The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

18 December 2007

National Enquirer Reports On 'Love Child' Of John Edwards


Damning Edwards Revelations May Point Fingers At Clintons

*** UPDATE: Story Quietly Pulled ***
*** UPDATE: Some Misinterpret This Piece ***
*** UPDATE: Story Returns In Longer Form! ***
*** UPDATE: Rush Addresses Story ***

In what will likely clear talk radio's topical decks for the next day or so, last- minute (as in Iowa) revelations of a soon- to- be John Edwards "love child" has fingers pointing straight at Clinton's war room.

Regardless of the story's origin, however, the National Enquirer's megascoop on Edwards and his extracurricular activities is sure to shake up the presidential race in a major way. That's because a new poll has Edwards leading in Iowa, with that state's caucuses right around the corner.

From the piece, just published tonight and already splashed across the Drudge Report:

The woman linked to Presidential candidate John Edwards in a cheating scandal is more than six months pregnant and telling a close confidante that Edwards is the father of her unborn child, The NATIONAL ENQUIRER has learned exclusively.

The NATIONAL ENQUIRER's political bombshell comes just weeks after Edwards emphatically denied having an affair with Rielle Hunter, who formerly worked on his campaign.

But The ENQUIRER has now confirmed not only that Rielle is pregnant, but she is also living in Chapel Hill, N.C. in a gated community, just a few streets away from Andrew Young, who has been a key official in Edwards' campaign.

The story goes on to allege a political cover-up, adding a level of intrigue for pundits to savor.

For talk radio hosts, potential reactions are not yet clear. Asked by your Radio Equalizer for a gut reaction to the story, syndicated talker Dr Laura Schlessinger quipped, "I would comment ONLY AFTER a paternity test...."

And ABC Radio talker Mark Levin told your Radio Equalizer late Tuesday, "if this turns out to be accurate, Edwards will become a favorite among Democrats."

Talk radio reactions could mirror some of the comments posted in the last few minutes at Lucianne's site:

This is no surprise, We all expected that as soon as Edwards made a move in the polls, Hillary's goons at the tabloids would drop a bomb on him.

Although we don't know if the story is true or not, it also would be no surprise to learn that an ambulance chasing scuzz like Edwards was two-timing his cancer stricken wife.


Let me guess, hillary is totally shocked by this and she had nothing to do with the story. Her people will be quoted as saying that they are surprised that that Edwards is bisexual and could father an illegitimate kid.


Andrew Young? The man who said Bubba been with more black women than Obama is now watching over Bambi's love child?

In October, the same publication broke news of the Breck Girl's affair, but this bombshell will likely do far more damage. The big question: will it ruin Edwards in Iowa, or create a backlash against Hillary there?

UPDATE: The DUmmies aren't happy

UPDATE: Without explanation, the Enquirer has pulled the story from its website. Slate has more here. What's going on?

UPDATE: Your Radio Equalizer is finding this post's point misrepresented in several places. From Outside The Beltway, here's one example:

Brian Maloney speculates, using apparently no evidence whatsoever, that this story is the work of the Hillary Clinton War Room. He has also gotten early reactions from Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, who don’t have much useful to add. Interestingly, Hunter has a passing resemblance to Ingraham.

Actually, the purpose of this post was to look at how pundits might react to this late- breaking story. In this site's view, it appears likely analysts would point fingers at Hillary. The reason: the Enquirer's Clinton- friendly history and the cited Edwards lead in current Iowa polling.

In addition, there was never a quote from Laura Ingraham in the piece. The other two hosts added what they intended as funny asides to a silly story.

That said, the intrigue level is actually higher now that the story has been yanked. Who was behind it? Is it true? What's the rest of the story?

UPDATE: Rush addresses story on today's show, calling it "another liberal dirty trick". Citing the uncanny coincidence of new polls showing Edwards ahead in Iowa, Limbaugh also says he has some questions about the story's validity.

Spending time exploring who could have leaked it, eliminating every candidate except Hillary and perhaps Obama, Rush jokingly asked, "who could it be? Beats me!"

El Rushbo also wondered where Edwards voters would go if they abandoned him: "How does a story about infidelity help Clinton?"

FOR New England regional talk radio updates, see our other site.

Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately purchase, help to further this site's efforts.

Support this site! Please contribute at the Honor System box to the right. Thanks again!

Technorati tags:


  • Brian?

    You're referring to Democrats as "DUmmies" while quoting the National Enquirer on political issues and asking "Dr." Ruth for gut reactions to moral questions?

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 18 December, 2007 22:27  

  • The National Enquirer remains the Newspaper of Record for the Democratic Party.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 19 December, 2007 00:05  

  • I'm surprised the moonbats are here screaming that Bush/Rove did this.

    Actually, Hillary's fingerprints are all over this story like they were all over the "found" billing records.

    Remember David Kendall, the Clinton's attorney, vettes stories at the Enquirer.

    By Blogger PCD, at 19 December, 2007 09:40  

  • The national Enquirer remains the only paper most Republicans can actually read. I doubt poster Bill could even fully understand the Enquirer, he needs Limbaugh to read to him.

    and "moonbats", again projection, all cons have left is projection, America rejects all of their candidates, the GOP in 2008 is pathetic !!!!
    Keep projecting pcd, you are the moonbat, America has left your ideology, your a moonbat

    Huckabee!!!! the father of as dog killer!!!

    I love comming here, to watch the 23.2%ers project as their last hope.

    This is expected, attack the only candidate that defends LABOR and even touches on worker issues in America, of course conglomerate big media HATES Edwards. MSM looks foward to the day, they can replece their staffs with temporary guest workers and $7.00 an hour non-union scabs, Edwards is an enemy of MSM

    I hope each and every wing nut has a rotten holiday.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 19 December, 2007 10:05  

  • *** UPDATE: Story Quietly Pulled ***

    What happened to my comment, Brian?

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 19 December, 2007 11:27  

  • Um, Brian...The National Enquirer?

    This is like the lefty thugs jumping on that Karl-Rove-will-be-indicted-in-24-hours story couretesy of drug addict Jason Leopold. Don't give this any credibility until a real media outlet checks this out.

    And once again, Minister of Poop spews forth garbage that comes straight out of Rin Tin Tin's tuckus. All he can do is lie.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 19 December, 2007 22:27  

  • Hash, you ignorant slut.

    Were you to follow the link in the story regarding the "DUmmies", it would take you to a thread on Democratic Underground. Thus, the DUmmies reference.

    It's also nice to see that The Strawman is still spreading around his unique brand of political persuasion. His reference to GOP supporters as the "23.2%ers" is especially endearing considering the approval rating being given to the current congressional leadership.

    But that sure is a nice little man crush MOP's got on Silky. NTTAWWT.

    By Blogger SierraSpartan, at 19 December, 2007 23:38  

  • Right, "Spurtin'".

    Read closely.

    I said,

    "You're referring to Democrats as "DUmmies" while quoting the National Enquirer on political issues and asking "Dr." Ruth for gut reactions to moral questions?"

    Now, I was REFERRING to the sheer obscenity of a second-rate hack, reduced to copping bogus smear stories from supermarket tabloid rags, referencing ANY Democrat, even the STUPIDEST possible Democrat, with a disrespectful, disparaging, childlike, term.

    Thank you for showing up and providing us with the stupidest possible neocon dirtbag imaginable, as counterpoint.

    "His reference to GOP supporters as the "23.2%ers" is especially endearing considering the approval rating being given to the current congressional leadership."

    What is the relevance of that tired, ridiculous canard to the fact that America has rejected filthy neoconservatives and their policies?

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 20 December, 2007 00:43  

  • When I say 23%ers I refer to the number of registered Republicans in America, around 23% of all registered voters. In case you have not noticed America rejected the Republican party last year, and Americans are leaving in droves..

    Babble about congress all you want, the Republicans are still in congress as well. I can predict the pavlovian response '"bu bu bu congress". I made a bet to myself, one of you zombies would post about the congress, I won!!!
    Thats the conditioned response from the rotted minds who have been reduced to the state of a Zombie from talk radio, "bu bu bu congress".
    Conservatives forget they still have a minority and the Republican minority has a lower approval rating than the Dems. Did Limbaugh tell you, there are no more Republicans in congress, and the approval rating of 23% only represents the Dems??? How f*cking brain dead are you?

    less that 24% of America are registered Republicans, no lies, just the plain, cold, embarassing facts. You have been rejected, the Enquirer won't help you, Mark Levin will not help you, Bill Oriley, won't help you, Limbaugh won't help you. We reject those voices, normal Americans reject those voices as vile, Republican douchebags.

    We the people have rejected the Republican party, and this does not mean we are all jumping for joy for the Dems either, you morons take parry over country, not real Americans. Patriots, conservastive or liberal, will vote Democrat, the party that still supports the American way of life, with all their faults, people do indeed get it.
    The constitution, our privacy and the right to earn a livable wage, is what Americans are interested in, and indeed America understands the GOP is still the same party of the rich they were in 1980, the party for the rich and the Anti-constitution party, James Madison would roll over in his grave. Trading the 4th amendment for "fear of terrorism" is UNAMERICAN. America gets it, this does not mean we are all "libs", Americans understand "freedom for fear" is UNAMERICAN.

    all the love child stories, Clinton "cackle", Obama the Muslim CRAP will not change the destruction of the GOP in 2008. America will hold their noses, vote Democratic, even us Democrats will be holding our noses, we hate our main choices......

    the only thing the GOP can do is pull another 2004, with the Diebold machines, but that has been exposed and it is unlikely to happen again.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 20 December, 2007 10:11  

  • HA-HA, MoPoop and Hash forced to defend Edwards from a Clinton attack. This is rich.

    Hash, YOU are the stupidest Democrat.

    By Blogger PCD, at 20 December, 2007 11:30  

  • Ugh.

    Fudgepacker City Dan, the resident repressed Nazi, has resurfaced to ruin everyone's Christmas...

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 20 December, 2007 14:48  

  • "I refer to the number of registered Republicans in America, around 23%"

    Let’s get this LIE straight once and for all. Some state's, mine included; does not register you for a party. So your "23%" is a useless number or useless lie you’re spreading.

    In the past you have quoted polls to say people were leaving a party. Poll numbers asking about job performance does not mean you are changing party affiliation. It means you agree or disagree. I’m sure you are smart enough to understand that.

    The reason dem's won congress back. Because Republicans were acting like liberals ie drug give away, boarders, spending.

    So in return they got beat and deserved it.

    Does that mean Republicans will vote for libs or not vote for republicans? Mark my words the tide will turn back hopefully before lib’s do to much damage.

    By Blogger pf1, at 21 December, 2007 01:48  

  • "Because Republicans were acting like liberals ie drug give away, boarders, spending."

    Pf1, it is not that Rethugs were acting like Dems.

    It was they were, and are, acting (and succeeding at) being TRAITORS to America, and Americans.

    The fact that the Democratic congress is allowing them to get away with it is simply making them accessories to the neocon crimes...

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 21 December, 2007 23:33  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger