and longer. One such article: Fred Baron’s version of the Rielle Hunter payments
. In it, Ted Frank asks two reasonable questions:

* When did Andrew Young stop working for Edwards, and why?
* How did Young and Hunter afford those nice homes in North Carolina to begin with?

There's ever so much more: just go to Overlawyered and search under "John Edwards" and "Fred Baron". That will be enough to keep readers occupied for awhile.

And while we're on the subject, here's a question for Overlawyered; it comes from DBKP reader, liamd:

Lawyers for Hunter and Young both claimed Young was the father. If it turns out …. surely it will…that Edwards is the dad, any consequence for the lying lawyers? Or can they just lie as long as they are not under oath? Anyone know?

Interesting question, liamd.

Enquirer Gave the MSM "Cooties"

Now that it's okay for the MSM to discuss the John Edwards scandal, Kelly Corbiella, of CBS News, asks, "How Did A Supermarket Paper Beat Other News Media To The Biggest Political Scandal Of The Day?"

"...Cobiella asked, if this is such scoop, and this was first out several [ED NOTE: nine] months ago, why didn't others pick up on it?"

Kurt Anderson, a media analyst and contributing editor at New York Magazine, said, "That is the sixty-four thousand million dollar question, isn't it?

"The National Enquirer gives the story cooties for all the Times and Boston Globes, the Washington Posts of the world. That is partly because thirty years, forty, fifty years ago, the National Enquirer was very different than today. It is this low-brow celebrity scandal-mongering thing."

Corbiella also quotes David Perel, of the Enquirer, on Elizabeth Edwards' involvement:

"Stop, stop. I don't want to go there. I do not like it," Perel said to a reporter's suggestion about the Elizabeth Edwards angle. "She's been hurt, she's lashed out."

"So there is such a thing as 'untouchable'?" Cobiella asked.

"Just some places you don't go," Perel told her. "And there's some places I don't want to go. And in this case we really have tried to stay away from that aspect of the story.

"I want to hit the news element of the story. I want to hit the fact that a man running for president had an affair and then lied about it to the American public and, you know, darn near blew up his own political party while doing it."

Of course, the Enquirer's been busy enough with tracking mistress, Rielle Hunter's movements, money trails and every other aspect of the scandal--months ahead of everyone else in Big Media.

My Little Chickadee Pigeon

Big Media source, Pigeon O'Brien, emails Deceiver with a complaint and an offer of a conditional pastry treat.

Included in the above post: What does RoseAnne Barr thinks about John Edwards--and oh, by the way, Bush? Let's just say she set up a whole round of a******s and F***s on the house for everyone.

Sally Kalson, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, starts to ask some uncomfortable questions and make a few equally-uncomfortable observations, What were the Edwards thinking? John Edwards was courting public suicide -- and his wife helped him.

People's marriages are their own business. If Mr. Edwards in 2006 had an extramarital affair, or worse, with a younger woman who made videos for his campaign and if his wife forgave him, that's for their family to deal with. But what in blazes was the man doing running for president with this time bomb in his hip pocket? And what was Elizabeth Edwards thinking when she encouraged him, made speeches for him, touted the strength of their marriage in the face of adversity as an indicator of his fitness for office, knowing that he'd cheated on her?

It may seem mean-spirited to pose that question about a wronged woman fighting cancer, especially one who was so brave and determined on the campaign trail. But as a fellow survivor, I claim a little leeway.

The disease may give you a pass in some areas. Chemo-brain is a legitimate excuse for forgetting things and making mistakes. Thoughts of your own mortality may cloud your judgment and crowd out other concerns. They also might make you desperate to achieve a long-held dream while there's still time.

This last point may explain how Mrs. Edwards could have gone out on the campaign trail on her husband's behalf, knowing what she knew, exhorting voters to believe in him as she believed in him. But even in separating his infidelity from his fitness for office -- and she's certainly not the first wife to have done that, as Hillary Clinton can attest -- she must have known they were playing with fire.

We wondered about a few those questions at DBKP, especially LBG's John and Elizabeth Edwards: New Info Casts Doubt on Couple’s Claim Affair Ended in 2006 and John Edwards Affair: When Private Lives Become Public Lies
, as well as Friday's John Edwards Scandal Photo: John and Elizabeth Edwards with Rielle Hunter Dec 30, 2006 - Exclusive DBKP Photo!.

Kalson wraps up her excellent story with:

Early in the primary, when the couple announced that Mrs. Edwards' cancer had returned, some in the media pressed hard on how they could forge ahead with such an all-consuming undertaking. Turns out it was the right question, but based on the wrong premise.

This isn't the first time the media missed an essential part of the story, and it won't be the last time a politician self-destructs this way. More's the pity on both counts.

Exponentially exact.

Words from a Clear-Eyed Liberal Mouth

Self-confessed "gossipophile", "Proud Bleeding Heart Liberal" and DBKP reader, PJ McIlvaine, sums up the John Edwards Scandal in one headline. [Sex, Lies, Money, Videotape and Pampers] The MSM's complete non-coverage--prior to Edwards' signing Big Media's permission slip on August 8--is dealt with in her post:

Sad to say, it SHOULD BE a journalist's wet dream...because it appears that, yet again, the MSM is letting bloggers like Deceiver and Death By A Thousand Paper Cuts do the leg work. Even more appalling is when MSM writes about it, and then fails to properly attribute their sources. Come on guys, you know better than that. You're not some rinky dink operation like Newsday (which, by the way, except for one headline story, has pretty much stayed away from the JE mess like Christie Brinkley from her snake of an ex). I like Christie, I'm glad she stood up to that jerk, but that's another blog.

And the Progressive defense about "we have other issues, and besides he denied it and we swallowed it"? McIlvaine minces few words:

And some of these progressive sites I go to, well, after a burst of righteous indignation, they seem to have fallen back to their sloppy ways of blaming everyone but JE and EE. He lied, he's still lying, everyone is lying...but let's not talk about it because, you know...we bought those lies. And since JE isn't going to be at the convention, hey, it's over with. Not important. Move along. We have to keep our eye on the prize.

Uh-uh. I'm not buying that shit.

Sounds like PJ might be liberal, but nobody's gonna tell her to get in (the party) line and shut up.

by Mondoreb

* ABC via DBKP
* Doug Ross
* Wikipedia

No comments:

Post a Comment

Leave your name/nic.
We've changed the comments section to allow non-registered users to comment.
We'll continue like that until it's being abused.
We reserve the right to delete all abusive or otherwise inappropriate comments.