John Edwards: What’s not to like

May 7, 2009

“The whole thing is just baffling”

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Character, Democrats, EE, Family Values, Lies, Scandal — is @ 3:11 pm

The whole thing is just baffling. Why would Edwards enter the race under these circumstances? And why didn’t Edwards quit the race a few months later when it was discovered his wife’s cancer had spread — giving him a graceful reason to bow out? Did John and Elizabeth Edwards really think the affair could be kept secret indefinitely? Was there any thought at all given to the impact on their children, their supporters, the Democratic Party and the nation if and when the affair was exposed?

Was Edwards really so egotistical, so ambitious to think taking the risk was worth the possible (and likely) consequences?

Apparently so.

Kalamazoo (MI) Gazette

I would ask Elizabeth that last question, too.

February 27, 2009

Happy, Happy Birthday, Baby

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Character, Family Values, Lies, Scandal — is @ 3:41 pm

rielle-baby

An earlier photo:

frances-quinn-hunter

The National Enquirer spycam photo, possibly taken at the Beverly Hilton Hotel on March 20, 2008:

john-edwards-rielle-hunter-love-child-photo_495x326

February 3, 2009

John Edwards’ Wife: New Book Will Address Affair

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Character, Democrats, EE, Family Values, Lies, Scandal — is @ 3:39 pm

You’d think after the chaos last year surrounding former Senator John Edwards’ personal life, his wife, Elizabeth, would not be looking for more publicity — or inviting questions.

But on May 12th, Broadway Books, a division of Random House, is releasing a new short memoir by Elizabeth called “Resilience,” a follow up to her best selling “Saving Graces.”

Edwards insiders are wondering if “Resilience” will be a tell-all, tell-some, tell-none, or an exercise in denial. The Broadway Books catalog says Edwards has written “an unsentimental and ultimately inspirational meditation on the gifts we can find among life’s biggest challenges.”

The publication of “Resilience” may not prove so inspirational to one reader, however: Rielle Hunter, the woman who gave birth last year to a baby girl whom many speculate was fathered by Edwards. Hunter has privately told friends that the child is Edwards’. Sources say the resemblance is as good as a paternity test.

So far, Hunter and Edwards have not come to any agreement about the baby’s paternity or finances — absolutely some of “life’s biggest challenges.”

The usually private Elizabeth Edwards, I am told, is definitely including her take on the relationship in her new book. Her publicist says she will be addressing John’s “affair and how she experienced it.”

Indeed, how Elizabeth “experienced” may be just as the public did: Edwards suddenly exited the race for the Democratic presidential nomination on January 30, 2008. In early August, after much pressure and a sting by the National Enquirer, he admitted the affair. What he didn’t say: the end of his campaign came exactly one month before Hunter gave birth to baby Frances Quinn.

Fox News

August 22, 2008

Edwards ran into the bathroom

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Character, Family Values, Lies, Scandal — is @ 5:28 pm

These days, you can’t fault Perel for feeling smug. Just two weeks ago, John Edwards confirmed to Bob Woodruff of ABC News much of what the Enquirer had been reporting for 18 months: that he had cheated on his cancer-stricken wife Elizabeth with 44-year-old Rielle Hunter, who was paid $114,000 by Edwards’s One America PAC for producing a series of “Webisodes” along the campaign trail. The paper had printed photos of a pregnant Hunter and named her as the mother of Edwards’s love child. (Edwards denied fathering the baby.)

-snip

In September 2007, Rick Egusquiza, a bartender turned Hollywood reporter who joined the Enquirer in 2000, was sitting at his desk in the paper’s Los Angeles bureau when he answered the tip line. (“I’m a nice guy, so people tell me things,” Egusquiza says.) The anonymous source told him that Edwards was having an affair with Hunter. “I was like, ‘Whoa, this is great,’ ” he recalled. “Not like this is great, but you know, like this is something I want to check out.” The piece was assigned the next day, and Barry Levine, the Enquirer’s executive editor based in New York, directed the coverage that grew to include nearly a dozen reporters. “We saw some of the videos. It was clear back then, the flirtation was going on. Edwards was like a blushing kid to her,” Egusquiza says.

After a month on the story, the Enquirer obtained e-mails from Hunter disclosing the affair. The first article was published on October 10, 2007, but it did not name Hunter. “We knew her name, but we withheld it,” Perel says. “We were being conservative; sometimes we err on the side of caution.”

In late November 2007, Perel and Levine dispatched to North Carolina a “ghost team,” reporters whose job it is to watch but not to be seen. The reporters discovered that Hunter was living in a gated community and having dinner with Andrew Young, the campaign aide who later said he was the father of Hunter’s child, and his wife. They wanted a photo, and they wanted comments from both Hunter and Young. “You know, you have sources telling you she’s six months pregnant, but let’s see it!” Perel says. “We decided to shift into ‘go-mode.’ “

For two weeks, a team of four reporters-including Alan Smith, who broke the Donna Rice scandal-staked out Hunter’s OB/GYN office until she was spotted and snapped outside a nearby grocery store on December 12. “The picture you see where she looks like Camilla Parker Bowles took fifteen days,” reporter Alan Butterfield, who was at the scene, remembers. “We sat in our car.”

Before publishing the photograph on December 19, the Enquirer pressed Edwards to confirm the story, Perel says. Edwards’s attorney offered to provide a sworn affidavit that his client hadn’t fathered Hunter’s child, but, according to two former Edwards staffers, Edwards never signed one. Perel says the paper also offered Edwards the chance to take a polygraph test; if he passed, Perel would kill the story. Edwards declined the offer.

Hunter’s baby was born on February 27. Perel’s reporters kept working the story. Four days before encountering Edwards at the Beverly Hilton on July 22, they learned he would be meeting Hunter at the hotel, and, on July 21, a team of seven Enquirer reporters reserved several rooms and set up camp. That day, Edwards arrived in California for an anti-poverty event. Sources told the reporters he would see Hunter during the visit, but they didn’t know when. “We were up for thirty-six hours,” says senior reporter Alexander Hitchen, a veteran of Fleet Street and son of Brian Hitchen, the former editor of the British Sunday Express tabloid.

Around 9:40 p.m. on July 21, Hitchen saw Hunter’s friend Bob McGovern pull up to the hotel in a navy blue BMW 740 sedan and take the elevator up to Hunter’s room. Hitchen and Butterfield knew Edwards would likely use a less visible entrance and stationed themselves in the lobby for the five-hour stakeout. Shortly after 2 a.m, Hitchen saw McGovern return to the lobby. Expecting Edwards to take the elevator to the basement where he could escape through a rear stairwell, the reporter positioned himself at the bottom of the stairs. Edwards popped out of the elevator and started up the stairs.

Then Hitchen pounced. “Mr. Edwards, Alexander Hitchen, from the National Enquirer. Would you like to say why you were at the hotel this evening to see your mistress Rielle Hunter and your love child?” he asked. Edwards froze and “turned pale,” Hitchen remembers. Edwards made a move for the top of the stairs but Butterfield, standing with a photographer, was blocking the exit. “He ducked, tucked, and ran,” Butterfield says. The Enquirer reporters ran after him, Hitchen asking questions all the while. “Do you think for the sake of your child, you should admit paternity?” he said.

Edwards said nothing.

Edwards darted into a bathroom and pulled the door shut. Hitchen and Butterfield stood in the corridor, trying to pry it back open. Edwards “was trying to pull the door, and occasionally I’d see his face, and you’d see the stress on his face and his hair tussling around,” Butterfield told me. A group of security guards came over. Hitchen explained the situation and handed his card to a guard who went into the bathroom. Soon, the guards shielded Edwards’s head with a jacket and escorted him up the stairs and out of the hotel.

Hitchen and Butterfield stayed up for five more hours, hoping to encounter Hunter; but, after she failed to appear, the reporters filed their piece, which was posted online, and went to sleep.

In the days since the Enquirer broke the Edwards affair, the mainstream media has debated the probity of the tabloid’s reporting, criticizing the paper for paying sources and for its seamy tactics, like staging stakeouts or digging through its subjects’ garbage. “[T]abloids pay. And they pay big,” former New York Times Hollywood reporter Sharon Waxman wrote critically on her blog on August 13. “I’d guess that Hunter sold the photo from an earlier meeting at the Beverly Hilton to the National Enquirer.”

Perel laughed when I asked him about Waxman’s theory. “Tell Sharon Waxman I wish Rielle was a source, because I would have nailed this story a long time ago. I would have been putting a sex tape on the Internet by now!” he said. He also says there’s nothing corrupting about the way the paper pays for sources; it only pays out if the information is found to be true. “We pay for accurate information,” Perel says. “We do it the way cops pay tipsters and informants.”

New Republic

August 14, 2008

Lawyers’ Ties Hint at Extent of Hiding Edwards’s Affair

As tabloid reports of a sex scandal threatened former Senator John Edwards’s 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 Mr. Edwards’s 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 Mr. 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 Mr. Edwards that suggests 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 Ms. 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. Mr. Gordon has worked with Mr. Baron on class-action personal injury cases, and Ms. 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 Ms. Hunter and Mr. Young, Mr. 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 Mr. Edwards and Ms. Hunter, which suggested that their affair went on longer than Mr. Edwards admitted and that the effort to conceal it by Mr. Edwards’s inner circle was much more extensive than has been reported.

-more

New York Times

November 29, 2007

Sen. Edwards Says: Sign a “Pledge”

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Lies, Negative Campaigning — none @ 8:27 am

and Send me Your Brain; I Say: No Thanks

by eriposte

I’ve previously discussed historical analogies between Sen. Edwards’ campaign against Sen. Clinton and Bill Bradley’s campaign against Al Gore in 2000. Now, we have moved on to the absurd anticlimax that I had hoped we wouldn’t. Here’s the latest pronouncement from Sen. Edwards, via the WSJ blog Washington Wire (h/t Taylor Marsh, emphasis mine, throughout this post):

For too long, our political leaders in Washington have looked the other way as lobbyists and irresponsible corporations have fought against efforts to achieve real change in America. Enough is enough.

…Please sign the “America Belongs to Us” Pledge, and join together with Americans from all across the country who are taking a bold stand to make sure that our next president belongs to the people — not the lobbyists.

Here’s the so-called “pledge”:

Because I believe we need real change in America and an end to the broken system in Washington that works for special interests and not us, I pledge not to vote or caucus for a Democratic presidential candidate that accepts campaign contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs.

This “pledge” has finally – and sadly – tipped me over the edge and made it clear that there is one candidate I am NOT supporting in the Democratic primary. That candidate is Sen. John Edwards. If he wins the primary I will still support him in his Presidential campaign since he will be better than the Republican candidate for President. But, as a strong protest against his transparent stunt (aka the “pledge”) I’m not going to support him in the primary. The reason is simple. When Sen. Edwards ran for the Senate back in 1998, guess how much PAC money he took in, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (Open Secrets):

ZERO

Yes, ZERO (more on the significance of that in a moment). His Senate campaign against Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) was marked by his trademark cry that he would battle the “special interests”:

“This is who he is,” Prince said, noting that as far back as his 1998 campaign against Sen. Lauch Faircloth (R-N.C.), Edwards was talking about fighting for the little guy and against special interests. In one ad during that race, Edwards said: “Insurance companies have plenty of lobbyists fighting for them. I don’t want to be their senator. I want to be yours.”

Not to mention this:

Despite his own personal wealth, Edwards ran as the populist outsider, saying Faircloth cared more about big business than the people of North Carolina.

“We have got to start the process of restoring people’s faith, making them believe again that this really is a democracy, and that their voice matters when decisions are being made in Washington,” Edwards, then 44, said during his race against Faircloth.

With his emphasis on vindicating blue-collar workers and the poor, Edwards was a political anomaly. He had the kind of rags-to-riches life story that is often celebrated by Republicans, but instead of singing the praises of the free market, he condemned its excesses.

So, how did “populist”, “anti-special-interest”-crusader John Edwards vote in Congress after taking a sum total of ZERO dollars from PACs and lobbyists? He voted in favor of a Bankruptcy Bill not once but twice, voted against filibustering the bill and voted against some progressive amendments to the Bill, he supported NAFTA as recently as 2004, he voted in favor of storing nuclear waste at Yucca mountain, he voted in favor of No Child Left Behind, he voted in favor of the Andean trade agreement and easing trade relations with China – not to mention, he voted in favor of the 2002 Iraq war authorization resolution and stood by his vote in 2004, he voted against an attempt to restrict the Iraq war authorization to one year, he voted against creating an independent report on pre-war intelligence manipulation, he voted against an attempt to raise taxes to fund the war, and he voted in favor of labeling Iran a state sponsor of terrorism. You get the picture.

With this “pledge” stunt of his, I unfortunately have to draw the line and point out that some of us still have some brains left and don’t intend to email either the “pledge” or our brains to him. Sen. Edwards is running on a platform that says you can only trust people who take no contributions from PACs/lobbyists. As he has shown through his own career in the Senate, this claim can be catastrophically wrong. Who you take money from is a factor, but it is absolutely not the kind of defining factor that Sen. Edwards makes it out to be. What matters most is the character and ideology of the individual – NOT who they take money from. Lawyer-turned-lobbyist Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN) has about $100K in PAC receipts, Republican Governor Mike Huckabee has taken barely $20,000 from PACs and Republican Governor Mitt Romney has about $300,000 in PAC funds – and all of them are far to the right of Sen. Hillary Clinton even though they have taken much less PAC money than she has. In other words, Sen. Clinton is very progressive on corporatist matters even when compared to Sen. Edwards and Sen. Obama and you have three top Republican candidates who are far to her right who have taken significantly less contributions from PACs than she has.

Don’t get me wrong. I am personally in favor of dramatically reducing the corrupting influence of corporatist interests in elections and would love to see all candidates refuse special interest PAC money. However, Sen. Edwards has undermined the “clean elections” movement with this “stunt” by hypocritically pushing the envelope so far against other Democrats who are far better than the Republicans who will absolutely undermine clean elections in this country. In an ideal world, I’d love to endorse Sen. Edwards PACman theory – i.e., that those who take money from PACs/lobbyists can’t be trusted with your vote. However, this theory – deceptively nice-sounding, superficially pleasing and comforting – is sometimes just a mountain of stinking horse manure and far more damage is often done to the country by people who take little or no PAC money, than by those who do. So, Sen. Edwards, here’s my position on your “pledge” – thanks but no thanks.

The Leftcoaster

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011418.php

November 14, 2007

An Impossible Promise From John Edwards

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Lies — none @ 5:39 am

John Edwards

The Ad: When I’m president I’m going to say to members of Congress and members of my administration, including my Cabinet: I’m glad that you have health care coverage and your family has health care coverage. But if you don’t pass universal health care by July of 2009, in six month, I’m going to use my power as president to take your health care away from you. There’s no excuse for politicians in Washington having health care when you don’t have health care.

Analysis: John Edwards’s new Iowa ad is very effective rhetorically–and based on a false premise. A president has absolutely no power to rescind federal health insurance for members of Congress, as the Edwards campaign admits.

“He would introduce legislation, that’s all it is,” spokesman Eric Schultz said. “He would introduce legislation and ask them to set a deadline for themselves.” While a President Edwards could mount public pressure based on the 47 million Americans who lack health insurance, Congress is, to put it mildly, unlikely to relinquish its own coverage. In fact, some experts argue that such a law would violate the 27th Amendment’s ban on “varying the compensation” of members of Congress without an intervening election. Schultz said Edwards would ask senior administration officials to voluntarily give up their health coverage if he fails to pass universal coverage.

The ad captures the former senator’s passion and underscores his message that the Washington political system is broken. But Edwards is making a promise he can’t keep.

–Howard Kurtz

The Washington Post

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/11/13/edwards_impossible_promise.html

September 24, 2007

Two Pinocchios for wild exaggeration

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Lies, Negative Campaigning, Performance, Polls — is @ 4:02 pm

Is Edwards “the Most Electable”?

John Edwards statement to Good Morning America, September 3, 2007:

“And the same polls that you’re talking about, if you look at the general election match-ups, show very clearly that I’m the strongest Democrat to beat the Republicans in the general election. “

The Facts

National head-to-head polls collected by Real Clear Politics do not support Edwards’ claim. They vary week by week, alternately favoring one candidate, then another. The most recent poll averages suggest that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have as good a chance as Edwards in many head-to-head matchups.

snip

“The polls do seem to suggest a structural advantage for Democrat candidates against Republicans at this early stage,” said Washington Post director of polling John Cohen. “But there are no consistent, reliable data showing Edwards with a better chance than other Democrats.”

Washington Post Fact-Checker 9/24/07
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/09/john_edwards_strongest_democra.html

August 30, 2007

Edwards Watch: Do as I say…

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Environment, Image, Lies, Negative Campaigning — none @ 11:44 pm

While much of the political news attention has been focused on Idaho Senator Larry Craig’s apparent hypocrisy, Glenn Reynolds and Professor Bainbridge note the gross hypocrisy in John Edwards’ calling for a ban on SUVs. The guy not only has a 28,000 square foot estate, but as Glenn shows in a linked photo, that estate is surrounded by SUVs.

To which we might add that Edwards’ campaign dished out $430,000 in the first half of the year flying around the country in the private jet of his friend, asbestos tort kingpin Fred Baron

Point of Law.com

http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/004220.phpedwardshome.jpg

Edwards Caught in SUV Statement

Filed under: 2008 Primary, Environment, Lies, Transparency — none @ 4:42 pm

Democratic presidential contender John Edwards said Wednesday he would ask Americans to give up their fuel inefficient sport utility vehicles, even as he appeared to disregard such advice himself.

In a speech to the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, Edwards – a former U.S. senator from North Carolina – says he believes Americans are willing to make the sacrifice.

Yet, the Politico.com – a news and politics Web site – revealed Thursday that all major Democratic presidential candidates including Edwards are not traveling around the country in fuel-efficient vehicles, even as they scold Americans to drive them.

For his part, Edwards showed up in Iowa after announcing his presidential bid in New Orleans in a Cadillac SRX Crossover, which gets about 15 miles per gallon. Barack Obama, meanwhile, travels the country in an RV, while Hillary Clinton has ridden in an 18-wheeler.

His Web site says, “Edwards believes that everyone should be able to drive the car, truck or SUV of their choice and still enjoy high fuel economy,” according to the Politico.com.

Newsroom America

http://www.newsroomamerica.com/politics/story.php?id=390110

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.