Now you're talking about hush money, extortion, and, in a totally non sequitur fashion, the freaking JonBenet Ramsey case.

And, this is a good assessment of the sad truths about media coverage of it all...

I was reminded of a column in Salon discussing the use of the word 'mistake' after Marion Jones was tagged for the drugs investigation thing.  It seems to be the newest non-apology apology word among those that get caught out:

Jones says she trusted her track coach, Trevor Graham, when he gave her the THG and told her it was flaxseed oil.

That's a mistake. Lying about it for half a decade or more, that's a way of life. It's a pattern of deception. It might even be some kind of pathology. Jones didn't wake up one day and say, "I made a mistake here. I should tell the truth." She ran out of options. She got caught.

By repeating the 'mistake' mantra, it seems as if JE is trying to create a story where he should be forgiven, or at least given a pass, for his actions.  After all, we all make mistakes, who are we to judge another for making them?  

When JE was asked about paternity last night, he said he was only one part of the testing, as if he KNEW she would refuse testing.  I'd bet dollars to donuts that they made a deal, he would volunteer for paternity test and she would refuse it.  How convenient for JE.  

Perhaps I'm just gunshy from watching years of the woman in any controversial event being cast as the evil, conniving b*tch from hell, starting with the Anita Hill hearings in the 90s (if not before).  Or, really, being cast that way even if not involved in anything even remotely controversial.

But as for Rielle's part in this -- doesn't matter.  It doesn't ameliorate anything Edwards did.

Maybe she's the most horrible person on the planet, but she's not a public figure and she wasn't running for president.  She wasn't going on tv leveraging her solid family values story for votes.

Telcom spying? Nads-out omputer and communications hacking? Come on that's a well-lit pathway with neon billboards saying, "Yo Dem JACKASSES you've been burned by this over and over and over fercrappinoutsideways!"

I don't excuse or condone any ethical lapses that exploit the public space and public trust. (Criminality should go without saying but we're talking about a time where the law has been reduced from its former majesty to being a voyeuristic beggar and trespasser on its own terrain.

Nuke my @ss if this is hijackery but sheeeeez this always comes down on Dem frontrunners, stars and up and comers somehow, even generously allowing for the huge IOIYAR factor. (Predictably, it's always after the gratuitous Hair obsession ... the GOP Head'n'Hair one-two punch the right wing Lizard Brain goes for instinctively.)

The marital and family turmoil isn't my business or interest, though it's a domb way to behave for anyone in public service (and sheesh, it's not like loads of 'safer' sexual alternatives to affairs aren't abundantly availabile.)

caveat:  I can't be sure this wasn't shot before the reveal - though why would they have her on before?  

I saw some of Edward's spiel.
It was truly revolting.

It's as if Edwards is doing to the public what he did to Ms. Hunter.
And the media is all too happy to provide him with the forum.

Beverly Hills hotel tip must have come from her or with her direct knowledge.

She knew the Enquirer had been tipped with original story. So she must have known somebody in her inner circle was behind it. If she wanted to keep the Edwards visit a secret she would not have told others.

It is obvious she wanted this to come out and she was getting paid.

As to the baby originally I thought he might have been the father. But now that she is saying she doesn't want a DNA test I believe he is not the father.