Monday, August 17, 2009

John Edwards Affair: Grand Jury Decision Awaits Edwards

Your Ad Here




"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." --John Edwards' statement to the press, August 8 2008.


Q: How can you tell when a trial attorney-turned-politician is lying?
A: When his lips are moving.

John Edwards is reportedly finally to admit he is the father of [Sources: Edwards to admit paternity of ex-mistress' child] 18-month-old Frances Quinn Hunter.

What might compel former presidential candidate, John Edwards, to finally come clean about mistress, Rielle Hunter, and daughter, Frances Quinn? [John Edwards to Admit Rielle Hunter’s Love Child His: When Politicians Fail to Keep Their Pants on]. Maybe it's a sudden yearning to demonstrate he's tired of deceiving the public.

Or perhaps, it is the looming grand jury decision on whether he paid his mistress out of campaign funds.

Over 80 articles chronicling the affair from December 2007 to present.


In the John Edwards Scandal, the Mainstream Media truly became the Mainstream Mouthpiece Media (MMM), taking the side of a millionaire presidential candidate over their readers' interests; it found a plethora of reasons why it did not investigate the Edwards' allegations.

In Edwards' case, the story came out, not because of the media's handling of the story, but in spite of it.

During the months of the Edwards' scandal, the media instituted their own "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Obsessed with managing the news instead of reporting it, in the MMM's eyes, the public's right to know became what was right for the public to know. In fact, it was the MMM's principal defense of their non-coverage of the story.

The attitude festered during the 2008 presidential campaign and continues to the present time.

There was a small segment of the public who didn't want to know; the comments section of many Edwards' articles reveals who those people were. They were, in most cases, blameless, Most likely, they were part of the dwindling readership of big city dailies.

That might be one reason that Public Attitudes toward the media show only one publication gaining in trust over the last 10 years--the National Enquirer.

The Enquirer continues to outperform the dinosaur media to this day. See any of the stories linkied at the bottom of JOHN EDWARDS SECRET DNA TEST PROVES HE'S THE DADDY!.

[image courtesy of]

Edwards' own "Trend-line in Trust" will have to be guessed at by the reader.

Though not listed, another loser of trust was Wikipedia, which demonstrated that the on-line compendium is less-than-reliable on subjects political, especially contemporary controversial ones. [John Edwards Love Child Scandal: Debate at Wikipedia Rages and John Edwards Love Child: Wikipedia Editor Defends Go-Slow Policies On Edwards Entry]


* In Mickey Kaus' Edwards' Love Child: Mandatory Gloating Edition, the Edwards scandal is broken down into several easily-digestible parts.

Kaus, one of the few who covered the Edwards' scandal, succinctly details the lies, damn lies and fall-back lies which Edwards hid behind. He also provides a "Historic Gallery of Kossack Krap" and asks plenty of questions. Kaus points out:
If Edwards is in fact the father this entire fallback edifice of BS crumbles. ... It's worth reading the transcript of the ABC interview--practically every sentence out of Edwards' mouth is a lie.

What, Me Lie?
Edwards' August 8 2008 national mea culpa on ABC Nightline
John Edwards Scandal: The Many Faces of Contrition

* DBKP pointed out several of these lies the day of the Edwards' "confession" to ABC [John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Admits Affair, Lies, to ABC News]. Two days later, in John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Continues Deception in Interview, we expanded the list.

A week after Edwards' Nightline appearance, DBKP's exclusive photo [John and Elizabeth Edwards with Rielle Hunter Dec 30, 2006] put the lie to not only Edwards' narrative of the affair, but also Elizabeth Edwards' statement.

The Mouthpiece Media might be excused for a similar quick reaction: it was too busy explaining why it had not asked a single question of Edwards from November 2007 until August 2008 about his curious connections with Hunter.

John and Elizabeth Edwards with Rielle Hunter
December 30 2006

Both Edwards led the public to believe that the affair was over and their "long period of healing" began in 2006.

* Deceiver comments on the recent events: Big Baby to Admit Paternity of Little Baby? and Least Shocking Edwards Story Ever?.
Recall that previously Edwards said he was eager to do the DNA test, but Rielle refused. Which sure was convenient. That’s the problem with hush money: When the money stops, so does the hushing.

* Edwards still harbors the delusion that he is not finished as a national political figure. Apparently, it has not occurred to him that whatever the grand jury decides, he's guilty: either of providing for his mistress with campaign funds--or of merely being just another deadbeat dad.

In either case, only the most narcissistic of politicians would be encouraged.

You know its a lost cause when even the Washington Post admits that John Edwards a Lot Short of 99%.

* Are the Edwards still together? Technically, they are.

DBKP interviewed some residents in the Edwards' neighborhood who say that the couple does not live together. One said that "John does not live at their home, but does watch the kids." Edwards spends a good deal of time during the fall and winter at their residence on Figure Eight Island. Figure Eight Island is a gated private oceanfront community close to Wilmington NC.

* Andrew Young, the political aide-cum-father, readies publication of a tell-all book, complete with John Edwards-Rielle Hunter sex tape revelations.

The basic problem with the book: how much can we believe from the man who (through his attorney in December 2007] claimed he was "the father of Ms. Hunter's unborn child"? [UPDATE: JOHN EDWARDS LOVE CHILD SCANDAL!]

Strangely, at the end of the day, Young may come out the best of the bunch.

Though he lied, he only did so in that December 2007 statement and in exchanges with the National Enquirer's reporters. Both John and Elizabeth Edwards, Rielle Hunter and the media continued their deceptions--sometimes to the public and to themselves--repeatedly.

Andrew Young, though partially motivated by profit, could at least say that he did what he did because of someone in whom he believed.

by Mondo Frazier

Crossed fingers image, courtesy

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.