Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Edwards Forced to Testify About Sex Tape

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 06:50 AM
Original message
Edwards Forced to Testify About Sex Tape
Oy. I can hear the m$m now. All sex tape all the time; salaciousness rules.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/04/23/edwards_forced_to_testify_about_sex_tape.html

Edwards Forced to Testify About Sex Tape

John Edwards has been called to submit to a sworn deposition on May 13 in the case of Rielle Hunter v. Andrew Young, the Daily Beast reports.

"Edwards is forced to testify under oath about his extra-marital sex life -- specifically that much-talked-about sex tape he made with mistress Rielle Hunter -- and whether he might have spent federal campaign funds to keep Hunter lavishly hidden away from the media and under the watchful eye of trusted aide Andrew Young."

The Raleigh News & Observer reports Hunter is seeking to have transcripts of depositions kept secret for fear they'll end up in a movie based on Young's book, The Politician.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 06:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. What More Damage Can This Do?
Edward's political future is toast, his marriage is done and he still faces possible criminal charges. A scandal is always best when the target is riding high...Edwards was laid low by his poor performance in the '08 primaries (pretty much sealed any future bid...and before this scandal broke) and his admission of the affair and fatherhood made sure of it. From here on out it's total titilation...and there's sure to be those who will get all wrapped up with it, but overall, the rise and fall of John Edwards is a sad tale in how power and ego can turn on the real stupid and selfish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. No damage for him, agreed, but the future prospect of
mindnumbing commentary isn't something I relish. And you can bet the gop will also be salivating to connect him to Dems to tar the whole bunch of us in whatever way they can, even as the hypocrisy bites them in their hindquarters.

I guess, same as it ever was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. If there is no one to defend him, the coverage
will get boring fairly quickly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. A prominent Democrat, in an election year? You have to ask?
The RNC is salivating. This will be used to proved that "they're all like Clinton."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Hardly Prominent
Edwards doesn't currently hold any elected office...and hasn't since 2005. Let the RNC salivate as they take clients out to another S&M club. :rofl:

The GOOP has its own list of sexual "athletes" compared to the 90s and I'd see the Massa mess as being more emabarassing. If the "both sides do it" meme works it does on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. On the ticket last election but one?
And now equally famous for trading his wholesome family man issue for tawdry philandering?

Hell, yeah, they're still salivating. Edwards keeps on giving, and the media focus on him is the best possible distraction from the myriad Republican cocksmen who look like amateurs next to him.

In this matter, the Republican party doesn't have to play the lame "both sides do it" meme. Edwards blows 'em all away--partly because he's a Democrat, but also because he's pretty.

As with Clinton, who was more famous but less pretty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Edwards Was No Clinton
The Clinton inquisition was a bald-faced attempt to negate his Presidency...to dirty him with scandal and tie him down with frivolous charges and investigations. Clinton was stupid with all that scrutiny to diddle with Lewinski which sent the witch hunt into hyper drive...far different than Edwards who, again, holds no public office and was a distant third in the '08 primaries before his scandal became public. They can make all the noise about Edwards they want, but who cares...a lot different than trying to get rid of a sitting and duly elected President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Oh yeah, they're different cases.
They are useful to the GOP, though, in the same way. They're cemented in the public consciousness as proof--each one of the other, and of the general principle--that Democrats are the amoral horndogs. Though both are long out of office, they keep popping up in the headlines, and Republicans smile every time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. serves him right, totally karmactic. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NaturalHigh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. Why does anyone make a sex tape?
It seems to me that always ends badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC