moonbattery.gif


« Our Current Level of Political Debate | Main | Another Obamathon Memento »


July 24, 2008

Rielle Hunter Blackout

When is a bombshell not a bombshell? When it makes a prominent Democrat look bad.

Anyone who doesn't rely on the MSM for news knows by now that John Edwards, who made a big deal about his loyalty to his cancer-stricken wife during his failed presidential campaign, was actually cheating on her and presiding over an elaborate cover-up. He even has a love child with the radiant Rielle Hunter:

john-edwards_rielle-hunter.jpg

There are at least 10 eyewitnesses to corroborate the story of his getting caught with his pants down, which would have resulted in immediate screams of "I'll sue!" from the Breck Girl if it weren't completely true.

Yet Silky Pony has been considered a leading candidate for the hollow Obamessiah's VP, so the MSM is obediently silent. Slate reports on the lack of reporting:

—The New York Times doesn't tell you what happened yesterday.
—The print edition of the Washington Post doesn't tell you what happened yesterday.
Newsweek doesn't tell you what happened yesterday.
Time doesn't tell you what happened yesterday.
—Katie Couric didn't tell you what happened yesterday.
—Brian Williams didn't tell you what happened yesterday.
—Charlie Gibson didn't tell you what happened yesterday. […]
Has the gap between what the MSM lets you know and what happened — and what you can easily find out happened — ever been greater? …

The silver lining to the absurd and potentially catastrophic Obama campaign: when it's finally over, no one will ever take the establishment media seriously again.

On a tip from Burning Hot.

Posted by Van Helsing at July 24, 2008 7:51 AM

Comments

Unlike the unsubstantiated rumors of John McCain having an affair with a lobbyist, which the New York Times put on Page 1.

Posted by: V the K at July 24, 2008 8:11 AM

National Enquirer, eh? Gimme a friggin break.

Posted by: Get Real at July 24, 2008 8:25 AM

I’m certainly no a apologist for the Enquirer, but how friggin’ stupid would they have to be to deliberately slander a nationally known, and very successful (despite total douche-bag) trial lawyer?

If there’s nothing to this, he could (& would) sue them out of existence in a heart-beat.

My bet is he’s re-counting his (mis)steps to estimate how much evidence (pictures & phonecons) they might have against him.

Posted by: Snoop Diggity-DANG-Dawg at July 24, 2008 8:43 AM

Did the National Enquirer ever fake Texas Air National Guard memos? Nope, that was CBS News. Did the National Enquirer publish unsubstantiated rumors of John McCain? Nope, that was the New York Times. Did the National Enquirer publish completely fabricated stories by Jayson Blair? Nope, New York Times Again. Did the National Enquirer keep a reporter on staff who required eighteen corrections in a single year of reporting?. No, once again, that would be the New York Times.

So, why is the National Enquirer any less reliable than the New York Times or CBS News?

Posted by: V the K at July 24, 2008 8:58 AM

Yes, that is one silver lining I am looking forward to.

Still seems too good to be true tho.

I expect them to die like Rasputin.

Posted by: Cluebat from Exodar at July 24, 2008 9:49 AM

Go get 'im V.

Posted by: Cluebat from Exodar at July 24, 2008 9:51 AM

I'm just waiting for the asshat response from the trolls on that one, V. Good one, man!

Posted by: Thulsa Doom at July 24, 2008 10:05 AM

"I'm just waiting for the asshat response from the trolls on that one, V. Good one, man!"

Fact: You're the troll.

Fact: I am a fan of this site, as in, I am a conservative and come here for the fun of mocking moonbats.

--------------------------------

"So, why is the National Enquirer any less reliable than the New York Times or CBS News?"

It is not less reliable as those. It is the same reliable. You don't believe this kind of crapola when it comes from the Slimes, so why would you believe it when it comes from the Enquirer? Double standard much? Do you believe it because it damages Silky Pony? Do you read WND often? Read about how the end of days is nigh?

Posted by: Get Real at July 24, 2008 10:50 AM

"Did the National Enquirer ever fake Texas Air National Guard memos? Nope, that was CBS News. Did the National Enquirer publish unsubstantiated rumors of John McCain? Nope, that was the New York Times. Did the National Enquirer publish completely fabricated stories by Jayson Blair? Nope, New York Times Again. Did the National Enquirer keep a reporter on staff who required eighteen corrections in a single year of reporting?. No, once again, that would be the New York Times.

So, why is the National Enquirer any less reliable than the New York Times or CBS News?"

.........................................................


I just want to examine this logic.

Premise: NY Slimes et al lie often
Conclusion: Therefore the Enquirer is being truthful about Edwards porking that pig

I don't know what college you attended or if you had any training in logic, but this, sir, fails.

Posted by: Get Real at July 24, 2008 10:57 AM

I think that most readers here could probably read the Enquirer and pick out the truthy morsels.

I like to read it sometimes because I can shake my head that so many people believe it all.

Kinda like a cross between The Onion and Dirt Magazine.

They do employ diggers and get scoops.

Mostly crap tho.

Funny crap.

Posted by: Cluebat from Exodar at July 24, 2008 11:02 AM

So, Get Real, I guess the logical extension of your argument is we should never believe anything from any news source?

That seems... kind of dumb.

Why not, instead, do we not just consider the evidence in light of our experience, instead of simple-mindedly dismissing the source?

If the National Enquirer has evidence ... photographs, interviews, eyewitnesses... let us weigh that. Let us also weigh what their interest would be in presenting a false and potentially libelous story... about a trial lawyer.

So, should one simply dismiss all news because all news outlets lie all the time about everything ... or should one engage one's intellect and consider the evidence?

Posted by: V the K at July 24, 2008 11:29 AM

Years ago, I became aquainted with a stringer for The National Enquirer. He explained to me that they do publish the truth they obtain on the "ponderosas" that they agressively stake out, for the entertainment value to their readers. Los Angeles, New York, Palm Beach-Miami, London, Chicago...you get the idea. In Edwards case in LA, the Enquirer reporters nailed him because he egotistically chose the Beverly Hilton, mwhere reporters hangout 24 hours-7 days a week. Those reporters never would have seen him if Edwards would have gone to a motel in East Los Angeles.

Posted by: Mockinbird at July 24, 2008 11:29 AM

Since when have I been a troll? Anyone?

Posted by: Thulsa Doom at July 24, 2008 12:04 PM

I don't see how this hurts Silky Pony. I'd always figured he was a Streisand, so he moves up (very slightly) by evidence that he's not.

Sorry, Carlos, always a bridesmaid, eh?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 24, 2008 12:13 PM

V the K,

Well said. All three times!

Posted by: Lyle at July 24, 2008 12:44 PM

MEDIA BIAS? WHAT MEDIA BIAS?

Published July 24th, 2008

Let’s see now.

Imus says something stupid and he’s driven off the air by Black activists; Jesse Jackson calls New York “Hymie Town” and that anti-Semitic remark has no repercussions for the good “reverend.”

Dan Quayle makes a spelling mistake with potatoes and he is still being ridiculed for it; Barack Obama says he “campaigned hard in all 57 states” and that idiotic remark doesn’t even cause a media ripple.

Larry Craig plays footsies in a men’s room stall and is reviled as a hypocrite (which he is, if the charge is true) and a hue and cry for his resignation from the Senate is heard throughout media land; Jesse Jackson makes adulterous whoopee with a paramour, creates a love child, and yet provides spiritual counsel for former President Bubba (on the propriety of boinking versus fellatio?)

Now we have the man Rush Limbaugh calls “the Breck Girl,” none other than the coiffure-obsessed, $400 a haircut, former senator and former and recently short-listed Obama VP candidate, Johnny Edwards, apparently doing the nasty and producing a bastard with some blonde.

Reported initially by the Enquirer, (and how could anyone question the credibility of that supermarket-favorite tabloid?), Johnny made a baby with the bimbo and was caught visiting (trysting?) with her.

Slate.com, which is not exactly a Republican website, seems to think there’s more to this lurid tale and calls it a “double standard” that the mass media is ignoring the story. (http://www.slate.com/id/2195869/) Rush Limbaugh understandably picked up on the media, and the Eduardian, hypocrisy and cites the Enquirer’s details, including Edwards’ running from the media to seek refuge in a basement men’s room at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in L.A. after a five hour get together with his friend and her baby. (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_072308/content/01125115.guest.html)

This is not an effort to cast stones in Senator Edward’s direction since, I guess, he isn’t getting much at home considering that his wife Elizabeth Edwards is battling cancer and the man has needs. Still, his 3 surviving kids must be surprised that they have a step-sibling.

This is more an indictment of the media for their hypocrisy and lack of journalistic integrity and reporting.

As for Johnny, despite his alleged brilliance, he must have skipped out and missed the chapter in his high school sex ed course on the proper use of condoms when one is screwing around.

Posted by: Gene Lalor at July 24, 2008 3:34 PM

He's definitely going under Obama's overcrowded bus with this move...

July 21 - Vice Presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards was caught visiting his mistress and secret love child at 2:40 this morning in a Los Angeles hotel by the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

Posted by: BURNING HOT at July 24, 2008 6:56 PM

Edwards went out of the hotel briefly with Rielle, they were observed by the NATIONAL ENQUIRER and then went back to her room, where he stayed until attempting to sneak out of the hotel unseen at 2:40 a.m. (PST). But when he emerged alone from an elevator into the hotel basement he was greeted by several reporters from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER.

Senior NATIONAL ENQUIRER Reporter Alexander Hitchen asked Edwards why he was visiting Rielle and whether he was ready to confirm that he was the father of her baby.

Shocked to see a reporter, and without saying anything, Edwards ran up the stairs leading from the hotel basement to the lobby. But, spotting a photographer, he doubled back into the basement. As he emerged from the stairwell, reporter Butterfield questioned him about his hookup with Rielle. Edwards did not answer and then ran into a nearby restroom. He stayed inside for about 15 minutes, refusing to answer questions from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER about what he was doing in the hotel.

A group of hotel security men eventually escorted him from the men's room, while preventing the NATIONAL ENQUIRER reporters from following him out of the hotel. Said reporter Hitchen: "After we confronted him about seeing Rielle, Edwards looked like a deer caught in headlights!

Posted by: BURNING HOT at July 24, 2008 6:58 PM

It was the National Enquirer that broke the story on Rush Limbaugh and his drug addiction. You see how skeptical the media and the leftists were about that story, so they're just exercising the same restraint on this story.

...or not.

Posted by: Lyle at July 25, 2008 2:23 PM

Actually, IMHO, she looks like Michael Keaton in drag.

Posted by: U NO HOO at July 26, 2008 3:11 PM

Check this out from 2007:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/09/26/edwards-mystery-innocuou_n_66070.html

Very interesting, indeed.

Posted by: Wuptdo at July 26, 2008 9:16 PM

LMAO... Why does this idiot guy V have a choir singing his praises??? He has said nothing intelligent, not a single point in opposition to the actual story.... Just more political crap designed to protect osama Hussien and John, I need another haircut, Edwards.

Posted by: Hereswaldo at July 27, 2008 2:44 AM

Hmmm... let's see now. We've got a gaggle of shouting reporters on the scene, we've got a surprising love child, we've got the openly-biased LA Times banning any mention of the story. And an easy Google News search of "Rielle Hunter" brings up a pack of stories, with photos, about Edwards cheating on his wife in an obscenely expensive hotel dedicated to the privilidges class.

Look! It's the Democrats self-destructing again!

The cat is already out of the bag. It'no longer a secret. It's too late for a coverup. The smart thing to do is for Edwards to quickly get in front of this story before he's crushed by it. Right now, it's only a simple case of marriage infidelity. But if it turns into infidenilty and a coverup, Edwards is going to hurt Obama by association - AFTER he becomes the sorry butt of late-night jokes.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, the Republican's strategy is the same as it's ever been - do nothing and let the Democrats defeat themselves. Looks like it's working.

Posted by: Crete Property at July 27, 2008 11:28 AM

Well, what do you know?

All the nay-sayers who thought the Enquirer was trashing Silky Pony's good reputation must now step up and have a slice of humble pie.

Posted by: Lyle at August 8, 2008 12:37 PM