She's not a "victim"....she and Edwards created this situation....she's old enough to know exactly what she's doing.....

Graham, stop it. Edwards is out of the game. The one who now is being hurt ... again, is his wife and you even defame her.

The "other" woman you show such empathy for is culpable here as well as JE. She willingly if not deliberately, entered a liason with a married man who had just been through, with his wife, an horrendous two years battling cancer. She approached him originally, not the other way around. That doesn't excuse his behaviour but it sure as hell doesn't make her a candidate for sainthood.

She moved on from that affair to another staffer Andrew Young who has admitted paternity of her child. And just BTW ... it isn't the Andrew Young you confused him with last night in this thread. He's a young man , married and with young children of his own.

The lady is batting 1000 in the married man sweepstakes.

Stop sounding like some bitter old woman with nothing better to do than gossip about the latest scandal she feeds on for daily sustenance, and go take a chill pill.

Thanks, Terra. I kind of needed that.

please look at the details

Just in July person goes clandesently into a hotel room in the dark of night

to try and obtain silence

Please, it defies explanation

This is a back story written to get the tidy package that was presented to us last night

We've been played this same story too many times

Put on your Columbo hats and see this story is not to be believed.
For all we know, the two are still together, and were making plans for ten years in the future.

The man in that picture sure looks happy

Edwards lied like Clinton lied to hide an embarrassing situation. Do the affairs and the lying say something about the character of them both...sure. Do situations like these present big problems if one is POTUS or running for president...sure. The possibility of black mail always lurks around the corner until the person "fesses up". For John to do this when he was running for a shot at the presidency was really over the top irresponsible.But, he didn't get the nomination (thank the voters for that!) so now this situation is nothing more than a personal issue between he and his family. Even if he should be the father of the baby, it's an issue that won't (hopefully) affect the outcome in November. In fact, this issue might even bring some subtle attention to the strong and loyal Obama marriage.

up to 2 days ago, John Edwards was on the short list of VP candidates, and he himself indicated he would take it if asked (after changing his answer
a month or two ago to that one)

So this is a completely relavant story

(and if your assessment is correct, then someone like Al Gore might indeed be once again have another reason to answer the call, like he did in 1992
to offset Clinton's Jennifer Flowers affair that just about derailed him. (long before Monica).

Where there is one, there are many.

Nobody seems to care about this woman being bashed.


http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=5546813&page=2
Mistress' Family Challenges Edwards to Take DNA Test
Sister of Other Woman in Edwards Affair: 'Stop Bad-Mouthing My Sister'
By RHONDA SCHWARTZ and BRIAN ROSS
Aug. 9, 2008

(AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)
In the first reaction from Hunter's family, her younger sister Melissa told ABC News that Edwards should immediately follow through on his pledge to take a paternity test.

"I would challenge him to do so," the sister said. "Somebody must stand up and defend my sister," she said. "I wish that those involved would refrain from bad-mouthing my sister."

In his interview with ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff acknowledging the affair, Edwards said he knew the child was not his because of "the timing" of the pregnancy and the affair.

"I would welcome participating in a paternity test," Edwards said. "I'm only one side of the test, but I'm happy to participate in one."

Hunter left her Santa Barbara home earlier this week in advance of Edwards' ABC News interview.

Related
Edwards Admits to Sexual Affair; Lied as Presidential CandidateTranscript: John Edwards InterviewWATCH: Edwards Admits to Extramarital Affair She had been hired to produce Web documentaries for the Edwards campaign, at a cost of $114,000, even though she had no filmmaking experience.

Edwards said the affair began only after she was hired. The two had initially met at a New York city hotel bar, according to friends of Hunter.

Her daughter, Frances Quinn, was born in February in Santa Barbara.


Edwards admitted to ABC News he met secretly with Hunter last month at the Beverly Hilton in Beverly Hills, California for the purpose of "trying to keep this from becoming public."

As he left the meeting, at 2:30 in the morning, he was confronted by reporters from the National Enquirer.

Edwards told ABC News he had not told his wife about the meeting in advance.

He said in the meeting was not "the only contact" he had with Hunter since 2006 when he said he ended the affair.

"There have been some other telephone contacts," Edwards told ABC.

Hunter's sister Melissa said Rielle was being falsely portrayed as a "promiscuous person" and was not involved in "setting up" Edwards at the hotel meeting.

"Do you think it's easy for us to just sit back and let everyone rip her to shreds and not defend her honor?"

I don't hear Edwards bashing her. As far as others' opinions about her, what did she expect? Play with fire, ya get burned.

Elizabeth is a pro

One could take the same statement you just made on this woman, and send it back to her

She knew this and covered it up for 2 years.. What did she expect? That the press would not have found out?

That Hillary would let a major scandal like this, when Hillary sic'd all her attack dogs on the candidates to find
stuff out, would not find out about this?

Who do you think got this info released when it was?
Naive to think this outcome was not political when the Clintons, like the Bush's are the two dirtiest bunch of fighters
out there...and the known scism that was said about where the loyalty of John and Elizabeth with regard to candidates
was. (after all Elizabeth still to my knowledge did not support Obama).

Everyone in this story has an angle...and they all played with fire and they all got burned.

One could say in 2006, with the love of the nation Elizabeth had, she could have tossed him out and ran for President
herself and got more votes than she did. That she remained silent meant that what happened was able to happen.

Just looking at the raw facts. Sometimes they are not pretty.

And I do want to know how this story got where it did, because a major crime may have been committed if there was
a dirty trick involved and it involved Hillary...
I have a sneaky suspicion...
Follow Clinton's trail...where that is, trouble follows.

Like Elizabeth is supposed to expose her husband's affair???? Get a grip, Graham

I believe John Edwards loves his wife.

So do I.

I do as well.

It seems obvious that he loves her. The question is how much and how well and is it enough to satisfy Elizabeth. Personally, I never wanted him for President or VP. Picking him was one of the big mistakes Kerry Made.

I agree on all points.

And I. Being unfaithful to his wife points indelibly to his personal lack of self-discipline when the chips are down. No matter how egocentric he was becoming, his mental moral compass should have kicked in and stopped the "several nights' stands" he indulged in. As far as the 'other woman'?????? She knew exactly what she was doing and what the ramifications would be if found out. She obviously cared nothing for her family or for Sen Edwards or his family. A book deal may even be on the horizon..........wouldn't surprise me.

It's irrelevant whether he loves her. He totally disrespected her at a time when she needed him most and that makes him a scumbag in my book.

I agree as well. One's personal life vs. one's public life are not separate black and white entities. There is always a gray area of influence of either on the other.

As for Edwards in 2004? He only received my vote because he was Kerry's running mate. I had no disdain for Edwards, but I can't say I really revered him as part of the ticket until I went to the voting booth. Edwards has just never struck me as strong and durable. I think it's really quite sad that this affair turned out to be one of his weak spots.

In my book, too.

Trust, faith, and respect are all part of true love. Edwards failed on all counts.....and that's despicable.

My opinion of Edwards has been verified...Nuff said!

I agree with all your statements but the first

The first is NONE of our business and constitutes gossip on our part

The other parts of this sordid story that I care about are all political and the power, obsession, bribery, hush money, conspiracy that this all entails.

Not to mention plain dumb arse stupidity, so stupid, that one wonders if this is not in cahoots with trying to bring democracy and our constiuttion down

I could care less if john loves Elizabeth (having sex with another women is the going standard in DC it seems for prooving one's love to their spouse, isn't it) nor do I care that we rah rah rah
take a poll to see who thinks John Loves Liz. As if that has anything to do with the price of beans and cheese and gas

Big whoops in the love department here
How one could love someone while doing someone else is beyond me.

she knew about it in 2006 and this is 2008

as they never will be in want of money, or possessions or homes, the one revenge she might have had is stopping him from being President, especially if she feels she is not going to be here
that many years

and she is one of two people in the entire universe, the other being Hillary who got this exposed, either / or.
So indeed she might of been the one

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned and all that be-bop and jazz.

Some people are not revengeful types,Graham. Elizabeth probably fits in that category...and she has her children to think of...and John has and will receive "punishment" enough from the public. Now you having Elizabeth doing what you might do in similar circumstances....you're blurring the boundaries...Elizabeth is not you.

And, as usual, it's all Hillary's fault .....

If she didn't then Hillary did, however I have a thought in my mind as to how this may be playing out...
I most defnitely will not put it down here though, but I sure hope I am wrong.
Treachoury in higher office and so devious, only a BushClintonRove would think of it. (or one who sees how we are being played).

If only there was a congress that had some cajunes to impeach when it could have been done...

Fasten your seatbelts, as Bette Davis said, we are in for a bumpy ride.

Some people choose to live in a far simpler, far uglier world and have a Messianic drive to convince others it exists beyond their morbid and hate driven imaginations.

I know...it always amuses me when cheating spouses say the other woman doesn't mean "anything" to them and that they love their wives. If my husband loved me in that way he would no longer be my husband. BUT, that's me and I understand there are many issues that factor in when a betrayed spouse is deciding what path to follow.

Edwards and his family are on the bumpy road, Graham. "We" are not in for for a bumpy ride unless McCain wins the WH.

.......I'd map it as a path out the door. One can forgive but one can't forget. Some say trust can be re-established. However, as long as that memory exists the betrayed will have doubts, and there is no way that cannot affect one's happiness together. Elizabeth deserves better.

Canjcat different people handle things differently.

Elizabeth Edwards and her husband have faced adversities during a 31 year marriage that some cannot even imagine. Losing a child as they did should not happen. Our children are meant to outlive us. Dealing with that and coming through it with marriage intact creates a bond which no one can understand who hasn't lived through it.

Add to that Elizabeth's cancer.

I am not in any way defending his actions. And aside from his weakness as a man , from what I have been reading elsewhere this morning in the media .. not blogs, his judgment is seriously impaired when it comes to selecting a partner in his trangressions. Still the fact Elizabeth chooses to stay with her marriage is not that difficult to understand for me. A marriage that has had much love AND much tragedy and which survives has a foundation that does allow for forgiveness and the ability to understand and in time forget. Obviously Elizabeth Edwards cherishes her marriage vows enough to make that effort.

I won't post links to the papers I read as that would be smearing the Other woman quite dramatically but suffice it to say if even one tenth of what I read is true, we haven't heard the last of this woman by a long shot..

I was just stating my opinion which I realize differs from some others here. I've stated my opinion in earlier posts as well. I reiterate....all are only my opinion statements.

In no way am I questioning what Elizabeth has chosen to do. It's ultimately her decision and her decision only. Whether or not her decision agrees with how I would respond in the same situation is inconsequential to me. Elizabeth was wronged, and I support her regardless.

My thoughts, prayers and respect are only with Elizabeth and her children who are suffering as the collateral damage for John's actions, poor choices and the notoriety associated with it all.

As far as John and the "other woman"?? I couldn't give a flip about either of them.

I love that one should not forward this because it is personal, then one at the same time makes a Saint out of Elizabeth and makes it personal. I care about as much for her personal business
as she does about mine- which is not one concern at all. Public people put themselves in public- don't you think Elizabeth should have told John DON'T RUN IN 2008 and use me as an excuse?
A caring husband who loved his dying wife would never have run anyhow, but they did.
anyhow...

I could care less about the personal stuff.

The political intrigue is what is important and how it affects the next 88 days til the voting, and the next 19 til the convention

Here from the votemaster at electoral-vote.com
John Edwards has admitted having an affair with Rielle Hunter in 2006 but vehemently denies being the father of Hunter's child and is willing to take the necessary tests to prove it. Edwards' chances of being Obama's Veep kind of dropped a bit with this announcement. No doubt it will get a lot of play in the traditional media. It will be interesting to see if any enterprising reporter asks John McCain point blank: "Have you ever committed adultery?" It is a germane question because (1) Edwards adultery is big news and (2) McCain has made "moral character" the main issue of his campaign.

McCain may not be too keen to answer yes or no because the truth won't please the family values crowd. While he was a P.O.W. in Vietnam, his first wife, model Carol Shepp, was seriously injured in a horrific traffic accident in which she was thrown through the windshield. She didn't mention this in her letters to him in Vietnam to keep his morale up. When he got back and saw her 4 inches shorter, seriously overweight, and on crutches, he began having affairs. One piece of indisputable evidence is the fact that he obtained a license to marry wealthy beer heiress Cindy Hensley on March 6, 1980, while still legally married to Carol. Here is the L.A. Times story but if you type: McCain adultery to Google, you'll get 500,000 hits. Journalistic standards ought to require that if Edwards cheating on his sick wife is an indication of a deep moral flaw, then McCain cheating on his sick wife ought to be the same thing. And McCain is a candidate for President; Edwards is not.

I understand that and I wasn't disagreeing with you. We all see things from our own point of view. I was simply offering mine.

Yes, the family suffers and the public has to be exposed to more of the "down on the knees" mea culpas..... they've lost their bearings, their moral compass is out of whack, they drink to much and will enter rehab....they love and respect their wives and families, whatever. I wish they would just get honest and say that it's between them and their families, it's a personal issue, so that we all would be spared the groveling and confessions.

Once again, if you ask me

Any mention whatsoever of Elizabeth is personal and has no need to be on a political board UNLESS it is in connection with the democratic
campaign of 2008

And, if Elizabeth did or did not forward this story out to the press to sabatoge John

That is what should be on a political board

It really is just a MacGuffin to stop conversation of the political aspect of the entire situation, the VP race, and the who-done-it aspect that could
actually be a federal crime if harrassment or coersion or blackmail were involved by any of the parties

And if it was a dirty trick smear by Hillary, that needs to be investigated one way or the other and that info fully come out, and appropriate action
taken if a crime was committed.

Many people have affairs, many people have cancer and die, many people are poor, many people have kids

Only 10-20 people ran for president in 2008
only a handful are/were seriuous contenders as of 40 hours ago for the vice presidency
Only 2 candidates remain one of whom will be the next president one democrat or one republican

That is this issue.

Any other mention of Elizabeth is IMHO the gratuitous part and trying to end discusion of the important poltiical aspect above.

Otherwise, why not talk about it in the off-topic section of people who are dying who's spouse have affairs.

because the personal stuff is not what any of these famous people want

They want the job they set out to have, that their being caught stopped them at having

So Hugh Grant goes on Leno
and Marcia Brady sells a new book
and this and that
and John Edwards does a mea culpa soley so he could still be considered for a job with Obama either as VP AG or somewhere else

After all, if John becomes a private citizen, who the f--- cares about this. He don't need anyones permission to be a cad He has 200 million plus dollars to lie at home drinking and loving anyone
he chooses the rest of his life

He is an egomaniac and full of himself (he said so yesterday), and he craves the camera spotlight and wants to be VP so he could be President
That is 100% why

Same as Hugh Grant wanted another movie, and all the others who confess want whatever it is they want- which is money, power, attention in the media, and have that for the rest of their
lives.

If a common person had this happen
a the spouse would probably toss them out of the house and a divorce would soon happen
b no one outside the small circle of friends and relatives would give a spit
c life would go on for all sides in this cruel, cruel, world

Who died and made John and Elizabeth so damn important that they thought they could hide a lie for 2 years in front of the biggest media blitz in the world and nothing would be revealed

What egos. What power.

Warren Beatty and Madonna couldn't have done better (or Paris and Britney and Lindsay these days).

You only get in the press by being famous. Joe Shmoo's don't have this problem.

let alone...the Beverly Hills Hilton...oye vey...

No, Joe Smos don't have this problem and it's all about narcissism, huge insecure egos, power and addiction to the spotlight for many politicians and other public figures. Glad my husband and I are members of the average Joe set.

Elizabeth's requests can not be done, sadly.
......There is the issue of public money and the question of how it was used? That investigation which may well have criminal aspects can not allow her or her family the privacy that she requests. Thats a large part of this tragedy.

me too! 100% agreement.
It's a totally different world. And they think we are suppose to care about their world 24/7/365...none of these types ever consider all our little own worlds at all.

You guys wouldn't believe the big deal that Huffington Post has been making about this story. They've actually been reporting it since right after the NE printed their story about his been spotted at the LA hotel.

Now they've given the story a whole section of the Huffpo site, all on its own.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/john-edwards

It's titled: "SOME NEWS IS SO BIG IT NEEDS ITS OWN PAGE"

This just gets worse and worse. From Sam Stein:




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/09/j...t_n_117925.html

John Edwards' False Assertion During The ABC Interview


August 9, 2008 03:16 PM


John Edwards made a false assertion about the nature of his extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter during an interview with ABC on Friday night.

Asked by correspondent Bob Woodruff to detail the beginnings of his romantic relationship, he said that it started after Hunter was hired to direct a series of documentary films for his One America Committee.

WOODRUFF: When you hired Ms. Hunter, that was back in 2006, the committee hired in July 2006, paid her $114,000 to make films for you... Uh was the affair going on when you hired her?

EDWARDS: No. No. And again, I always said this to you, I don't think I'm going to go through the details of this, I already did it with Elizabeth-- uh, she was hired to come in and produce films and that's the reason she was hired.

WOODRUFF: But this had nothing to do with the fact that you were having an affair with her?

EDWARDS: Same answer. Same answer -- no I did not.

WOODRUFF: So you hired her before it even started?

EDWARDS: That is correct.

A review of political action committee payments, contemporaneous reporting, and emails obtained by the Huffington Post reveal this statement to be false.

Edwards and Hunter initially met each other sometime during the winter of 2006 (either late December 2005 or early January) in a hotel restaurant in midtown Manhattan. It would be another seven months before Edwards would first pay her for the documentary work. As Woodruff rightfully noted, the initial check cut to Hunter's film company was written on July 5, 2006, for the cost of $12,500.

What happened in between that winter meeting and the start of filming? Emails sent by Hunter suggest that her romance with Edwards was in full bloom that spring. In early April, Hunter wrote about a trip she had taken to North Carolina to see the man whom she affectionately referred to as "my love lips."

A week later she wrote another email in which she described the mental anguish of "being in love with a (still somewhat dysfunctional) married man."

Indeed, the circumstances surrounding Hunter's professional life resoundingly suggest that Edwards hired her as a front to continue their relationship. For starters, she had virtually no film experience prior to being asked by the former Senator to make documentaries. Moreover, Hunter's film company, Midline Groove Productions, was started in the spring of 2006 - months after she and Edwards first met -- suggesting that it was created for the sole purpose of working with him.

As Colin Weil, a film consultant on the project told the Huffington Post back in October 2007: "Neither of them [Hunter and her business partner and friend Mimi Hockman] had done tons and tons of stuff before hand..."

In the context of admitting to an affair, it may seem innocent for Edwards to have misled ABC about the staring point. But the precise date is important. Over the course of nine months Edwards would spend more than $114,000 of the One America Committee's budget on Hunter's films. Whether he did that in an effort to have Hunter around or as a legitimate documentary project would likely make a difference to those who thought they were contributing to a poverty-eradication effort.

Did she and her company do the work? If so, it's a dead issue as far as I'm concerned. And who really cares in any event?

I swear, the Internet is as much a curse as it is a blessing.

I think a criminal investigation into Edwards is warranted

I think he committed a mulititude of crimes and might just wind up in jail
Wonder if he knows any lawyers (not ambulence chasers)

This is a major big deal.

It goes into trust, lying, extortion, payoffs, hushmoney, blackmail, bribery, misuse of funds

outright fraud

and bullying

Why anyone would want to cover it up is beyond me...

and if a person cheats and gets caught, chances are they have done it often before the time they got caught

The whole thing is a sham

Anyone who bought a book should sue for a refund - maybe a class action lawsuit

Dennis Koslowski is in jail for buying some shower curtains...this is outright fraud if found guilty

I am glad to see someone agrees 100% with me
Bonnie Fuller from the HuffPost

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bonnie-fulle...h_b_117938.html

Elizabeth Edwards Drank Her Husband's Kool-Aid And Became His "Ambition Enabler"

Here's why Elizabeth was willing to believe her husband could cheat and STILL run for president

It's easy to understand why John Edwards first felt he was entitled to cheat on his wife and family, and then second, thought he could keep it secret from the American public. He is a self-admitted "narcissist", and narcissists believe they are entitled to whatever they want, whenever they want it. As psychologist Cooper Lawrence told me, "they always think some other poor schnook will get caught, not them."

The bigger question is "why did Elizabeth Edwards drink her husband's Kool-Aid? How could she have possibly believed that her husbands affair would remain a private matter when he was running for President of the United States? Hello, the National Enquirer had already broken the story last fall. Why in fact, did she knowingly encourage her spouse to even enter the campaign when she had been fully informed about the affair for over a year? And she helped support and propagate John Edwards' image as a devoted husband and family man.

She was so supportive that she even remained committed to his campaign after the discovery of her metastasized breast cancer. Despite the fact that she was facing a terminal illness, she was willing to take flack for her belief that John Edwards' presidential campaign was so important that not even her own health should stand in the way of its proceeding.

Elizabeth Edwards is now protesting in her own public statement that the public appetite to 'know" is the real culprit in the situation. The 'public' is being voyeuristic in her view and is getting in the way of her family's right to privacy.

Well, she may not want to admit it but Elizabeth is as guilty as her husband at this point, in inviting the public into her family's personal life. Once Bill Clinton's antics in the White House with Monica Lewinsky became Page One headlines for months, no presidential candidate or their family could ever realistically kid themselves, that marital fidelity would not be an issue in political life. If she had any questions about that last spring, she only had to make a call to Silda Spitzer.

No, Elizabeth Edwards had to be in some extraordinary form of denial and that's why she became her husband's "ambition enabler", when she supported his recent run for the presidency. My belief is that after almost thirty years of marriage she too had become so invested in his political ambitions, his cause, that she couldn't give up either, even after he cheated and she knew there was a chance his affair could be reported in the mainstream press.

"His success, now defined her success, so she was willing to go along with the fraud that that their marriage was fine," believes psychologist Victoria Zdrok, currently working on a book titled," Dr. Z on Straying."

Think about it. The Edwards met in law school; She still wears the $11 wedding ring he gave her. He became a successful trial lawyer and then a member of the Senate. She pursued a law career too but ultimately gave it up to support his career and take care of their family. As a couple they experienced the worst of tragedies, the death of their 16 year-old son, and then they made the decision to have two more children. It's easy to understand why Elizabeth Edwards would feel that her marriage was worth salvaging after her spouses' episode of infidelity. It's the presidential campaign that is far harder to understand.

That's why I believe that it's because Elizabeth had made such an enormous personal commitment to her role as her husband's helpmate and as a potential first lady and had made so many sacrifices over the years in the interests of realizing those goals, that she was willing to risk public exposure.

Her terminal illness may actually have also played a role in her decision to publicly stand by her man and his presidential ambitions, according to Zdrok. "When we seek death, we often seek to achieve a symbolic immortality. And becoming a presidential wife could have been that for her."

In any case, Elizabeth Edwards was a victim when her husband cheated. She did nothing to deserve that and as a wife she had every right and many reasons to forgive the jerk. But the decision to stand behind him and publicly broadcast his staunch family values image was her own doing. As courageous and admirable as she has been in dealing with her cancer, she is now the latest member of the Publicly Humiliated Wives Club, and she has no right to complain about the public's interest in knowing exactly what has happened. She helped get herself in this situation.

Crap like that is exactly why I DON'T read the blogs.

The truth hurts I guess.

Too bad the MSM (or the drive by media as Rushie calls it) doesn't do their own investigative work

Watergate never would have broke in 2008

And had the net been around in 2000, Al Gore would have been seated, of course Clintonites never wanted 12-12-2000 to go any other way in the
first place. It would not have suited their purpose to have had Al Gore win.

No, the blogs are, for the most part, just a bunch of knee-jerky opinion. I value my own opinion much more.

It is a bit puzzling as to why Elizabeth would encourage her husband to pursue the presidency when she knew he had had an affair. They had to have known this would be exposed. She's paying the price for it now as are her children. This would have been exposed even if he hadn't entered the race but having been a presidential contender and lying about it makes it that much more news worthy. God bless Elizabeth, but she had to have known what a mess this would create for her and her family if John pursued the presidency. I think I would have told my husband to forget about the national scene.

Well, perhaps if it had been exposed differently the damage might not have been as significant. Remember, Clinton won despite having admitted infidelities. But John getting caught meeting the woman at a hotel ......

I'm sure Elizabeth was just hoping for the best. John, too, for that matter.