John Edwards love child?

[Lemon law]

OK, the fats in the fire. We have the NE claiming that some gal not only had out of wedlock sex with John Edwards, but she is also pregnant.

Now lets stand back a few paces and examine on what evidence that claim is made.

On the surface its slightly more credible than some fanciful story John Edwards had sex with some man and he is pregnant, but as far as I can see, the NE has nothing but rumors and innuendo to back their story. Because the gal ain't talking.

Certainly modern DNA testing could with a good deal of certainty prove or disprove the claim, but it sure sounds like a political hatchet job to me.

But the question is and remains, can the Edwards campaign disprove the rumors?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: daveymark

got a link that proves Gingrich's wife was dying of cancer?

She wasn't necessarily "dying" of cancer, but neither is Elizabeth Edwards. Newt undisputedly cheated on his wife while she was in cancer treatment, and notified her that he was filing for divorce while she was hospitalized following cancer surgery.

 

[jjzelinski]

Yeah LL, that's the whole point. If Edwards were to agree to a paternity test, that would add an element of legitimacy to the situation. If he ignores it, he's essentially allowing the allegations to go unchecked. Either way he's fvcked. Just ask McCain.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

(If it is true... what an asshole. Cheating on his dying wife?)

Yep, that Newt Gingrich is somekind of wonderful....

She wasn't..dying..of cancer

thanks for clearing that up. The "Newt divorced his wife while she was dying of cancer" myth is a lie that gets perpetuated all over the place.

A divorce had been in the works long before the estranged wife entered the hospital and she wasnt dying of cancer. She had surgery to get rid of her cancer which was successful. She is still alive today.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

(If it is true... what an asshole. Cheating on his dying wife?)

Yep, that Newt Gingrich is somekind of wonderful....

She wasn't..dying..of cancer

thanks for clearing that up. The "Newt divorced his wife while she was dying of cancer" myth is a lie that gets perpetuated all over the place.

A divorce had been in the works long before the estranged wife entered the hospital and she wasnt dying of cancer. She had surgery to get rid of her cancer which was successful. She is still alive today.

Then I guess Newt is totally exonerated for perpetuating the divorce procedures while his wife was recovering from surgery, and for rallying the SoCons around the Clinton Sexual misconduct effigy while committing the same sins. Newt, I had you all wrong; you ROCK!

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

(If it is true... what an asshole. Cheating on his dying wife?)

Yep, that Newt Gingrich is somekind of wonderful....

Aren't you always running around accusing people of pulling the "But Bush" card?

Butt Bush?

Hahaha, because he's a butt.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
OK, the fats in the fire. We have the NE claiming that some gal not only had out of wedlock sex with John Edwards, but she is also pregnant.

Now lets stand back a few paces and examine on what evidence that claim is made.

On the surface its slightly more credible than some fanciful story John Edwards had sex with some man and he is pregnant, but as far as I can see, the NE has nothing but rumors and innuendo to back their story. Because the gal ain't talking.

Certainly modern DNA testing could with a good deal of certainty prove or disprove the claim, but it sure sounds like a political hatchet job to me.

But the question is and remains, can the Edwards campaign disprove the rumors?

It's true.

I am that man.

Johnnie is just so dreamy . . . .

Looks to me like someone has some internal polling that has Edwards winning Iowa - hence the need for a 3-weeks-before-the-caucus smear.

Telephone push-polling is certain to follow!

 

[RightIsWrong]

I have a question. It seems that everyone tries to pull the sympathy card about the "dying spouse" whenever one of these stories comes out.

Does anyone else here think that that is a bullshit plea to your subconscious emotions to make the accused look even worse?

Let's face facts, the cheating is the bad part not that she has cancer. Essentially, we are all in varying stages of dying and the fact that one is closer than another is not good, but that isn't really the relevant part of the argument to be put forth into the spotlight.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I have a question. It seems that everyone tries to pull the sympathy card about the "dying spouse" whenever one of these stories comes out.

Does anyone else here think that that is a bullshit plea to your subconscious emotions to make the accused look even worse?

Let's face facts, the cheating is the bad part not that she has cancer. Essentially, we are all in varying stages of dying and the fact that one is closer than another is not good, but that isn't really the relevant part of the argument to be put forth into the spotlight.

It does show you're a bit of a douche, or worse. Apparently a prime time to cheat on one's wife is while she's pregnant. I can only assume it makes it worse knowing that she's bringing a kid into the world with a cheating dad. I can assume that tbe pain of having a cheating spouse compounds that of battling a terminal illness. The spouse knows this and thus should hold off until you're cured if they insist on being naughty

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

(If it is true... what an asshole. Cheating on his dying wife?)

Yep, that Newt Gingrich is somekind of wonderful....

She wasn't..dying..of cancer

thanks for clearing that up. The "Newt divorced his wife while she was dying of cancer" myth is a lie that gets perpetuated all over the place.

A divorce had been in the works long before the estranged wife entered the hospital and she wasnt dying of cancer. She had surgery to get rid of her cancer which was successful. She is still alive today.

Then I guess Newt is totally exonerated for perpetuating the divorce procedures while his wife was recovering from surgery, and for rallying the SoCons around the Clinton Sexual misconduct effigy while committing the same sins. Newt, I had you all wrong; you ROCK!

LOL, what say you daveymark??? While your at it, I'm also curious how you know she couldn't have died from cancer back then. Got a link to that?? :laugh:

Neither she nor Newt could have known what the outcome would be when Newt was divorcing her.

 

[Lemon law]

If we want to engage in wild speculation, there are even cases where a dying spouse wants
a significant other to get some sex from someone else because they can no longer provide
that role. And because they love their spouse, it makes them feel better.

But this sure still sounds like John Edwards has been swiftboated. Ironically, it could even benefit Edwards if he can prove its a planted story.

Campaign 08 looks like it will get really dirty.

 

[Nitemare]

isn't he the father of batboy?

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

(If it is true... what an asshole. Cheating on his dying wife?)

Yep, that Newt Gingrich is somekind of wonderful....

She wasn't..dying..of cancer

thanks for clearing that up. The "Newt divorced his wife while she was dying of cancer" myth is a lie that gets perpetuated all over the place.

A divorce had been in the works long before the estranged wife entered the hospital and she wasnt dying of cancer. She had surgery to get rid of her cancer which was successful. She is still alive today.

Playing with semantics, as usual. Anyone fighting cancer is in a potentially life or death situation.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: JayhaVVKU
:roll:

Lighten up Francis.

Unsubstantiated allegations have a way of spreading and becoming perceived as truth. Today it's "did you see the Enquirer artible about Edward's affair/lovechild? Hysterical!" but by next month it's "Well, I remember hearing that Edward's had an affair and knocked up some chick while his wife was dying of cancer." Negative ads are still used in campaigns. Why? Because they work.

 

[jjzelinski]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: JayhaVVKU
:roll:

Lighten up Francis.

Unsubstantiated allegations have a way of spreading and becoming perceived as truth. Today it's "did you see the Enquirer artible about Edward's affair/lovechild? Hysterical!" but by next month it's "Well, I remember hearing that Edward's had an affair and knocked up some chick while his wife was dying of cancer." Negative ads are still used in campaigns. Why? Because they work.

Yep

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

(If it is true... what an asshole. Cheating on his dying wife?)

Yep, that Newt Gingrich is somekind of wonderful....

Aren't you always running around accusing people of pulling the "But Bush" card?

Butt Bush?

Hahaha, because he's a butt.

lol, thank you Beavis and Butt Head.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Pabster
It should be noted that The Enquirer is now owned by a huge Clinton supporter. Coincidence? I think not.

This looks to be a hit piece straight from Team Clinton. Edwards is a huge threat, especially in Iowa, where he seems to be nearly everyone's second choice.

wouldn't everyone's second choice be better than a small plurality's first choice? voting strikes me as odd, that way.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: jjzelinski

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: JayhaVVKU
:roll:

Lighten up Francis.

Unsubstantiated allegations have a way of spreading and becoming perceived as truth. Today it's "did you see the Enquirer artible about Edward's affair/lovechild? Hysterical!" but by next month it's "Well, I remember hearing that Edward's had an affair and knocked up some chick while his wife was dying of cancer." Negative ads are still used in campaigns. Why? Because they work.

Yep

Bingo. Spreading garbage and laughing it off may be amusing, but the garbage part is what tend to sticks in peoples minds...

 

[Thump553]

It astonishes me how fast so many posters here have accepted the conclusion the John Edwards story is either true, or if it is false, that Hillary Clinton's team is behind the rumor spreading.

Come on folks, its the National Enquirer. The paper thrives on bogus, sensationalistic articles. Frankly they have published so many false stories that I place zero credibility in anything "reported" there.

The only difference between this and a Martian baby one is the subject matter. And the connection to the Clinton campaign is totally conjecture, at most.

 

[Fern]

I smell a Clinton "hit peice". ^ months pregnant, yet this comes out nationally just before Iowa?

Edwards, as has been reported on Chris Mattews's show, is leading the national polls. The poll shows Edwards as the only Dem candidate beating all Repub challengers.

Edwards has the union's support in Iowa. There are legit pundits expecting him to win there because of the nature of their unique caucas system. If the weather is bad on caucas day, the union guys are gonna show up. Will the older women (HRC's support base there) also drive through the snow and ice to show up? Many doubt it.

If HRC places third in Iowa it's expected to drag her down in NH, she can't NOT win in NH, her "fire wall" state.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not predicting her to lose the nomination here, just pointing out potential problems her campaign is likely worried about. She's still in news everyday, even if it's bad. But when the media starts ignoring her, she's toast IMO.

Edit: Will be interesting see if/how Edwards responds. Also to see if HRC's campaign tries to benefit, like with the Obama "cocaine" remarks. Can't she once again make something like this backfire against her?

Fern

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Thump553
The only difference between this and a Martian baby one is the subject matter. And the connection to the Clinton campaign is totally conjecture, at most.

No, the connection between a rabid Clinton supporter and friend - and the National Enquirer - is very, very real.

NoPrisoners has this synopsis entitled "That Magic Clinton Touch" which reads:

This is a perfect "one-two" punch by the Clintons. First, have some cutout mention that the Republicans might make hay out of a question about Obama "selling" drugs. Second, have a tabloid allege that Edwards has fathered a child while his loving, devoted, wife if dying of cancer. Since all sources are either being denied/fired or suspect, the damage is not enough to knock out either opponent - only weaken them. This way the two (Obama and Edwards) can split the anti-Hillary! vote but, both remain in the race (with reduced support) so she doesn't have to face only one strong contender.

This is pure Clinton "magic".

In fact, this is the second hit piece on Edwards in the last 3 months. Coincidence? I think not.

 

[Jhhnn]

I smell a Clinton "hit peice". ^ months pregnant, yet this comes out nationally just before Iowa?

Why attribute it to Clinton? Why not to the Rovian SwiftLiars squad?

It's clear that the rightwing prefers Hillary as the opponent of choice- they're all zeroed in on her, and have laid the foundations for a lot of Hillary-hate over the last 15 years...

It wouldn't be out of character at all for them to attempt to interfere with the process of selecting their opponent, sliming both the winner and the losers with the same brush...

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Why attribute it to Clinton? Why not to the Rovian SwiftLiars squad?

Ah, yes. Why would we ever think Hillary would do something so dirty in a campaign... :roll:

The fact is, only one candidate truly benefits from Edwards being knocked out. And you know who that is.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Pabster

The fact is, only one candidate truly benefits from Edwards being knocked out. And you know who that is.

No, there's also Barack Obama. If you're not a total hack, of course.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
No, there's also Barack Obama. If you're not a total hack, of course.

Yeah, but Obama doesn't need Edwards out. She does.

When you look in Iowa at people's second choice candidate, Edwards wins by a pretty whopping margin. Something like 3 to 1 over the other candidates.

And when you factor this incident in to the totality of the other shenanigans we've seen the past few weeks from Team Clinton (including the new attack web sites, the "Hussein" nonsense from Bob Kerrey, the "Did he sell drugs?", et al.) it is pretty clear where this is coming from.