ABC News: John Edwards admits affair, denies paternity

ABC News is reporting that John Edwards confirmed that he indeed had an affair with videographer Rielle Hunter, but denied that he is the father of her baby -- the subject of recent allegations in the National Enquirer that have launched a broad debate over the media's responsibility in pursuing such stories.

In an interview with Bob Woodruff to air this evening, Edwards admits to having an affair with Hunter but says it began and ended while the cancer afflicting his wife, Elizabeth Edwards, was in remission. The disease has since flared anew.

ABC said that Edwards, who has not taken a paternity test, contended he could not be the father of Hunter's baby because the affair ended before the child's conception. A former aide, Andrew Young, has said that he is the father though a birth certificate apparently lists no father for the child.

It was unclear whether Edwards had been on Barack Obama's short list of vice presidential contenders, but his admission would seem to put a spike in that, not to mention any high-profile role at the Democratic National Convention on Aug. 25-28 in Denver.

Added to the controversy: Edwards lied about the affair when the Enquirer first raised the issue in October. As The Ticket reported then, Edwards, then actively seeking the Democratic nomination, told reporters the story was "false" and "ridiculous."

Video of the news can be seen here.

-- Scott Martelle

Photo: Associated Press

Comments

[NinaK]

Men typically say "who cares" when it comes to knowledge of affairs, whereas women take pause.

If you cannot trust someone, be it a spouse or the president, you cannot have relationship of substance.

It's the basics of morality that are behind the slow desecration of our country. Lying. Stealing. Cheating.

Until truth and trust take precedence, we are doomed.

Posted by: Barbara
-----------------------
Barbara, please do not be so hard on the men; after all, it does take a WOMAN with whom to have the affair. That does not mean I condone affairs; however, I do feel both the man and the woman are guilty of having the affair. If Hunter was not married, she certainly was having an affair with a married man AND others men as well. What is wrong with these women that jump from one bed into another??

[David Almond]

Alas! A story most informed in L.A. new about via the net, but the L.A. Times and right in their own back yard. Will somebody revive the Los Angeles Herald please? In the words of the Joker in the first Batman movie, "This town needs an enema!"

[NinaK]

This paragon of virtue who is fighting to end poverty in America also ended the funding for a program that sent poor N.C. kids to college. I guess he's concerned that he's about to join the impoverished. His wife is about to take all the money that he earned running obstetricians out of business. I won't cry a tear.

Posted by: Fleiter
--------------------
Maybe he was/is being blackmailed by the woman??

[Rachel]

Edwards had an affair with someone on his campaign payroll, who may have gotten the job just to be his mistress. She had no video production experience, and he could have hired any number of professionals. So, besides the lying, the deception, and the poor judgment, he also misused campaign funds.

Or was he fighting poverty, one blond at a time?

[callie]

Well, hold on. It takes two to tangle. She knew she was getting involved with a married man.

[Ro]

Okay, so we visited Edwards' affair. Since he is no longer a candidate this is a private matter between he and his wife (does anyone smell the Clintonism stink involved with the "exposee" i.e. seek and destroy the enemy") Now why doesn't the press play fair and discuss the Clinton cover up dramas of White Water Gate; Travel Gate; Flowers Gate and Monica Gate, and so on and so forth. Somehow these had not been mentioned during the primaries. Or, don't you have the guts for fear they will destroy you? Read their biographies for heavens sake. The way poor Hill and Bill are written up you would think they were Joan of Arc and St. Thomas Moore combined.

[NinaK]

That's the trouble with men; they think with something other than their brain. Women are a lot smarter so when will the Democrats realize they made a hugh mistake in their nominee. Even tho Obama is not reported to have an affair, he's just like other male candidates: they think only of themselves, are egotistical, arrogant and self serving. This country will be far better off whenever we are smart enough to elect a female as president.

Posted by: Shana McCarthy
-----------------------------------
We will have a female president when we get a female candidate that is NOT egotistical, arrogant, and self-serving.|

[tolduso]

Sammy Z help! Please fire everyone at the times now. This rag of a newspaper is so openly in hip pockets of the progressive bowel movement it's pathetic. no need to consult the board sammy -- just do it!

[Rodney Lamprey]

Why couldn't Edwards just continue denying the story? Democrats are so weak, and always confessing. Why couln't he just lie like a Republican and keep everybody happy?

[Robert Lewis]

Rielle Hunter of the John Edwards story: The $9,644 lawsuit and her ex-husband, an attorney, and the son of JonBenet Ramsey murder case District Attorney Alex Hunter

webofdeception.com

[2lolo]

Shame on you!!!!!

[MS]

So, all the right-wing nutcases posting here don't care that McCain did exactly the same thing with his current wife?
Oh, I get it, it's only wrong when a Democrat does it. This is only going to serve to remind people about McCain cheating on *his* sick wife.

[Carla]

All the people bashing the LA Times here: this is not the only mainstream outlet to choose not to report this story. Most of the time papers, like the Enquirer, print stuff with NO corroboration. Is that what you prefer happen here? That the nation's biggest and best papers start reporting rumors without any proof? There is such a thing as libel and slander. What if it happened to be false? The damage from that would be incredible.

No one cares if you don't read the Times anymore. Find your power somewhere respectable. Pressing SEND is a false power, weaklings.

[Macy Baum]

There's more to this story than an extramarital affair. The Edwards campaign paid Rielle Hunter over $100,000 for her filmmaking services - even though she had no prior experience. This was a story worth investigating from day one, but the LA Times (and everyone else in the MSM) took John Edwards at his word rather than doing an independent investigation. Such journalistic malpractice would have never occurred if the cheater had an "R" after his name instead of a "D".

[greggie]

I cannot believe this guy was a bigg buxx trial lawyer. He tells stories that any idiot can see do not square with the truth.

There are THREE key FACTS that expose his current storyline as yet another Edwards lie.

FACT #1: Eye witnesses place Edwards in Ms. Hunter's Los Angeles Hotel 3 weeks ago, for several hors in the middle of the night. Edwards is caught slipping in through a side entrance to the hotel, and then attempting to sneak out hours later through a basement egress.

FACT #2: These same eye witnesses note that Ms. Hunter checked into the hotel with her newborn infant.

FACT #3: At the time of the recent hotel "visit," Edwards' wife's cancer was NOT in remission.

Now let's compare these three facts to the two parts of Edwars' latest "story:"

Edwards' allegation #1:The affair with Ms. Hunter ended long ago, when his wife's cancer was still in remission.

Edwards' allegation #2: The kid ain't mine.

If both of Edwards' allegations were true, then there would be NO REASON for Edwards to be sneaking in and out of Ms. Hunter's hotel in the middle of the night. There are only two reasons for a sneak visit of the duration reported by the witnesses who confronted Edwards as he was leaving the hotel:

Reason to visit #1. Edwards is still having an affair with Ms. Hunter; OR

Reason to visit #2: Edwards was spending "quality time" with his newborn child; OR

BOTH #1 and #2.

If #1 is true, Edwards is lying about the duration of his affair with Ms. Hunter.

If # 2 is true, Edwards is lying about the paternity of the newborn infant.

If Both #1 and #2 are true --- which seems likely due to the totally absurd circumstances surrounding Andrew Young's "confession" of paternity --- then Edwards is simply holding true to form. He believes --- like so many courtroom "giants" --- that he is "above the law" and "immune from the truth."

[Tim_CA]

Rachel had the line of the day...

"Or was he fighting poverty, one blonde at a time?"

LOL - Nicely Done!!

[sammy]

This won't be good for Republicans because it will renew discussion about McCain's affairs while his first wife was ill.

[Bill Whittinghill]

Just a thought on NinaK: With such a long infomercial for the DNC, obviously someone, including Nina, has begun to mount a defense for one of Obama's favorite dudes - Edwards. To quote Ann Coulter, " In his defense, Edwards had to do something to kill time between giving $50,000 speeches on poverty." I wonder if Edwards is going to send NinaK a check for her work on here. I hear there's an opening for a web-based photographer and writer. NinaK should apply - you never know what might happen!!

[BJ]

Keep Rockin'!

[PAUL]

Edwards picked a good day with the OLYMPICS and GEORGIA WAR are Headlined. The LA TIMES should HIRE those REPORTERS from the ENQUIRER and fire the POLITICAL HACKS it now employs.

[Rob Sessions]

The LA times rushes sexual harassment allegations against Arnold Schwarzenegger onto its front page on the eve of his election, but mysteriously fails to "confirm" or even investigate vastly more substantive allegations against Edwards in LAT's home territory. As editorial bias is doubtless impossible, what could explain this seeming paradox?

[Geoffrey]

Its obvious LA Times is not objective, might be leaning left? Placing this story as a side note illustrates how unimportant they consider this story . National Enquirer, now an investigative journalism paper.?..Oh my, a role reversal.

[sayitisntso]

Mom and dad always quoted the National Enquirer! We thought they were nuts, but, sheesh, now that the LA Times has put their seal of approval on the "scandal sheet," I guess, we should cancel the Times and subscribe to the Enquirer.

[Rick Baker]

The New York Times just conducted a poll, asking people why they don't seem to care what they say any more, and more to the point, why they won't pay a dime for their paper. This is a perfect example. A memo leaks in which you basically spiked a story because the target was one of your own. We all remember when you tried to save Davis and derail Arnold. Your political blinders will put all of you in the unemployment line.

[MaryJ]

The LA Slimes continues to demonstrate why nobody is interested in paying 50 cents for this cheap, laughably biased rag. It's as if your "reporters" have never heard of something called the Internet. You just can't, in this day and age, conspire to hide stories anymore just because they're unflattering to liberal Democrats, open borders shills, minorities or other left-wing worship objects. Deal with it.