The John Edwards love-baby story: What took so long?

Who knew that the biggest story to break at the television critics' tour would happen while we were all in our rooms getting some shut-eye?

In the wee hours of Tuesday, July 22, John Edwards — the former senator from North Carolina, former presidential candidate and running mate in 2004 — was confronted by reporters for the National Enquirer at a men's room of the Beverly Hilton, the very hotel where TCA summer press tour had concluded a few hours earlier. They believed he was there to pay a visit to the child he had fathered out of wedlock and the baby's mother, an ex-campaign staffer named Rielle Hunter.

On Wednesday, the story finally started to trickle out into the mainstream, beginning with Wikipedia and followed today by a news story in our sister paper, the News & Observer. Given the Enquirer's stellar track record in reporting such things, why was the media so slow?

If I were you, I'd dispense with the idea that a liberal conspiracy of silence kept this story under wraps. It wasn't under wraps. In December 2007, Drudge Report passed along this National Enquirer story confirming that Hunter was, indeed, pregnant and living in a gated community near a close Edwards confidant (who had argued, in a lovely parallel to the Anna Nicole story, that the baby was actually his).

Edwards was still running for president last December. Why didn't his opponents jump on this? Why didn't the story get any traction? One likely reality is that vigorous denials from campaign staffers, veiled threats to put reporters off the bus if they persisted, and the absence of any follow-up reporting from the Enquirer or any other source combined to take the air out of the story.

That doesn't explain why it took 10 days for the Enquirer ambush — which was almost immediately confirmed by a security guard — to make it out of the tabloidosphere. Paul Harris and listeners were talking it up on WLS Radio in Chicago last week. Yet the story just sat there. And even though bloggers love to talk about the MSM's irrelevance, smart ones like Mickey Kaus recognized that mainstream coverage was indispensable to getting Edwards, and the Democratic left, to finally treat his open wound.

Parked in front of the Beverly Hilton, 7/19/2008. That was "Stylista" and "90210" day at TV critics' tour. (Photo by me)

You can argue that Edwards is a private citizen, and that merited extra caution. I don't buy it. Even if Howard Fineman is right and Edwards isn't on Obama's short list for vice president, until the running mate is actually named, it's ridiculous to treat him as though he's returned to Mount Vernon like Cincinnatus.

So that leaves the Elizabeth factor. Regardless of what one thinks of John Edwards or his politics, the popularity of and public affection for Elizabeth Edwards is undeniably high. She was an effective campaigner because she was seen as the honest broker her husband, the candidate, couldn't always be.

Elizabeth Edwards is the real reason this story hasn't gained traction until now. I think that out of respect for EE, and a desire not to compound her grim cancer scenario with further emotional pain probably caused editors to hold back reporting the story until something else came along.

Two things happened Wednesday that seem to have pushed this over the edge. First, after more than a week of acrimonious debate, Wikipedia editors gave in and began including references to the alleged affair in its John Edwards entry. As Wired's reporter aptly put it: "Some users wondered why ... The New York Times' John McCain lobbyist affair (story) could be relied upon, but not a tabloid like The National Enquirer."

Then on Wednesday, John Edwards bolted from reporters after a public appearance. In a weird parallel to his Beverly Hilton encounter, he ducked out of a hotel kitchen area on Wednesday in the hopes of avoiding the press. Not a good way to erase suspicion.

Perhaps that's why our McClatchy Washington bureau has put the Edwards story on the wire.

I doubt that anything was lost in the 10 days since the late-night encounter at the hotel — other than a chance for me to score an exclusive camera-phone shot of the room where the senator allegedly visited his love baby — but I am not sold at all on the idea that liberal squeamishness was the reason the press held back on this story. (If anything, the ineptitude with which the Times fast-tracked its allegations against McCain should be a cautious lesson about rushing a story to press.)

And let me say this as someone married to a breast cancer survivor. If I were in John Edwards' position, and I could pull myself away from the nearest mirror (that hair is to die for), I would play the Elizabeth card as aggressively as I could. I would have my advisers tell the press, on the QT, to keep quiet about the story because it's a painful time for the family as it is. That's an unpleasant truth (not that I'd ever cheat on my wife), but as long as it kept alive the possibility that this story might go away again, I'd do it. I wouldn't be proud to do it, but I'd do it.

Then again, it sounds like John Edwards doesn't have much to be proud of lately.

Comments

[Uh_huh]

too bad Edwards dropped out before that whole CNN candidate event on religion "The Compassion..something" What a hoot that would have been...he couldn't very well say "Well Campbell, like so many Americans money and pussy are my religion, so I guess I would identify myself as an Honorary Mormom." yeah, truth in politics, always a worthy goal. Do you guys really think a narcissistic hottie like Edwards who hit the career lottery pretty young hasn't been fooling around FOR YEARS?? oh please, the gentlemen does protest too little. why oh why do these guys run for public office?!!? Truth is if this were France and we weren't puritanical children in this country--with overly intrusive media--Edwards would have a lot to contribute. He's smart, he's too rich to be bribed and his policies betray a good heart despite a few personal foibles that aren't really relevant to work performance, except that we make them relevent.

[dualdiagnosis]

"..the popularity of and public affection for Elizabeth Edwards is undeniably high. She was an effective campaigner because she was seen as the honest broker her husband, the candidate, couldn't always be..."

Puhlease. Elizabeth can be portrayed this way only by the highly partisan left. She is a posting member at DemocraticUnderground the whacked out lefty site.

If this story has been held back in deference to her, it is further evidence that the MSM is actively suppressing the story to protect one of their own.

[Diana]

Mark Anderson--

You hit the nail on the head..everything you stated is just as I and many others believe what happened, IF, this story is true.

They've been after John Edwards for a long time because he's a brilliant, successful attorney, adores his family & would never hurt his family in any way, is grief stricken about his wife reoccurring, & let's not forget, the Edwards' family also lost a son in a tragic auto accident that ripped their hearts out.

Let's not forget the MSM selecting the candidates for the next president of the US. We all are aware that they were aware that Edwards was going to get to the bottom of what and who was behind all the events that have taken place in the past 8 yrs and would make sure justice would be served. They had to look or create something that would knock Edwards out of the running, even if it was VP, DOJ.

Let's be honest about this woman..Take a good look at her..She's far from attractive, & knows his wife is terminal. What kind of woman would intentionally hurt a prominent, wealthy
family?--a gold-digger, JMO. I'd like to know about her past, might prove very interesting, I'm sure.

We all know there's many players involved in a witch-hunt, and will stop at nothing to fabricate anything to ruin anyone's reputation and life. I believe it was the National Enquirer also who did many stories about Laura and George getting a divorce due to him having an affair with Condi, his drinking, Laura staying at a hotel on many occasions, etc. that I'm sure you've also read..Yes, these publications will headline anything for $$, and there's always someone behind these to cause ruination and divert attention from things that are really happening behind the scenes. Ever notice how "important" news that citizens comes out on late Friday and is hidden in the back pages on papers, and isn't mentioned by the MSM? Yes, there's a lot of things that should be printed and discussed on MSM but isn't.

Edwards already stated it wasn't true when this rubbish first appeared, how many times does he need to respond to such trash. He doesn't have to continually answer such BS. The NE should be focusing on the subpoenas issued to those who felt they were "above the law" to testify on many important matters and what's been covered up.

I bet if you had a way to check on this woman, you'd probably find that she hasn't had many filming jobs since Edwards camp. She's in dire need of $$, and might've been given $ from the NE and playing a game to ensure financial security. I highly doubt Edwards would get involved with her..As you said, "she was the aggressor, that she even plyed him with alcohol on some fateful night to help break down his resistance and judgment."

[Anne Browning]

Why am I not surprised? You know what they say about powerful men...
My thoughts are with Elizabeth Edwards and their three children... John Edwards should be ashamed of himself - and Rielle Hunter too.

[e]

AHHH, Mr. Edwards,

Too bad for you. But you were probably just trying to help out the poor and underprivileged when you were undressing her. Maybe, you were thinking of boosting the strength of unions or helping another poor soul trample by greedy corporations. No wait a minute, you are currently not in the presence of a low IQ common man "jury of peers". It will be interesting to see how the slippery Sam ambulance chaser, extreme fruit cake populist does. What this nation really needs is more trial attorneys, more lax laws on suing companies...then we can all be working for Edwards and Scruggs (oh, I'm sorry Scruggs is going to prison).

[Sue Erlewine]

When I hear or read comments like "Just speculation, of course, but I think that it is more likely that she {Reille Hunter} was the agressor. That she targeted and seduced him" from Mark Anderson, I just have to speak out. As a survivor, not of cancer, but of an affair that my husband had, I resent any attempts to make the "other" in an affair responsible. As if poor John was weak, tired, and unable to resist. If so, would we really want a man or any person like that for our president? Sadly, he is 100% responsible for his actions. Unless Reille Hunter raped him, he actively committed adultery and understood the consequences. He alone had a marriage contract, a relationship and an obligation to his wife and family. Reille Hunter had no such obligations or concerns. Truly, she could have been any one of a number of women. She is not important to this marriage. But John Edwards is. He has the responsibility for his own actions, his own free choices. No one made him, forced him or coerced him. Period. Take the blame off of Ms. Hunter and place it where it belongs – on John Edwards, who knowingly, willingly and sadly broke his vows to his wife.

[Sue]

Sorry, but I am outraged at this news. Why? Because this shows the true nature of the man. You have a wife with terminal cancer, yet you're need to satisfy yourself (whether it be sexually or ego-driven) causes you to commit adultery. But, that's not the end! You and your lover are both too stupid to use birth control! Or, was this baby on purpose? If it was, then Edwards needs to pay the consequences for his actions. He's a public person, he's going to be outed! And, for those who say we are at fault for being unhappy with this, Edwards, not us, has caused much pain for a beloved woman (namely his wife!) who does not deserve this! Or his children! Or the rest of the world who learns by example!

[Erewhone]

@ Sue Erlewine, "'{Reille Hunter} was the agressor' ... Take the blame off of Ms. Hunter and place it where it belongs – on John Edwards, who knowingly, willingly and sadly broke his vows to his wife."

It appears that you're both right. According to author Jay McInerney (Bright Lights Big City fame), the main character of his book Story of My Life, "an ostensibly jaded, cocaine-addled, sexually voracious 20-year old," was inspired by his then-girlfriend Rielle Hunter. Note that McInerney's chosen title copies that of Hellen Keller's autobiography, who is famous for being "blind, deaf, and dumb," suggesting that McInerney himself was not entirely sympathetic to his main character or former girlfriend. (Amazingly, McInerney's roman à clef character "Alison Poole" also appears in other novels, and notably in Bret Ellis's American Psycho, who has his main character, Patrick Bateman, attack McInerney's.)

So there's a lot of sympathy for the view that Hunter was the sexual aggressor and that Edwards stupidly succumbed—Fatal Attraction will be mentioned a lot as this scandal unfolds. The coverup, however, is an entirely different story. That's the one that Edwards will pay most for.

[alicia]

Re: preceding post.

But scrutiny of Rielle Hunter in no way gives John Edwards a pass. He alone is responsible for honoring his marriage vows.

However, just because she is single, does not excuse Rielle Hunter/Lisa Druck and whatever other names she has used from ethical behavior. And getting involved with a married man is not ethical.

I think uncovering the dynamics of this relationship would give valuable insight into the character of this man. A man who had been seeking the presidency and who may still be seeking access to determining significant public policy.

Certainly don't know for sure, but it would seem that if cheating on his wife were a pattern for Edwards, then he would have by now acquired the accompanying reputation for it.

He is not only very good-looking but good-looking with that "x" factor. Plenty of "x" factor. That means that on a daily basis, he has women coming on to him. Subtly and not so subtly.

If his habit were to avail himself, then wouldn't some other names have also surfaced by now?

Rielle Hunter's job of shooting web videos for Edward's campaign would have put her into extended contact with him. She saw him early in the morning, she saw him in the afternoon, she saw him late at night. Day after day after day...

She,therefore, got to see his strengths. And she also got to see his vulnerabilities. She may have seen the opportunity to manipulate circumstances to her advantage and have acquired the ammunition to do so.

How is it possible that he did not use contraception? Doesn't make sense.

Just speculating but I tend to give Edwards the benefit of the doubt rather than Hunter. Until evidence reveals otherwise.

P.S. (Sorry Mark Anderson. Mark Anderson is innocent. Free Mark Anderson.)

[alicia]

To Erewhone: Just read your post. Very interesting.

[Kay]

Edwards will deny this child until the DNA results come out. He puts himself first before family and country and always will.

[anne fischer]

John Edwards is a hypocrite; pure, and simple. He has disappointed his supporters and his poor wife and family. I personally have no sympathy for him....if this isn't a news story, what is?
Like Elliot Spitzer, he has ruined his own reputation. No cabinet position for him...go back to what he does best: practice law.

[Kathy]

I voted for John Edwards in early voting. I have HUGE respect for his wife Elizabeth and I am extremely disappointed in what appears to be infidelity especially with Mrs. Edwards battling illness. I have lost so much respect for John Edwards, but my admiration for his wife will always be there.

[Dave]

I still believe that SOME Democrats still care about stuff like this. Some of them still are offended that a guy would claim to be supporting his sick wife and was in secret off polishing his belt buckle with a cute wacky blonde...

I realize that committed far leftists really don't care if Edwards did this. But what if your OWN husband did it? Don't you people still feel ANYTHING?

Edwards is no Bill Clinton. He has been riding the moral horse for years, poor little sick children that made him rich, poor sick wife that made him sympathetic to wives everywhere who hope their husbands would support THEM like that if THEY got sick...

Do you think those women still hope their husbands will be like Edwards?

I don't THINK so..