Edwards has NOT ONCE denied an affair with Rielle Hunter.

This has been well-established by us, most recently in today’s post on the subject.

Edwards issued his denials in October, when the allegations were of the general nature. He has, at NO TIME denied these allegations once they became specific.

You are incorrect about there being no corroboration of the Enquirer’s story: time has passed your assertion by. Even as we speak, Democrats are calling upon Edwards, who has disappeared from the public scene since July 30, to come forward and clear things up–which he could very easily.

Will he?

As we said in December, Time will Tell.

In this case, the truth does contain lies, while the only innuendo seems to be Edwards’ skillful deflection that his shrinking band of supporters pass off as “denials’.

Thank you for stopping by, reading and taking the time to comment.

“The fact he cheated on his wife is some interest in looking for clues to a man who was named 2 weeks ago as being on the short list for VP.

Of more interest is the lying and elaborate cover-up undertaken by Edwards in this affair– it was very French-like, though.”

Um, when was this established as fact? When the National Enquirer said it was? Edwards has stated he did not have an affair with Hunter and that the child is not his. Hunter has said she did not have an affair with Edwards and that the child is not his. The father, Andrew Young, has stated that he did have an affair with Hunter and that the child is his. Those are facts. Nothing in the National Enquirer’s stories last year or now has been supported by evidence or corroborated by anyone willing to come forward with anything resembling honest appraisal of what actually happened at the Beverly Hills Hilton last month.

This story has more holes than finely-made lace. But since the truth would be less interesting, why not stick with the lies, innuendo, and plain-old bad reporting.

I like French fries.
I like French dressing.
I like French kissing.

French Politics? French political corruption always gives one something to write about. I do like that.

Your point about Roosevelt and Kennedy proves nothing, other than marital fidelity is sometimes easier to cast aside for some than others. Might not a man who breaks his wedding vows also break his Oath of Office? Your characterization of “Kennedy” as one of the “best” presidents is a personal, not historical one–though Kennedy was very personable.

Edwards is human and humans make mistakes. The fact he cheated on his wife is some interest in looking for clues to a man who was named 2 weeks ago as being on the short list for VP.

Of more interest is the lying and elaborate cover-up undertaken by Edwards in this affair– it was very French-like, though.

Lastly, of more interest here is the utter and complete failure of the Mainstream press to fulfill their constitutionally-protected duties and investigate, ask tough questions and report back. Their failure in the Edwards story is the real story in my mind.

Thanks for taking the time to stop by, read and comment.