Edward's Story Doesn't Add Up

[Easy90]

Inconsistencies Raise Concerns Edwards May Still Be Lying About Affair

Monday , August 11, 2008


John Edwards’ explanation of his affair with videographer Rielle Hunter includes several apparent inconsistencies, which grate against his assertion that he was telling “99 percent” of the truth before coming clean Friday in a confessional interview.

Edwards admitted to the affair with Hunter, saying it began in 2006. He denied it for months it following reports by the National Enquirer last October.

But discrepancies between his story and the unraveling timeline of events raise more questions about whether Edwards' attempts to come clean are in fact just more lies and half-truths.

A former close friend to Edwards’ mistress said Monday that the former presidential candidate’s affair began “long, long, long” before she was hired to work for his campaign — contrary to Edwards’ claim that the relationship began only after Hunter was hired to film Edwards for a series of documentaries to appear on the Internet.

Pigeon O’Brien told ABC News that Hunter met Edwards at a New York City hotel in late February or early March of 2006, and that the affair began shortly thereafter.

By the time Hunter was signed on to the Edwards campaign as a videographer — for a fee of $114,000 — O’Brien said they were already in a steamy relationship.

“The affair began long, long, long before she was hired to work for the campaign — almost half a year before she was hired to work on that video,” O’Brien said.

“She said that they had a very deep connection and that they were spending time together in a romantic and sexual way very early on, and in a very intense way.”

But Edwards said Friday that Hunter’s hiring in July 2006 had nothing to do with the affair, and that in fact the affair began after she was brought on board.

In his written statement admitting the affair, Edwards said the “misconduct took place for a short period in 2006. It ended then.”

But according to reports, Hunter wrote e-mails in early April about a trip she took to North Carolina to see her “love lips.”

Campaign finance records also show Hunter received her first payment in July 2006.

Other loose threads are also unraveling Edwards’ account.

After Edwards was caught by The National Enquirer visiting Hunter in late July at the Beverly Hilton, the former North Carolina senator said Friday that that rendezvous was only arranged last minute.

“I had been in Los Angeles that day to do an event with the mayor, and that afternoon I got a call in my hotel room from a gentleman named Bob McGovern. … And he asked me to come and meet with them.”

But a National Enquirer reporter told FOXNews.com in July that they got a tip “a while ago” that Edwards would be at that hotel, and that “we had some time to implement a plan.”

Without going into specifics, the reporter said the tip came within the week, suggesting the tabloid had more than an afternoon to organize its stakeout.

Edwards’ admission was arguably driven by the report that Edwards was caught visiting Hunter at the Beverly Hilton. FOXNews.com confirmed last month that Edwards had the run-in with reporters, and Edwards later copped to it.

But he said he only went to keep her from going public with the affair — and not to see the baby that he denies is his.

Though the Enquirer published a photo that alleges to show him holding a baby at the Beverly Hilton and an Enquirer reporter said he saw McGovern show up at the Hilton on that day with a baby carrier, Edwards said, “I have no idea who that baby is.”

Meanwhile, the issue of paternity is a question that is not likely to be resolved soon.

Edwards said confidently during his interview Friday that he would submit to a paternity test to prove he is not the father of Hunter’s baby.

The Enquirer issued a challenged for him to do so on its Web site and even a family member of Hunter’s came out to suggest such a test be taken.

But a day later Hunter’s lawyer issued a statement saying Hunter would not take the test.

“Rielle will not participate in DNA testing or any other invasion of her or her daughter's privacy now or in the future," lawyer Robert Gordon said.

Edwards issued artful answers to a handful of other questions Friday.

Asked about reports that $15,000 a month was being paid to Hunter by Dallas attorney and Edwards supporter Fred Baron, Edwards said, “I had nothing to do with any money being paid and had no knowledge of any money being paid.”

He added: “Is it possible that he wanted to help them because they were in a difficult time? Of course. Is it possible that he was worried that in fact something had happened with me and he wanted to help? I mean, I think all these things are possible.”

Edwards also left open the door when asked about reports that he had met Hunter in California several times before his run-in with the Enquirer in July.

He responded only, “I was at the Beverly Hilton.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,401462,00.html

[brien]

Edwards is done so stick a fork in him..I just wonder how much it cost him to buy that woman's decision to refuse a DNA test to prove who is the father. I say let him go down in disgrace and stay there in the dustbin of history.

[Wndrtch]

I want to know how the money flowed.

First, you have Edwards saying I never gave a dime to her, never told anyone to give her money, and never was told of anyone giving her money.

Then, his bud said...Yah, I gave her money, but I was never told to. I did it because I'm a swell guy.

I heard it confirmed that she recieved at least $100K over 4 months. Did she pay taxes on that? Did she claim capitol gains?

[AlanC]

Edwards is done so stick a fork in him..I just wonder how much it cost him to buy that woman's decision to refuse a DNA test to prove who is the father. I say let him go down in disgrace and stay there in the dustbin of history.

Yep, this one is over. Anyone who still believes a thing he says on the matter is too deluded to be convinced otherwise anyway. That makes it a waste of time to try.

[Stoner]

I agree. There is much to this that doesn't add up. There's no doubt in my mind that baby is his. His wife has cancer and he's boinking something that looks like a Rob Zombie movie extra.

Sickening. Then again what do you expect from a man who channels dead babies in court. Fucking ambulance chaser.

[ECW]

I agree. There is much to this that doesn't add up. There's no doubt in my mind that baby is his. His wife has cancer and he's boinking something that looks like a Rob Zombie movie extra.

Sickening. Then again what do you expect from a man who channels dead babies in court. Fucking ambulance chaser.

Again, is this all you have?

[preservanation]

O'Riely is on this like white on rice.
By the time this is over everyone involved, especially with the money and Edwards with his silly explanations, inconclusive confessions and meaningless apologies are going to be walking around like they have a hot fireplace tongs shoved up their ass.

[ECW]

O'Riely is on this like white on rice.
By the time this is over everyone involved, especially with the money and Edwards with his silly explanations, inconclusive confessions and meaningless apologies are going to be walking around like they have a hot fireplace tongs shoved up their ass.

As an entertainer, you would expect this from him. Trouble is, if this is all that the rightwingers have to hang their hat on (infidelities of a has-been politician), then it's going to be a long, long summer for the GOP because McCain was guilty of the same infidelity thing and the more they talk about it the more opportunities Democrats have to bring up McCain's actions as well. I guess celebrities aren't perfect after all.

[Blueneck]

O'Riely is on this like white on rice.
By the time this is over everyone involved, especially with the money and Edwards with his silly explanations, inconclusive confessions and meaningless apologies are going to be walking around like they have a hot fireplace tongs shoved up their ass.
And then what...?

I mean, where all the morality police headed with this?

I beginning to wonder about you Republicans and your preoccupation with these things. It's not healthy. :ponder:

[brien]

I think the only question left open here is where the money is coming from to pay for this woman's living expenses. Some people are looking into the campaign finances to see if there is a trail back to them.

imo, Edwards is too smart for this. I think he bought her off with his own money which he filtered through someone else. We will see where it goes because if there is any campaign finance money involved, there is criminal activity. And the beat goes on..

[Blueneck]

I think the only question left open here is where the money is coming from to pay for this woman's living expenses. Some people are looking into the campaign finances to see if there is a trail back to them.

imo, Edwards is too smart for this. I think he bought her off with his own money which he filtered through someone else. We will see where it goes because if there is any campaign finance money involved, there is criminal activity. And the beat goes on..
She worked on the campaign as a videographer. She got paid. You can read more into that if you like, but again, not illegal.

She also wouldn't be the first person given a cushy, overpaid position in a campaign in order to pay back "favors".

[Phyxius]

As an entertainer, you would expect this from him. Trouble is, if this is all that the rightwingers have to hang their hat on (infidelities of a has-been politician), then it's going to be a long, long summer for the GOP because McCain was guilty of the same infidelity thing and the more they talk about it the more opportunities Democrats have to bring up McCain's actions as well. I guess celebrities aren't perfect after all.

I love the smell of Reich-winger desperation in the morning. It smells like...



... victory. :madlaugh:

[brien]

She also wouldn't be the first person given a cushy, overpaid position in a campaign in order to pay back "favors".

Favors that included her "love lips"? I wonder what those love lips were wrapped around for him to long for them so as we read in the OP. ROTFLMAO

Were I him, I would be so mortified I would never show my disgusting bad hair face in public ever again. But this guy has no shame. He looks right into the camera and lies like someone else who once said:

"I never has sex with, that woman, Monica Lewisnky." She sure had some love lips also!

Still ROTFLMAO

It's no longer about sex anymore, it's time to follow the money trail here. Let the lips, oops I mean chips, fall where they may....

[Blueneck]

Favors that included her "love lips"? I wonder what those love lips were wrapped around for him to long for them so as we read in the OP. ROTFLMAO

Were I him, I would be so mortified I would never show my disgusting bad hair face in public ever again. But this guy has no shame. He looks right into the camera and lies like someone else who once said:

"I never has sex with, that woman, Monica Lewisnky." She sure had some love lips also!

Still ROTFLMAO

It's no longer about sex anymore, it's time to follow the money trail here. Let the lips, oops I mean chips, fall where they may....Why do Republicans obscess about blowjobs so much? I really don't get what the big deal is. :confused:

[preservanation]

She worked on the campaign as a videographer. She got paid. You can read more into that if you like, but again, not illegal.

She also wouldn't be the first person given a cushy, overpaid position in a campaign in order to pay back "favors".Oh it could be very illegal if a dime of campaign money went to her outside her "job" as a videographer
I think we know that already happened...by some nice guy out of the blue who just happened to know Johnny.

Also...gift taxes have to paid and income filed on her end.
This ain't going away.
Edwards better pray the EffinBI doest get involved.
That's a whole new chunk of cheese.

[Phyxius]

Why do Republicans obscess about blowjobs so much? I really don't get what the big deal is. :confused:

Jealousy? :ponder:

[Blueneck]

Oh it could be very illegal if a dime of campaign money went to her outside her "job" as a videographer
I think we know that already happened...by some nice guy out of the blue who just happened to know Johnny.

Also...gift taxes have to paid and income filed on her end.
This ain't going away.
Edwards better pray the EffinBI doest get involved.
That's a whole new chunk of cheese.Again, I have to wonder at what is driving this. Do you wish to see every politician's campaign audited for these indiscretions or just Edwards? Do you actually believe they are all honest and faithful to their wives except him?

What I really want to know is, where does this get you in the end? He's no longer going to have a political career and really wasn't much of a contender to begin with, so why destroy him any more completely than he's already been destroyed expect purely out of spite?

[preservanation]

Again, I have to wonder at what is driving this. Do you wish to see every politician's campaign audited for these indiscretions or just Edwards? Do you actually believe they are all honest and faithful to their wives except him?

What I really want to know is, where does this get you in the end? He's no longer going to have a political career and really wasn't much of a contender to begin with, so why destroy him any more completely than he's already been destroyed expect purely out of spite?You have a point
But, If he considered telling the truth one time and he's still vague, and that's a euphemism.
(if you want to argue that Edwards has been truthful, you can do it with stoner).

I could care less that he got his noodle wet with some moonbat.

However, there are extenuating circumstances.
He used his faithful loving family as a prop to sell himself.
His wife deserved his support through those years...and he was a supposed champion of women, and their guiding light
He has lied repeatedly.
Has yet to explain what the hell he was doing there the last time he scurried away into a mirrored room.
Some don't like to be lied to and this whole thing is extremely distasteful and over the top.

All that can piss off a public.
Sorry, it does...

All that money changing hands under the radar can...
piss off the Feds.
Sorry, it does...

[Blueneck]

Vitter lied. And broke the law.

Craig lied. And broke the law.

Spitzer lied. And broke the law.

Guess which party's guy who actually held a public office in the not imaginary world is gone?

So who's party is doing a better job of cleaning up after themselves?

[Blueneck]

But then again, if you want to spend the entire election season talking about adultery, don't let me stop you - McCain's name is bound to come up sooner or later....

[ECW]

And then what...?

I mean, where all the morality police headed with this?

I beginning to wonder about you Republicans and your preoccupation with these things. It's not healthy. :ponder:

They are preoccupied with the sex scandal because they have nothing else. BS birth certificate furor, drilling furor, Muslim furor, reverend furor, and town hall furor is all they can come up with because they have nothing else. THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE. They cannot discuss the real issues which is why they got their asses handed to them in 2006 and why they will get them handed to them again this year.

THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE. A dozen threads on Edwards is all they can come up with. Truly pathetic. Sex obsessed little minds can't handle real issues.

[preservanation]

What about Vitter?
What about papaya jello?

For those who think that Edwards was in any way thinking that this was exceptable because a repub did.
IMO, you are mistaken.

If this is such a non-issue...condemn him and move on.
IMO, it is an issue.
We couldn't wallow in the pit by ourselves...you have to bring the mud

[Blueneck]

What I'm saying is get your own guys who not only cheated on their wives but broke laws while doing it, out of Congress before you start cleaning our house of a guy who broke no laws and doesn't hold public office.

I am not condemning Edwards for something I don't give a shit about. I don't think it is an issue. Republicans are trying to make it one, and the press is playing along because attractive people's sex lives seem to be of great interest to the voyeuristic consumer.

But this will be over by next week, so all your fake moral outrage doesn't amount to squat in the end and will only serve to point out McCain's indiscretions, and the Republican parties hyposcrisy.

Apply your moral standards to yourselves not to us. Your party is far from being without sin, so if you wanna keep throwing rocks, go ahead, but you better get McCain a helmet first.

[ECW]

For those who think that Edwards was in any way thinking that this was exceptable because a repub did.
IMO, you are mistaken.

It isn't acceptable. The difference is that Edwards is no longer a candidate for anything. He's not running for president or Senator or anything else. What happened in his private life should be private, if we are to follow the republican talking points laid out for us when the issue of McCain's adultery came up. Remember, McCain did the same thing. His conduct was even more reprehensible when he did it because his wife waited for five years for him to come back from Nam. Once he discovered she had been injured in a car wreck and was no longer the beauty queen he had married, the bastard went and found himself another beauty queen. How is McCain's behavior not an issue while Edwards's behavior is?

If this is such a non-issue...condemn him and move on.
IMO, it is an issue.

Then it is equally an issue for McCain.

We couldn't wallow in the pit by ourselves...you have to bring the mud

It was only dirt before you got ahold of it. After you pissed all over the place it became mud.

And it goes to show that rightwingers cannot deal with the REAL issues facing the country and are obsessed with the sex lives of others while denying the inadequacies of their own people.

[aaronssongs]

It isn't acceptable. The difference is that Edwards is no longer a candidate for anything. He's not running for president or Senator or anything else. What happened in his private life should be private, if we are to follow the republican talking points laid out for us when the issue of McCain's adultery came up. Remember, McCain did the same thing. His conduct was even more reprehensible when he did it because his wife waited for five years for him to come back from Nam. Once he discovered she had been injured in a car wreck and was no longer the beauty queen he had married, the bastard went and found himself another beauty queen. How is McCain's behavior not an issue while Edwards's behavior is?



Then it is equally an issue for McCain.



It was only dirt before you got ahold of it. After you pissed all over the place it became mud.

And it goes to show that rightwingers cannot deal with the REAL issues facing the country and are obsessed with the sex lives of others while denying the inadequacies of their own people.

Well-said. They are so very good at pointing fingers, while ignoring the thumb, pointing back at them.

[preservanation]

This is all a way to rationalize away what Edwards did...and who he is as a person.

Stand up and move on if this is such a non issue..

[Phyxius]

O'Riely is on this like white on rice.


Falafel-breath should remember two little words before he steps on that landmine -- Andrea Mackris... :madlaugh:

[GHJ]

Who wants to bet he'll marry the b-itch soon after his wife dies?

[ECW]

This is all a way to rationalize away what Edwards did...and who he is as a person.

Stand up and move on if this is such a non issue..

And let you piss in peace? You wish.

[ECW]

Who wants to bet he'll marry the b-itch soon after his wife dies?

I'll take that bet.

[PostmodernProphet]

What about papaya jello?



.....something tells me I do NOT want to Google that......

[Easy90]

The real fun of this thread is watching the lefties defend Edwards and attack anyone who posts the news about what he did. They totally slough off the real significance of the way Edwards used his wife as a prop to attempt to get votes....claiming her unfortunate medical condition and brave support put him in a special class of understanding about what's important about "character" in a candidate...and then, they use the Clinton defense....(It's just sex...and if you talk about it then YOU'RE a perverted bastard!) LOL! Also, a big element of this story that bears repeating as another "toldyaso!" is the way the sycophant media refused to investigate or publish this story until Edwards himself came out and sort of....kinda ADMITTED IT!

OH, and I also like the "he's not in office, and not a candidate" stuff! How FUNNY! John Edwards was the last DEM VP Candidate! He was actively being considered for an Obama Cabinet Post...Holds the third most pledged Democratic delegate votes, and was/is scheduled to deliver a speech at the Convention... Now he's been exposed as one of the biggest hypocrites and morally bankrupt slimeball in political history....and the lefties say "ain't no big thang!" Wow! I LOVE IT!

[Stoner]

The real fun of this thread is watching the lefties defend Edwards and attack anyone who posts the news about what he did. They totally slough off the real significance of the way Edwards used his wife as a prop to attempt to get votes....claiming her unfortunate medical condition and brave support put him in a special class of understanding about what's important about "character" in a candidate...and then, they use the Clinton defense....(It's just sex...and if you talk about it then YOU'RE a perverted bastard!) LOL! Also, a big element of this story that bears repeating as another "toldyaso!" is the way the sycophant media refused to investigate or publish this story until Edwards himself came out and sort of....kinda ADMITTED IT!

OH, and I also like the "he's not in office, and not a candidate" stuff! How FUNNY! John Edwards was the last DEM VP Candidate! He was actively being considered for an Obama Cabinet Post...Holds the third most pledged Democratic delegate votes, and was/is scheduled to deliver a speech at the Convention... Now he's been exposed as one of the biggest hypocrites and morally bankrupt slimeball in political history....and the lefties say "ain't no big thang!" Wow! I LOVE IT!

QFT! The libbies' hypocrisy runs deeper than Mariana's Trench.

[preservanation]

He was almost the Dem NOMINEE this time around...he had some very ardent supporters who thought he could win!
Holy shit, can you imagine the turmoil if he succeeded in getting the nomination?
You think Bush is unpopular with the DNC?
That would have been contortions of Olympic proportions.
Talk about burning someone at the stake?....HOOOOOO BOY!
God, that would've been great!

[PostmodernProphet]

talk about complex issues....with Clinton it was only "I did not have sex with that woman".....now because so many people are coming forward and saying he isn't the father, I hear Young is having to say "I did not not-have-sex with that woman".......

[preservanation]

So either Edwards is lying, or this Hunter was passed around the campaign staff like a rag-doll.
What ever, Edwards should just come clean and sulk away like the perahia he has become.

[Trish]

There appears to be quite a bit more to the Edwards scandal than just adultery and lying. What we've heard so far about all this is just likely to be only the tip of the scandal iceberg.


Lawyer's ties to Edwards suggest extent of affair coverup

By SERGE F. KOVALESKI and MIKE McINTIRE
New York Times

Aug. 14, 2008, 10:09PM


As tabloid reports of a sex scandal threatened former Sen. John Edwards' presidential campaign last December on the eve of the Iowa caucuses, two lawyers surfaced with written statements that appeared to exonerate the candidate.
One of them, Robert J. Gordon of New York, said that his client, Rielle Hunter, a pregnant 43-year-old filmmaker, was not carrying Edwards' child. Shortly thereafter, the other lawyer, Pamela J. Marple of Washington, sent word that her client, Andrew Young, an Edwards campaign aide, was the baby's father.
Seemingly issued independently of Edwards, the statements appeared to deflate the anonymously sourced reports of an Edwards tryst. But what went unnoticed was that the two lawyers shared an important connection to Edwards that raises questions about whether they were part of an orchestrated effort to protect him, one that is continuing even after he admitted last week that he had an affair with Hunter but denied that he fathered her child.
The lawyers are linked through Fred Baron, a wealthy Dallas lawyer and former finance chairman for the Edwards campaign who was a key player in the campaign's response to the scandal. Gordon has worked with Baron on class-action personal injury cases, and Marple helped defend a lawsuit brought against both men and their law firms by an asbestos manufacturer.
After initially saying that he did not know how the lawyers were chosen to represent Hunter and Young, Baron acknowledged that he might have played a role.
The revelations of ties among the lawyers emerged through public records and interviews with people close to Edwards and Hunter, which suggested that their affair went on longer than Edwards admitted and that the effort to conceal it by Edwards' inner circle was much more extensive than has been reported.
The review found that Edwards' political action committee went to unusual lengths to make a final $14,000 payment to Hunter's film company months after its contract with the committee had ended. The payment was issued while the committee was short on cash and could pay its bills only after receiving thousands of dollars from Edwards' presidential campaign and donations from four people, including Baron's wife.
Furthermore, a woman who helped Hunter create a Web site on New Age spirituality in 2006 says she regularly corresponded with her about a married North Carolina man named John whom Hunter was dating in March of that year, if not earlier. Edwards has said his affair with Hunter did not begin until after she had started doing video work for his political action committee months later.
The woman, Pigeon O'Brien, who says she worked with Hunter to build her "Being Is Free" Web site and a related foundation, said that Hunter recounted how she had met "John" at the Regency Hotel in New York in early 2006 and that they had started dating soon after.
O'Brien said that Hunter made at least one trip to North Carolina in March 2006 to visit him and that, during the next few months, she never made any references to Young, who later claimed to be the father of the child, or indicated that she even knew him.
O'Brien recalled that Hunter, whom she had originally met in the 1980s in New York, had difficulties in dealing with the fact that John was married.
"There were stormy moments for her, a lot of tears and a lot of struggle," O'Brien said.
Gordon, Hunter's lawyer, declined to comment, citing the privacy of Hunter and her baby.
Hunter's work for the political action committee involved making short videos of Edwards, known as Webisodes, in which she tried to capture what she considered to be his more natural side. Hunter can be seen in photographs videotaping Edwards in the final days of December 2006, right after he declared his candidacy for president on the 28th of that month. The committee made six payments totaling $100,000 to Midline Groove Productions, Hunter's production company, before its contract ended on Dec. 31, and Hunter no longer appears in photographs of campaign events after that.
But three months later, on April 1, 2007, the committee made another payment to Midline for $14,086, which coincided with the receipt of $14,035 by the committee from Edwards' presidential campaign to cover the cost of office furniture, according to Federal Election Commission reports. The infusion of cash from the presidential campaign was necessary to make the payment to Midline, because the committee began April with only $7,932 in the bank, the reports show. The only other money the committee took in during that quarter was donations totaling $18,000 from Baron's wife and three other people.
A senior official in the Edwards campaign, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the final payment to Hunter covered the cost of video clips she took of Edwards under her 2006 contract. The payment did not occur until April because it took that long for the committee to get Hunter to turn over the video, the former official said.
This person added that the two $14,000 transactions were necessary to cover the payment to Hunter because the One America Committee was winding down and no longer raising much money, except to pay for expenses left over from before Edwards announced his intention to run for president. Once he made that announcement, under federal election rules, he could no longer use his political action committee.
The public airing of the videos created by Hunter was short lived. By the fall of 2007, when the first reports of an Edwards affair began circulating, the videos had been removed from the Web and Hunter's personal Web site, beingisfree.org, had been taken down.
The precise nature and origins of Hunter's relationship with Young, Edwards' campaign aide, is unclear, because neither has spoken publicly about it. But by mid-2007, Hunter had moved into the gated community in Chapel Hill, N.C., where Young rented a house with his wife and three children. The Youngs had moved there earlier that year, after selling their house in Raleigh.
After The National Enquirer reported in October 2007 that Edwards had had an affair, Baron helped to relocate Young and Hunter. Baron, who made millions pressing asbestos lawsuits, has long supported Edwards, a fellow lawyer who opposed efforts in the Senate to rein in damage awards in liability cases.
Although he said he used his own money to pay for Young and Hunter to move to California, Baron initially said he did not know how they had chosen their lawyers.
But he has since offered conflicting explanations about his involvement in arranging for the two lawyers to step in and effectively defuse an accusation that threatened to derail Edwards' political career. Because neither Hunter nor Young have spoken publicly about it, the statements issued by their lawyers remain the only record of their denials that Edwards fathered Hunter's child.
On Wednesday, Baron said he might have directed Hunter to Gordon.
"I have this recollection of somebody asking me for lawyers in New York, and I remember naming three or four, and he must have been one of them," Baron said. Referring to Hunter, he added, "It was either her who called or somebody on her behalf."
And on Thursday, Baron also provided a vague answer to the question of whether he was involved in introducing Young to Marple, who represented Young for a brief time and is no longer involved in the case.
"I remember getting a call from Pam and her telling me that she was representing him," Baron said. "I may have sent him over there, but on the other hand I may not have. I don't have an accurate recollection."
Asked whether he had lent Hunter and Young any money, Baron said, "I have a brief recollection of giving someone some cash. My assumption is I loaned some small amount of money to the both of them." Marple declined to comment on her representation of Young. Gordon, Hunter's lawyer, said: "Ms. Hunter called me. I represent her and only her, as I would any client."
When Hunter, her baby and the Youngs moved to California around the end of last year, they all initially lived in the same residence, according to an associate of Young and Edwards.
But the arrangement strained relationships, and Hunter moved into a different residence, which cost about $6,000 a month in rent. The associate believed that the lease on the home where the Youngs had been staying was to run out on Friday.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/5944898.html

[Easy90]

Campaign finance law violations. Gee...now it looks like Edwards DID break the law too... Go figure!

[Trish]

Campaign finance law violations. Gee...now it looks like Edwards DID break the law too... Go figure!

Perhaps so. But....it was a private matter - should have remained between Edwards and his wife - right? ;)

[Stoner]

Perhaps so. But....it was a private matter - should have remained between Edwards and his wife - right? ;)

Should have been. Unfortunately libbies don't know how to man up and take responsibility. They think they can solve their fuck-ups by bribing their way out of them.

Now he faces some serious questions by men in suits.

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa69/djrobotmonster/John-Edwards-President.jpg

[ECW]

Should have been. Unfortunately libbies don't know how to man up and take responsibility. They think they can solve their fuck-ups by bribing their way out of them.

Now he faces some serious questions by men in suits.


I guess that's why Gingrich is on his third wife. I guess that's why Dole is on his second wife. I guess that's why McCain is on his second wife. I guess that's why Limbaugh is past his third wife. It's why Rudi Guiliani is on his third wife. It's why Fred Thompson is on his second wife. They can't man up after they have fucked up and they cannot take responsibility so they run like the little pussies they are. Lying fuckers one and all. They have no standing to call anyone else out on any moral question. Losers.

Say what you want about Clinton and Edwards, they are still with their first wives.

http://www.constructiveanarchy.com/blog/1aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacarol%20shepp %20mccain.jpg

McCain and his first wife before he became the two-faced adulterous piece of shit he is today.

[Blueneck]

There appears to be quite a bit more to the Edwards scandal than just adultery and lying. What we've heard so far about all this is just likely to be only the tip of the scandal iceberg.


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/5944898.html
I don't see a shred of evidence in that long, boring article.

At what point did he break the law?

[Trish]

I don't see a shred of evidence in that long, boring article.

At what point did he break the law?

The article doesn't purport to deliver any evidence - it just raises questions. Questions that are cropping up because it now appears that the entire Edwards "cover-up" of the affair, timing, etc. was based upon a deliberate and concerted effort to deceive. The only "evidence" introduced in the piece are the comments by Baron that show he was more "in charge" of this whole mess than he'd previously said.

Did Edwards break the law? I don't know. At this point no one knows and the article doesn't state that he did. What IS stated, as my original OP indicated, is that there APPEARS to be more to the story than simply a case of adultery and lying. There does appear, from statements issued, that some financial impropriety exists. Was it illegal? Until someone investigates, no one knows the answer to that question. And that's the point - this scandal is apparently a lot more involved and complicated than simply a case of adultery which should have been a matter between husband and wife.

[Easy90]

Perhaps so. But....it was a private matter - should have remained between Edwards and his wife - right? ;)

I agree...right up until he campaigned on a "character and family values" basis...and perhaps violated campaign contribution laws by using $14,000 of donations to pay off his concubine.

"The closer we get to the election and the more people move past celebrity and to the issues such as honesty, integrity and who can actually bring about change, I think they are going to pay very close attention to those questions," Edwards said while riding in a minivan between campaign stops.

Here's another Edward's gem: ""You're in a position to understand and evaluate the honesty, the sincerity and the integrity of the presidential candidates," he said. "All of this other stuff becomes unimportant if you don't have a president that you believe will tell you the truth even when it's hard, and a president who is honest and sincere and that you can count on. I don't know about you, but I'm not interested in having the next great politician as president."

And this gem, June 1, 2008 in a "Rolling Stone" interview: "You’ve got to have a president who has strength and character, integrity. Because without it, the ideas don’t matter." (John Edwards)

[G.B.]

One thing I have discovered to be a foolproof way to tell if politicians are lying over the years..... Watch for their lips to move. If their lips move they are lying.

[Muser]

One thing I have discovered to be a foolproof way to tell if politicians are lying over the years..... Watch for their lips to move. If their lips move they are lying.

My method is an offshoot of that - whatever it is that comes out of their mouths, anticipate a completely opposite reality, i.e., Bush, Edwards, Spitzer, Clinton, McCain, etc.

[Blueneck]

The article doesn't purport to deliver any evidence - it just raises questions. Questions that are cropping up because it now appears that the entire Edwards "cover-up" of the affair, timing, etc. was based upon a deliberate and concerted effort to deceive. The only "evidence" introduced in the piece are the comments by Baron that show he was more "in charge" of this whole mess than he'd previously said.

Did Edwards break the law? I don't know. At this point no one knows and the article doesn't state that he did. What IS stated, as my original OP indicated, is that there APPEARS to be more to the story than simply a case of adultery and lying. There does appear, from statements issued, that some financial impropriety exists. Was it illegal? Until someone investigates, no one knows the answer to that question. And that's the point - this scandal is apparently a lot more involved and complicated than simply a case of adultery which should have been a matter between husband and wife.Who do you think should pay to investigate this?

[ECW]

One thing I have discovered to be a foolproof way to tell if politicians are lying over the years..... Watch for their lips to move. If their lips move they are lying.

An old replay of a Bobby Kennedy quote about LBJ...

[Trish]

Who do you think should pay to investigate this?

Some of the same people we're paying to investigate Bush/Cheney or we paid to investigate any other political figure suspected of wrongdoing.

[Blueneck]

Some of the same people we're paying to investigate Bush/Cheney or we paid to investigate any other political figure suspected of wrongdoing.Name one other political figure who isn't actually holding a public office who's being investigated at the expense of the taxpayers merely because of adultery.

Oh, wait, the Democrats have the majority. I forgot, we don't do that.

[preservanation]

If the feds get involved it will be because of misuse of campaign funds and tax evasion and irregularities, not adultery.
The IRS gets involved all the time...as we all know.

This is typical, some did the same with Bill Clinton, calming that it was about sex, when it was about lying under oath to a Grand Jury in the civil suit brought by Jones, perjury, subornation of perjury, among others
All the hanky panky and lying to all of America in pressers and official statements played no roll in his impeachment or fed investigations.

Same tactic...different perp.
What they have in common is a (D) next to their name.

[aaronssongs]

If the feds get involved it will be because of misuse of campaign funds and tax evasion and irregularities, not adultery.
The IRS gets involved all the time...as we all know.

This is typical, some did the same with Bill Clinton, calming that it was about sex, when it was about lying under oath to a Grand Jury in the civil suit brought by Jones, perjury, subornation of perjury, among others
All the hanky panky and lying to all of America in pressers and official statements played no roll in his impeachment or fed investigations.

Same tactic...different perp.
What they have in common is a (D) next to their name.

Oh, please. We're talking about possibly sex for pay.
Marshmellows compared to the high crimes and misdemeanors of the other side of the aisle.

[Easy90]

Yeah...cept this one is easily provable..and your attempt to equivocate it away is mere deflection.

[Tsky]

This Edwards issue isn't even up for debate as far as I'm concerned. Both sides should agree that this guy is the stupidest politician alive and leave it at that. He got caught cheating and supposedly came forward about it except he's still lying thru his teeth. He's made his wife and himself look like complete morons for running a presidential campaign knowing about the infidelity and the possibility that it could destroy the Dems chances in the White House. Actually, Edwards has been a complete disappointment to the Dem party, not evening carrying his home state or home district for that matter in 2004. He's a 3 time loser and Obama was wise enough to not even consider putting this wackjob on the ticket.

[ECW]

Ah, but you are sooooo wrong, Tsky. The Edwards affair is the issue that will win it for the GOP this November. It ranks #1 on the "Issues Of Importance" list in every republican household, campaign headquarters, and RNC press release. It's why there were 35 threads started about it and they are still discussing it today. To hell with Iraq, the faltering economy, the mortgage crisis, the Russia-Georgia War, 48 million people without health care, and the hemmoraging red ink from the Bush budget. John Edwards and his wank rule the airwaves. I hear FOX is starting a second cable news channel devoted just to the issue.

[Leslie]

Ah, but you are sooooo wrong, Tsky. The Edwards affair is the issue that will win it for the GOP this November. It ranks #1 on the "Issues Of Importance" list in every republican household, campaign headquarters, and RNC press release. It's why there were 35 threads started about it and they are still discussing it today. To hell with Iraq, the faltering economy, the mortgage crisis, the Russia-Georgia War, 48 million people without health care, and the hemmoraging red ink from the Bush budget. John Edwards and his wank rule the airwaves. I hear FOX is starting a second cable news channel devoted just to the issue.


Great summation. :thumbsup:
We know Pubs can't stick to real issues anyway. :lmao:

[AlanC]

This Edwards issue isn't even up for debate as far as I'm concerned. Both sides should agree that this guy is the stupidest politician alive and leave it at that. He got caught cheating and supposedly came forward about it except he's still lying thru his teeth. He's made his wife and himself look like complete morons for running a presidential campaign knowing about the infidelity and the possibility that it could destroy the Dems chances in the White House. Actually, Edwards has been a complete disappointment to the Dem party, not evening carrying his home state or home district for that matter in 2004. He's a 3 time loser and Obama was wise enough to not even consider putting this wackjob on the ticket.

I agree completely with all of that. But it's like the thing with Foley. It's a story that is done with, but it won't go away. Everyone who ever supported the guy will be reminded of it all the way to November.

Is it something I look forward to? Absolutely not, but then it now has a life of its own and he's responsible for that too. I don't think anyone can put this thing out now.

[Trish]

Name one other political figure who isn't actually holding a public office who's being investigated at the expense of the taxpayers merely because of adultery.

Oh, wait, the Democrats have the majority. I forgot, we don't do that.

Oh please - let's not be juvenile about this. Any investigation into this mess won't be because of adultery, it will be possible campaign funding violations. Edwards fucking around on his wife and lying about it is one thing - but IF campaign funds were used to pay Hunter illegally that's an entirely different matter and THAT's what will be investigated.

[ilikegw]

He was paying her while having sex with her and supposedly the videos she made aren't worth what she was paid (on paper). Who knows how much money he gave her that's not accounted for.

[ECW]

I agree completely with all of that. But it's like the thing with Foley. It's a story that is done with, but it won't go away. Everyone who ever supported the guy will be reminded of it all the way to November.

Is it something I look forward to? Absolutely not, but then it now has a life of its own and he's responsible for that too. I don't think anyone can put this thing out now.

Yeah. The more you all talk about it, the more the public realizes that your party has no answers for what ails this country and all you want to do is talk about a sex scandal that has very little political impact. I seem to recall that you all did this back in the 1990's with Clinton and the more you all talked, the more popular Clinton became.

Please keep running a campaign without issues. Please keep telling us that drilling for oil will win it for you in November or gay marriage will win it for you in November because the more you say it the more the public sees that you are clueless as to what is going on in America's heartland and blind to the issues that mean the most to Americans as a whole.

Please. I beg you.

[Blueneck]

Oh please - let's not be juvenile about this. Any investigation into this mess won't be because of adultery, it will be possible campaign funding violations. Edwards fucking around on his wife and lying about it is one thing - but IF campaign funds were used to pay Hunter illegally that's an entirely different matter and THAT's what will be investigated.If she was paid for the video produced, that's not illegal, and this would never be investigated. But because adultery was involved, we suddenly feel the need to look into it. So yes, it is about adultery.

And it's kind of my whole point about these kinds of scandals. Because we continue to judge candidates on biblical values and not practical ones, we overlook other indiscretions, business, campaign finance, etc., that are much more important to the "character" of the individual. If a candidate never gets caught screwing around on his wife, he's safe.

No one is looking into John McCain's campaign to see who's paid, how much and for what, and what their connection may be, past or present. Or Obama for that matter.

But suddenly, every aspect of Edwards campaign needs examining? Which is why I hope the "Cone of Silence" thing gets thouroughly vetted. It's a stupid issue about nothing that could turn into a big scandal.

If we're going to turn this election into stupid hysteria over minutia, let's go all the way, baby. Spread the bullshit around so we all get covered in it.

[Trish]

If she was paid for the video produced, that's not illegal, and this would never be investigated. But because adultery was involved, we suddenly feel the need to look into it. So yes, it is about adultery.

And it's kind of my whole point about these kinds of scandals. Because we continue to judge candidates on biblical values and not practical ones, we overlook other indiscretions, business, campaign finance, etc., that are much more important to the "character" of the individual. If a candidate never gets caught screwing around on his wife, he's safe.

No one is looking into John McCain's campaign to see who's paid, how much and for what, and what their connection may be, past or present. Or Obama for that matter.

But suddenly, every aspect of Edwards campaign needs examining? Which is why I hope the "Cone of Silence" thing gets thouroughly vetted. It's a stupid issue about nothing that could turn into a big scandal.

If we're going to turn this election into stupid hysteria over minutia, let's go all the way, baby. Spread the bullshit around so we all get covered in it.

The adultery and the lies about the adultery brought the mess into the public spotlight. Once the matter was in the public arena and claims were being evaluated, then the money aspect was brought forth.

Until Edwards confessed, this whole story was pretty much a non-issue because the NE just couldn't be trusted to actually publish the truth. Edwards' confession rang hollow and didn't match up with much of what had already been reported. People started digging and more inconsistencies were uncovered. The more that is learned, the more there appears to be learned.

It's the same type situation in which Clinton found himself. Getting a blow-job from Lewinski was scummy but not illegal. It was his lying under oath about the blow-job that did him in. So yeah, the Edwards mess is about adultery in that it was the affair and the lying about the affair that possibly led to illegal acts just as the Clinton mess was about a blow-job in that lying about that blow-job led to an illegal act.

[Blueneck]

And in the meantime, we're all looking the other way while much more sinister corruption is going on amongst those politicians who don't get caught cheating on their wives.

It's just stupid.

[Trish]

While I don't think we need to focus on this mess to the exclusion of everything else, I don't think we should ignore it either. I'm really rather proud of the Democrats who forced Edwards' hand in making his confession. It's about time each party was serious about exposing its own dirty laundry because neither one of them is free from it!