John Edwards Denies Proposing to Rielle Hunter

By Jeralyn, Section Other Politics
Posted on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 08:13:58 PM EST
Tags: John Edwards (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

John Edwards can't catch a break. The National Enquirer reports he has proposed to Rielle Hunter and is buying a $3.5 million home for them to live in together. Edwards spokesman denies it.

Meanwhile, a court in North Carolina continues to deal with Andrew Young and the "personal video." Apparently, the court wasn't satisfied with Young's accounting for originals and copies of tapes and photographs and the other day entered this supplemental contempt order. The parties return to court next week.

I also can't figure out what business the FBI had taking a copy of the tape from Young's lawyer for presentation to the grand jury, as Young claims in his latest affidavit. How is it relevant to the investigation into whether Edwards knew campaign contributions were funneled to Hunter? According to Young, there's no sound on the tape and you can't make out the woman's face. [More....]

And Andrew Young just keeps talking. His latest: Elizabeth Edwards is threatening to sue him for alienation of affection because of his book.

I don't believe the Enquirer. Or Andrew Young. Neither he nor Elizabeth nor their children deserve this.

< Report:Haiti Judge to Release Idaho Missionaries | Iranians Protest; Ahmadinejad Touts Uranium Milestone >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

John Edwards Denies Proposing to Rielle Hunter | 24 comments (24 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Well we agree Elizabeth and the kids don't deserve (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by cawaltz on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 08:24:50 PM EST

this. John made his own bed though. If he hadn't lied through his teeth about first his relationship with Rielle and second his daughter, he'd have alot more credibility when he said stuff.

His behavior thus far has been pretty sleazy. It isn't surprising that people would believe the worst of him even with a denial.

And how about those campaign contributions? (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by Lora on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 09:36:51 PM EST

I don't know that John Edwards deserves to cut a break.

Tell the truth, John. Tiger Woods was slammed on this blog for apologizing publicly for his behavior. You were cut a break when you apologized. Seems like that was just the tip of the iceberg. Right now, Tiger has more credibility than you.

Andrew Young is just sleazy. I dunno though -- The National Enquirer has been right before about Edwards, hasn't it?

I bought Elizabeth and John's crap (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by kidneystones on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 10:07:34 PM EST

hook, line, and sinker. They both lied their frigging faces off and now neither seem the slightest bit aware that they burned a whole lot of people. I don't have any particular sympathy for either of them.

I feel sorry for all the folks without work or who are facing another three years of indifference.

Hillary stands head and shoulders about the pack and unfortunately that says an immense amount about her and the 'stars' of the Democratic party.

I still hope she runs in 2012. This party is going nowhere under the current leadership.


: please (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Jeralyn on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 12:05:06 AM EST

stay on topic and it's not Hillary.

I did not slam Tiger Woods (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by Jeralyn on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 11:59:37 PM EST

even once and "this blog" didn't either. The only thing BTD criticized was his decision to address the matter publicly with an apology. He thought he should have remained quiet.

Commenters don't speak for TalkLeft.


: Please be accurate (none / 0) (#23)
by Lora on Sat Feb 13, 2010 at 03:23:59 PM EST

I NEVER SAID that either "you" or "This blog" "slammed" Tiger Woods.
I SAID that Tiger Woods was "slammed" ON this blog FOR publicly apologizing.
I was entirely correct.
BTD wrote (emphasis added):

Tiger Woods made a terrible decision today. He publicly apologized for "transgressions" against his family.
Whatever Tiger needed to say to his family should have been said only to his family. It is outrageous that he shared their issues with the public.
The ironic thing is Tiger thinks that will end the instrusions into his private life. What Tiger has done is issue an open invitation. What a terrible and indefensible decision.
Speaking for me only
That was a SLAM.

: I feel special (none / 0) (#24)
by Lora on Sat Feb 13, 2010 at 05:00:50 PM EST

Commenters don't speak for TalkLeft.
Just because I used the words "this blog" in stating a fact doesn't mean I should be singled out as a commenter who might be attempting to speak for Talk Left.
I think it is obvious that neither I nor any other commenter is speaking for your blog. I didn't say anything that you needed to distance yourself from. I hope you will consider lightening up when it comes to me and my comments. I'm not out to get you.

Even John Edwards doesn't deserve this (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by Mitch Guthman on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 09:42:19 PM EST

Assuming that the FBI's investigation is limited to campaign finance, I agree about not seeing any possible evidentiary value in the tape insofar as the investigation of possible irregularities in using the campaign's money. The obvious explanations for why the FBI took the tape are: (1) because they could; (2) to help promote a plea if they are able to indict Edwards but lack a provable case or (3) to show to the jury if they are forced to trial without a strong case.

I think there may be a remote possibility that the tape has been used (maybe by Andrew Young) in some sort of a shakedown (illegal unless you hire a lawyer to help). It might explain why the Feds and the Judge Jones are so gung-ho. And I kind of see that as a subtext in the WRAL.com piece you link to.

The only things I am sure about right now is that my former candidate (to whom I foolishly contributed) is a dog and Andrew Young is a snake. Even though intellectually I'm pretty sure that my guesses above will probably prove correct, there's a substantial part of me that would really, really enjoy Young spending the next 20 years in federal poky behind an extortion conviction.

: Being blackmailed possible motive ... (none / 0) (#10)
by Babel 17 on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 10:56:56 PM EST

for Edwards to do things that would otherwise seem improbable?

It may be hard to accept, but as (5.00 / 3) (#9)
by Anne on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 10:11:32 PM EST

this whole mess has unfolded, the National Enquirer has pretty much been ahead of the pack on the details, so I'm not so sure anyone should assume that the Rielle proposal/expensive home story is a bunch of hooey.

That being said, this all sounds like a fantasy - or promises made to keep someone - Rielle - from going out of control on what are probably even worse details than what we have already learned.

It's a terrible story - all of it - and unless and until John Edwards or someone from his campaign is charged with violations, I'd hope the story dies a relatively quick death.

my guess, nothing at all; (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by cpinva on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 12:02:27 AM EST

How is it relevant to the investigation into whether Edwards knew campaign contributions were funneled to Hunter?

to be used merely to show what a really, really horrible guy edwards is (he killed a bazillion people you know!), and so they must return indictments!

yeah, edwards is clearly a nimrod. and that makes him different from all the other nimrods how, exactly? to my knowledge, he hasn't killed anyone, or even physically harmed them, he's simply been an unutterable cad.

andrew young and family are, i suspect, definitely off the edward's family christmas list. geez, what a yabbo!

you can speculate all you want about how, had edwards not been in the primaries, hillary might have won, blah, blah, blah. it remains that, pure speculation. maybe, had i stopped and bought a lottery ticket, i'd now be a multi-millionaire. maybe. probably not.

unless the judge is prepared to launch a full investigation of the entire internet (and you know it's out there), he's wasting valuable time and resources on his hunt for all copies of the DVD.

someone should bring him (slowly and gently) into the 21st century.

Well . . . (none / 0) (#2)
by nycstray on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 09:12:11 PM EST

let's hope he's learned his lesson about denials . . . ;)

: At least Edwards' spokesman (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by ruffian on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 09:31:19 PM EST

did not say that he was the one that proposed to Rielle. That is a step in the right direction.

I remember the day... (none / 0) (#4)
by NealB on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 09:31:39 PM EST

...Edwards was selected as John Kerry's running-mate in 2004. The day we watched their families come walking over the crest of the hill and how family-like it all seemed. All those heterosexual white family people, parents and their children, white shirts on the boys, colorful jumpers on the girls, the northerners and the southerners. They all looked so happy.

: Interesting to think (none / 0) (#7)
by ruffian on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 09:44:38 PM EST

Edwards could be in his 5th yr of being VP if things had worked out differently. Whole other life for his family.
Of course, we still would probably not have health care....

Why in heck (none / 0) (#11)
by TomStewart on Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 11:14:02 PM EST

..would Young keep the video in the first place? I would have destroyed the thing myself, probably without even thinking about keeping it as some sort of bargaining chip.

But really, John Edwards is more than done, why does anyone care beyond the justice system?

Because it is a legal case now (none / 0) (#14)
by Jeralyn on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 12:03:44 AM EST

and that's what this blog is about. Crime and politics. So the legal developments are of interest to me, particularly the grand jury investigation.

Young didn't just keep the video, in his interview on ABC, his wife described how it had been broken with some tape coming loose and he put it back together. It wasn't his, it was Hunter's and in a box filled with her belongings, so he had to be keeping it either (1) to prove his claims so he could sell his book or (2) for blackmail. I'll leave it to the courts to decide.


what cherie young said (none / 0) (#16)
by Jeralyn on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 12:11:43 AM EST

in the abc interview

"It was cut and pulled down, I mean, pulled out, like we...he really...like real... taped it... back together... and we played it."


This blog is fine of course (none / 0) (#17)
by TomStewart on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 12:36:24 AM EST

and is being true to it's mission, but I find it really tedious the media in general is still flogging this like it had any relevance to the world at large. Even the National Enquirer has better things to do. I mean People is getting all the good bikini pics of Jennifer Aniston!

Giving Young any more publicity for his sleazy tell all and equally sleazy behavior is counter productive. I'm just hoping it doesn't bring any other score settling aids with sex tapes of more middle-aged politicians out of the woodwork.


Youngs sleazy behavior? (none / 0) (#20)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 09:07:02 AM EST

what about Edwards sleazy behavior. I saw this guy defending himself and he made some interesting points about how when this was happening he didnt quit because he has three children, two with health problems or so he said, and that Edwards promised him he would "come clean".
what he is doing is not that surprising. very few "aids" would not take advantage of this opprotunity to make a lot of money.
and the tape. good lord. how much bad judgement did that take?


: Yep (none / 0) (#21)
by TomStewart on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 11:29:33 AM EST

Edwards was, and probably still is, a damn fool. I'm not excusing his behavior by not going into it, I was talking about Young's behavior in keeping something like the sex tape.
And really, could Edwards have gotten away his nonsense for so long without the help of people like Young?

How anxious am I to be (none / 0) (#18)
by oculus on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 03:48:06 AM EST

Inside, warm, drinking wine at Cafe Angelique and ruminating on whether Edwards did or did not propose.

this (none / 0) (#19)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 09:02:27 AM EST

Elizabeth Edwards is threatening to sue him for alienation of affection because of his book.

seems a little like shooting the messenger doesnt it?

: No, not shooting the messenger (none / 0) (#22)
by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 12:42:22 PM EST

Think back to the excerpts....Elizabeth blamed Young for covering up the affair when it was happening. There were voicemails released by Young that had Eliz telling him to stay away from the entire Edwards family, she wouldn't allow John to take his calls, etc.
The book was the straw that broke the camel's back and her case will be built on Young's participation in setting up J/R meetings, and enabling the affair while it was happening.
How can he defend himself now that he made a public confession of his role in enabling the affair? It's North Carolina...he might not have much of a defense.