John Edwards Affair: Rielle Hunter's Family Wants Edwards Paternity Test

Edwards Casts Aspersions at More than the Enquirer during ABC Interview



John Edwards has now officially been put on notice.

The family of Rielle Hunter wants Edwards to put up or shut up.

UPDATES to follow at the end of story, throughout August 9, 2008.
UPDATE #1 - 1345 EDT August 9 2008 - Class Action?
UPDATE #2 - pending



After a televised interview with the ex-presidential candidate painted everyone, including his unnamed mistress Rielle Hunter as somehow sinister. Edwards, caught leaving the Beverly Hilton after a meeting with the Enquirer's reporters on July 22 also took shots at unnamed "supermarket tabloids."

The Enquirer published it's response to Edwards by labeling his interview a "confession". [JOHN EDWARDS ADMITS AFFAIR!]

As far as being the father of Hunter's love child, you might as well go all the way now, Johnny Boy.

Submit to a DNA test.

NOW, ABC News is reporting that the Mistress' Family Challenges Edwards to Take DNA Test.

Hunter's sister, Melissa, has been reported by ABC News in an Enquirer-type sub-headline as saying, "'Stop Bad-Mouthing My Sister'".

ABC also quoted Hunter's sister as saying, "Somebody must stand up and defend my sister," she said. "I wish that those involved would refrain from bad-mouthing my sister,"--not naming Edwards, in the same way he avoided naming Rielle Hunter in his ABC appearance.

"Ironically, now, its John Edwards who's the one making allegations," wrote one reader, "without offering any more proof than his word--and he's shown how much we can all trust that."


UPDATE #1: 1345 EDT Class Action against Edwards?

Ted Frank at Overlawyered wonders, "Where's a trial lawyer when you need one?" [Yes, I’m being facetious]:

Where’s the trial lawyer bringing a class action on behalf of all of the people who were defrauded when they gave money to John Edwards’s presidential campaign? It’s certainly a much more plausible claim of causation, reliance, and financial injury than the typical class action.

If Frank were the prosecutor in the court of public opinion, Edwards' interview would get 30 days in the electric chair.

"Alas, ABC didn’t ask the right follow-up questions, such as how Edwards thought meeting Hunter in a hotel room would help keep the story quiet."

Frank has other penetrating questions for Edwards. We'll let him present them.

UPDATE #2 - at DBKP.com John Edwards Scandal: Sister Asks Edwards to Stop Bad-mouthing Rielle Hunter - UPDATED

by Mondoreb

John Edwards Affair: Edwards Statement Admits Little

"Breathtakingly Brazen"
--DBKP's description of Edwards' Nightline appearance

"[Edwards] used the interview to play the Supermarket Tabloid Credibility Card to trash his nemesis, The National Equirer."
--DBKP's LBG,




John Edwards Statement:
* The Words "Affair" and "Lied" never appear in Statement
* No Mention of "Rielle Hunter" to be Found
* Taking "Full Responsibility" Doesn't Include Admission of Guilt
* "99% Honest"--Even While I Lied


Mainstream Media: "Admits", "Lied" and "Affair" in Most Headlines--But Those Words Not Found in Edwards' Statement
No Mention of "Lied", "Affair" or "Rielle Hunter" during Nightline Interview Either






"I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public. With my family, I took responsibility for my actions in 2006 and today I take full responsibility publicly. But that misconduct took place for a short period in 2006."
--John Edwards, August 8, 2008 Statement


"One question which immediately comes to mind: What was Edwards doing leaving the Beverly Hilton at 2:40 in the morning, visiting a woman he says he did not love and her baby, which he says he did not father?"
--DBKP: John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Admits Affair, Lies, to ABC News


If admission is the first of the twelve steps toward recovery, John Edwards has yet to take that first step.

At least, that's one conclusion after reading Edwards' press statement or watching his performance on ABC's Nightline.

One hardly knows where to begin.

That was the thought that occurred while reading John Edwards' breathtakingly brazen statement on his "error in judgment" with Rielle Hunter. "Brazen" might also be an appropriate word for Edwards' Nightline appearance.

Edwards' announcement may prove to raise more questions than it answered.

Edwards' statement alleges that he has "given a complete interview on this matter" and "will have nothing more to say". Was this part of the statement an attempt to enable Edwards to appear at the Democrat National Convention without being dogged by pesky reporters' questions?

ALSO at DBKP: Click on banner to access over 60 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal.

Are "have already given a complete interview on this matter" and "have nothing more to say" today's substitute for yesterday's failed answers of "tabloid trash" and "lies"?

One guess: The National Enquirer--who wields a far better record of veracity on this subject than Edwards--might have something to say about whether Edwards revisits the topic in the future.

Edwards claims he was 99% honest. Yet, he leaves the specifics of that 99% to the reader's imagination--as well as the remaining 1%. There's a lot that has to be shoe-horned into that 1%.

As LBG points out [John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Defends Affair with Supermarket Tabloid Credibility Card ]:

The MSM claimed Edwards “fessed” up to “lying” about the affair.

“Edwards: Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family, I did not tell the public.”

“I did not tell the public” is an omission, not an admission of lying. Remember, Edwards knew exactly the impact each and every word he chose to use when arguing his case before the public on Nightline.

LBG goes on to explain.

Edwards never said he lied, he said he “denied”, but mitigated the denial by trashing the National Enquirer, saying it “contained many falsities”. Edwards never expounded on any of the “falsities”. Edwards also chose to defend himself by claiming he was “99% honest”. In fact, the only claim about “lying” was from Edwards in his interview, who charged it was the Enquirer who was lying.

2006

In his statement, Edwards mentioned a "mistake", "an error in judgment" and "my actions in 2006". He also referred to his "misconduct".

But nowhere in his statement or on TV, does he state what that "mistake", "error" or "misconduct" actually was. So, image the surprise it must have been to the millions hearing of all this for the first time, when Edwards starts talking about a baby.

Could it be possible that these words referred to Frances Quinn Hunter?

Edwards was careful to use the phrase "my actions in 2006--so careful, in fact, that he repeated the claim, both in his statement and in his TV interview. Edwards--who disappeared completely from public view after reporters attempted to question him about the affair in Washington, D.C. on July 30--had at least a week to craft his statement. This was no slap-dash effort: every word was painstakingly weighed with the precision of a trial attorney; every sentence parsed, before it made its way into Edwards' press release.

Again, if we take Edwards' word on this, could this not be an attempt to settle the matter of Frances Quinn Hunter, so as not to be questioned in Denver? Is "my actions in 2006" a hypnotic device to lull a once-sonambulant, Big Media back to sleep?

Edwards' precisely-worded, "I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby, and I am truly hopeful that a test will be done so this fact can be definitively established," is interesting.

The Enquirer previously reported, in its August 11 print edition, that Edwards had refused to take a DNA test.

National Enquirer Editor-in-Chief, David Perel, appeared on CNN with Wolf Blitzer and was direct.

That's true. We know that Rielle believes that he is the father. And Mr. Edwards today, in his own statement, said he did not take a paternity test. He's now saying that he will take one. We've asked him for months if he would take one and he's ignored that request.

Perel also touched on various claims Edwards made in his statement.

Blitzer: What happens, David, if he does take the paternity test and it doesn't match and it shows he is not the father?

Perel: We'll publish that. I've made the offer to him repeatedly: take a paternity test, whatever the results are, we'll publish it. He has refused to do that, as he's been calling this story lies and tabloid trash and lying to the American public. Unfortunately, I think the only reason he came forward and admitted the affair is because we did catch him at the hotel meeting on July 21 and we did publish a photograph this week in the National Enquirer showing him holding the baby.

We can also reveal that in addition to that meeting, he met at the same hotel a month before with Rielle Hunter and the baby, so his actions are what counts. His words have proven not to be credible.

Blitzer: I guess a lot of people question the reporting of the "National Enquirer," in part, David, because you pay sources for information, is that right?

Perel: Wolf, we do pay sources for information after it checks out as credible and accurate. I think, in retrospect, nobody can deny the accuracy of these stories. We've been reporting on the affair for about 10 months now. He says his statements were 99 percent truthful and yet he told the American public while running for the highest office in the land that he did not have an affair, that these were lies, lies? This is a character issue, and he still insists he's 99 percent truthful?

I think the truest thing that he said today in his statement was when he admitted that he's narcissistic.

Edwards' peculiar wording only leads to more questions.

"[T]ruly hopeful that a test will be done"?

"[A]m and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby"?

After a week's seclusion, why these two phrases, particularly the ambiguous second one? Why not the more simple and direct, "I will submit DNA for a paternity test"?



Doubts

DBKP is not the only ones who harbor doubts about the Edwards' statements. The National Enquirer also expressed skepticism at the claims made by Edwards.

Shortly after ABC announced Edwards' Nightline appearance, the Enquirer, at its website published "JOHN EDWARDS ADMITS AFFAIR!".

The article was short, direct and, as stated, skeptical.

Perhaps the Enquirer was referring to Edwards' claim that "Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family," when it revealed that "His wife had not known about the [Beverly Hilton] meeting."

What did the Enquirer have to say about Edwards' claims that he had "not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby"?

Edwards denied paying Hunter to keep her silent but said it may be possible friends or supporters of his made the payments.

Edwards says he will now investigate any possible hush money payoffs.

Obviously, the Enquirer was thinking of another famous self-investigation: O.J. Simpson's famous "I will find the real killers".

Following clues left in this week's Enquirer, DBKP [John Edwards Scandal: Is Fred Baron the Enquirer ‘Hush Money Man’?] and Doug Ross [Rumors Run Wild: Is Fred Baron the Wallet for John Edwards Scandal] both speculated Thursday about the identity of the man the Enquirer says "funneled hush money" to Rielle Hunter and Andrew Young.

Today, Fred Baron, came forward, talking to the Dallas Morning News: [Dallas lawyer Fred Baron paid for Edwards' mistress to relocate]

Dallas lawyer Fred Baron, who helped bankroll the former North Carolina senator's presidential run, told The Dallas Morning News that he paid for the woman, Rielle Hunter, to leave Chapel Hill, N.C., because she was being hounded by tabloids.

Mr. Baron, who was chairman of the Democrat's campaign finance committee in 2004 and 2008, said Mr. Edwards didn't know about his aid to Ms. Hunter.

Two comments to a Radar story also speculated that the Enquirer's money man could be Baron or ex-Dallas Mavericks coach, Don Nelson.

Forced to endure John Edwards' "tabloid trash" attacks--Edwards repeatedly played the "tabloid card" during his interview in lieu of answering Brian Woodruff's questions--the Enquirer, at last, answered back.

As far as being the father of Hunter's love child, you might as well go all the way now, Johnny Boy.

Submit to a DNA test.

By the way what was it you said about The ENQUIRER's journalistic chops when the main stream media was silent until we gave them more than a smoking gun by dropping a bomb on August 6?

Oh yeah - "Tabloid Trash."

Leaving readers to conclude that John Edwards and The National Enquirer are engaged in a high-stakes game of "chicken".

Sounds like the Enquirer isn't going to blink first. Does the Enquirer believe Edwards "came clean", as some reports claim? Their closing sentence holds a hint.

The JOHN EDWARDS "CONFESSION" AIRS TONIGHT 11:30 PM ON NIGHTLINE (ABC).


The country may very well prove to be the Two Americas that John Edwards' referred to in his aborted presidential campaign--but in a very different way than he meant.

One America that believes the "tabloid trash" of The National Enquirer and another that believes John Edwards, The "99% Honest" Man.

A man who, it may be argued, has yet to take that first step to any hope of a political recovery.

by Mondoreb
images: National Enquirer

John Edwards Affair: Edwards Claims He Was 99 Percent Honest About Affair

John Edwards has released this statement to the press.

In 2006, I made a serious error in judgment and conducted myself in a way that was disloyal to my family and to my core beliefs. I recognized my mistake and I told my wife that I had a liaison with another woman, and I asked for her forgiveness. Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family, I did not tell the public. When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99 percent honest is no longer enough.

I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public. With my family, I took responsibility for my actions in 2006 and today I take full responsibility publicly. But that misconduct took place for a short period in 2006. It ended then. I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby, and I am truly hopeful that a test will be done so this fact can be definitively established. I only know that the apparent father has said publicly that he is the father of the baby. I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby.

It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up — feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.

I have given a complete interview on this matter and having done so, will have nothing more to say.

It may not be too early to observe that John Edwards has, with this statement, given the National Enquirer--and the small part of the Blogosphere who wrote about this when no one else did--a huge story for the foreseeable future.

by Mondoreb
image: National Enquirer
Source: Statement from Edwards on his affair

John Edwards Affair: Edwards Admits Affair with Rielle Hunter

In a coldly-calculated political move, John Edwards has now admitted that he had an affair, but did not father Rielle Hunter's daughter, Frances Quinn Hunter.

In an interview with ABC News Nightline admitted that he had an affair with Rielle Hunter and lied about it while campaigning for President.

In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 44-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter's baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.

Just a few days after leading Democrats called for Edwards to deny the affair or risk losing a prime speaking spot at the Democrat National Convention, Edwards did not deny the affair--something he has not done since a November 29, 2007 interview.

The political calculus is: Edwards hopes that his admission of having an affair will allow the incident to blow over, allowing him to procede with his political career.

According to ABC News, which has refused to report on the event previously, "Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby's birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father."

The announcement may prove to raise more questions than it answered.

One question which immediately comes to mind: What was Edwards doing leaving the Bevrly Hilton at 2:40 in the morning, visiting a woman he says he did not love and her baby, which he says he did not father?

UPDATES to follow at DBKP.com

by Mondoreb

John Edwards Affair: WSJ Links Scandal Non-Coverage to MSM Financial Woes

John Edwards Gets "Kid Gloves" Mainstream Media Treatment




Tom Bemis, at the Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch [Media's self censorship is a bigger scandal than Edwards
Commentary: Is it any wonder that nobody buys newspapers any more?] comments on the media's non-coverage of the John Edwards Scandal, after noticing that "no major network or national daily paper is doing anything with the story.":

In February, the New York Times spilled barrels of ink, and clear-cut a forest to tell the world that -- hint, hint, wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean? -- Sen. John McCain allegedly had had an affair. This was great stuff, until someone bothered to vet the story.

By those standards, the Enquirer's reporting on Edwards is Pulitzer grade stuff. (They have a picture.)

Although the Mainstream Media's non-coverage of Edwards has been described as a "kid gloves" treatment elsewhere*, Bemis's handling of the MSM is anything but.

The guy's up for a cabinet post at least, maybe even veep -- well, not any more.

But somehow, it's just not relevant that he won't answer questions about why he was hiding from a couple of trashy tabloid reporters in a bathroom at the Beverly Hills Hilton at 2:30 a.m.?

Enquiring minds want to know.

No wonder nobody bothers to buy newspapers anymore.

Exactly.

* Most recently by Gary Pearce, the Democratic strategist who ran Edwards’ 1998 Senate race. "“The big media has tried to be responsible and handle this with kid gloves, but it’s clearly getting ready to bust out." Among others using the phrase:
The John Edwards Love-Child Non-Story - mediabistro.com: FishbowlNY, John Edwards Update: The Silky Pony And His Foal - Right Wing News ... and Patterico’s Pontifications » John Edwards’ Love Child (Updated)


by Mondoreb
image: dkimages

Obama: Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain

"Lions, and tigers, and Change!, Oh, my!"


by RidesAPaleHorse
image: RAPH

John Edwards Scandal: LA Times Blogs Now Allowed to Report Scandal

LA Times Lifts Gag Order

* LA Times' Reports Denial Canard
* Writer Gives Readers a "Backdoor" to More Information?

GAG ORDER LIFTED

The embargo on John Edwards Scandal news at the LA Times Blogs has apparently been lifted. The embargo on supplying accurate information, however, may not be.

Don Fredrick's "Might a John Edwards Dem convention role be in jeopardy?" on the LA Times' website is Exhibit A.

UPDATES throughout the day, at end of story at DBKP.com.
John Edwards Scandal: LA Times Lifts Embargo on Edwards Scandal News

LA Times' readers, who might wonder how a prime VP candidate of only a few weeks ago might now be persona non grata in Denver, are brought up to speed by the story.

The story reports, "Edwards has continued to deny the affair allegations". However, Edwards has not denied the story since November 29, when the allegations were very general.

ALSO at DBKP: Click on banner to access over 70 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal.

Three weeks later, the National Enquirer published the photos of a pregnant Rielle Hunter and named her as Edwards' mistress. Since that time, Edwards has issued no denials. Prior to July 23, Edwards was never asked about the allegations by reporters.

Edwards statements on the matter since that time have ranged from, "tabloid trash," to "tabloids full of lies," to "sorry, I can't talk now".

It's not known if Fredricks, whose on-line bio states "served as an editor helping guide coverage of every presidential election since 1984," was allowed to report that, however. The following paragraph did make it into the post:

Chris Lehane, a key Al Gore aide during the 2000 presidential campaign, added that "an appearance at the convention [by Edwards] would only highlight the unresolved story."

Unresolved, for those who know about it, that is.

The article is informative on how the LA Times will explain its previous participation in the media blackout on Edwards' scandal news.

"For the most part, mainstream media outlets have not pursued the matter, in part because Edwards no longer is a presidential candidate nor does he hold a public office."



INFORMATION BACKDOOR

Which may leave readers wondering, "What has changed about Edwards' status to now allow discussion of the scandal on August 8?"

The LA Times' story references Alan Mutter's Reflections of a Newsosaur blog, "Where’s the Edwards love-child story?", which directly contradicts the LAT's non-coverage thesis above--though the LAT's article, obviously, doesn't quote the contradictory material. Mutter observes,

"Even though his presidential campaign is over, John Edwards has sought to be a major public figure for a decade. As such, he long since has forfeited any claim to privacy for his family or himself."

Might this be an instance of guerrilla journalism? By directing LAT readers to Mutter, who is freer to speak on the subject, a backdoor to information on the scandal that the LAT doesn't feel comfortable discussing is opened. More Mutter:

The rest of the mainstream media need to start writing and talking about the story, too. If not, their silence will be viewed as complicity in a suspected cover-up and their already fragile credibility will slip still further.

Has Don Fredrick learned the Rule of Information in the Internet age?

When one door shuts, another opens.

EDWARDS SCANDAL THREATENS OBAMA?

"John Edwards love child rumours threaten the Barack Obama presidential campaign" is the headline of a story in yesterday's The Daily Mail (U.K.).

"Barack Obama's supporters yesterday tried to distance him from a potentially damaging sex scandal."

Annette Witheridge, the Daily Mail's reporter on the story, has a firm grip on how the U.S. Mainstream Media operates.

Rumours that Mr Edwards, whose wife Elizabeth is battling breast cancer, fathered the child were ignored by the mainstream media until yesterday when the National Enquirer printed a grainy photograph allegedly showing Mr Edwards cradling the baby in a Los Angeles hotel room last month.

Witheridge avoids the MSM urban legend of Edwards' denying an affair with Rielle Hunter and fathering her daughter, Frances Quinn Hunter.

Until the photograph emerged Mr Edwards, who was John Kerry’s running mate in the 2004 presidential election, had managed to avoid questions about the affair.

DID RIELLE HUNTER TIP THE ENQUIRER?

The Daily Mail's article also observes, "Last night it was not clear how the Enquirer had obtained a photo that appeared to have been taken inside the room when the curtains were closed."

The Enquirer's latest edition reports a "Blow Up with Mistress" and recounts a telephone conversation in which Edwards, "hurled angry accusations at Rielle for at least 10 minutes, demanding that she keep her mouth shut and not trust anyone, according to the source."

Once again, the question becomes, "Was John Edwards's meeting at the Beverly Hilton with his mistress and daughter tipped to the National Enquirer by Rielle Hunter?"

Which might answer questions of why the pictures, which are described as "grainy" and "blurred" by some news outlets, were not clearer. Hard to take an unnoticed, clear picture of the man holding your baby, when they're both only a few feet away.

by Mondoreb
image: Daily Mail; National Enquirer

Trench's Pro Wrestling Report: Good Week for Pro Wrestling

* Jack Hardy's Angry
* Matt Morgan's a STUD
* SummerSlam Match-up?



I've decided to do things a little differently this week and give the report a little more structure.

Smackdown 8/1: I really liked seeing an angry Jeff Hardy. I just wish they weren't using his personal tragedies to push the storyline. I don't see the point of jobbing him out to the Mediocre Khali either. Who does that really help?

Mick Foley's promo on Edge couldn't have been more awesome. Further evidence of why Mick Foley is such a legend. If you haven't seen his greatest promos you need to find his promos as Cactus Jack from the old ECW. (You knew I had to bring that up at least once.) Anyway if we're lucky this is the opportunity that brings back the Edge that we love to hate. Again, it's too bad that this storyline has to be driven by a bad wedding angle.

TNA Impact Replay 8/2: I don't watch TNA on Thursday Nights because Burn Notice is on at the same time so I try to catch the replays on Saturday nights.

Matt Morgan is a stud. They should be building the promotion around him not to mention some of the other younger guys. I mean wouldn't you rather see Samoa Joe vs. Matt Morgan than Samoa Joe vs. Booker T? As much respect as I have for guys like Kurt Angle, Sting, and Booker T, their names aren't exactly increasing TNA's ratings. If I was Jeff Jarrett and Jim Cornette I'd be pushing the young guys to the moon.

TNA loves to do comedy and I think they do it well. Curry Man, Shark Boy, and Super Eric just crack me up. But let's not overdo it. It's a rough transition to go from Shark Boy hilarity to a pissed off Samoa Joe.

The new women's champion is boring and generic. I can't even think of her name off the top of my head. She's a decent wrestler but she doesn't grab my attention. I don't find it believable that she beat Awesome Kong twice either. I'd rather see Roxxi or ODB holding the belt.

WWE Saturday Night's Main Event: I didn't watch it for two reasons. One, I forgot it was on which should tell you how great of a job WWE did in promoting it. Two, while I think Autism is a horrible disease I also think Jenny McCarthy is a tool for spreading fear for blaming her son's Autism on vaccinations. The Autism people may want to find a better spokesperson.

Anyway from what I read SNME was lame.

RAW 8/4/08: I actually like Mike Adamle as the RAW GM. It's something new which is something that wrestling in general is lacking these days.

Santino Morella is comedy gold. TNA should take note on how to do their comedy bits.

I thought it was ridiculous how much praise Lawler and Cole were pouring on Adamle throughout the show considering Michael Cole got his head handed to him last week because of Adamle.

CM Punk vs. JBL at Summerslam? Really? Why is JBL still even on TV? He's not being booed because he's the bad guy. He's being booed because people are tired of him. At least that's what I hope they're booing him for. Jericho vs CM Punk would have been epic but I realize they'll do something with Jericho and HBK at Summerslam. Hopefully Punk will retain and they can have the Punk-Jericho match later.

News: The big story on the dirt sheet sites this week was that WWE has parted ways with Ric Flair. The buzz is that Flair was unhappy with WWE not allowing him to book outside appearances. If I was TNA I'd be offering him whatever they could. Even to have him in a non-wrestling role would be quite the coup for TNA.

All in all a pretty good week. Which means next week should suck hard.

by Trench Reynolds

Trench Reynolds: DBKP This Week in Crime 26

July 27-August 2, 2008



[Editor's Note: DBKP apologize for the lateness of this week's Trench on Crime. We mistakenly thought this was posted earlier in the week. Look for new Trench's DBKP This Week in Crime on Sunday or Monday, as is usual.]

I'm Trench Reynolds.

I blog about crime.


This is DBKP's This Week in Crime for July 27th-August 2nd, 2008.

This week at craigscrimelist I the most amusing story was this one about a male temp that was running a prostitution ring in a veterinarian's office.

My favorite link from CrimeNe.ws this week would be this one which just happens to go to a guest post I did for Investigation Discovery.

Business has definitely picked up at News of Doom where we had not one but two particularly grisly stories.

At MyCrimeSpace the story of the week was about a 17-year-old rapist who was sentenced to 3 years in juvenile detention. The real story is in the comments section of that post.

At TheTrenchcoat Chronicles we had a story about a school shooter who is spending his life in prison who wants you to feel sorry for him.

And lastly at Bad Breeders while the coverage of the disappearance of Caylee Marie Anthony continues I do want to point out this post about a newborn that was mauled by a dog? Freak accident or inattentive parents?

As usual if you want to follow my blogs you can use Twitter, the RSS feed, or Netvibes. If you have another way you'd prefer to follow my blogs let me know.

That's it for this week. I'm Trench Reynolds for DBKP.

So until the next time have a good sin.

by Trench Reynolds

John Edwards Scandal: Wealthy Democratic Fundraiser is Edwards Money Man

Mystery Man Resides in Dallas, TX



The National Enquirer released more than just the photos of John Edwards holding Frances Quinn Hunter yesterday [: it also revealed more clues to the identity of the man who, the Enquirer claims, funneled the hush money to Rielle Hunter and Andrew Young.

But, the Enquirer released the details in their print edition only, which hit parts of the country yesterday. One area of the country which doesn't have the new Enquirer yet is our own. But through the efforts of one reader--who wishes remain anonymous and who purchased a copy of the newest Enquirer for us!--that went beyond and above the call of duty, we did obtain some details about the Edwards "hush money man".

We won't spill all the Enquirer's beans here; after all, David Perel, the Enquirer's Editor-in-Chief, has to recoup the investment of a year's worth of reporting on the story.

It ain't cheap chasing around people who don't want to be found.

However, we will report a few of the Enquirer's findings about a man, about whom an earlier Enquirer story would only refer to as, "a wealthy colleague who was closely tied to the Edwards’ campaign. This same man is also shoveling cash to Edwards’ pal and former aide Andrew Young – who tried to take the heat off the ex-Senator by claiming he is the father of Rielle’s baby."



The Enquirer also wrote last week on its website [EDWARDS' HU$H MONEY TO MISTRESS]: “A super-rich pal – who was closely involved with the campaign finances – is helping John. It’s likely this man doesn’t know all the dirty details of John’s extramarital affair, but is acting out of loyalty and is not asking a lot of questions – only writing the checks,” revealed a source very close to the situation."

The newest Enquirer reveals more clues to the man's identity--to entice MSM reporters who have thus far proved resistant to investigating and reporting on the story, perhaps?

A "wealthy Democratic fundraiser" from "Dallas, TX" is part of what the Enquirer reveals.

The story also states that besides the $15,000/month payments to Rielle Hunter and daughter, F.Q. Hunter, that $20,000 is being given to former Edwards' operative, Andrew Young and his family.

The details of the Enquirer's attempt to question the man, when and how much money the wealthy Edwards' backer raised?

Go buy your own copy of the Enquirer.

Any MSM reporter with an Enquirer and an Internet connection ought to be able to run down the identity of the man in a heartbeat.

Doug Ross?

by Mondoreb
image: National Enquirer

John Edwards Affair: Media Myth of Edwards December Denials

Peter replied, "Man, I don't know what you're talking about!"
--Famous denial, Luke 22:60

Media Circulates False Story that Edwards Denied Affair in December



National Enquirer's December Allegations NEVER Denied

The Media's "Don't Ask Edwards, He Won't Tell" Policy

Edwards' Denials After November 29: A MSM Urban Legend

Perhaps history's three most famous denials were issued by the apostle Peter on the night that Jesus was arrested. Thus, Peter issued three more denials in one night than John Edwards has made after November 29, 2007; i.e., none.

One recurring theme turning up for Mainstream Media apologists in the last several days goes something on the order of, "Edwards denied this story in December". Variations range from yesterday's Raleigh Telegram's insistent "Edwards continuously denied the accusations," [Enquirer Publishes Blurry 'Photo' Of John Edwards] to Deceiver's July 28 "The John Edwards Non-Scandal Keeps Getting Not-Weirder":

Then, last December, Edwards denied having an affair and an illegitimate child with Hunter after the National Enquirer spotted her, visibly pregnant, living in North Carolina.

One British newspaper repeated the "Edwards' December Denial" recently. Yesterday, at NRO, Byron York cited--inadvertently, no doubt--the EDD meme. From "John Edwards: The Picture of a Scandal" (emphasis added):

Last December, when the Enquirer first named Hunter, Edwards did deny it. A couple of months earlier, when the Enquirer published a thinly-sourced story claiming that Edwards was "caught in a shocking mistress scandal that could wreck his campaign," Edwards quite emphatically denied it. "The story is false," he said then. "It's completely untrue, ridiculous. Anyone who knows me knows that I have been in love with the same woman for 30-plus years."

As our own LBG put it, in "John Edwards Scandal: Where in the World is John Edwards?":

The MSM turned a blind eye to the alleged Edwards' affair so it was a surprise when the story resurfaced in November in the Daily News. On November 29, the Daily News' Rush and Molloy published "Tabloid's affair rumor dispelled, says John Edwards". The article wrote that "John Edwards believes he's stared down the National Enquirer".

The article mentioned the Enquirer's promise to follow-up the initial Edwards affair story on October 10. The Daily News cited an Enquirer insider who admitted "there's a lot of smoke, but no smoking gun". The Daily News also quoted Edwards who claimed the story "disappeared because it's made up".

In December, a two-line item was tagged onto the end of one report that "an unnamed reporter in South Carolina" asked Edwards about it and he responded with the deflection, "Tabloid gossip" and "trashy lies". DBKP believes this occurred during Edwards' Christmas campaigning break, when he was back in North Carolina

Is this hair-splitting? Maybe, but that incident was no denial.

This point is important: it allows the those in the major media to excuse what was their complete failure to fulfill their adversarial duties for nearly eight months. Once the Enquirer allegations went from the general (October Enquirer story) to the specific (December), the press didn't ask, Edwards didn't tell--at least until July 23.

The Democrats could have save a pound of August headaches with just an ounce of December MSM investigative legwork.

As we stated earlier today in "John Edwards Scandal: Dems Worry, Call on Edwards To Come Forward":

It may be noted that Democrats could have avoided all of this–if just one major news organization would have investigated the easily-checked facts of the National Enquirer’s December edition of the scandal. [Curious Circumstances Excite No Curiosity in the Mainstream Media and The Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere]

Back in December, in the above stories DBKP wondered why not one reporter had asked Edwards, “Do you deny you’ve been in telephone contact with Rielle Hunter since she found out she was pregnant?” Hunter, at that time, was living within five miles of the Edwards campaign HQ in Chapel Hill, NC, in the house of an Edwards’ backer, driving a BMW registered to former Edwards Director of Finance, Andrew Young–all checkable facts.

But not one reporter thought it curious enough to investigate then.

In doing the research for this article, we found several "December denials" sprinkled throughout the sparse MSM coverage of the last few days. We can find no such proof that Edwards was even asked about the Rielle Hunter affair in December.

We waited, in vain in December for that one brave MSM reporter to ask Edwards about the National Enquirer's allegations. Astonished that none did not, we wrote about it in December several times.

The waiting continued, though Edwards was in the news as a possible VP pick or cabinet selection.

Our waiting was over July 23, when Edwards gave his now-infamous video "non-denial".
[Edwards Love Child: Worst Denial Video Ever]

Edwards denials came in October, with the last one on November 29, when he felt he had covered his tracks and that the Enquirer was bluffing about the affair.

The "continuous denials" and "December denials" that are being bandied about in the press as reasons they didn't investigate Edwards eight month ago?

They have all the making of a Mainstream Media urban legend: they sound good, but they simply aren't true.

It's a matter of record--for any reporter wanting to investigate.


THE BUZZ

Speaking of denial...

A few days ago, Mickey Kaus, Slate, wrote a handy "Why write about the Edwards scandal?

Here's a short clip-'n'-save response to those (including many friends) who argue the Edwards scandal shouldn't be pursued--or at least pursued too vigorously-- even if it is true:**

In the ** footnote to the above, Kaus outlines what might be the "Six Stages of MSM/Dem/Edwards' Supporter Denial".

**--For purposes of this item, I'm assuming we're reaching the next-to-final stage of the natural progression in cases like this: 1) Too horrible and shocking; it can't possibly be true; 2) It's not true; 3) You can't prove it's true; 4) Why are you trying to prove it's true? 5) It's disgusting that you've proved it's true; 6) What's the big deal anyway? ...

A check of the comments section, on any Internet locale that has written about the Edwards scandal since December, will quickly confirm Kaus' six stages. In fact, you can tell when pro-Edwards readers learned about the story by which stage of denial they were in when they penned their outraged comments.

Don Surber, in "Dems do what MSM won’t", wonders--most reasonably, we think:

When Edwards is not in Denver later this month, I wonder how ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, NBC, and PBS will explain his absence.

Oh yeah: John Who?

by Mondoreb
images: National Enquirer

John Edwards Scandal: Dems Want Denials from Edwards

"If there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention."
--Don Fowler, a former Democratic National Committee chair, as reported in Tabloid's claims threaten Edwards' role at party's convention

Distress Could Have Been Avoided if Press Had Done Their Job

The meter is running for John Edwards to answer the National Enquirer's allegations that he fathered an illegitimate daughter, lied about it and orchestrated an "elaborate coverup".

And, with the Democrat National Convention less than three weeks away, it was prominent Democrats who started that meter running yesterday.

According to the Raleigh News & Observer, Gary Pearce, the strategist who ran Edwards' 1998 Senate race, was blunt:

“He absolutely does have to [resolve it]. If it’s not true, he has to issue a stronger denial,” said Gary Pearce, the Democratic strategist who ran Edwards’ 1998 Senate race. “It’s a very damaging thing. ... The big media has tried to be responsible and handle this with kid gloves, but it’s clearly getting ready to bust out. If it’s not true, he’s got to stand up and say, ‘This is not true. That is not my child and I’m going to take legal action against the people who are spreading these lies.’ It’s not enough to say, ‘That’s tabloid trash.’ ”

Former DNC Chair, Don Fowler was succinct on whether Edwards would be accorded a prime speaker's spot at the convention--which according to reports he was promised when he endorsed Barack Obama.

"If there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention."

What's changed the media picture in the last several days? Why is the Mainstream Media suddenly interested in reporting on the scandal now, just a few weeks away from the Democrat National Convention, when they wouldn't touch it for seven months ago?

Ryan Tate, at Gawker, sizes up the changed media scenery as though he were using X-Ray Specs [Exploding The Edwards Mistress Scandal]:

See, previously the Edwards scandal was just an irrelevant trifle about how the maybe next U.S. attorney general or even vice president had a baby with another woman while his wife died of cancer and possibly paid the mistress hush money and lied to everyone about it. But now it's about how a speaker at a meaningless convention might distract the media from covering the media event in the way media handlers prefer. In other words, a REAL story.

What's up for grabs now is a prime prime-time speaking spot and, as Tate explained, a distraction-less Denver convention. But where is Edwards?

LBG points out that Edwards has disappeared from public view since July 30. [John Edwards Scandal: Where in the World is John Edwards?]:

Despite the fact that Edwards was in the midst of promoting his Half in Ten national poverty tour, the July 30th appearance at the AARP symposium in Washington, D.C. was Edwards’ last known public appearance.

As she points out, Edwards' Washington sighting was only his third appearance since the morning of July 22, when he was cornered by the Enquirer's reporters at the Beverly Hilton.

A story on the McClatchy Newspapers wire listed several details sure to unsettle Democrats planning for Denver, "Tabloid's claims threaten Edwards' role at party's convention":

* Edwards evaded (The McClatchy story calls it "brushing off") reporters after a July 30 speech in Washington, D.C.--including at least two from McClatchy papers in North Carolina--by exiting through a side entrance normally reserved for kitchen help. [John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Bolts from Reporters Once Again]. Edwards reportedly answered journalists' questions at the time with "Sorry," and "I don't have time for that now."

* A reporter at the Edwards estate in North Carolina got no response Wednesday when he rang the buzzer.

* McClatchy reports Edwards' designated staffer for the press has yet to respond to email requests for an interview.

* The story also reports that "Friends and former staffers refuse to comment now, though they helped Edwards last fall by dismissing an October story in the Enquirer of a sexual relationship between Edwards and a campaign videographer when it initially broke."

* The Raleigh News & Observer reported that: "Sorry cannot help you on this one," wrote Jennifer Palmieri, a former top Edwards aide, in an e-mail Wednesday."

On July 26, The Politico reported [Everybody wants a piece of Obama] that "Edwards told others he was promised a prime time speaking slot when he endorsed Sen. Barack Obama". Traditionally, also-rans in the primaries are offered opportunities to speak to the convention.

It may be noted that Democrats could have avoided all of this--if just one major news organization would have investigated the easily-checked facts of the National Enquirer's December edition of the scandal. [Curious Circumstances Excite No Curiosity in the Mainstream Media and The Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere]

Back in December, in the above stories DBKP wondered why not one reporter had asked Edwards, "Do you deny you've been in telephone contact with Rielle Hunter since she found out she was pregnant?" Hunter, at that time, was living within five miles of the Edwards campaign HQ in Chapel Hill, NC, in the house of an Edwards' backer, driving a BMW registered to former Edwards Director of Finance, Andrew Young--all checkable facts.

But not one reporter thought it curious enough to investigate then.

In May, we revisited the Edwards story [John Edwards: Looking for Rielle Hunter’s Baby News, VP Love, After Obama Endorsement] and asked a few questions:

Mark, a commenter at New York Nerd, sounded absolutely like a fortune teller when, back on January 6 2008, he predicted that the MSM, which imposed a blackout on any news concerning the Hunter-Edwards affair, would only become interested in the affair IF Edwards won the Democrat nomination.
...
Might that not still hold true, if Edwards is the VP candidate again?

We’ll see.

The Mainstream Media has proved unusually resistant to any and all curiosity where the curiously “coincidental” happenings of the Rielle Hunter-John Edwards story is concerned. Maybe the “Two Americas” Edwards referred to meant the ordinary curiosity that most folks exhibit upon reading about the circumstances surrounding Rielle Hunter and John Edwards–and the Mainstream Media brand of decidedly selective curiosity about all things involving the Democrat Party.

Democrats will be right to wonder what might have been, if the press had fulfilled their adversarial duties back in December, when the Enquirer's Edwards allegations went from the general, featuring unnamed sources, to the specific, with dates, names and locations?

If only.

NOTES

* Byron York, NRO, talked to David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer [John Edwards: Picture of a Scandal]. One topic was the Denver convention.

But is there anything else? Maybe the Democratic National Convention, coming up a little more than two weeks? “Obviously, the convention has not been our driving force behind the story,” Perel says. “The reporting takes however long it takes. It took seven months to go from the December story to the [Beverly Hilton] meeting….But if it happens to be a happy coincidence — if the story just happens to be breaking around that time, in terms of maximum exposure — “ Perel pauses. If the convention wasn’t part of the timetable before, it is now. The Edwards pictures might make a nice splash with the Democratic delegates gathered in Denver.

* A comment from Ping2007 on the News & Observer website to the story cited above:
"Diaper Change We Can Believe In"!


* Ann Coulter's response to the Washington Post reporter, who defended the total blackout on the National Enquirer's John Edwards' love child story, telling the Times of London: "Edwards is no longer an elected official and he is not running for office now. Don't expect wall-to-wall coverage." [Only His Hair Dresser Knows for Sure]

"Isn't there some level of coverage between "wall-to-wall" and "double-secret probation, delta-force level total news blackout" when it comes to a sex scandal involving a current Democratic vice presidential and Cabinet prospect?"

More Coulter licks against the MSM; among which was this gem:

But with a Democrat sex scandal, the L.A. Times is in a nail-biting competition with The Washington Post, The New York Times, ABC, NBC and CBS for the Pulitzer for "Best Suppressed Story."

At this point, it's a dead heat.


by Mondoreb
images: dncc; thumbs; National Enquirer; Technology360

John Edwards Scandal: Photos Shift the Scandal to MSM Coverage

Will Media cover it now?

"You can bring a MSM reporter to the story, but you can't make him report it."
--DBKP's LBG

Radar contacts Hairstylist

The Enquirer gives the MSM a BIG smoking gun

August 6 turned out to be Christmas for many mainstream media outlets across America, as the National Enquirer gave them not one, but a whole collection of smoking guns. [THE PHOTOS EVERYONE'S BEEN WAITING FOR!]

The Enquirer released the long-awaited John Edwards scandal photos. The traditional press now has the "proof" that they have been using as a reason not to report the story to their readers.

The Enquirer gave the MSM a smoking gun over two weeks ago: Edwards running from reporters as he was leaving the Beverly Hilton.

"Not big enough," said some, while others thought it didn't even look like a gun: it was only an Enquirer toy gun.

But will many MSM outlets report it even now?

The New York Times' quandary now--outside of stock that's dropped to half its value a year ago--is: How do you hide a howitzer from your readers, many whom already knew about it by searching the Internet?




THE REAL SCANDAL

The real scandal wasn't that Edwards fathered a baby while married to a cancer-stricken wife. It may not even have been the "elaborate cover up", as the Enquirer labels it. It was the monolithic refusal of the American mainstream press to even investigate the facts of the story, which were, with the application of a little legwork, easy enough for them to investigate.

After Edwards was caught by the Enquirer's reporters at the Beverly Hilton at 2:40 in the morning July 22, the reason for not reporting was "there's no confirmation". When FoxNews confirmed the run-in by interviewing one of the hotel security guards involved, the reason shifted to, "We want to see pictures".

Two weeks ago, Enquirer Editor-in-Chief, David Perel told us, "The onus is on them to do some reporting."

But outside of a few dailies and a few mentions at FoxNews, there was none. Customers of CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, the New York Times, Time, Newsweek and the LA Times --where LAT's Blogs Editor, Tony Pearce, infamously and specifically ordered his reporters not to blog on the topic--are still in the dark.



We weren't the only ones in the blogosphere that takes deserved shots at the Mainstream Media for it lack of Edwards coverage.

Gateway Pundit [National Enquirer Releases Photo of John Edwards & Love Child] observes that "the National Enquirer continues to do the hard journalism the mainstream media refuses to do". The photos he concludes are "Proof that is just too much for the tainted American media."

Gawker's Alex Pareene expands on the theme [The Edwards Love-Child Old Media Doesn't Want You to See]:

Hooray! The National Enquirer has published photos of former political person John Edwards with a baby. The baby is almost certainly made up in part of DNA he left in a woman named Rielle Hunter, a former Edwards staffer who now spends her time cashing checks and hiding in hotels and denying everything to the media (until Good Morning America finally books her!). So now would be a perfect time for, like, established print media to cover this story, right? Anyone? Ha, no, they are all too embarrassed. Once again, it's up to the internet!

Radar did some legwork by contacting the Chapel Hill hairstylist of Andrew Young's wife, Cheri, and concluded: "And there you have it: definitive proof of the affair! Get to it, mainstream media!"

They detail their efforts with their tongues-in-cheek, which highlight the glamourous-not side of reporting: [Stylist At Center Of John Edwards Lovebaby Rumors Clams Up]

With a little bit of legwork, we established that Young gets her hair done at Mina's in Chapel Hill. We tried repeatedly to get Young's stylist on the phone, but were told that she wasn't authorized to speak to the press, and that we'd have to go through the owner, Louann. Louann seemed quite amused when we briefly explained why we wanted to talk to the stylist four days ago (all we said was that Cheri Young had been in the news, and that we wanted to talk to her for a few minutes); she said that she'd ask the stylist if she felt comfortable talking and get back to us, but that it didn't seem like it would be a problem.

When she got back to us today, however, her tone was a little different: "She knows nothing, they've never had a conversation about that," she said politely but firmly. When we asked what "that" referred to, Louann said, "That's all I will really say about this."

Thus, Louann was asked one more time about the scandal than John Edwards was from November 2007 through July 23, 2008.

UPDATES to follow at DBKP.com [John Edwards Scandal: Enquirer Give MSM a BIG Smoking Gun]


by Mondoreb
images: national enquirer; military pictures

John Edwards Scandal: National Enquirer PHOTOS Released

National Enquirer: Edwards with Baby

Mainstream Press Interested Now?
Edwards Laying Low
Print Trumps Digital for some Areas of the Country




Editors all over America are scampering to the checkout line to buy the latest edition of the National Enquirer, which contains the photos they were waiting on: John Edwards scandal photos.

The National Enquirer has released its latest information in the John Edwards Scandal investigation.

The stunning “spy photo” shows the former presidential contender holding his infant daughter Frances Quinn Hunter at the Beverly Hilton hotel in Los Angeles – where the ENQUIRER caught him visiting the baby’s mother, his mistress Rielle Hunter.

Edwards is holding his love child while standing in front of a distinctive striped curtain.

The same window covering hangs in each one of the hotel’s guest rooms – and is clearly visible in photos of guest rooms on the hotel’s Web site.
National Enquirer: THE PHOTOS EVERYONE'S BEEN WAITING FOR!

A source quoted by the Enquirer states, "His elaborate coverup is unraveling at the seams.”

Alerted to the existence of the photos by a reader earlier, DBKP, like those many mainstream media editors, checked the Enquirer's website--which still was silent on the matter--and left in pursuit of the latest edition of the Enquirer.

No luck. The new issue was not available yet in our area. When we returned twenty minutes ago, the Enquirer's site featured the damning photos.




Look for updates to this and an earlier DBKP story throughout today.

ALSO at DBKP: Click on banner to access over 60 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal.

A new debate will begin today in MSM outlets, as the pictures are hard evidence of the scandal the traditional press refused to report. The new debate will doubtless feature those who present new reasons for not reporting.

The Enquirer last week reported hush money in the Edwards Scandal mix.

The new Enquirer also features news of the money connection from John Edwards to Rielle Hunter, and pictures of the homes of Rielle Hunter and Andrew Young.

One interesting photo shows John Edwards in front of the hotel room window pulling the drapes closed. He appears to be sweating--or it could be where the baby, Frances Quinn Hunter, drooled on his shirt.

UPDATES to follow.

by Mondoreb
image: dbkp file; National Enquirer

August 6, 1945: The Beginning of the Atomic Age

Click image to enlarge


August 6, 1945.

Sixty-three years ago, the bombing of Hiroshima helped bring about the end of the most destructive world in the history of the world.

The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuclear attacks at the end of World War II against the Empire of Japan by the United States at the order of U.S. President Harry S. Truman on August 6 and 9, 1945. After six months of intense firebombing of 67 other Japanese cities, the nuclear weapon "Little Boy" was dropped on the city of Hiroshima on Monday, August 6, 1945, followed on August 9 by the detonation of the "Fat Man" nuclear bomb over Nagasaki. These are to date the only attacks with nuclear weapons in the history of warfare.
--Wikipedia: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Japan announced its surrender six days later on August 15, 1945.

To all those who sit in comfort in 2006 and render judgment on those who lived and made decisions sixty-three years ago, a few reminders.

1- Those in 2006 do not have husbands, brothers and sons who would have faced certain death in an invasion of Japan in 1945.

2- Did not have to live through the preceding four years of nearly total war.

Those who argue in favor of the decision to drop the bombs generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing massive casualties on both sides in the planned invasion of Japan.

Those who argue against the decision to drop the bombs characterize them as inherently immoral, war crimes or, crimes against humanity and/or state terrorism. They may also argue that they were militarily unnecessary.

Regardless, today is the 63rd anniversary of the beginning of the Atomic Age.

From that point forward, the stakes for disagreements between nations were raised immeasurably.

by Mondoreb
image: RidesAPaleHorse

Culture Watch 26: Ethanol Damages and

Culture Watch, Vol.26 Nancy Morgan RightBias.com August 4, 2008

Click for video: "Leave Barack Alone!"
[WARNING: Explicit Language]


The good news is, Congress is adjourned for the next five weeks. The bad news is, Pelosi and pals were successful in avoiding a vote on offshore drilling. Just because 70% of the American people want to drill doesn't mean that the Democrats are going to hand the Republicans a political victory this close to the election. This endless, eternal, ongoing:

ELECTION '08:

Obama's star is becoming tarnished, much to the chagrin of the old media. Those nasty polls continue to show a race that, as we speak, is now tied. Not one to take this sitting down, Obama has become even bolder. He just announced his new 'emergency economic plan.' In what can only be described as pure socialism, Obama has proposed giving families a $1,000 stimulus check, funded from "windfall profits from big oil." A modern day Robin Hood, this guy.

Speaking of Obama, as we have been for what seems an eternity, "The One" has offered a solution to high gas prices. Americans, inflate your tires! I kid you not.

Meanwhile, 30% of conservative Democrats say they'll vote for McCain and the DNC fund-raising for their convention is off by $10 million. Obama just backed further away from McCain's challenge of a Lincoln-style debate, agreeing only to the standard three face-offs in the fall.

The McCain campaign has released a great video, mocking the divine Obama. 'The One' accurately sums up the media induced cult status this empty suit has achieved. Hilarious stuff.

GOOD NEWS:

Iraqi and US forces now control virtually all of Iraq and Baghdad's troops may be able to take on security for the whole country by 2009. Meanwhile, US combat deaths in July plunged to the lowest level in four years and Bush has cut tours for troops in Iraq down to one year.

This commercial being shown on Iraqi TV sums up better than I how much we've accomplished in Iraq. Nothing short of miraculous.

On the immigration front, it appears that the number of illegal immigrants in the US has dropped by app. 1 million. Banks in Mexico report that remittances from Mexicans in the US fell 2.2% in the first 6 months of 2008. And the US allowed in more than 2,300 Iraqi refugees last month, setting a record and putting the Bush administration on pace to surpass its goal of accepting 12,000 Iraqi by next September.

Other good news: The number of chronically homeless dropped nearly 30 percent from 2005 to 2007 and the number of Americans who consider themselves Democrats fell two percentage points to 39.2%

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and new bride, Jennifer Siebel

GOVERNMENT AT WORK:

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed a bill that clears the way for gay and lesbian couples from other states to marry in Massachusetts. As gays celebrated, the CDC issued a new report. Apparently the US AIDS infection rate is 40% higher than earlier estimates. Oops. In some black communities, the HIV rate actually exceeds that of some African nations.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom took time out from the people's business to marry actress Jennifer Siebel. Then, it was back to work, as newly wed Newsom officially proposed a $1,000 fine for all those irresponsible residents who don't sort their trash into the environmentally correct piles.

Down south in LA, the city council approved a one-year moratorium on new fast-food restaurants. Seattle, meanwhile, became the first city to discourage the use of paper and plastic shopping bags by requiring retailers to slap a .20 per bag charge on them. Continuing their valiant efforts to save the earth, Seattle's Mayor Greg Nickels is planning 'car-free' days throughout the city.

The House successfully kept the issue of offshore drilling from coming to a vote - concentrating instead on approving legislation that would empower the EPA to regulate the tobacco industry. Congress also tackled illegal immigration by announcing, to great fanfare, their latest solution: advising illegals to deport themselves rather than risk getting caught.

Last, but not least, the House issued an unprecedented apology to black Americans for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery. Mea culpa. Next step: reparations. Sigh.

CULTURE:

The clash between gay rights and religious freedom acquired two new fronts recently, both involving Christians who say they were punished on their jobs for actions that reflect religious disapproval of homosexuality.

A government school in Texas will force students who don't follow the rules to wear prison-like jumpsuits. Parents complain the policy will make the kids feel like prisoners. Neal Boortz accurately points out, they are.

Workers at Tyson Food's poultry processing plant in Shelbyville will no longer have a paid day off on Labor Day. Instead, they will take the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr in the fall.

A British website is recruiting kids as 'climate cops', encouraging them to keep records on their parents and neighbors for violations of 'energy crimes' against the planet.

More women than ever are donating their eggs. A sixty year-old Saudi man has graciously agreed to postpone his marriage to a ten year-old and, in Australia, surgery to 'rejuvenate' the vagina has been blacklisted as more women become injured by the dangerous procedure.

The first ever eyelash extensions for men will hit the shelves next month. They will be offered in both thick and fine options.

Mechanics are starting to see the damage ethanol is doing to small engines. "When you put that ethanol in here, it eats up the insides, or rusts them out."

This 'smart car' gets great mileage but no left turns.

The new 'smart car' gets 40 MPG but isn't heavy enough to set off the sensors that activate left-turn signal lights at intersections.

Memo to McDonalds: The Palestinian Authority is facing a severe financial crisis due to a lack of donor countries to fulfill their pledges to fund the Palestinians.

A record 9,000 Chinese couples plan to tie the knot to celebrate the opening of the Olympic games and to take advantage of the lucky date, 8/8/08. The World Bank has designated Linfen, China as the most polluted city in the world.

Academics have unearthed what they believe to be the world's oldest joke, a double entrendre about men's sexual desire. Saudi Arabia's religious police have announced a ban on selling cats and dogs as pets. [Guess you can still buy them for food] The reason? Men are using them as a means of making passes at women. Did you know there is no word for humor in Islam?

Last week, US Airways announced - no more free water on their flights. Delta, meanwhile, is doubling its charge for checking a second bag on all domestic flights.

IDIOT OF THE WEEK:

This week's award goes to all those ingenious suicide bombers who are starting to wear explosive 'underwear briefs' to evade body searches.

Before I sign off, I have an interesting tidbit. For all of you who have been impressed by T. Boone Pickens commercials touting wind power, you might want to read this article.

by Nancy Morgan

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and a news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina, where she writes "Culture Watch" weekly.

Article may be reprinted with attribution. Bio available on request.