Fox News the scums going after Edwards....

[monmouth]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,391426,00.html

Let us finally put this crap to bed. Evidently, the woman who supposedly had a "love child" by John Edwards, did NOT!. Fox News is at the bottom of this, getting back at John because he urged none of the debates be held by Fox. This is their way of getting back at Edwards. Apparently this woman had a child by someone (note below)in Edward's campaign. I'm so sick of this crap. Hope I posted this correctly, I only took 4 paragraphs from the article:




Before and during the Democratic primaries, Edwards urged all candidates to boycott planned debates on FOX News, even though he had made prior appearances on the channel. One of those debates was to be sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus.

Last October, the Enquirer reported that several sources said a former campaign worker on Edwards' campaign had been having an affair with the former North Carolina senator. In an e-mail allegedly written by Hunter to a friend, she wrote that she is "in love with John," but it's "difficult because he is married and has kids."

Edwards' wife Elizabeth, whom many have credited as being one of the driving forces behind Edwards' campaign, announced in March that her breast cancer had re-emerged after going into remission following a 2004 diagnosis.

Hunter has said that the father of her child is former Edwards campaign official Andrew Young. The 41-year-old married father of three has also said he is the father.

[Beaverhausen]

1. from the article, the guard said photogs stuck cameras in his face so- WHERE ARE THE PICTURES???

from the article:

'Edwards did not say anything while he was escorted out, said the guard, adding that at times the reporters on the scene were "rough on him," sticking a camera in his face and shouting questions.
**********************

this is such bullshit. Not one photo has surfaced.

:mad:

[monmouth]

12. And who is this guard? I want to see his pic...n/t

[Catchawave]

67. A name would be good too :)

There's never any names in these tabloid trash pieces....how can I ever trust them :sarcasm:

Remember, these are the same photographers who climb trees to catch Britney's 2 yr old holding a pack of smokes....and it's released within hours.

[Ilsa]

2. Someone in Edwards'campaign has had sex? Oh, the tragedy of it all!

Fox is such scum. They'll use "we were incorrect" news articles to continue to try and trash Democrats.

[monmouth]

3. I'm thinking they're thinking (?) Edwards will be VP and they're

gearing up. This just goes beyond the pale and really, really ticks me off. I hate the media so much these days........sigh.

[PresidentObama]

36. They know the list is shrinking, time to pick off the real threats.

[Virginia Dare]

4. When Obama wins the White House..

I think he should make John Edwards AG or head of the FCC. Either one works for me.

[AZ Criminal JD]

5. What was Edwards doing at the womans hotel room at 2:00 am?

Discussing politics?

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Why would you think anything in that article is factual?

[AZ Criminal JD]

7. The hotel's security guard confirmed he helped escort Edwards out.

So that means he was there at that time. Purpose?

[ErinBerin84]

8. heh, the enquirer probably paid them off or something.

Seriously, isn't that the only source for this? That's what they do. I haven't been following closely. The enquirer should be the official source of Fox news anyways.

[PresidentObama]

13. Haven't tabloids paid off "witnesses" in the past?

So do you believe National Enquirers hit piece that Obama's an Iranian plant, too?

[AZ Criminal JD]

19. And the moon landing was faked too, right?

You are implying that security personnel for a major LA hotel just made up a story for some money. That would not only make him liable for a lawsuit but the hotel also. I guess some people are able to suspend belief easily.

[Beaverhausen]

22. What is the guard's name? My god, you are so gullible

It's the Enquirer and Fox we are talking about here. You don't think they would EVER lie about ANYTHING, do you? :rofl:

[AZ Criminal JD]

28. It is going to be funny to see your reponse a few days from now.

Your head will be turning faster than Linda Blair's in the Exorcist.

[Beaverhausen]

32. you might recall they tried floating this story last fall - no one bought it then, either

[PresidentObama]

35. That's what they said AFTER the first story NE did on this matter...

...and they STILL have no proof.

[Medusa]

51. If this story were about McCain or any prominent repug

no one here would be doubting the authenticity of the story, with or withour photos. Just saying. :hide:

[Inspired]

52. Oh please! Of course we wouldn't doubt it if it was McCain. He has a history of this behavior.

[Medusa]

62. And do we truly know Edwards history?

I've lost faith in too many politicans in my lifetime over matters like this. Anyone remember Gary Hart and Donna Rice? Because I sure do. I worked in Hart's campaign at the time and I know what it felt like to find out the awful truth about him. So I don't go around hotly defending any politican over matters like this any more. Who broke the Hart story first? The National Enquirer. Sometimes even a blind pig can find a truffle. Just saying.

[Inspired]

63. There were pictures of Hart with Rice. Where's the proof with Edwards?

[KharmaTrain]

58. You Mean This Woman???

Vicki Iseman...

http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/02/20/mccain-lobbyist-problem/

How soon the corporate media dropped that story like a hot rock...but a lot of questions about their relationship...lobbying and otherwise was never fully vetted.

[PresidentObama]

33. So you're denying that tabloids have bought off witnesses in the past?

And so what he's a LA hotel security personnel.

If National Enquirer offers you $3,000 to use your name and a quote, you'll take the money and go with it.

It wouldn't be the first time. Your defense of a hit piece on a Democrat with NO evidence is quite funny.

[AZ Criminal JD]

40. Well we all now know your price.

[PresidentObama]

44. Don't change the subject, defend your position...

You really can't. You're backing up a hit piece against a Democrat that has no evidence.

[AZ Criminal JD]

45. This is silly

For your position to be true there would have to be a conspiracy involving dozens of Enquirer personnel, Fox personnel and most important Hotel personnel. If it wasn't true the hotel would have records, including video, that would disprove the story. But it doesn't surprise me because people believe conspiracies that would have to involve thousands such as 9/11.

[PresidentObama]

46. This is silly, yes. Yes, that you defend a hit piece on a Democrat fueled by Fox News

Despite the lack of evidence, lack of photo proof, and unreliable image the source it came from has..

[treestar]

65. Yeah. Could you be more naive?

[hiaasenrocks]

53. Any proof of that?

I don't think there's any hard proof of any of this story and there's also no proof that the Enquirer paid the security guard, yet you're suggesting that. So are you really interested in waiting for the facts here or pushing an outcome?

[Cha]

49. You're always raggin' on Dems and sticking

up for the shit heads..purpose?

[AZ Criminal JD]

50. If that is true then you can post links by doing a search.

If it is a lie then we won't see anything.

[zbdent]

54. I remember that four state troopers claimed that they personally took Bill Clinton

to his trysts in Arkansas ...

but when it came time to put their hands on the bible, hmm ... they suddenly had other things to do ...

[npincus]

66. Enquirer says it will publish pics this weekend

so, that's where it is.

My view is, the story is probably true, and FUX is sadistic scum to trumpet it, given Elizabeth's illness, and the fact they have young kids.

[Inspired]

10. Don't be so quick to believe what you read in tabloids....or Fox.

[AZ Criminal JD]

14. So both the Enquirer reporters AND the hotel security guard are making it up?

Some people think they will never get caught. Witness the recent Governor of New York. I heard Edwards on the news the other day and he didn't deny it. He just said that "all tabloids are garbage". Right.

[Inspired]

21. I can't argue this kind of ignorance so I know how Edwards must feel.

Why bother?

[PresidentObama]

38. So no body EVER makes anything up?

Enquirer reporters aren't reporters. Tabloids are notorious for factually inaccurate stories.

And if this hotel employee is telling the truth, how come NO media minus FOX News (with it's RW agenda) is picking up on it? Maybe they see what we see, this isn't a story. Just another empty and baseless piece from the sketchy NE with no evidence, no photos, no quotes from the supposed hotel guests who saw the situation, and the only 'proof' from a security guard who could easily be bought off.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

27. Ever worked on a campaign? Late nights go with the territory.

In almost any other situation, I'd be skeptical of a married guy being in a woman's hotel room. But when we're talking a political campaign, it's more likely to be innocuous than not.

[ruggerson]

37. What campaign?

What is he running for?

[PresidentObama]

39. He was in LA for Half In Ten, his campaign.

[11 Bravo]

31. I don't give a flying fuck if they were hanging from a chandelier.

Is that in some way cogent in an Obama - Grandpa presidential campaign?

[AZ Criminal JD]

42. What does Obama have to do with it?

We are talking about Edwards in this thread.

[11 Bravo]

47. Perhaps you haven't noticed, the name of this forum is General Discussion: Presidential.

John Edwards is not the Dem nominee (even though he was my first choice). Concern trolls (if the shoe fits) will toss out alleged malfeasance by any Dem in an attempt to tar our candidate (some going so low as to quote FoxNoise quoting the fucking National Enquirer). But thanks for playing.

[AZ Criminal JD]

48. I didn't post the OP

Just responded to it, just as you did. But thanks for playing.

[geek_sabre]

9. not sure why Fox is taking the blame

Its an Enquirer story, they're just trying to corroborate. The article you link contains statements from someone who was directly involved in the Enquirer's timeline of events (the security guard). This story has been popping up for nearly a year, and with Edwards' unnecessarily premature withdrawal from the race, I figured there might be an ounce of truth to it (even saw it on HuffPo). I really hope its not true. If there are pictures, I'm guessing that they're saving them for the print edition. If there are no pics there, then the story is BS.

I think it is fair that they mentioned Edward's boycott in the article, as the reader can take whatever they find in the article with a grain of salt. I don't think it was their motivation for pursuing it, rather they are trying to scoop all of the other networks that won't touch it with a 10 ft pole.

If Edwards is innocent, he should hold a press conference, and offer up his DNA for testing. Otherwise this will continue to haunt him.

[Inspired]

11. Why are you defending FOX? How absurd!

And, since when in our country do we need to prove our innocence? Offer his DNA? Over a fucking article in THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER?

Again I say....ABSURD!

[tritsofme]

16. You are not innocent until proven guilty when running for office.

I consider anyone that seeks governmental power to be suspect to begin with.

In politics you are guilty until proven otherwise, in the court of public opinion.

[tularetom]

34. Unless you are a republican

then you are innocent even after it has been proven that you never reported for duty with the Alabama National Guard or whatever.

[geek_sabre]

18. I'm not defending FOX, I'm defending the press

The Enquirer story is so detailed that is is very easy to confirm or reject any of the events in the timeline. Hotel cameras. Apparently lots of press in the hotel at that time (including NYT). So easy was it, that Fox was able to make a few calls and track down the person who "rescued" Edwards from the bathroom.

If Edwards can prove that wasn't him, or that he was elsewhere, why shouldn't he? Shut that rumors down right away. IF (a big capital IF) the accusations are true, the pictures ARE forthcoming, and it will be much harder to reign this story in if there is proof that he was in that hotel as an unregistered guest.

[Inspired]

23. Fox and The National Enquirer are not legitimate press.

Good grief!

[PresidentObama]

26. You think FOX is legit press?

And you really think that Edwards has any obligation to prove he's innocent? Why because the National Enquirer said he's cheating? They're the same ones who claim the Clintons are divorcing every other year and that Obama is an Iranian plant. And you're idiotic if you believe they have photos. They've produced TWO stories without ANY proof, if they had photos they would have produced them by now to make a case here. They haven't proved anything but push baseless tabloid trash.

[geek_sabre]

41. I hope you're right

If they do have pictures, they will surface with the print article.

They have been right before. I doesn't make good business sense to go after a popular politician with a sick wife if you have no evidence.

[PresidentObama]

43. They go after popular persons all the time, and are wrong most of the time.

My mother used to buy National Enquirer, I just to read them for years and years. She stopped buying them after realizing how inaccurate and phony they were, and how very little of what's posted in them actually being true. And a lot of the stories that are somewhat factual are filled with tons and tons of inaccurate information and lies.

And I'll say it again: they have no photos.

They would have said they did or posted them. You don't drop TWO articles with "bombshells" without photos if you have photos.

They simply don't. You're wrong for defending a Right Wing news station and a tabloid that posts lies.

Sorry...

[Medusa]

61. Legit or not,

they are the number one cable news network in the country and their ratings dwarf CNN & MSNBC's, usually 2 or 3 times over. They have a reach and they have an impact and to ignore that is simplistic at best and stupid at its worst. They have the ability to push a story to the forefront that I'm sure the other networks envy.

[PresidentObama]

20. Defending FOX and suggesting the story is true because Edwards withdrew early?

Unbelievable. Karl, is that you?

[geek_sabre]

24. I am not suggesting its true

You are welcome to your own opinion. I don't want this story to be true, but the fact that the story is so detailed, and they say that they had photographers, DOES suggest that they have some goods.

Just because it is in the Enquirer doesn't mean it is untrue. They are not a political magazine, and that they would invest so many resources into this political story (apparently over 10 months of investigation) suggests that they've got something.

[Beaverhausen]

25. all that investigating and not one photo? Please

how are we to believe they are all over this story without one fucking picture?

[PresidentObama]

29. You 'hope' it isn't true, but you defend it as if it's true?

So what it's detailed. I could produce a detailed account of my affair with Hillary Rodham Clinton, nevermind I have no lick of proof and am gay, but hey...it's detailed. They say they have photographers? So? Where's the photos? This is TWO stories now, and no photos. And they never said they had a photo. Nor a single piece of proof. They claim hotel guests saw the event. Wouldn't they want to quote those guests to give the story life? So what they quoted a hotel employee. Tabloids like National Enquirer have a history of buying off "witnesses" in the past. National Enquirer has no credibility, and is VERY unreliable. Many of the stories, and it's very FEW, that they actually post something factual..it's stories they've gotten details from other sources and other places. All in all, they have a sketchy image as unreliable and not very factual.

Saying (supposedly) you've had a 10 month investigation and providing a detailed story, which could EASILY be made up, doesn't prove anything when they've provided no evidence--NONE.

[Divine Discontent]

55. and Obama needs to provide a sperm sample to quiet the rumors over Larry Sinclair, too, right?

Do YOU agree the Corporation-Controlled Media, who are given TALKING POINTS from the White House, would lie or not tell the truth about an issue??? If you agree, then it's not hard to see how it's ridiculous to ask Edwards to provide a DNA SAMPLE FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE!

If they provide photos that show a timeline that makes sense, or audio (how hard are audio mics to wear, or to keep video rolling for an hour?), then MAYBE he should address it... otherwise - thanks for your concern!

[JuniperLea]

15. They have nothing...

Yet this story lives? It has no legs! They must be pushing it around in a wheelbarrow!

I'm so sick of this crap!

[PresidentObama]

30. Me too. This stuff gets old, and some Democrats even buy it.

I thought we were smarter than that.

[Faygo Kid]

17. Hannity was all over it today. Remember, Edwards said don't go on Faux News.

So of course they now stalk Edwards.

My prediction? O'Lielly does his fucking "Talking Points" on this tonight.

If Edwards screwed up, we have seen it before, in 1998. And it is regrettable on many levels, but it doesn't have anything to do with his message.

The next time Faux reports in any depth on the multiple GOP hypocrisy, will be the first.

This isn't going to be pretty, folks. It's just starting. The Swift Boaters were clumsy amateurs compared to what's coming.

[Divine Discontent]

56. they've been making fancy anti-DEM videos for the past year

and you're right, faygokid, it will make the SBVT morons look like a joke, because of the depth of the smears they're going to push out in the media in one final puke to protect their power - they will stalk and harass all the DEMS they can, from the ones who have something they don't want out there, to the ones that have nothing out there but the "fair & balanced" media will still talk about!


More at - www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable

[Hekate]

57. Yes. All true Dems should be making a pact to watch our leaders' backs, not help Rove stab them

Christ on a Trailer Hitch, this is going to get ugly. You're right --it's just started.

Hekate

[Divine Discontent]

59. hey there Hekate!

:hi:

yep, when I saw this was posted by several people, and also fabricated in repeated posts throughout many threads (things like he needs to give DNA, he's done for politically, or just posting the story) it make me nauseous because there is not ONE real piece of evidence at this time - if there comes real hard evidence, then fine, it's up for discussion, but my goodness, what a sick precedent these DUers are making by throwing on any story the NE puts out about a candidate... That's if they're real DEMS to begin with!

take care, and yes, we gotta keep hard core vigilant in our response to this crap, not only here, but on TV, radio, email b/c they will become so vicious on Obama as it becomes clear he has a solid lead 2 months before the election -


I believe we're going to get a "Kitty Dukakis" question put his way in a debate, meaning, something so disgusting to hear them speak that we're gonna wanna throw a brick at the screen! I know I was outraged for Michael 20 years ago when I was a teenager, that was so horrible of that CNN guy, Bernard Shaw, to invoke a direct image of Kitty being slaughtered after being raped, in getting the response they wanted from Dukakis being shocked by the disturbing quality of the question, compared to his beliefs. So, they'll try and craft a question about Obama that's so personal that they can apply to his repeated beliefs... They are evil incarnate... I really believe this!

More At - www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable and www.cafepress.com/votenoon8

[Hekate]

60. If you & I & a posse stay alert we might at least catch some of this at DU & encourage...

... the Activist Corps. :hi:

Hekate

[Rosa Luxemburg]

64. Fox is just a moving version of the National Enquirer = junk