He Did Not Have Paternal Relations With That Woman
Folks sure will be quick to believe John Edwards new admission of semi-guilt to ABC News - he lied in denying an affair with Rielle Hunter, but the baby was born so late after the affair ended that he couldn't possibly be the father:
John Edwards repeatedly lied during his Presidential campaign about an extramarital affair with a novice filmmaker, the former Senator admitted to ABC News today.
...
Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter's baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.
Edwards said he knew he was not the father based on timing of the baby's birth on February 27, 2008. He said his affair ended too soon for him to have been the father.
Oh, get Rielle. So what is Edwards' motivation here? Does this admission let enough air out of the balloon that the media go away (as if they had really even arrived - I can't wait to see the NY Times non-coverage of this.) I doubt it.
Whatever. I guess this means the LA Times is free to report on it.
INSUFFERABILITY WATCH: He'll always have a place in my heart, but will Mickey be unbearable for the rest of humanity? Time will tell!
TIMING IS EVERYTHING: Stephen Spruiell works the dates:
Elizabeth Edwards was diagnosed with incurable cancer in late March of 2007. Rielle Hunter's baby was born in late February of 2008. That means that if Edwards is the father, he was definitely still carrying on the affair with Hunter after he knew his wife's cancer was back.
So denying paternity, however implausibly, is important.
RIDICULOUS: Christopher Beam of Slate sees an Edwards problem for the Dems but tries to pretend that the infidelity topic might also hurt McCain. He accomplishes this self-delusion by pretending the only story is Edward's infidelity and ignoring the obvious press cover-up for a sympathetic Dem. If the press won't dish dirt on Edwards when it is dropped in their lap, what are the odds that they will present a fair and balanced portrait of Obama? His long-time partnership with unrepentant Weatherman Bill Ayers on education reform in Chicago will never be covered by a press that turned a blind eye to Edwards.
And this telling of the McCain bio is laughable:
Recall: John McCain returned to the United States from Vietnam in March 1973. His wife, Carol, had been in a near-fatal car accident while he was gone. She was overweight, on crutches, and 4 inches shorter than when McCain had left. McCain ended up divorcing Carol for Cindy Hensley, his current wife.
When Johnny came staggering home after more than five years of abuse and neglect at the hands of his Vietnamese captors he was a physical and emotional wreck unable to cope with his life or or wife's problems. Go figure. It was a long time ago, McCain was not lying about his fidelity while running for the Presidency, and I have no doubt Republicans would be thrilled to have the conversation shift to "What did you do during the war, Senators?".
But attack Dems being attack Dems, I expect this line will be trotted out and we will see for ourselves. Ahh, the thunder on the right if a press that couldn't cover the Edwards affair in front of their face goes all Sam Spade about the break-up of McCain marriage several centuries ago. That will energize the base!
I love the smell of thunder on the right in the morning...
OH, THAT EXPLAINS THE DEAFENING MEDIA SILENCE: Katherine Seelye of the NY Times explains the media Cone of Silence:
An intense public relations effort by Mr. Edwards and his associates had kept the story from spreading beyond the tabloid for months.
D'oh! Just mount an intensive public relations effort! Why doesn't every other scandal-plagued pol think of that? Some details:
When The Enquirer first reported the affair, a group of Edwards associates, including from past campaigns, assembled at his headquarters to try to stop the story from moving from the tabloid into major newspapers. They declined to respond to questions or issue any statements that might produce news reports, according to those involved in the effort. It was led by Jennifer Palmieri, a longtime associate of both Mr. and Mrs. Edwards.
But by this summer, the team had shrunk. Ms. Palmieri managed the crisis again, working mainly with Mr. Edwards and Harrison Hickman, Mr. Edwards’s longtime pollster. Initially Mr. Edwards argued that he could ride out the latest report, but several associates said that if they were not true, he should denounce them.
Stonewall and deny. Pretty subtle. Yet Edwards cracked like a jihadist at Gitmo under pressure from the unrelenting National Enquirer. Pity a real news organization didn't push a bit.
MORE: Thunder has no smell? Really?

...and he's visiting her and the kid at some hotel. Why?
Posted by: Karl | August 08, 2008 at 03:27 PM
K, the Dem politician has admitted the affair; checking the playbook, that means we move on to jokes about how the woman is fat, and her friend is fat and ugly. Who's Linda Tripp in this story?
Posted by: bgates | August 08, 2008 at 03:28 PM
Speaking of "move on", will a long-lived political force
be born ofcome out ofresult from all this? I'd like to start something to express my feelings about the media's "coverage" - how does "ComeOn.org" grab everybody?Posted by: bgates | August 08, 2008 at 03:30 PM
The motivation is to save his political career. He is hoping that this admission will give MSM enough cover not to pursue this further, and that, over time, this will not prevent him from resuming his political career (perhaps he is hoping that this will recede from memory soon enough that he will get the AG slot in a Big Zero administration (how fitting, by the way, that Barack's symbol is now a Big Zero)).
If Edwards were a GOPer, I would say this story wouldn't work, and that MSM would now be pursuing diligently why he met Lady Rielle at 2 am in a hotel room if the fling was over and the child wasn't his. But Edwards is a donkey, so perhaps this will recede.
By the way, my view on politicians stepping out is that they should be discreet about it, and if they get caught, it is a sign that they lack that amount of discretion necessary to be a leader. Feel free to lambaste me for promoting hypocrisy. I would suggest that in any polity, hypocrisy is an essential element. Letting it all hang out was fine for over-privileged baby boomers who could rely on grandma's and grandpa's generation skipping trusts, but it is no formula for an ongoing polity.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | August 08, 2008 at 03:35 PM
Exactly, If the affair ended before conception- he checks into hotels for a few hours in the dead of night to???... check up on an old friend? research Obama commercials? arrange a surprise for his wife? oh, wait-getting special medical information to treat his wife's recurrent
cancer? buy presents for HIS kids on his laptop while referring with woman he had previous long-time affair with? Oh, wait, I
know---he's babysitting for a friend.
Hit- help me out on this one, please. Outdo
your new Exxon credit card! :)
Posted by: glenda waggoner | August 08, 2008 at 03:39 PM
I don't know who's going to be more insufferable, Mickey Kaus or his editor [ed: me!]
-
Posted by: BumperStickerist | August 08, 2008 at 03:44 PM
So was Ann Coulter right to call him a "faggot"?
Posted by: Don | August 08, 2008 at 03:47 PM
There is more sex going on in campaigns and in Washington, in general, than in a Nevada brothel. When I worked for a Member of Congress, we were helping a young politician get his start in another District, until we found out that he was "screwing" every young woman who crossed his path. He was very generous, though, leaving each of his conquests with the gift of herpes. My boss gave him an ultimatum, get out of the race, or she would go public and encourage the young women to sue for lifetime medical payments.
Posted by: Sara | August 08, 2008 at 03:49 PM
Edwards has to be careful here. He may not be fully aware of everything the NE has and they have been twisting the knife slowly. Also, he doesn't wanna get Rielle too rielled up where she comes forward with a different story.
Posted by: centralcal | August 08, 2008 at 03:52 PM
Sorry to change the subject, but I need the leagl minds here to comment on the Accountable America letter to republican donars. That seems to me to be illegal on several fronts. Is it?
Posted by: BobS | August 08, 2008 at 03:54 PM
"So was Ann Coulter right to call him a "faggot"?"
Of course she was - faggot was a contemptuous term for a child or woman (and Edwards is certainly both) - it's only in recent history that the word was modified into an epithet towards gay men. And gay men are just as apt to have promiscuous, unprotected sex outside their committed relationships as apparently John Edwards has.
Posted by: Enlightened | August 08, 2008 at 03:55 PM
Karl asks: "...and he's visiting her and the kid at some hotel. Why?"
Little babies are irresistable, doncha know.
Porchlight - yes, that was the article which called it "the little red church on the hill." btw my daughter graduated from your enemy across the river, UM YA YA ::Sue Grin::
Big hello to Mary Rose.
Posted by: Lesley | August 08, 2008 at 03:55 PM
BobS: DOT left this comment in the previous thread re: Donor intimidation:
Posted by: Sara | August 08, 2008 at 03:57 PM
BobS, I don't know because I haven't seen the letter. Someone said it was up on Malkin's blog but I went there and couldn't find the text of the letter.
Concerning Edwards, I have always reserved an especially malignant corner of my heart for that oleaginous, swishy scumbag. I exult in his public disgrace, and look forward to seeing it continue unabated.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 08, 2008 at 03:59 PM
Folks - his math is wrong and he deliberately obfuscated the end of the relationship and the conception of the child.
He admitted he bagged Rielle whilst his wife was in remission. She only went into remission in June 2006. His love child was concieved in late May or early June based on the DOB of 2/27/07.
Another lie. I pity Elizabeth Edwards. When she needed her husband most, he was pulling a BillyJeff on her and now that she is in a fight for her life, she gets this, and the sad thought that after she's gone, she knows that her husband is all set.
I hope his career is over. And I wish Elizabeth had the strength to toss him on his ass.
Posted by: Enlightened | August 08, 2008 at 04:00 PM
Ok - I got the dates wrong - the baby was born this year!
Sorry about that. Baby was concieved in 2007 May/June - a couple of months after Elizabeth was rediagnosed.
Well, I guess he will have to take the paternity test now won't he?
Posted by: Enlightened | August 08, 2008 at 04:06 PM
Snapped Shot raises good questions about the Enquirer's pictures.
Posted by: soccer dad | August 08, 2008 at 04:08 PM
thanks sara....DOT I've linked a post from Gateway Pundit that you might be able to access.
Posted by: BobS | August 08, 2008 at 04:14 PM
Concerning Edwards, I have always reserved an especially malignant corner of my heart for that oleaginous, swishy scumbag. I exult in his public disgrace, and look forward to seeing it continue unabated.
Ah, you are a veritable Amazon of Perceptivity, my dear.
I harbor a special disdain for John-Boy Hair-and-Makeup since a post of mine on his extramarital activities was accused of being "spam" to blogger, which put my blog in the penalty box for a few days.
I hope this & the ensuing torrent of stand-up jokes will keep this bucket of smarmy toxic waste out of the Atty General job that the ultra-left trial lawyers wanted one of their own to inhabit.
And he visits the cute lil tot at 3AM in the morning just cuz he loves kissin' babies!!!
That'll be the sanctimonious piety that the NYT will cling to in its PMS gray ladydom.
Posted by: daveinboca | August 08, 2008 at 04:17 PM
""ComeOn.org" grab everybody?" The one by Eddie Cochran ?
Posted by: PeterUK | August 08, 2008 at 04:21 PM
Lesley, how neat! They are both great schools. Love the idea of you visiting your daughter in Nfld, my favorite little town in all the world. :)
Posted by: Porchlight | August 08, 2008 at 04:22 PM
Given that Edwards has admitted to visiting Hunter in the hotel, the Enquirer's pictures are at worst fake but accurate. And SnappedShot hasn't established that they're fake. (Of course, the burden of proof should be on the Enquirer to establish that they're real; the fact that Edwards has admitted to the bulk of the story counts on that score, I should think.)
Posted by: bgates | August 08, 2008 at 04:22 PM
Dot and I see eye to eye again. TM,invite Kaus here for a well-deserved victory lap.
Posted by: clarice | August 08, 2008 at 04:31 PM
fact that Edwards has admitted to the bulk of the story counts on that score
Precisely, bgates. The existence of the pictures is a big chunk of the reason Edwards had to fess up. If they were fake, he'd know it, and he'd have much less to worry about. The NE probably has more photos that they're holding back, probably taken while Edwards was being chased around the hotel.
Posted by: Porchlight | August 08, 2008 at 04:33 PM
Most disgusting of all to me is the CNN and MSNBC Dem pundits right now. Puke, Puke. Doing their darnedest to pretend this is not anything that important and that, according to that ..... Paul Begala, the Edwards message is what is important and that is what needs to be concentrated on. There were others on air on the cables as well trying to minimize this similarly. Do they think that Americans are that juvenile and stupid to buy that?? Disgusting.
Posted by: bio mom | August 08, 2008 at 04:34 PM
bio mom,
Two words. Bill Clinton. Americans were juvenile and stupid and bought it.
Posted by: Sue | August 08, 2008 at 04:40 PM
I can tell you one thing:
Next year, on their anniversary, Elizabeth Edwards may let John take her to Wendy's for dinner.
But it's going to be a Wendy's in the Mediterranean.
Posted by: BumperStickerist | August 08, 2008 at 04:41 PM
It will be interesting to compare and contrast the coverage John Boy receives with what Larry Craig was subjected to.
Posted by: Publius | August 08, 2008 at 04:48 PM
"he Edwards message is what is important and that is what needs to be concentrated on."
It does indeed,the gutless wonder has declared that if no one else claims paternity a poor innocent little child has been dubbed illegitimate.
A fine figure of a man to have stand on Hope and Change.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 08, 2008 at 04:49 PM
"...and he's visiting her and the kid at some hotel. Why?"
Karl,
The visit to the hotel occured in the other America. That's where the baby was conceived, too. People have always misunderstood Edwards' reference to 'two Americas'.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | August 08, 2008 at 04:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I heard Chuck Todd trying to peddle the idea that Edwards didn't know Hunter was going to be at the hotel that night when he went to see McGovern (through a side door).
My guess is he has not yet told Elizabeth this is his baby, and that's why the half admission.
I've been past the Beverly Hills Hilton about 4 times in the past 2 weeks, and every time I sooo wish I had been driving past the night in question.
Posted by: MayBee | August 08, 2008 at 04:53 PM
Next year on their anniversary Elizabeth Edwards may be dead.
The man can sleep with anyone he wants, but sheesh what a thing to do to his kids. Nice legacy John boy.
Posted by: Jane | August 08, 2008 at 04:53 PM
The Riell Diell has been forever exposed as the Riell Phonie Pony.
Personally, I think he is a Riell Asshole and my wife, who does not usually approve of my using such phraseology, has put her imprimatur on the appellation in this case.
Riell Dipshit also comes to mind.
What a slug of a human being. And this is from one trial lawyer to another.
The chances are now much higher that he is the dad, and his denial is disgusting. If he is so damn sure of that fact, he should immediately offer to exclude himself by DNA sample.
Finally, the silence of the vaunted "fourth estate" is now exposed that institution for what it is, BARD: The pravda/isvestia for the democratic party.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads aka vnjagvet | August 08, 2008 at 04:54 PM
John and Elizabeth are about to make a statement. This should be good.
Posted by: Sue | August 08, 2008 at 04:56 PM
The man can sleep with anyone he wants, but sheesh what a thing to do to his kids. Nice legacy John boy.
I'm not fond of Elizabeth Edwards, although I certainly wish good health on her. I think she is a nasty attack dog.
However, knowing your husband has another child while you are married, and knowing how that will complicate your own children's lives, would be unbearable.
Posted by: MayBee | August 08, 2008 at 04:57 PM
I'm not exactly a fan of Coulter, but her point was not to call Edwards a 'faggot', exactly:
She was making a (IMO) humorous anti-PC reference to the story in the news back then where there was this well-known (I guess; I never heard of the guy before this scandal) soap opera actor who went off on his gay coworker and called him a 'faggot', and then checked himself into rehab in the wake of all the uproar over it.
Posted by: Dave | August 08, 2008 at 04:58 PM
Is Elizabeth going to stand by his side?
Don't do it, Elizabeth!!!
Posted by: MayBee | August 08, 2008 at 04:58 PM
MayBee,
Probably.
Posted by: Sue | August 08, 2008 at 05:04 PM
If he is telling the truth, Elizabeth knew about the affair when she was encouraging everyone to vote for John. To keep campaigning after being rediagnosed.
Posted by: Sue | August 08, 2008 at 05:05 PM
Don,
Is it okay to call Obama a "chimp" since your side has been using that word to describe President Bush for 8 years?
Just checking.
Posted by: Jane | August 08, 2008 at 05:09 PM
I wonder if she will review a tape of Senator Clinton doing the 'stand by your meal ticket' schtick prior to her performance? I pray that she wins her bout with cancer but I have as little respect for her as I do for Senator Clinton. Ten times as much respect as I have for their husbands but still not enough to fill a thimble.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | August 08, 2008 at 05:10 PM
I'm kind of digging David Shuster right now.
Someone was trying to give politicians a pass for having affairs, and Shuster said "there are plenty of politicians that, despite everything we give them, manage not to cheat on their wives".
Posted by: MayBee | August 08, 2008 at 05:13 PM
So, Edwards was in favor of "drilling" back then?
Posted by: Buford Gooch | August 08, 2008 at 05:16 PM
Sheesh, is there any story more booring than this Edwards story? Who cares?
I cannot believe that Fox just broke off a live report from Georgia to give us "breaking news" on John Edwards remarks. And they didn't even answer my one and only question, did he or didn't he mess up his very important hair?
Booooooooooooring!
Posted by: Sara | August 08, 2008 at 05:18 PM
OK. He admitted it. He may still be lying about the kid.
Now the MSM can start hectoring us about how it is time to move on.
Posted by: Letalis Maximus, Esq. | August 08, 2008 at 05:20 PM
Beginning of spin on CNN:
"Edwards has just admitted to lying about sex."
He did say he has agreed to take tests for paternity. He should be required to do so for the baby's sake.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads aka vnjagvet | August 08, 2008 at 05:20 PM
Buford Gooch: Best line of the day!
Posted by: Dave | August 08, 2008 at 05:25 PM
Edwards' statement seems like another "modified limited hangout," if anyone remembers that term. It also has at least two parts likely to cause him trouble: 1) the somewhat gratuitous "I didn't love her" bit, which probably ticked off Rielle, and 2) the "maybe someone is giving her money but not me" part, which run through the Clintonian parser probably means "people in my employ arranged it with my OK."
I also think it's unlikely that the Enquirer faked any photos. They have a long history of being sued, and now run everything past lawyers. Intentional libel doesn't seem like their style.
Posted by: PapayaSF | August 08, 2008 at 05:25 PM
I agree with Sara,perhaps there should be a Georgia thread.It's been on my mind a lot today.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 08, 2008 at 05:27 PM
Senator Clinton
I'll be that was all she had to say.
Posted by: Sue | August 08, 2008 at 05:29 PM