« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Uh oh! National Enquirer releases first picture of Edward and "love child"
Or so alleges National Enquirer:
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/exclusive_john_edwards_love_child_photos/celebrity/65258
I don't believe anyone would be so reckless to post such photograph of a politician of this caliber without it being genuine, but we'll see.
Meanwhile, progressive writer Kevin Drum says he would be surprised if the MSM doesn't finally pick up the story:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_08/014239.php
Advertisement
Comments (10)
You're trusting that a blurry "spy photo" in the National Enquirer is actually of John Edwards because the Enquirer points out the curtains in the photo match the hotel's decor?
For God sakes, man! It doesn't even look like Edwards! And it's the National Enquirer!
You're a complete ass, truthseeker. Please get a job if you can find a sheltered workshop nearby. Your posts are increasingly irrational, vindictive and false.
I would UN-Rec this if I could. Last time I respond to you anywhere. I urge other to boycott your posts also.
August 7, 2008 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I thought he'd turned a corner with his posts on Josh Marshall and Obama's flip on tapping the strategic petroleum reserve.
But now he's descended into the ridiculous yet again. Count me in for the boycott.
August 7, 2008 8:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a better picture:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/6/133349/1355
August 7, 2008 4:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Donal for my first giggle of the day.
August 7, 2008 7:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your links don't work, but your tactics do. I predict at least 25 comments.
Thank you and your friends for your assistance as we send the USA into the crapper. You must be so proud.
August 7, 2008 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not saying whether the fuzzy picture is Edwards or not BUT, if you go to National Enquirer and read details, there's a clip that reads: "At 9:45 p.m. (PST) Monday, Edwards appeared at the hotel, and was dropped off at a side entrance. NATIONAL ENQUIRER reporter Alan Butterfield witnessed the ex-senator get out of a BMW driven by a male companion and stroll into the hotel.
Said Butterfield: "Edwards was not carrying anything. He walked in alone. He was wearing a blue dress shirt with the sleeves rolled up. He was looking around nervously before he entered the hotel."
So they are saying he walked in with nothing but a blue dress shirt with the sleeves rolled up but have a picture of him with a blue t-shirt on with sweat stains down the chest and place it next to a photo of Edwards with a similar t-shirt and stain that was taken back in January like both pics are from the same day.
Like I said, it sounds awfully "National Enquirer" to me. I'm generally curious now only because I think Edwards to be a loyal husband.
August 7, 2008 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oops...here's the article at NI:
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sen_john_edwards_caught_with_mistress_and_love_child_in_la_hotel/celebrity/65193
August 7, 2008 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, one more thing, isn't the baby supposed to be a girl? Most mothers would dress the baby in pink, not blue. Not that it's a rule...just a thought.
August 7, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh-oh. Another thread that relies on visual interpretations.
August 7, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kos has a feature which allows everyone to consult the list of recommenders for a given post. Such a feature here would certainly resolve the mystery of the so many recommended mediocre posts.
August 7, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment