John Edwards love child?

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The long and the short of it is that this thread has now pushed rumor and innuendo to about its limit. Without some factual backing to the love child story, its going to induce joy
and rapture from people who don't think much of Edwards in the first place, but those inclined to support Edwards or neutral to Edwards are still waiting and waiting and waiting for some credible evidence to back the story. And will probably soon ignore the scurrilous charges if someone can't back them with better proof.

And in terms of Hillary or Karl Rove being behind pushing the story into the national spotlight, its again, anything is possible, but you better show something more than speculation.

sooo...did you want to say something?

Heh - if you really want to have fun, read the other thread where of course Craig234 goes on and on not only to defend Edwards (and at the same time extoll Larry Flynt/Hustler magazine as a "better source" than the enquirer", then go on to defend a convicted left wing pedophile I'm sure Harvey will be back eating crow on this one too

yeah how long should we wait? lol

Id say quite a while

 

[BoberFett]

Apparently the (D) also stands for Dodge and Deflect.

This isn't about Gingrich, is it?

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The long and the short of it is that this thread has now pushed rumor and innuendo to about its limit. Without some factual backing to the love child story, its going to induce joy
and rapture from people who don't think much of Edwards in the first place, but those inclined to support Edwards or neutral to Edwards are still waiting and waiting and waiting for some credible evidence to back the story. And will probably soon ignore the scurrilous charges if someone can't back them with better proof.

And in terms of Hillary or Karl Rove being behind pushing the story into the national spotlight, its again, anything is possible, but you better show something more than speculation.

sooo...did you want to say something?

Heh - if you really want to have fun, read the other thread where of course Craig234 goes on and on not only to defend Edwards (and at the same time extoll Larry Flynt/Hustler magazine as a "better source" than the enquirer", then go on to defend a convicted left wing pedophile I'm sure Harvey will be back eating crow on this one too

yeah how long should we wait? lol

Id say quite a while

i suspect you are right.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Apparently the (D) also stands for Dodge and Deflect.

This isn't about Gingrich, is it?

It seems there were some comments/question about whether good ole Newt was cheating on a wife with cancer. I thought I would throw some light on the matter.

Don't like it? Sue me.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The long and the short of it is that this thread has now pushed rumor and innuendo to about its limit. Without some factual backing to the love child story, its going to induce joy
and rapture from people who don't think much of Edwards in the first place, but those inclined to support Edwards or neutral to Edwards are still waiting and waiting and waiting for some credible evidence to back the story. And will probably soon ignore the scurrilous charges if someone can't back them with better proof.

And in terms of Hillary or Karl Rove being behind pushing the story into the national spotlight, its again, anything is possible, but you better show something more than speculation.

sooo...did you want to say something?

Heh - if you really want to have fun, read the other thread where of course Craig234 goes on and on not only to defend Edwards (and at the same time extoll Larry Flynt/Hustler magazine as a "better source" than the enquirer", then go on to defend a convicted left wing pedophile I'm sure Harvey will be back eating crow on this one too

yeah how long should we wait? lol

Id say quite a while

i suspect you are right.

We can just keep bumping this thread for months, nay years with new info...

"Edward's love child enters kindergarten."

"Edwards sentenced to 6 months for misappropriation of campaign funds..."

:laugh:

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The long and the short of it is that this thread has now pushed rumor and innuendo to about its limit. Without some factual backing to the love child story, its going to induce joy
and rapture from people who don't think much of Edwards in the first place, but those inclined to support Edwards or neutral to Edwards are still waiting and waiting and waiting for some credible evidence to back the story. And will probably soon ignore the scurrilous charges if someone can't back them with better proof.

And in terms of Hillary or Karl Rove being behind pushing the story into the national spotlight, its again, anything is possible, but you better show something more than speculation.

sooo...did you want to say something?

Heh - if you really want to have fun, read the other thread where of course Craig234 goes on and on not only to defend Edwards (and at the same time extoll Larry Flynt/Hustler magazine as a "better source" than the enquirer", then go on to defend a convicted left wing pedophile I'm sure Harvey will be back eating crow on this one too

yeah how long should we wait? lol

Id say quite a while

i suspect you are right.

We can just keep bumping this thread for months, nay years with new info...

"Edward's love child enters kindergarten."

"Edwards sentenced to 6 months for misappropriation of campaign funds..."

:laugh:

I'm guessing there's a Newt thread they can bump as well.

 

[Lemon law]

Since this basically dead thread was revived only a few days ago, I see what I posted on 12/2007 is now often quoted. As far as I am concerned I was right then and right now, if an Edwards admission of paternity or DNA proof of Edward's paternity becomes later forthcoming, it simply lifts it from simply not credible rumor and innuendo to an undeniable truth we must all accept. Exactly the standard I proposed on 12/2007.

Until the facts are in, anyone can spread damaging rumors which are always unethical if billed as facts when they are at best mere possibilities or mere suspicions. And while the National Enquirer is the starter of many such rumors, they have a piss poor record because they are wrong far more times than they are correct.

And the other two things to mention, is that using public funds to pay hush money, is a separate crime not then charged.
But all we have now is un named sources saying Edwards will admit paternity and only those un named sources so we should still]
with hold final judgment.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Since this basically dead thread was revived only a few days ago, I see what I posted on 12/2007 is now often quoted. As far as I am concerned I was right then and right now, if an Edwards admission of paternity or DNA proof of Edward's paternity becomes later forthcoming, it simply lifts it from simply not credible rumor and innuendo to an undeniable truth we must all accept. Exactly the standard I proposed on 12/2007.

Until the facts are in, anyone can spread damaging rumors which are always unethical if billed as facts when they are at best mere possibilities or mere suspicions........

If only you applied the same standard to Cheney and Bush would your opinions hold the slightest bit of credibility. Your hypocrisy is amusing and expected. Well done.

 

[Lemon law]

I do not think Corn is being valid here, In the case of Edwards and Reilly, we had the fact of a baby, but no Edwards paternity established. And any evidence of Edwards and Reilly meeting to discuss the subject only occurred well after Reilly was already pregnant.

But in the Case of Bush and Cheney we had the facts of all kinds of un American torture abuses, and quite properly the paternity had to be directed at the top to Bush and Cheney. And before the torture occurred, the authorization from GWB and Rummy required revising various armed forces rules and training manuals with their signatures all over those revisions. We still not know even today, exactly how GWB&co screwed the pooch, but we 100% know it was GWB&co who screwed the pooch on torture and un American activities.

Quite different situations.

 

[OCGuy]

Stay classy, John Edwards. :thumbsup:

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I do not think Corn is being valid here, In the case of Edwards and Reilly, we had the fact of a baby, but no Edwards paternity established. And any evidence of Edwards and Reilly meeting to discuss the subject only occurred well after Reilly was already pregnant.

But in the Case of Bush and Cheney we had the facts of all kinds of un American torture abuses, and quite properly the paternity had to be directed at the top to Bush and Cheney. And before the torture occurred, the authorization from GWB and Rummy required revising various armed forces rules and training manuals with their signatures all over those revisions. We still not know even today, exactly how GWB&co screwed the pooch, but we 100% know it was GWB&co who screwed the pooch on torture and un American activities.

Quite different situations.

Why limit the discussion to the alleged "torture" issue, why not include your prior comments on Plamegate or the US Attorney firings amongst many others? Oh, I think I might know the answer to that one. LOL you are pathetically dishonest.

 

[Lemon law]

Corn, surely you should not wave a red flags that will make you look even more stupid by saying, "Why limit the discussion to the alleged "torture" issue, why not include your prior comments on Plamegate or the US Attorney firings amongst many others? Oh, I think I might know the answer to that one. LOL you are pathetically dishonest."

No doubt about it, its you who is being pathetically dishonest. Face the facts, it takes special stupidity to be so unpatriotic to out a CIA agent for petty political revenge. Please don't try to get me started on all the GWB&co lies told to sell the Iraq war. Its been all covered before and if you think its anything but shameless, I will let you waste your words in trying to defend the indefensible.

Some how, in the grand scheme of things, there is something different in saying GWB lied and hundreds of thousand of people died and John Edwards lied and one innocent child was born.

 

[UberNeuman]

John Edwards was an asshole for cheating on his sick wife and if he's found guilty of misusing his campaign funds, then I hope he gets his balls nailed to his forehead....

I'm glad to see so many of you feel the same way about Newt, Mark Sanford and John Ensign...

oh, wait... the rightwing sounds of silence....

/

such a hard week for rightwingers this week...

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Face the facts, it takes special stupidity to be so unpatriotic to out a CIA agent for petty political revenge.

Ahem:

Originally posted by: Lemon law
......As far as I am concerned I was right then and right now, if an Edwards admission of paternity or DNA proof of Edward's paternity becomes later forthcoming, it simply lifts it from simply not credible rumor and innuendo to an undeniable truth we must all accept. Exactly the standard I proposed on 12/2007.

Until the facts are in, anyone can spread damaging rumors which are always unethical if billed as facts when they are at best mere possibilities or mere suspicions........

So tell me, which undeniable truth do you have which implicates Cheney or Bush to the "unpatriotic" outing of a CIA agent? You don't seem to be living up to "exactly that standard" to which you allegedly abide. Just admit you're a hypocrite, no one is perfect.

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Please don't try to get me started on all the GWB&co lies told to sell the Iraq war. Its been all covered before and if you think its anything but shameless, I will let you waste your words in trying to defend the indefensible.

Yet another lie. You go ahead and provide a single example of me *defending* any allegedly illegal act committed by GWB. Any. Besides, if Bush's crimes are so clear cut as you say, it would seem to me that defending Bush isn't what's needed. Nope, it looks like the Obama administration which needs defending for it "unpatriotic" lack of action in prosecuting Bush.

 

[alchemize]

Bump

Edwards Admits Fathering Love Child, Reportedly Separates From Wife

Douchebag of the millennium...

 

[Robor]

Bump

Edwards Admits Fathering Love Child, Reportedly Separates From Wife

Douchebag of the millennium...

Douchebag? Yes. Of the millennium? No.

 

[StageLeft]

Douchebag of the millennium...

Absolutely.

 

[Avvocato Effetti]

I always had a fundamental distrust of this man.

 

[alchemize]

Douchebag? Yes. Of the millennium? No.

Who gets your vote? I can't wait to see who tops this list

- Running for president while fucking your "photographer"
- Knocking up your photographer
- Getting one of your cronies to claim the baby
- Doing all this while your wife battles cancer
- Lying about it for a year
- Going on 60 minutes, lying about 1/2 of it, but telling some of the truth
- Lying for another 6 months
- Finally admitting to it, then leaving your wife

And to top it off, he's an ambulance chasing prick who has caused more infant and mother mortality and raised healthcare costs with unnecessary c-sections than any one person in the US.

 

[Robor]

Who gets your vote? I can't wait to see who tops this list

- Running for president while fucking your "photographer"
- Knocking up your photographer
- Getting one of your cronies to claim the baby
- Doing all this while your wife battles cancer
- Lying about it for a year
- Going on 60 minutes, lying about 1/2 of it, but telling some of the truth
- Lying for another 6 months
- Finally admitting to it, then leaving your wife

And to top it off, he's an ambulance chasing prick who has caused more infant and mother mortality and raised healthcare costs with unnecessary c-sections than any one person in the US.

I'm going to go with someone who killed a lot of people. There are plenty. Take your pick of them.

 

[alchemize]

See urbandictionary.com for various definitions of douchebag. None of them are "killers". You fail at internet lingo.

 

[Lemon law]

Well what do we have, one more politician with potential greatness, who lost it all because he could not keep his rocket in his pocket.

Alas poor Yorick, John Edwards joins a pile of other politicians on all sides of the partisan divide. As we discover he has the same feet of clay all too typical of everyone.

I therefore suggest that we require all politicians, be they male or female, to become sexually neutered before they can run for office. That will fix the problem.

 

[Turin39789]

See urbandictionary.com for various definitions of douchebag. None of them are "killers". You fail at internet lingo.

hitler was a douchebag

 

[Fizzorin]

Edwards Admits Fathering Love Child, Reportedly Separates From Wife

Woah, wait, next you're going to tell me that Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Jason Giambi, Rafael Palmiero, Roger Clemens, Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, and Andy Pettite all used PEDs. Shocking.

Douchebag of the millennium...

No, no, that's the other John Edward(s). Biggest douche in the universe. http://www.johnedward.net/JE_home.html

 

[nobodyknows]

See urbandictionary.com for various definitions of douchebag.

They had a picture of you there??