March 4, 2010

A grand jury is about to indict John Edwards?

That's what the National Enquirer says, and we should've listened to them last time.

38 comments:

Sixty Grit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
former law student said...

John Edwards should have picked his mistresses from the ranks of government employees, like Clinton did. Putting them on his campaign payroll was his fatal error.

c3 said...

How many doctors in North Carolina are cheering this news?

Here's a thought, if the Republicans were serious about getting malpractice reform, they would repeat this phrase over and over:
John Edwards, malpractice lawyer so when asked by a reporter for their thoughts on this indictment they will state: well Mr. Edwards, a wealthy rich malpractice lawyer has...

Opus One Media said...

good.

Turtledove said...

John Edwards: Forgotten but not gone.

Pogo said...

There are two Americas: prisoners and the free.

SteveR said...

Going from having a girldfriend to being a girlfriend.

Fen said...

Indicting a poitician for lying about sex on the side has not been a serious crime for a long time

He's being investigated by FBI and IRS for improper use of campaign funds, not for having an affair.

Just to be clear: perjury and obstruction [Clinton] re sexual harassment [Jones], sexual discrimination [Lewinsky et al] and sexual abuse [Wiley] is NOT "just about sex".

So lets not play that game re Edwards.

TMink said...

"While he believes he's done nothing illegal in trying to hide his extramarital affair with Rielle and their daughter, he thinks the Feds are going to make an example of him."

Wow. Frak illegal, how about sinful? Then there are those pesky laws about paying hush money to your mistress with campaign funds. I bet that is illegal. As for making an example of him, he will get fined. He can pay a fine.

What a sleaze. God have mercy on him.

Trey

NewHam said...

"Indicting a poitician for lying about sex on the side has not been a serious crime for a long time."

It is now so get fucking used to it.

We're coming for you and your whores.

You may think you're taking over the country, but you're not going to enjoy it. We're going to see to that. We're going to separate you from your pussy and prosecute you every chance we get for crimes we'd look the other way for if your guys weren't such assholes.

That's how you get Capone.

That's the Chicago Way.

Bring your thugs to meetings. Bring your enforcers with their batons to the polls. Get up in our faces. Punch us twice as hard.

Bring it.

TMink said...

Right on point there Fen, but he and his people are trying to obfuscate the matter. They are after all, Democrats.

OK, I could have said politicians, but I am feeling snarky.

Trey

A.W. said...

i think that what is starting to get funny about this story is:

1) how the national inquirer has gotten to be the go-to source on this story, and

2) how many people are expressing a little shock and maybe even dismay about point #1.

But its a little like my comment on the IPCC scandals and the CRU leaks in regard to global warming. not only were these institutions wrong, but no one in the supposedly respectable scientific community said they were wrong. so you are inclined to beleive the deniers because they were the only ones telling the truth when everyone else BS'ed you. Ditto with the National Equirer.

Fen said...

Think for a moment what this says about the current state of the Democrat Party. John Edwards was their VP nom.

Thinking that Edwards is an outlier re Dem corruption is like a wife coming home 15 mins early, catching her hubby in bed with a hooker, and thinking this is the first time he's cheated.

Rialby said...

I wonder how much Vera Baker was paid to move to Martinique?

former law student said...

John Edwards was their VP nom.

Back when he posed as the ideal family man, who had refrained from dumping his wife after she let herself go.

A.W. said...

i think saying this says something about all dems is a bit much. There are plenty of republican hound dogs around, although it seems like the more flagrant ones are dems these days.

But is anyone shocked that this shallow, shallow man, would turn out to be such a creep? The dems have stroked his ego for years, are we surprised he has one?

NewHam said...

Back when he posed as the ideal family man

Edwards didn't pose so much as the media presented him as a family man, knowing full well that he was not.

Several members of the media were aware he was fucking Hunter; but they chose not to report it.

Which they are free to do. Except they're not able to then claim they're just reporting the facts, ma'am.

The Washington media are complicit in the presentation of these scumbags to us as legitimate leadership. Remember the Washington Post wanted to sell tickets to "salons" where you could meet and greet the legislators who would decide the fate of health care reform.

Of course, once the cat got loose of the bag they had to back down.

When the time comes for the Great Cleansing, we need to start the wash cycle with these fuckers.

Pogo said...

Maybe there can be a new Federal prison just for dirty pols.



The current one at Fannie Mae is full.

former law student said...

Several members of the media were aware he was fucking Hunter; but they chose not to report it.

He didn't even meet Hunter till 2006 -- how is she relevant to what happened during the 2004 campaign and before?

Was Edwards cheating on his wife before November 2004? Or was he "the ideal family man" as I said?

Pogo said...

"Was Edwards cheating on his wife before November 2004? "

Well I for one find the idea that John Edwards ever cheated before meeting Rielle simply absurd!

raf said...

About time, I'd say.

wv: pures. Gotta be a joke in there, just gotta be.

edutcher said...

SteveR said...

Going from having a girldfriend to being a girlfriend.

Exactly right. He better learn to take his showers wearing a chastity belt. And don't bend over!

A.W. said...

i think that what is starting to get funny about this story is:

1) how the national inquirer has gotten to be the go-to source on this story, and

2) how many people are expressing a little shock and maybe even dismay about point #1.


An article on BigGovernment led with the statement that it's the new paper of record.

Many a true word...

WV "excong" The current House leadership.

former law student said...

As Willie Stark said in Warren's All the King's Men:

"Man is conceived in sin and born in corruption and he passeth from the stink of the didie to the stench of the shroud. There is always something."

NewHam said...

"He didn't even meet Hunter till 2006 -- how is she relevant to what happened during the 2004 campaign and before?"

John Edwards was a member in good standing of the Democrat Party and was a candidate for the Democrat Party nomination for President while he was fucking Rielle Hunter and while his poor wife was battling cancer.

And it's relevant because I say it's relevant.

Several members of the media, and the Democrat Party, were aware of this while he was fucking her at the same time he was running for President. Members of his own team pondered whether to come clean, but chose not to.

And they chose not to report that news to the country (probably so that they would have information with which to blackmail Edwards should he ever actually become President).

See, what you don't want is a President open to being blackmailed by reporters who have withheld information damaging to him.

You know, people like John Edwards and other Democrats wielding huge amounts of power such as the New York Governor Eliot Spitzer. You know, people like Democrat Congressman Eric Massa.

You know ... the perverts.

traditionalguy said...

NewHam...Are you our old friend Florida? The threatening to fight the Democrats meme is more effective if you announce it when it is time to do it, or we risk sounding like girls hollering wolf. The scheduled elections are the revolution days, and we only need to fight when they cancel elections or they stuff ballot boxes. Ask yourself what would George Washington say and do.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

traditionalguy,

Indicting a politician for lying about sex on the side has not been a serious crime for a long time.

Actually, I don't think it's been a crime (serious or otherwise) ever. Lying about sex, possibly; writing an indictment of someone who lied about sex, never.

garage mahal said...

Well I for one find the idea that John Edwards ever cheated before meeting Rielle simply absurd!

LOL

Peter V. Bella said...

Read Game Change.

NewHam said...

"The scheduled elections are the revolution days, and we only need to fight when they cancel elections or they stuff ballot boxes."

Guy, this is a guerrilla war. We're already fighting you. You're already taking stunning amounts of casualties. You're hemmoraging. The Jack of Hearts is captured later today in New York.

We're combing through our deck.

The scheduled elections aren't the revolution days. The revolution started a year ago. We're not waiting for you to cancel elections.

We're taking you out now.

It will all be over by election day.

Big Mike said...

@traditionalguy, waiting until after the ballot box has been stuffed is waiting too long.

Big Mike said...

Does anyone else remember the scene in Men in Black, when Tommy Lee Jones holds up a couple tabloids and says "Best investigative reporting on the planet."

They knew! The scriptwriters knew.

Um, why is that black helicopter circling over my house?

Maguro said...

Has there ever been a more transparent phony than John Edwards?

traditionalguy said...

Big Mike...That means we need to get the Secretary of State Offices and all of the local election supervisory officials elected by our friends. The absentee ballot shinanigans is a loophole and the Photo ID requirement being ruled as a racist trick is another loophole that needs to be a fought and won. But using weapons in the street are an excuse to cancel the elections.

Big Mike said...

@traditionalguy, while NewHam is using violent imagery to make his point, I hope that neither he nor anyone else from the other-than-Democrat side resort to arms, other than in self-defense.

But NewHam's line about being punched twice as hard, you do remember who said that first? And it's pretty well-known that several armed thugs showed up at a polling place in the "City of Brotherly Love" to intimidate voters. You wouldn't happen to remember which candidate they supported? And whose Attorney General declined to prosecute?

My view is that NewHam is merely forcing Democrats to stare into an abyss that they themselves created. If they don't like what they see there, perhaps they need to back down their own rhetoric and tell their own thugs to knock it off?

Just a thought.

NewHam said...

"... while NewHam is using violent imagery to make his point ... "

NewHam is using Obama-approved imagery to prove his point.

And NewHam is using Obama-approved Alinsky-inspired tactics to fight and win the guerrilla war.

I doubt seriously it would ever need to come to arms, but if that's what it takes I find it of note that they prefer to cluster in gun-free zones.

Mian said...

The frightening thing is that John Edwards --irrespective of his political party -- came close to becoming VP of the US.

The people I blame for this is the skeezeball Press, whom we rely upon for Due Diligence on those who aspire to power. Boy, were they ever incompetent on this one.

May God grant that the Media step away from their hubris long enough to do their jobs properly!

Peter V. Bella said...

Has there ever been a more transparent phony than John Edwards?

President Barak Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Shumer, Kirsten Gillibrand(Shumer's "protege"- ahem), Charlie Rangel, Steny Hoyer, and the list goes on and on and on.

traditionalguy said...

NewHam ...You and who else thinkd they can take me out now? The most dangerous opponent in a room is the one who is quietly watching others brag about their plans, until he strikes unannounced. Your public announcement that you do not need elections to start eliminating politicians you deem an enemy makes you a moby, because if it was true you would be out doing it instead of poisoning the reputation for rational discourse here.