John Edwards Scandal: Whatever Happened to Andrew Young? – UPDATES
“[Andrew Young] is living large, [in California] with no visible means of support.”
–DBKP on John Edwards’ former Director of Finance, Andrew Young.
DBKP Reader: Is Bing the Money Man?
What’s happened to Andrew Young [NOTE: not the former UN ambassador], one of the central players in the John Edwards love child scandal?
UPDATES at end of story.
UPDATE #1: 11:37 EDT August 5, 2008
UPDATE #2 11:50 EDT
UPDATE #3 13:15 EDT
UPDATE #4 13:32 EDT
UPDATE #5 14:15 EDT
Back in December, Young stepped forward, claiming he was the father of Rielle Hunter soon-to-be-born baby. From the National Enquirer’s December story, UPDATE: JOHN EDWARDS LOVE CHILD SCANDAL!:
A former “Director of Operations” for Edwards’ campaign, Young’s last official position with the campaign was “North Carolina Finance Director.” He left that job about a month ago – about the same time Rielle settled in Chapel Hill.
A source close to Young vehemently denies that he funneled campaign money to Rielle – who drives a BMW SUV registered in Young’s name.
ALSO at DBKP:  Click on banner to access over 60 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal. |
For readers new to the story, from December’s [John Edwards’ Love Child Scandal: Reille Hunter “Kept†Woman]:
Former Edwards campaign Director of Operations, Andrew Young, gives Open Marriage advocates something to cheer about.
The 41-year-old former “North Carolina Finance Director†of the Edwards campaign has stepped forward and not only claimed the “alleged†love child of John Edwards as his but has also moved his six months pregnant mistress, Reille Hunter, into the same multi-million dollar gated community as his own wife and children.
No word from Young’s wife on how well she’s adjusted to the new neighbor, the ‘other woman’ and the impending “bundle of joy.â€
According to the National Enquirer, the bald-headed stepchild of the MSM, an unnamed source claims Young, and his ‘first’ family, his legally married wife and legitimate children, had dinner with his pregnant paramour in her newly acquired abode.
Hunter and Young’s purported relationship was perhaps the strangest item in a strange cover story. More from December’s Enquirer:
A day later, in a shocking twist, the attorney for Mr. Young issued a statement that Young fathered Rielle’s baby!
“Andrew Young is the father of Ms. Hunter’s unborn child,” declared his Washington, D.C.-based attorney.
“Sen. Edwards knew nothing about the relationship between these former co-workers, which began when they worked together in 2006.
“As a private citizen who no longer works for the campaign, Mr. Young asks that the media respect his privacy while he works to make amends with his family.”
So just how has Andrew Young been doing in the seven-plus months since the Enquirer published its allegations? Has he made “amends with his family? The same family that played host to Rielle Hunter for dinner at their home, according to the Enquirer?
According to the National Enquirer’s latest print edition (the information is not on the Enquirer’s website), dated August 11 2008, Andrew Young has followed his bliss, so to speak; following Hunter to California–and bringing along his wife and their young children.
The source also revealed that to keep the coverup going, Andrew Young, 42, and his family relocated to Santa Barbara, CA, where Rielle is living with her child.
“Young had to pretend to be by her 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.
In December, DBKP characterized Young’s statement as “taking a bullet for the [Edwards campaign] team”.
Now, a reliable DBKP source reports that Young is indeed in Santa Barbara, “living large with no visible means of support.”
That Young might have followed Hunter across the country, to be with the mother and child, would have been believable. But, dragging his wife and children across the country so they could also be close to Hunter and her child?
That’s a Jerry Springer wet dream.
To those who insist that none of this matters, we present Susan Estrich, who is no conservative apologist: Estrich, August 1, at FoxNews.com [Is an Ex-Senator's Alleged Love Child News?] recalls:
It feels like only yesterday that I was spending half my time arguing just that, as Republicans sought to make President Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky into an impeachable offense. It wasn’t the sex, they argued, but the lying. I never bought that. It was the sex. Yes, she was an intern. On the other hand, she didn’t get pregnant and have a child. On the other hand, he didn’t have one of his aides come forward and say he was the guy who had the affair: in this case, the fall guy, if that’s what he was, was a younger former associate who was and is married with children, and supposedly invited the woman and child to his home for dinner with his wife and children after publicly taking responsibility for the pregnancy, all of which understandably contributed to people wondering if all of them knew something we didn’t. Like the truth.
Setting up a fall guy to protect the big shot, if that’s what it was (and that’s certainly how it looks), understandably bothers a lot of people. It’s one thing to mess up; it’s one thing to say, truthfully, that the details are not any of our business and simply to refuse to answer questions. If he can live with that, and his wife and kids can live with that, and the other woman can live with that, we should live with that. But setting up some other guy, especially a guy who is married and has a family of his own, to take responsibility sort of stinks.
Estrich then asks a few of the same questions posed here about this pretzel-like cover story gone wild:
Besides, if he really was the father, as he announced publicly, why not put his name on the birth certificate? And why hasn’t he come forward in the last two weeks since the Enquirer broke the latest story? One of my friends, who is himself in the news business, says he’s been trying, without success, to find the guy for the last two weeks. I don’t blame the putative father for disappearing, but, coupled with the empty space on the birth certificate, it certainly doesn’t look good for the senator.
NOTE to Susan E.: tell your news friend to start looking in Santa Barbara, CA. Andrew Young should not be that difficult to find, using Santa Barbara as a starting point.
TIP: Remember, apparently, he’s come into some money.
WARNING: “Newsfriend” may have to leave his desk. Perhaps, even actually have to go to Santa Barbara to do this–but maybe not.
After all, if such tabloid trash as the National Enquirer was able to track Young and his family down, surely a crack investigative reporter from the mainstream press should do the same.
Doubtless, Estrich’s friend will find out more–along with the rest of us–about Young, Hunter and Edwards, when the Enquirer releases more details on the story.
UPDATE #1: 11:37 EDT August 5, 2008
Mickey Kaus performs an invaluable service for any who have written on the scandal that dare not speak its name. [Why Cover the Edwards Scandal?]
Why write about the Edwards scandal? Here’s a short clip-’n'-save response to those (including many friends) who argue the Edwards scandal shouldn’t be pursued–or at least pursued too vigorously– even if it is true:**
He then lists some ammo for the inevitable retorts of the “Edwardians”, as one reader put it to DBKP recently. We’ve reproduced one of Kaus’ reasons below:
1. No”private citizen”: Edwards was certainly a contender for VP, or a big cabinet post like Attorney General, or even the Supreme Court, before the scandal first erupted in the “undernews” in late 2007. Some reporters say he was still on Obama’s VP list until quite recently. If he’s now finished as far as those big jobs are concerned, it’s in large part because of this scandal, which Obama might never have learned about if everyone had followed the MSM’s lead. Even now, Edwards may not be out of the running for an array of lesser public posts–including cabinet-grade positions–that provide non-trivial power and a platform for future advancement. Important unions back him. Until last week, he’d been traveling the country keeping himself in the public eye in a way well-designed to let him play a big national role in either the Obama administration or the opposition to the McCain administration. It’s silly to say “he’s just a private citizen”–he’s much less of a “private citizen” than, say, William Bennett was in 2003 when Jonathan Alter and Joshua Green torpedoed Bennett’s career by revealing his gambling habits.
Update #2 to follow shortly.
UPDATE #2: 11:50 EDT August 5, 2008
Roger Simon buttresses Mickey Kaus’–as well as our own–arguments. [Censored John Edwards/Wikipedia love child page revealed]
Which returns us to the original question: Is John Edwards’ private misbehavior news? Well, to begin with, it’s not private. This is a man who has made a political career of what a great husband and father he is, not to mention being a public moralizer about American values and our mistreatment of the poor.
But, you say, he has already lost his campaign for the presidency. So what? Leaving aside whatever chance he may have had for the vice-presidency or other important position in an Obama administration, the reaction to Edwards’ behavior by most of our mainstream media is a remarkable example of that media’s own mendacity and self-censorship.
Simon also reports on something we discovered in our net search for John Edwards news last night, namely a deleted Wiki page on the John Edwards scandal.
The cache location of the original censored Wikipedia page on the John Edwards love child scandal – and the internal Wikipedia debate over it – has been made known to Pajamas Media.
We’re reserving judgment on whether the info falls into the “censored” category–at least for awhile longer. The Wiki page is included in a story planned for later today.
UPDATE #3 13:15 EDT August 5, 2008
Ron Chusid, at Liberal Values,The Case For Covering The John Edwards/Rielle Hunter Scandal thinks the weakest part of Kaus’ clip & save arguments is the hypocrisy one. Chusid also thinks of one investigation that hasn’t been pursued in the Edwards’ scandal.
Edwards’ legal career could be used to claim hypocrisy, but only if one is so naive as to see that career as being based upon seeking justice as opposed to wealth for John Edwards. (Looking back at Edwards’ legal career also raises the question as to whether he might have wound up in Rielle’s hotel due to following an ambulance headed in that direction as opposed to having an affair. Has the Enquirer even checked the local ambulance company records for the night in question?)
Betsy Newmark asks, perhaps rhetorically, “Does anyone have any doubt that the MSM would have tried to cover this story up for Mitt Romney?” ["Clip and Save" on the John Edwards story]
Mickey Kaus has written a useful summary of why the John Edwards story is one worth covering. He shoots down all the objections. And I would add in that, even though Edwards is no longer a political figure perhaps, this story was what put the final kibosh on that and so it is relevant just for that reason. And he is still a public figure. He is still going around the country giving speeches and advocating his ideas on fighting poverty and global warming. If he’s going to be a public spokesman for his cause, then his character does become relevant.
A shout to PAPundits for their reprise of DailyKOS Bans Stranahan for Writing About John Edwards’ Scandal.
And Simon, at Deceiver, notes: “Whew! And nary a word about the Breck Girl.
UPDATE #4: 13:34 August 5, 2008
From a just-written comment to this story, a DBKP reader wonders, “Is Bing the Money Man?” and has reasons for his speculation:
Steven Bing was John Edwards’ largest donor in the 2004 vice presidential campaign.
Steven Bing denied paternity of Liz Hurley’s son in a manner similar to that with which Edwards’ denied Frances Quinn’s paternity.
Bing is a billionaire Hollywood movie producer, and both Andrew Young and Rielle Hunter are living near LA.
Lots of coincidences.
Maybe enough coincidences to whet the curiosity of anyone not employed in the traditional press.
Our story earlier this morning reported on the speculations, then backtracking of Radar that the money man may be ex-NBA player, Eric Montross. [John Edwards Scandal: Media Coverage Mixed; MSM Waits on Enquirer]
UPDATE #5: 14:15 EDT August 5 2008
Andrew Sullivan [Why Cover The Edwards Story?] answers Mickey Kaus and others as to why the MSM has refused to touch the story of an affair and coverup by a once-presidential, now-VP (at least before the Enquirer unleashed it latest information on the Edwards scandal) candidate: the “the press is humane”. Sullivan writes, “Sometimes, that’s a good thing.”
…I think the reason the MSM is leery of this story is because someone else has actually claimed to be the father of the child in question and because Elizabeth Edwards is extremely sick, and this story would be an horribly traumatizing question for a cancer patient to deal with. And there’s enough to this story already to bar any near-future public office for Edwards.
For the sake of argument, we’ll concede for a moment Sullivan’s “humane” argument. Still, this doesn’t seem to be much reason for the MSM’s monolithic refusal to investigate the allegations.
Sullivan is right to point out that “this story would be an horribly traumatizing question for a cancer patient to deal with.” It’s an important consideration. So important, in fact, that perhaps even Edwards himself might have considered it.
Which raises the question: how far should a free press pass extend?
by Mondoreb
Steven BIng was John Edwards’ largest donor in the 2004 vice presidential campaign.
Steven Bing denied paternity of Liz Hurley’s son in a manner similar to that with which Edwards’ denied Frances Quinn’s paternity.
Bing is a billionaire Hollywood movie producer, and both Andrew Young and Rielle Hunter are living near LA.
Lots of coincidences.
Reply
There’s a whole bunch of ways to censor unpopular facts at Wikipedia. Here are two examples:
1. The original Wikipedia article on the JRE paternity allegations (webcite link) was “speedily deleted” without discussion. This was observed by many, and this article is currently restored, but watch for the “debate” about its deletion again.
2. The Wikipedia article on Jay McInerney’s novel Story of My Life has been scrubbed of any mention of the fact that McInerney based his main character, “an ostensibly jaded, cocaine-addled, sexually voracious 20-year old”, on his girlfriend Rielle Hunter. One editor attempted to restore this, but was threatened with banishment for a year if he tried. Read the “debate” at the discussion page here.
Reply
Oh yes, lots of coincidences, and don’t forget Bing and Edwards are also both very rich men, and yeah sonewhat famous, and yeah, they both live in the U.S. and oh yeah, that’s another one they are both male.
You people are truly sad. Since you don’t have a clue, let me give you one…
get a life!
Reply
You mean be like John Edwards and get a life – a secret one???
Reply
Dinah,
Are you now using the same logic to somehow intuit and then spin
what I meant by “get a life” to the as yet unconfirmed non concrete evidence to support ANY of these Edwards allegations.
It is amazing what people will believe without on true verifiable shred of evidence.Shocking really
Please try to apply some critical thinking here. Who has the most to gain by floating a “story” about Edwards at this particular juncture in an election cycle? Isn’t it all convenient… Just wait, when Obama announces his VP this will all die a quick death, as it’s intended purpose will have been achieved, to keep Edwards out of the White house. Karl Rove himself has said ” John Edwards” is the one the GOP has always been afraid of reaching the WH. And all acomplished through innuendo and rumor and not one picture or document to support any of it. Please don’t try to say a birth certificate without the father listed is proof that Edwards is the father, that’s insane. You know when you have already have made up your mind about something you then see all things through that lens, and subsequently bend that information to conform to that belief. Perception is everything!
Are you aware the parent company of the NE is on the verge of bankruptcy? I wonder if getting it out of the red is the price this manufacturer scandel cost the ‘powers that be’. Now there’s a real story….
Reply
John Edwards was worthless as a Senator.
John Edwards was worthless as a candidate.
Apparently, he is also worthless as husband and father, too.
He’s the prototype for narscicism – 16 year old son dies – but he’s gotta keep the family line going. Wife is too old to breed, so they pump Elizabeth full of hormones, get an egg donor and do in vitro fertilization. Has a daughter instead of a son. Wash, rinse, repeat. Another boatload of hormones go into old Liz. Gets an egg. Does n vitro fertilization again. Has a son. Gets diagnosed with breast cancer.
Reply
long-term, the story will not go away — the baby will grow up, paternity will inevitably become apparent (even if it’s not revealed until 2021, whatever.)
Reply
This story is no longer containable in the short term.
There are too many actors in this play and there’s a huge paper trail to all of them. Paychecks.
There’s also a microrecorded account of every minute detail of their lives online for the public to peruse.
There are a minimum of twenty people who can connect the dots, and
1. Rielle Hunter (Wannabe actress who can’t wait to tell the world she’s relevant, and is growing increasingly pissed that Andrew Young is being paid more than her)
2. Rielle Hunter’s family
3. John Edwards (Getting tired of making all these payments).
4. Elizabeth Edwards (Finally figuring out what the hell is actually going on).
5. The Bag Man (Steven Bing?)
6. Edwards’ aide Josh (Saw the whole relationship from start to finish. A young kid with political aspirations, he may not sell out his credibility).
7. Josh’s assistant “Front man” from other video (Dead end).
7. Sam Cullman (Video staff)
8. Nick Chatfield (Video staff)
9. Mimi Hockman (Video staff)
10. Bob McGovern (Getaway Driver/Guru and likely the one who tipped off the media)
11. Andrew Young (Fake Babydaddy)
12. Cheri Young (Outraged and falsely-cuckholded wife of Fake Babydaddy, wondering why she was packed up to
California).
13. Andrew Young’s kids (Just play along).
14. John Edwards kids (Why is daddy kissing his staff?)
15. Rielle’s Yoga Friend from the silent retreat.
Reply
How is this a short time I wonder? This supposed secret liason has been going on now for over 2 years, with all these numerous random players and it is only the Enquirer that has the goods on Edwards? what gives ? any number of these people could spill on him at any time why haven’t they? Are you now going to suggest they are all being paid off? are all blindly loyal?Hmm, How about secondary people such as hotel employees? hairdressers? cousins, friends, friends of friends, etc. are they all being given hush money? maybe we can now speculate on which one of the principle players may try to blackmail Edwards? Yet inexplicably nobody knows anything but the Enquirer, how curious? In a world where Madonna’s brother Christopher can write a tell- all about his own outrageously rich sister for God knows how much $$$’s you don’t think someone would sell out, now while this could be huge? Not one person out of as you say, sooo many principal players? defies logic doesn’t it? maybe it’s because much of these scenarios are a figment of minds that watch waayyy to much TV and in some way want it to be true, for whatever reason. Sometimes there just isn’t any there, there.
Reply
Jeanne – look how long it took Madonna’s bro to write the story. Perhaps Young is concerned for reasons having to do with
1. What will he do when the money stops if he tells? 2. Legal issues and possibly tax fraud issues (is the bag man supplying a 1099?) Perhaps many of these people are speaking on condition of anonymity and are hoping one or the other of the players will go on the record first so it won’t be “them” who officially “spilled” the beans. There is so much more to this story. And WHY, I ask WHY, won’t Edwards come forward, forthrighly, step up to the mic, deny all the allegations, call out Rielle Hunter and Andrew Young, and request DNA to clear his name? That is all he has to do. The sweet bundle of DNA has all the answers. And then, everyone involved can turn on the National Enquirer and sue the crap out of them and shut them down. It is so easy. John Edwards can shut this down in an instant. If it is all a lie, then expose it as such and be done.
Reply
He just may do that in the long run. However you often state there is so much there. Right? well what is really there? state facts? Nothing has been conclusive, this is all meant to be off the mainstream because it’s original intent has always been to keep Edwards out of the White House. People say connect the dots, what dots? you mean the ones that the Enquirer keeps telling us about? Why has no one outside of the Enquirer been privy to all this? Name one verifable FACT that has been unearthed by the Enquirer? Other than this woman had a baby, that has a birth certificate, that does not name the father. How do we know she is not a plant? that this has been a set up? with her supposed shady background? How do you know with complete certainty that this whole scenario is not a very elaborate set up. Supposedly the NE was tipped off that Edwards was coming to the Hilton. Why would a man concerned about being seen with a purported lover, agree to an assignation with her in Beverly Hills, the mother ship of all media, not to mention on the very floor a media convention is going on. Why not somewhere private? yet he then shows up to this hotel stealthlike to avoid being seen going in. Then a while later the enquirer states he leaves with this woman out the front door of the hotel, and then returns 45 minutes later with her back through the same lobby. But yet late that night decides to leave again real stealthlike. What on earth??? Edwards is so smooth that he can pull this 2 year affair off without the MSM getting any wind of it, he can then micromanage all the players complicit in this sordid drama, yet be sloppy enough to parade out in public with this woman in Los Angeles at the Beverly Hills Hilton , right…. The Enquirer also states that while leaving at 2AM he went via the basement to avoid being seen, yet according to the incident report made at the police station(which I have read, and so can you if you look for it) made at 10 AM the following morning byt he 2 NE reporters they stated this UNNAMED political figure, (kinda like the UNNAMED security guard isn’t it)? encountered in the LOBBY of said hotel. So was it through the basement to evade as they wrote in their expose? or through the lobby like the rest of us. But their printed version is much more juicy isn’t it? And why the unnamed politician? Why not name Edwardsin the police report? Maybe because unnamed people who can’t be identified can’t be called to testify. But yet he can be named in a gossip rag. Go figure! Enquiring minds want to know?
Reply
I don’t think it’s just this story people are quiet about. I know two people who were on the periphery of George Seniors’ life who claim he had a mistress everyone knew about and checked into hotels with her, et. al. and that the press knew and just decided not to report.
Reply
George Bush (senior) was a sitting Republican president. This affair is a concerted partisan effort to destroy this particular mans future in politics. Anyone paying attention during the primaries saw the corporate MSM at work, they did everything in their power to make sure Edwards never found any traction. They actually had metrics that measured the media coverage of the top 3 dems running he was virtually shut out, there are statistics to bare this out. After Obama clinched the primary, the respected SUSA polling all showed that an Obama/Edwards ticket beat out all others against McCain and all his possible VPs. People really like Edwards, he clearly strengthens the ticket, he is already vetted. The American people know him, Obama not so much. Check out the latest polls McCain is moving up fast, with the anemic field of VPs Obama has left to chose from I now fear even with this anti Bush anti Republican climate the Dems could lose this, as they now begin to double team Obama, including the supposed left leaning media.. B.S.This has never really been about an affair/love child, but about politics and the lengths a Rove led GOP and corporate America will go to to rid the field of any potential contenders. Discredit someone where they are perceived strong. If it can’t be the haircuts, hedge funds or house, lets get him as a cheater. All classic Karl Rove tactics… and then use a cheap rag like the Enquirer,as the messenger that can later just be laughed off as the gossip rag it is, Just long enough to place doubt, keep feeding it, but never produce any tangible evidence that could remove all doubt,Until Obama announces, and the mission is accomplished. I truly believe a deal has been struck between the financially struggling parent company of the Enquirer and the pols that needed a messenger to deliver their poison.
Reply
Jeanne,
It’s depressing to see someone as gullible as you. Why are you wasting your time defending a person you don’t even know? I actually do know Rielle. Well. I’ve known her since her name was Lisa Druck. The story is true. The reason people who know her don’t all come out of the woodwork is because when you know the person, the whole story is just sad and awful.
Reply
Darby I hate to break it to you dear, but I am far from naive. However, I do agree if it was true, it would be horribly sad & awful, for both families. And I am also not so gullible to think that it’s impossible the child could not be Edwards. I do believe that the case has not been made that has been supported by real evidence. You state you know it’s true, well then support that with real tangible evidence, just because you say it is, does not make it so. That is what the Enquirer is trying to pull. But I heartily disagree completely with your contention that people who know her don’t come out of the woodwork, you just did…if what you say is true. We all know that money talks and if all these people know about this, there should be plenty of evidence to supply to the right people, for the right amount of payoff. As they say almost everybody has a price. How much is your loyalty worth? BTW Why are you outting your friend on this board? does Ms. Druck Hunter know what you just did? or did she give you the go ahead? and if so why? enquiring minds want to know??
Reply
Jeanne’s game is one of misdirection and distraction. Ignore her.
Reply
Anything but the facts, your moniker is apropos.The only misdirection is the Enquirer, and whoever the powesr that be want to turn your head in the direction of. Stop being sheep and believing blindly, use some critical thinking. What is wrong with a healthy debate about possibilities? expand your mind, look behind petty gossip magazines and take a broader look at the evidence, or lack thereof.
Do you ever wonder why other media outlets have chosen not to run with this?
Reply
Edwards lied about the cause of Multiple Sclerosis to mothers and juries. Does anyone think he would not lie to a dying wife?
Reply
This supposed secret liason has been going on now for over 2 years, with all these numerous random players and it is only the Enquirer that has the goods on Edwards? what gives ?
What gives is that so far they’re the only ones investigating it. Well, besides the Internet.
Reply
Jeanne
“Do you ever wonder why other media outlets have chosen not to run with this?”
To paraphrase an old campaign slogan: IT’S THE MSM STUPID!
Were this a Republican in question, the MSM would be all over it like a cheap suit.
24-7
Here’s yer sign………………
Reply
A while back I would have agreed with you Raph. But the MSM is not left leaning any longer. It is corporate owned and hence does what is in the best interests of the corporations, usually GOP types. We are still under the (de)illusion that this country is a primarily 2 party system. It’s not. We are closer to the “one party system” that Karl Rove and company have firmly rooted into our fragile democracy. As a one time Republican I am horrified to see what has become of our once ‘for the people by the people’ Democracy. The 2 parties fight amongst themselves while our country is being hijacked by these neocons, all the while we powerless partisans wring our hands and gnash our teeth in righteous indignation at outlandish rumors coming from our most ridiculed media sources.Smoke and Mirrors. While the MSM smiles behind their hands, yes get the bastard son of the media to do our dirty work, all the while reviling them, holding theor collective noses, without appearing to dirty their own hands. Brilliant really.
Reply
Brilliant really.
Next up: At the Movies with Stevie Wonder.
Reply
The Enquirer’s got photos up and its pretty obvious they were taken from inside the hotel room with hidden cameras.
Its looking more and more like Rielle Hunter’s guru Bob McGovern who rented rooms 246 and 252 is the source of the Enquirer’s leak.
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sen_john_edwards_caught_with_mistress_and_love_child_in_la_hotel/celebrity/65193
Reply
I indepently confirmed the prescence of the striped curtains in each rom visible behind John Edwards.
http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/EVOD4P8nB5VRZguA52Gl2w?select=tVuJpdy6WOcyRBInTlMg0A
Reply
Oh my God ! they have had 2.5 weeks to photoshop or manufacturer these pix and that’s the best they can do? pathetic, and it doesn’t really even look like Edwards, the hairline is completely off in addition to that poor excuse for a lighter colored hairpiece on the top. This is hysterical. And the shirt? then show a pic of him supposedly wearing it at another time. Wow I feel a major lawsuit coming on. All this does is confirm that this is ALL a fabrication. where are the supposed pix the Enquirer took may I ask? all this shows is someone taking a picture of a baby in a specific hotel room with a man that is NOT John Edwards!
Reply
http://www.oprah.com/slideshow/spirit/inspiration/slideshow1_ss_challenge11/11
Reply
[...] ruining journalism by reporting easily verifiable facts that some find unpleasant. According to DBKP, the latest issue of the Enquirer claims that Andrew Young, the purported father of 5-month-old [...]
Jeanne,
You sound positively MSM-like.
We will only say the same thing we’ve been saying since December, “Time will tell”.
Nothing will convince those who clamored for pix and now are yelling “PhotoShop”…not even and Edwards’ mea culpa.. Then the cry will change to “So what?”
I do agree with some of your points in your comment response to RAPH.
Thanks for stopping by, reading and commenting.
Reply
To everyone who commented on this story:
It was fun and joy to read the intense back and forth on this! Like I always say, sometimes, the comments are as good (or better) than the story!
Thank you all!
Reply
hmmm, well guess now that he admitted both to the hotel and the affair the NE does not look so dumb, feel sorry for his wife and andrew young’s family, what a jerk Edwards is, if he is the father and still lying he is an idiot, might as well put it all out there at once finally
Reply
[...] Continue reading: John Edwards Scandal: Whatever Happened to Andrew Young? [...]
[...] Carolina News » News John Edwards Scandal: Whatever Happened to Andrew Young?2008-08-09 06:48:18Official for Edwards’ campaign, Young’s last official position with the [...]
The ONE AND ONLY reason this story was not picked up by the MSM is that Edwards is a Democrat. Had he been a Republican or conservative the MSM would have been all over this like a cheap suit. There is nothing humane about the left wing press.
Reply