If John Edwards thought nobody would be paying attention because he sorta-somewhat-partially confessed on a Friday? Oooof.

• Jeralyn Merritt at TalkLeft says she’s confirmed that Bob McGovern’s phone number and address, which were deleted from Margaret Sweet’s site but still appeared in the Google cache for another week or so, match California real estate records for a Robert Philip McGovern. She also has some very good questions about the relationship between McGovern and Edwards.
• If you didn’t scroll all the way down the 57 updates to yesterday’s post, here’s another link to Newsweek’s Jonathan Darman looking back on his friendship with Rielle Hunter. Darman wrote the Dec. 2006 “John Edwards, Untucked” story about those weird campaign web videos that were at the root (so to speak) of all this. Now that the feline has escaped the sack, apparently Darman’s not worried about being taken off Rielle’s Christmas card list. Or whichever New Age winter holiday she celebrates.
• Rielle allegedly had a nickname for Edwards. I’ve tried to type it out three times now, but the shuddering prevents me. Just go here.
• Lee Stranahan looks at the criminal record of Edwards aide, and alleged father of Frances Quinn Hunter, Andrew Young. Maybe Rielle is refusing the paternity test because she can’t face the possibility that this jerk really is the father? Just trying to consider all the angles…
• Psychology Today says John Edwards is nutty:
  

  Edwards’ TV performance will go down in history. It is hard to find a way to parody it. He confessed to “a narcissism that leads you to believe you can do whatever you want, you’re invincible, and there will be no consequences.” We knew that. But, more incredible, Edwards was demonstrating the same narcissistic sense of invincibility in his supposed confession!

  Like I said: It takes a special kind of narcissist to be narcissistic while confessing to his own narcissism.

If you find anything else new or interesting in the next 6-8 hours or so, please leave it in the comments. I’m going to take a nap or three. You have to hand it to Edwards: He said, “Okay, you know what, these bloggers wanna mess with me? I’ll make ‘em work weekends!” Unfortunately for him, we’re not all as dumb as he thinks, we don’t like being lied to, and we have no social lives.

Wow, the John Edwards scandal went from 0 to 60 in only three weeks. From the just-posted ABC News story:

Edwards Admits Sexual Affair; Lied as Presidential Candidate

John Edwards repeatedly lied during his Presidential campaign about an extramarital affair with a novice filmmaker, the former Senator admitted to ABC News today.

In an interview for broadcast tonight on Nightline, Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 42-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

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.

He’s claiming he can’t possibly be the daddy because he broke it off with her before late May/early June 2007, when the baby must have been conceived. He also denies having anything to do with the lavish lifestyle Rielle Hunter and Andrew Young have enjoyed for the last year or so, with no visible means of support. Apparently we’re supposed to take Edwards’ word for it. But hey, why not? Just look at his track record.

P.S. Courtesy of the Daily Kos: 7/22 Truthers!

P.P.S. The Los Angeles Times, the largest “news-paper” in the city where this incident happened, keeps rockin’.

I’m not going to bother labeling the rest of these postscripts individually, so just keep clicking Refresh on this and I’ll add them as soon as I can:

Continue reading ‘We Love to Say “We Told Ya So!”’

In the two weeks since the National Enquirer allegedly caught John Edwards red-handed, most of the press has treated the Rielle Hunter story like it’s coated with anthrax. The newspapers haven’t touched it, except in opinion columns about why the newspapers haven’t touched it. 24/7 cable news has spent maybe 10 minutes on it, tops. Network news? Shyeah, right.

But the Internet has been all over it. We’ve been filling the role the news used to. (Whether that’s good or not is up to the reader.) Not to get all triumphalist about it, but we’ve kept this legitimate news story in play and uncovered some very interesting facts. And now Edwards has to decide if he’s even going to set foot in the Democratic National Convention, let alone speak there. All because of a story that hasn’t even been alluded to by Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson, or Katie Couric, but that everybody knows about anyway. Unless you’ve only got two sites bookmarked, Wikipedia and Daily Kos, you’re better informed about this story than you’d be if you only consumed “legitimate” news.

All of which makes Adam Nagourney’s August 1, 2007 story for the International Herald Tribune, “Edwards Campaign Becomes Internet-Savvy,” incredibly ironic:

After running a decidedly traditional race for the White House in 2004 and in the early stages of this contest, Edwards has quietly overhauled his campaign with one central goal: to harness the Internet and the political energy that liberal Democrats are sending coursing through it.

In a slow but striking power shift, advisers who champion the political power of the Web have eclipsed the coterie of advisers who long dominated Edwards’s inner circle, both reflecting and intensifying his transformation into a more populist, aggressive candidate…

The populist message that Edwards offered with a sunny face to living rooms of Iowans in 2004 is this time offered with indignation and anger, replete with us-against-them attacks on President George W. Bush, establishment Washington, the wealthy and the media. And his campaign is methodically pitching it directly at the Web audience.

“The Internet is the principal way we are communicating with voters right now,” Elizabeth Edwards said in an interview.

But now, one short year later, the Internet is the principal way they’re trying to impede communication. That is, assuming they have anything to do with the obvious efforts to scrub any trace of Rielle-ity from the Web. (I’ve been talking about this to anybody who’ll listen, here, here, here, and here.)

And consider this quote from Edwards’ senior campaign advisor Joe Trippi:

“The one thing is, in a strange way, Edwards and Elizabeth — Elizabeth in particular, but Edwards, too — get it that the old way doesn’t work, that you need to use the Internet, blogs, technology, YouTube, to reach out to people.”

But apparently they don’t get that once you reach those people, there are no takebacks. No matter how deep the memory hole is, there’s always going to be somebody with a reeeeeally long fishing line.

(Hat tip, once again, to “Fortunate Son”)

In Other Edwards Non-News: Byron York at National Review talks to Enquirer managing editor David Perel, and Aaron Barnhart at the Kansas City Star looks at this “teachable moment” in history. They also give shout-outs to Deceiver’s coverage, which is primarily why I’m linking to them nice. And the National Journal’s Blogometer read yesterday’s 1,200-word Edwards post, or at least the first sentence.

Update: Well, the National Enquirer got me to do something I’ve never done before: purchase a copy of the National Enquirer. It’s the Aug. 11 edition, which doesn’t have THE PHOTOS EVERYONE’S BEEN WAITING FOR!, but it does have a picture of the mysterious Bob McGovern. If you’ve ever wondered what a professional “intuitive” looks like, here he is on p. 27:

Note: As I was typing up my latest opus on this subject, the National Enquirer finally posted some of the photos everybody’s been demanding. Cry “Photoshop,” and let slip the dogs of denial!

There he is, allegedly, with his alleged baby. I think the pic in the lower-left corner is supposed to be from when the Enquirer guys, well, cornered him. Allegedly. Either that or he’s being shocked with defibrillator paddles. [Correction: According to a commenter at JammieWearingFool, the caption says: "Earlier this year, Edwards was seen wearing a similar T-shirt with a similar sweat stain at a workout in New York (left).] And the arrows there are comparing the curtains behind him with the ones in the Beverly Hilton. Curtains, how appropriate…

Boy, you skip a day on the John Edwards/Rielle Hunter non-story and you miss a lot of non-news. Let me try to play catch-up here:

First and Foremost: Slate’s Mickey Kaus, Rielle-Hunter #1, lists five good reasons to cover this. (Personally, I only need one: because the people who are supposed to be covering it aren’t.) Kaus slaps down the “He’s not a politician anymore!” argument, points out Edwards’ alleged hypocrisy, and much more. I only had one quibble with it:

If the scandal is true, it almost certainly means that during the campaign Edwards presided over an elaborate coverup involving at least a) having an aide wrongly claim paternity and b) having other aides go out and lie to reporters.

While I appreciate his choice of the verb “preside,” considering Edwards’ obvious White House ambitions, the past tense isn’t really appropriate here. As I’ve tried to show, almost every available scrap of background information on Rielle Hunter and her palm-reading buddies is currently being scrubbed from the Internet. The coverup is ongoing.

Speaking of the Coverup: Those dirty, nasty sleazemongers at the National Enquirer just keep ruining journalism by reporting easily verifiable facts that some people find unpleasant. According to DBKP, the latest issue of the Enquirer claims that Andrew Young, the purported father of 5-month-old Frances Quinn Hunter, has moved from North Carolina to Santa Barbara to be closer to mother Rielle and the child. And guess who he brought with him?

“Young had to pretend to be by [Rielle's] side — but he’s living in a separate home with his wife and young children. The word is that he’s sick of living this lie. His wife Cheri is particularly fed up,” said the source.

Young and his wife are still married, despite his claim that he fathered Rielle’s child, a claim that sources say is absolutely false and part of Edwards’ elaborate coverup.

Reminds me of that old song: “If You Leave Me, Can I Come Too?” DBKP adds:

Now, a reliable DBKP source reports that Young is indeed in Santa Barbara, “living large with no visible means of support.”

If you believe the Enquirer’s earlier report that Young is getting at least $15,000 a month to continue the ruse, then yes, his financial support is indeed invisible as far as the mainstream press is concerned.

Of course, this information is coming from scummy tabloids and miserable blogs. Why would a single “legitimate” journalist in the whole country want to, y’know, check?

Cheri Young Is a Saint: Thank you to Deceiver readers “Fortunate Son” and the ever-reliable Kris for the tip about Cheri Young’s participation in Oprah’s Pay It Forward Challenge back in 2006. Cheri, along with 300 other Oprah audience members, was given $1,000 and told to use it to help the less fortunate. Within a week, she had raised over $35,000 for needy families in western North Carolina:

Continue reading ‘The John Edwards Anti-Scandal Continues to Not Continue’

(Hi there! If you’re just joining us, welcome to Deceiver.com. You can find our complete coverage of the John Edwards/Rielle Hunter story here. We’ve got information about Hunter’s psychic friend and alleged hotel hookup-enabler Bob McGovern, her website that somebody doesn’t want you to see, and a lot more. And why not? It isn’t like anybody else is reporting on it.)

The following video is from the Father of the Year Awards in New York on June 7, 2007. Which, oddly enough, was a little less than 9 months before Frances Quinn Hunter, daughter of Rielle Hunter, was born on Feb. 27, 2008. I mention this for no particular reason.

Here’s the clip:

“Your children learn not only from what you say, but from what you do.” Truer words…

As I noted yesterday, all sorts of information about this story has been mysteriously disappearing from the Internet. So I’d advise you to download this video if you want to watch it more than once or show it to somebody else. It’s from the official John Edwards YouTube channel, and they might just pull it when they see people talking about it in a slightly different context. Actually, at this point I hope they take it down, just to confirm the pattern.

(Hat tip to Deceiver reader Kris, who’s now 2 for 2. At this rate you’re angling for Deceiver’s Tipster of the Year!)

P.S. Just in case this video does disappear, here’s a screenshot from page 16 of Edwards’ YouTube channel as of noon EST. This clip is in the top row, last one on the right. You can see part of the “Father of the Year Awards” logo behind him:

P.P.S. Via Roger L. Simon, you can read a cached copy of the now-deleted Wikipedia entry on this whole scandal here. I’ve only skimmed it, but it seems notable that the References section lists 83 — that’s 80 plus 3 — references to “legitimate” news sources with information on the topic. Somebody at Wikipedia put a lot of work into this thing and made it as well-sourced as humanly possible. And then somebody else at Wikipedia decided you shouldn’t see it. Wonder why?