Showing posts with label Blackout. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blackout. Show all posts

Monday, August 17, 2009

John Edwards Affair: Grand Jury Decision Awaits Edwards



Your Ad Here


EDWARDS TO ADMIT PATERNITY
OF RIELLE HUNTER'S DAUGHTER, FRANCES QUINN


EDWARDS AWAITS GRAND JURY DECISION

MAINSTREAM MOUTHPIECE MEDIA (MMM) ALREADY INDICTED


THE 99% HONEST MAN:
"I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby." --John Edwards' statement to the press, August 8 2008.




THE TANGLED WEB


Q: How can you tell when a trial attorney-turned-politician is lying?
A: When his lips are moving.

John Edwards is reportedly finally to admit he is the father of [Sources: Edwards to admit paternity of ex-mistress' child] 18-month-old Frances Quinn Hunter.

What might compel former presidential candidate, John Edwards, to finally come clean about mistress, Rielle Hunter, and daughter, Frances Quinn? [John Edwards to Admit Rielle Hunter’s Love Child His: When Politicians Fail to Keep Their Pants on]. Maybe it's a sudden yearning to demonstrate he's tired of deceiving the public.

Or perhaps, it is the looming grand jury decision on whether he paid his mistress out of campaign funds.




JOHN EDWARDS LOVE CHILD SCANDAL Library
Over 80 articles chronicling the affair from December 2007 to present.









IN GOD WE TRUST
ALL OTHERS (ESPECIALLY POLITICIANS & MEDIA), PAY CASH


In the John Edwards Scandal, the Mainstream Media truly became the Mainstream Mouthpiece Media (MMM), taking the side of a millionaire presidential candidate over their readers' interests; it found a plethora of reasons why it did not investigate the Edwards' allegations.

In Edwards' case, the story came out, not because of the media's handling of the story, but in spite of it.

During the months of the Edwards' scandal, the media instituted their own "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Obsessed with managing the news instead of reporting it, in the MMM's eyes, the public's right to know became what was right for the public to know. In fact, it was the MMM's principal defense of their non-coverage of the story.

The attitude festered during the 2008 presidential campaign and continues to the present time.

There was a small segment of the public who didn't want to know; the comments section of many Edwards' articles reveals who those people were. They were, in most cases, blameless, Most likely, they were part of the dwindling readership of big city dailies.

That might be one reason that Public Attitudes toward the media show only one publication gaining in trust over the last 10 years--the National Enquirer.

The Enquirer continues to outperform the dinosaur media to this day. See any of the stories linkied at the bottom of JOHN EDWARDS SECRET DNA TEST PROVES HE'S THE DADDY!.


[image courtesy of http://www.stateofthemedia.org]



Edwards' own "Trend-line in Trust" will have to be guessed at by the reader.

Though not listed, another loser of trust was Wikipedia, which demonstrated that the on-line compendium is less-than-reliable on subjects political, especially contemporary controversial ones. [John Edwards Love Child Scandal: Debate at Wikipedia Rages and John Edwards Love Child: Wikipedia Editor Defends Go-Slow Policies On Edwards Entry]





ONE YEAR and NINE DAYS LATER


* In Mickey Kaus' Edwards' Love Child: Mandatory Gloating Edition, the Edwards scandal is broken down into several easily-digestible parts.

Kaus, one of the few who covered the Edwards' scandal, succinctly details the lies, damn lies and fall-back lies which Edwards hid behind. He also provides a "Historic Gallery of Kossack Krap" and asks plenty of questions. Kaus points out:
If Edwards is in fact the father this entire fallback edifice of BS crumbles. ... It's worth reading the transcript of the ABC interview--practically every sentence out of Edwards' mouth is a lie.



What, Me Lie?
Edwards' August 8 2008 national mea culpa on ABC Nightline
John Edwards Scandal: The Many Faces of Contrition


* DBKP pointed out several of these lies the day of the Edwards' "confession" to ABC [John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Admits Affair, Lies, to ABC News]. Two days later, in John Edwards Scandal: Edwards Continues Deception in Interview, we expanded the list.

A week after Edwards' Nightline appearance, DBKP's exclusive photo [John and Elizabeth Edwards with Rielle Hunter Dec 30, 2006] put the lie to not only Edwards' narrative of the affair, but also Elizabeth Edwards' statement.

The Mouthpiece Media might be excused for a similar quick reaction: it was too busy explaining why it had not asked a single question of Edwards from November 2007 until August 2008 about his curious connections with Hunter.


John and Elizabeth Edwards with Rielle Hunter
December 30 2006

Both Edwards led the public to believe that the affair was over and their "long period of healing" began in 2006.



* Deceiver comments on the recent events: Big Baby to Admit Paternity of Little Baby? and Least Shocking Edwards Story Ever?.
Recall that previously Edwards said he was eager to do the DNA test, but Rielle refused. Which sure was convenient. That’s the problem with hush money: When the money stops, so does the hushing.



* Edwards still harbors the delusion that he is not finished as a national political figure. Apparently, it has not occurred to him that whatever the grand jury decides, he's guilty: either of providing for his mistress with campaign funds--or of merely being just another deadbeat dad.

In either case, only the most narcissistic of politicians would be encouraged.

You know its a lost cause when even the Washington Post admits that John Edwards a Lot Short of 99%.


* Are the Edwards still together? Technically, they are.

DBKP interviewed some residents in the Edwards' neighborhood who say that the couple does not live together. One said that "John does not live at their home, but does watch the kids." Edwards spends a good deal of time during the fall and winter at their residence on Figure Eight Island. Figure Eight Island is a gated private oceanfront community close to Wilmington NC.


* Andrew Young, the political aide-cum-father, readies publication of a tell-all book, complete with John Edwards-Rielle Hunter sex tape revelations.

The basic problem with the book: how much can we believe from the man who (through his attorney in December 2007] claimed he was "the father of Ms. Hunter's unborn child"? [UPDATE: JOHN EDWARDS LOVE CHILD SCANDAL!]

Strangely, at the end of the day, Young may come out the best of the bunch.

Though he lied, he only did so in that December 2007 statement and in exchanges with the National Enquirer's reporters. Both John and Elizabeth Edwards, Rielle Hunter and the media continued their deceptions--sometimes to the public and to themselves--repeatedly.

Andrew Young, though partially motivated by profit, could at least say that he did what he did because of someone in whom he believed.


by Mondo Frazier

Crossed fingers image, courtesy http://www.newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com





Saturday, August 9, 2008

John Edwards Scandal:The Faces of Edwards During Nightline



Your Ad Here


Pixelaneous #51:
The Many Faces of John Edwards






Edward the Confessor

We present for the reader's edification, these seven pictures. They are taken from the Friday Nightline featuring John Edwards, which many news outlets labeled a "confession".

Did John Edwards confess? Edwards did confess that he was a narcissist*, and a few other things. He said he had asked his family for forgiveness. Edwards said twice that "saying I'm sorry is inadequate"; he never mentioned what words would be adequate.

Now, we'll let the readers decide: was John Edwards contrite?

Seven picture taken from his interview on ABC's Nightline.


* - narcissit: A conceited, self-centered person











MORE PIXELANEOUS:

* 50 - Candy Cigarettes: The Most Politically-Incorrect Candy
* 49 - Science Fair Projects: Unlikely Winners
* 48 - Summer Thunderstorm: Before and After Pictures
* 47 - The Crazy World of Egg Stacking
* 46 - Meaning of NASCAR Flags
* 45 - Big Muskie: The Biggest Machine to Ever Walk the Earth
* 44 - Hell's Belles: All-Female AC/DC Tribute Band
* 43 - Machine Gun Shoot at Cheyenne Wells, CO!
* Pixelaneous #41:
Ouch! Some Painful Moments



Your Ad Here










ALSO at DBKP:


Click on banner to access over 70 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal.








So, readers, was John Edwards sorry about the affair and cover up? Was he sorry--or was he just angry--he got caught?

Was John Edwards sorry?

by Mondoreb

Monday, July 28, 2008

U.K. Papers Help Break Media Blockade in John Edwards, Rielle Hunter Love Child Affair



Your Ad Here


The New York Times cite the "public's right to know" every time they reveal national security documents that aid and abet terrorists. However, when it comes to the Times' readers and the John Edwards Love Child Scandal, the "public's right to know" be damned.
--R.E. Bierce




The state of the media coverage--or rather, non-coverage--six days after the National Enquirer's reporters catch John Edwards at the Beverly Hilton visiting his mistress and their love child.

Two daily newspapers from the U.K. cover the news the American mainstream media won't. More specifically, the John Edwards Love Child news.

The Independent Sunday edition contained "Love child and mistress claims hit Edwards", while the Times also offered major coverage.

Guy Adams of the Independent has an entertaining account of the affair.

Amid scenes more suited to a Benny Hill sketch than the corridors of a luxury hotel, two journalists and a photographer chased Mr Edwards – whose wife Elizabeth is battling incurable cancer – around the building for several minutes. He eventually went to ground in the men's lavatory for a quarter of an hour, before being escorted from the premises by security staff.

The incident was reported in lurid detail by The Enquirer, and followed up in dozens of America's influential political blogs and news websites, which claimed that Mr Edwards and Ms Hunter were filmed entering the hotel room at 9.30pm.

The country's upmarket newspapers and major broadcasters refused to investigate The National Enquirer's claims. Tony Pierce, the editor of The Los Angeles Times, went so far as to order staff "not to cover the rumours or salacious speculations". Its unofficial blackout appeared to be holding firm until Friday night, when the presenters of Fox's 9pm talk show, Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes, ran a report that confirmed several major details of the Beverly Hilton incident, and asked: "Why were the reporters chasing Edwards, and why is this story nowhere in the mainstream media?"




As mentioned, The Times also carried big coverage of the scandal in yesterday's Sunday edition. We're not nearly as enthusiastic about that story however. The Times' reporter, Sarah Baxter, lifted quotes from DBKP's John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer without giving credit to DBKP.

[Nearly 3 days after we alerted the Times to the problem, they still have not acknowledged it. Someone at the Times is aware of the problem, however. Two comments left on the story voicing plagiarism concerns went unpublished, while other comments--submitted later--were. MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?. What we once thought was surely an oversight is now apparently Times' policy.]

Doug Ross, who discovered the problem, has the story: "Sunday Times runs John Edwards-Mistress-Love Child story, rips off blogosphere"



But, as the Soviet government found out, it's hard to control the flow of information in the Digital Age. The lesson remains lost on MSM editors, but it's a lesson that will be taught nonetheless. Media watchers scurry to find a pulse on a MSM that insists on selling a dying product of warmed-over liberal socialism and "all the news we decide you can handle" to the dwindling few who rely on them for "news".

There's no pulse on a corpse.

However, the American media blockade of the story is slowly being penetrated. The Hartford Courant's Kevin Rennie raises a point that MSM editors might consider:

Edwards serpentined around the hotel, before reaching the rooms where both his alleged paramour and baby were staying, according to the Enquirer, which appears to have had a platoon of reporters in strategic spots. Edwards probably thought he would not be noticed when he left at 2:30 in the morning, so he alighted upon the lobby from an elevator. Reporters greeted him when he stepped out.

The former presidential aspirant and vice presidential nominee took refuge in a men's room until hotel security could escort him out and block the five reporters who wanted a few words with him. Edwards later issued a brief statement criticizing the tabloids. He didn't address the love child story, though it was the right time to deny it if it isn't true. Whether it's true or not, his behavior was bizarre for a potential attorney general.
--Kevin Rennie, Hartford Courant: A Star Turn For Elizabeth Edwards


Did Wikipedia join the MSM news blackout of the Edwards affair?

[See: John Edwards Scandal, The Press: Edwards Campaign’s Curious Connections with Rielle Hunter Excite No Mainstream Curiosity and John Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere, among others.]

Apparently so. Newsbusters carries an account: Wikipedia Disallows Any Mention of Alleged John Edwards Scandal.

Wikipedia, which allowed verb tenses for their Tim Russert entry to be changed from present to past tense about a half hour before the official announcement of his death, is suddenly going ultra legal in its refusal to allow their John Edwards entry to be updated with mention of the alleged scandal which was reported in the National Enquirer with many of the details confirmed by Fox News. Suddenly Wikipedia has become a stickler for confirmation detail before the Edwards entry can be updated. To get an idea of how much Wikipedia is twisting itself into a pretzel to justify their refusal to update their John Edwards entry, one needs only to look at their pained, but comedically entertaining, discussions of this matter in their "Tabloid scandal accusations" section:


Gawker also notices, as it continues its yeoman work this time around on the story with "John Edwards' Wikipedia Page Strangely Love Child-Free".

Gawker stepped in with enlightened coverage to supply an Internet searching for news of the affair, the site's Pareene noting that there will always be ways for the creative to disseminate information.

"(Kudos, of course, to the enterprising editor who buried mention of this scandal in this unread entry on a book by Rielle Hunter's ex-boyfriend Jay McInerney.)"

In a curious bit of irony, Newsweek mentioned more about Rielle Hunter's involvement with Edwards in 2006 than after the Enquirer broke the story in October 2007. In an article titled, "John Edwards, Untucked", Johnathan Darman wrote more about Hunter and Edwards than Newsweek's readers have seen since.

In the midst of a short theme sequence that begins each Webisode, the camera lingers over the former senator's behind as he tucks a starched white shirt into his pants. Still, [Rielle] Hunter, now under contract with Edwards's organization, says she sees the untucked John Edwards coming more and more to the fore.
--Jonathan Darman | NEWSWEEK: Politics 2008: John Edwards, Untucked


Newsweek's readers are left to own devices to supply any updates of the "untucked John Edwards" after that Christmas Day 2006 article.

The New York Times continues its formidable non-coverage.

Occasional DBKP contributor, R.E. Bierce writes: "The New York Times cites the "public's right to know" every time they reveal national security documents that aid and abet terrorists. However, when it comes to the John Edwards affair, the "public's right to know" be damned. That information is too sensitive for its readers to handle.

The public's right to know is Times' puffery, to be trotted out whenever its editors feel like giving aid and comfort to an enemy that has already killed over 3000 American on September 11."

Six days on after it's been verified Edwards was at the Beverly Hilton with Rielle Hunter--in the same room--and the MSM is monolithic in its refusal to inform its readership.

Maybe the expected appearance of pictures in this week's edition of the National Enquirer will change their attitudes.

It will be then that their rapidly-disappearing customer base will finally get information that's been available all this time--elsewhere.

by Mondoreb
images: National Enquirer; dbkp file
 
coompax-digital magazine