Yahoo via The Nation picks up the Edwards story.

I wish they hadn't done this. I read the Enquirer story (yeah, I know) and it's all innuendo and twisting. It's one thing for this story to be in the Enquirer, it's another when it hits the MSM. I don't support Edwards politically, but I sure do personally, and I think this crap is toxic.

From The Nation:

Opinion
Edwards and the Enquirer Wed Dec 19, 12:47 AM ET



The Nation -- If the story is true, John Edwards is finished as a contender for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

The story is the National Enquirer top-of-the-page cover article -- which is set to go on sale at the checkout counters of the supermarkets and drug stores of Iowa, New Hampshire and the other 48 states Wednesday morning -- that claims the former senator from North Carolina is the father of a soon-to-be-born "love child."

The article claims Edwards, who has long burnished an image as the consummate family man and whose wife Elizabeth is a key player in his campaign, had an 18-month affair with female staffer who traveled with the candidate during the current campaign. According to the Enquirer, which is indeed a supermarket tabloid but which has at least some history of breaking sordid political stories that turn out to have credibility, the staffer is now six-months pregnant and hiding from the media.

Edwards and the staffer are reportedly denying the story -- with the campaign issuing an absolute and unequivocal dismissal of its validity. The Enquirer counters with a claim that it has obtained confirmations from friends of the woman who say she shared the details of the affair and the pregnancy with them. Reporters for the weekly newspaper also claims to have seen emails that were purportedly sent by the woman regarding an affair.

<snip>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20071219/cm_thenation/45261535_1

Why would this be proof? I could send an email saying I was having an affair with George W Bush (after I gagged) and it would have no more validity than any other email.

This is just so bogus.

Proof of.... nothing. But the MSM has picked it up. It's now going to be all over, and unfortunately, the Edwards have to deal with it.

With the Iowa Caucuses right around the corner and Edwards coming up in the polls, the "leaking"...ahem, excuse me...I mean "breaking" of the love child story at this particular moment reeks!

and posting it over and over on Du does not bode well for who "we" are that we would propagate this bullshit!

fly

about Kerry and an affair before the 2004 primaries?

running for a long time to make a stupid mistake like this and not keep it in his pants... I hope John comes up with a Dr.s note indicating a vasectomy or something... It would help the most. Maybe its to try to take heat off the Big Dog that all the other papers are hiding until later on in the races? Then again, the National Enquirer has some pretty bogus stories.. the Bush/ Laura saga has yet to make it to MSM.

the Enquirer runs bogus stories every day. But I am not happy with The Nation picking it up.

we have a demented drug and or alcohol abuser in the White House, and the MSM won't touch it.

I'm not touching this other than to say that learning that Bill Clinton might be messing around would be as surprising as learning water is, errrrr wet...

unfortunately, if it's not, it's rather hard to fight this kind of innuendo once it starts snowballing. Also, if it's true, he's a complete and total fucking idiot, and I guess he learned nothing from the Clinton scandal. I hope he hasn't put himself in a position where it could even be construed as being true, but I will reserve judgment for now.

are probably less than 1%. I am not an Edwards fan but this crap makes me sick.

The Korporate media has a nice way to put forth stories that serve their purposes, whether they have any depth or not, and not look at all at things that don't (like Guckert?). And they are supposed to be the "liberal media"?????????

was ever a "liberal media"? Maybe, it was a media that reported facts and the fascists tried to smear it with the moniker, "liberal"?

It puzzles me that this woman, after having experienced the October rile-up with this story, would have moved from out of state to Chapel Hill well along in her pregnancy and in the heat of the primary season. All involved had to see this new storm coming. I wonder whose bright idea it was for her to move there. As in the October story, it seems driven by friends of the woman leaking confidences. You had to wonder in the first place if Rielle Hunter was feeding it. Now I wonder if she still is. I mean, she could have had her baby in New Jersey a lot more quietly.

in NC. For all we know, that's not even true.

The NE says her lawyer confirmed it was she living in that house, who they had tried to interview. I tend to think it is, but unless a second source confirms it, you're right.

Why did The Nation bring any credibility to this story?

If I were an editor at the Nation, I wouldn't risk my cred on a story from the Enquirer, unless I knew there was something legit to report.

Can't believe more people don't see that this will help him. It's obviously not true, so people will feel sorry for him being smeared.

Even if he does well in Iowa, the guy isn't going to win this race.

I think the part about her "hiding" is what makes this different about the non-story with Kerry in '04. I really hope this will turn out to be a non-story. He's my 2nd choice but I don't want to see him go out like that. I don't know if her giving a press conference to say "This isn't Edwards's kid." would help but her "hiding" out doesn't look good.

Isn't it more likely that JRE's recent successes in the polls have some people worried? Funny, isn't it, the timing on this thing? You have to ask yourself "Why now" and the answer is right there on the primary calendar...

Yahoo, Wonkette, Drudge et al have picked it up and I'm sure talk radio is going to run with it. And if this woman is going to act like a hermit it's going to make JE's job that much harder.

That makes it very different from the Kerry lie. If she had stayed hiding in New Jersey, this wouldn't be news, maybe. I think what it will take is the staff guy, now former staff guy, being convincing enough that it's his kid, and his wife being cooperative enough, even if it is his kid. But it's a matter of wonder, as well, what he's doing parking his pregnant mistress a few blocks from his own wife and family. I think the whole thing is too screwy for the press to not gnaw on like a bone at least for a while. But if Edwards handles it firmly and the staff guy stands up, right quick, it will probably blow over in Iowa, once a couple of issues of NE have passed through the supermarkets. How it will play in South Carolina itself is another issue. I don't think the effect there can be calculated as yet.

And that story turned out to be false, too!

I remember about Kerry's campaign during the primaries.

John needs a rapid response team on this.

If, indeed, it is not true.

Have a press conference laughing and say, "You won't believe this, but I have to address it..."

but don't you think the timing on this thing is suspect? Now that JRE is surging a bit in the polls, somebody is afraid he'll make it to the nomination. As they say in the law, cui bono (who benefits?).

The Nation has no business printing this article. From what I could see, there is just some unidentified woman's emails and conversations as "proof". AFter she gives birth, in 3 months or so, she would have to back up her assertion with a DNA test.

What an appalling state of affairs we are in with this flimsy accusation!

And Enquirer "(r)eporters...claims to have seen emails that were purportedly sent by the woman regarding an affair?" So the Enquirer themselves can't auththenicate the e-mails. And they were puportedly sent to whom--Edwards himself or the staffer's friends? And shouldn't it matter that the staffer denies the story?

:headbang:
rocknation

The Nation, which is a decidedly left publication has picked it up and so has Yahoo.

It turns up in search results but not at the link. And I was all set to scold them for not making the denial the heart of the story! Looks like they've taken it down. Cue the Vonage theme!

:woohoo:
rocknation

and got an error. Looks to me like someone unauthorized put it up. I hope someone gets fired.

Tabloids such as these do have expert legal teams who have to give the green light before a major story such as this can go to press. They've had reporters on this one for at least 2-3 months, that's long enough to confirm thru several sources.

They must be fairly confident in the reporting, because if the story isn't true, John Edwards can sue them back to the stone age. And I hope he does!

he can only sue them back to the stone age, or even the bronze age, if there is a "reckless disregard" for the truth, regardless of whether or not the story is true.

load of absolute nonsense. I don't believe this crap for a second.

"To whose benefit" is it to have this story come out (now)...

Answer that question and you might find the genesis of this rumor...

I'm not answering it because to answer it is to point fingers and I hate that kind of shit regardless of the target...

and I don't think any of the dems would do this.

But to determine who benefits from an action is the logical place to begin an investigation...

Pointing over there. With nothing to back it up.

That's straight forward investigation technique..


You have to determine who benefits... That's how lawyers are trained to see if a person is making a truthful or false statement...

It's akin to Occam's Razor...

The seamy tabloid media themselves benefit.

Who knew?

But I doubt very much if his campaign did this.

The story came out in early October, though. It's juiced up now by the pregnancy and the woman's relocation. I've never thought it was campaign-driven, actually. I think it's somebody in Rielle Hunter's social circle trying to make money.

I am not saying any more...

Elizabeth needs to be getting visibly pissed at whoever started this shit.

And I was all set to give The Nation the same type of scolding I gave Robert Novak and the Washington Post about their Obama smears!

:bounce:
rocknation

had been, thought this story would die except for those who would work to keep it alive in some fashion. Did you ever find it at all at The Nation, they don't usually give gossip any credibility at all.

but it's down now. I suspect that someone unauthorized to do so, posted it and Yahoo picked it up. It's now gone from Yahoo as well. If true, someone should be fired at The Nation.

on one of the blogs someway.

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/john_edwards_love_child/celebrity/64426

ETA: updated link

"In 2001, the Enquirer uncovered that the Rev. Jesse Jackson had an illegitimate child. Salacious details of the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair were first made public by the Enquirer. The Enquirer was regarded by some as having the best media coverage of the O.J. Simpson murder trial. For example, when a distinctive footprint from a Bruno Magli shoe was found at the crime scene, Simpson vehemently denied owning such a shoe. The Enquirer, however, dug up a photograph of him with just such a pair."....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Enquirer

There was a new one posted as Breaking News last night that comes out in print today.

when it went to print. I remember alerting several times on threads thinking the NE had taken it down, because the Breaking News link came up empty, when it turned out to have been published in a different section of the site. I suspect that's what's happening with this one, too. I read the distribution of the print edition is today East and West Coast and tomorrow in other regions.

little story made it here and is running around.. hopefully they squash it... To some people this would matter a lot...

because they had nothing!

God this is the oldest trick in the book.

So you know. He denied it in October and he is denying it now.

Joe and Jane Six Pack here "Edwards" and think "love child scandal"

I'd do the same regardless of which Dem candidate they helped smear.

Eff them.

searched over there and you will never find where it has been there. Not sure how they got connected with this but they are far above this kind of stuff. This story came off of Yahoo, cannot find where it was at The Nation.

however briefly and mistakenly. All Yahoo does is pick up stories from other sites.

I think the "Nation" that the OP references was a national news segement for Yahoo, but not The Nation.

That's exactly how they've sourced other stories they pick up from it. And it says it's an opinion piece.

There doesn't seem to be anything at The Nation site. Also it appears that Yahoo has a segment called The Nation. Anyway, I doubt it came from the The Nation. Show me the link.

I'll contact The Nation about the smear before I cancel my subscription.

At The Nation online I typed "love child" into their search engine and found a reference to a blog entry about the rumor that Edwards fathered a love child, but when I clicked to read the entry, there was nothing there about it.

True or not, it will be adopted by the pundits and political operatives.

I hope it's not true, and is quickly proven not to be true.

CNN, don't know about Fox. Nothing really except the Enquirer, Drudge & I guess Yahoo. I think it is dying.

I can't imagine any of them, with that one glaring exception, will want to touch it if it's not true. And it's not.

...(She) is pregnant...(and) living in Chapel Hill, N.C. in a gated community, just a few streets away from Andrew Young...(whose) last official position with the campaign was North Carolina Finance Director. He left that job about a month ago — nearly the same time Rielle relocated from the New Jersey area to Chapel Hill...(A) 41-year-old married man with young children, (Young) now claims HE is the father of (the) baby...(The woman) hired a lawyer and issued a statement saying that Young is the father...

:rofl:
rocknation

We missed you. (sarcasm)

Old tactic of the right wing. Use tabloids to make smear claims. It is easy enough to do. They did it back in the 50s and 60s too. It doesn't matter if its true or not. It only matters how much they can color public perception.

For those of you who might not think this is politically motivative tripe, remember NE's obsession with White Water? And then think of all the nice juicy Republican scandals that the NE did not break and has very lightly covered. Well I bet most of you don't read it every week. My parents are subscribers.

You make me sick.

I posted this because it was on Yahoo. I did not and would not post anything from Drudge or a tabloid- as many people did. And I've made it quite clear that I don't believe any of this. If you weren't quite so overly sensitive, you might be able to see that. If you weren't quite so hypocritical, your distress might actually carry some real weight.

Just keep talking about it. How many posts is that now? Two, three, maybe four?

Sell it somewhere else sister. I really thought better of you than this. The house is one thing, talk about his votes and his haircuts all you want.

This man has a sick wife, and you know this is a non-story. But you just keep spreading the disinformation.

Mark Penn would love you.

I did it because if it's in the MSM it becomes news, genius. That is a no brainer.

You love to make shit up. I have NEVER brought up JE's haircuts. I have NEVER played in the dogshit you love, pumpkin, with your pics of Clinton next to bush with the little "meet the new boss, same as the old boss", crap. I have posted dozens of positive posts about Edwards as well as posts critical of him. And that's true of every candidate here.

And you're the rovian type with your photo nonsense, bucko.

Newt Gingrich, anyone?

I'm not saying Edwards did or did not have an affair. We don't know, yet.

But, to insinuate that people with sick spouses don't have affairs is ridiculous.

Now incap, however, would. Because I detest Edwards and hope this is true and destroys him.

lol.

:evilgrin:

she wishes they hadn't printed it but what does she do. Posts it and how this story came about is somewhat strange as you can't find any of the story from the links. Not there unless they have taken them down.

I have emailed The Nation to inquire about it because they do not post garbage gossip like this.

Here is her first link to this story:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3859431&mesg_id=3859431

the 2nd post on this subject by you.

Not too hard to tell your motivation.

Here is your first post on this matter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3859431&mesg_id=3859431

.

We're not reporting the story itself... we are reporting he story that someone else reported the story.

:rofl:

motivation since we all know your feelings about John Edwards?

We know it is gossip, unfounded.

Here is your first post about the Drudge article.

You say it disgusts you, you wish they hadn't printed it but yet, you post it every chance you get. Then and now this post.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3859431&mesg_id=3859431

The post you link to is in response to people here accusing Clinton of being behind the rumor. It's that simple as the OP says. It links to NOTHING. I have NEVER posted anything from Drude.

I was not one of the people that posted this rumor.

You are a bald faced.....

That post was not about the Drudge rumor. It was about people reacting to it by accusing Clinton of being behind it.


I have never hit ANY of the candidates beneath the belt. And furthermore, I've posted good things about JE when I see something I agree with, or just because I think it's an article people here who support him might like. I did that yesterday before any of this was posted and I did it again today.\

Some tabloid did, and then the MSM felt "obligated" to cover that.

I don't care if this is true, and I hope it isn't true...vote on the issues, not some rumors.

by taking votes away from Obama.

It is not at Yahoo either. Looks like it was in Ari Melber's column.

The article is already gone, which is not looking good for their reputation.

You make a play like this, you better not fuck up, and taking the story down means they already have even if it should prove to be true later on. American journalism at its finest (and no, that's not facetious).

he made good use of the 60 Minutes retort to the charges.

God I love that rag......

Remember Bill Clinton, when the press started with his affairs with other women, that is when he started to rise in the polls......Funny ,Funny,Funny

Well, this was a one day story, wasn't it?