New York Times John Edwards Coverage:
Let Sleeping Dog Lie
Exhibiting that "New York Times state of mind" that has characterized the paper's (lack of) investigative effort in the Edwards story, Times' columnists, David Brooks and Gail Collins, argue that, after the Times' 11-day coverage of the affair, the John Edwards affair is ready to "recede[s] into history".
From State of Affairs
Gail Collins:David, we’re about to embark on back-to-back conventions, so let’s find something else to talk about besides the presidential race. Before the John Edwards affair recedes into history, should we discuss Lessons Learned?
Lessons Learned?
One of the lessons DBKP has learned thus far: Don't depend on the New York Times to break anything of consequence on politically-sensitive news that affects Dem pols. Subtract from the Times' John Edwards' coverage the stories:
A. the Times stole from bloggers;
B. the Times covers itself for not covering the Edwards story; and,
C. that either furiously spun why it didn't investigate Edwards or conversational pieces like the Collins-Brooks gabfest.
What's left? Not much.
If forced, The NYT may comment only as much as is necessary on the National Enquirer's investigative work--before it assigns another reporter on its possible story about Edwards' possible past dalliance with a Duke co-ed.
Collins continues to echo the "Edwards scandal was a sex story" MSM meme--demonstrating that the Times is perfectly willing to let others beat it to the bigger story of the cover-up and the money trails that even now have our "crack research department" reaching for the Dramamine.
I hope the mainstream media doesn’t decide that this means they should commit their limited investigative resources to trailing every allegation of political adultery The National Enquirer uncovers. We all have specialties in life — I’m good with letting The National Enquirer folks hang onto their niche.
Could Collins be referring to the niche known as "news"?
As voters, our interest in which big names are sleeping around is real but limited. One limit is that you don’t torture also-rans. If Edwards had ever had a serious chance of becoming the Democratic nominee, this would have been a huge matter. He’d made his marriage a major part of his campaign — by the end, it was really the main thing he had going. Imagine the chaos the Democrats would be in right now if he had the nomination locked up.
"Imagine the chaos the Democrats would be in right now if he had the nomination locked up."
Actually, the REAL mental exercise would be imagining the chaos right now in the Times' editorial office. How would they go about reporting on a Dem nominee's scandal and cover-up that they had never written about?
Collins and the Times still don't get it: this was an affair--big deal. But it was, and is, an elaborate cover-up undertaken at precisely the time when the Times, and others in the MSM, failed to perform their traditional duties vetting and investigating candidates running for president.
Collins would have been spared the mental gymnastics of "the chaos the Democrats would be in right now if he [Edwards] had the nomination locked up", if the Times had assigned a mail room worker to do even the most elementary investigation on a home PC.
Regardless of their opinions of the National Enquirer, the tabloid presented the MSM with a gift-wrapped box of facts to check out in December on John Edwards, when he was very much in the running for the Democratic nomination.
What's more important than what media watchdogs, Gail Collins or DBKP think about the Times, are what readers, advertisers and stock buyers think about the decrepit Grey Lady. From a few months ago;
THE New York Times once epitomised all that was great about American newspapers; now it symbolises its industry’s deep malaise. The Grey Lady’s circulation is tumbling, down another 3.9% in the latest data from America’s Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC). Its advertising revenues are down, too (12.5% lower in March than a year earlier), as is the share price of its owner, the New York Times Company, up from its January low but still over 20% below what it was last July. On Tuesday April 29th Standard & Poor’s cut the firm’s debt rating to one notch above junk.
At the company’s annual meeting a week earlier, its embattled publisher, Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger, attempted to quash rumours that his family is preparing to jettison the firm it has owned since 1896. Carnage is expected soon as dozens of what were once the safest jobs in journalism are axed, since too few of the staff have accepted a generous offer of voluntary redundancy.
Note to Colins, et.al.:
New York Times stock price (Aug 22 2008) - $13.21, down from the $23.65 of a year ago.
Might be time for the New York Times to change that "All the News That our Hopeless Editorial Staff Decides is Fit to Print" slogan to something a little catchier.
Like maybe, "We read the Enquirer, too"?
by Mondoreb
images: dbkp file
Residents of Gori wait to receive humanitarian aid from local authorities as Russia called today for Georgian forces to surrender in the separatist enclave of Abkhazia
"Amid promise of peace, Georgians live in terror"
So reads the headlines of The Guardian. And from the same source:
Several Russian trucks overshot and missed their turning. One broke down. A soldier got the wheezing vehicle going again. Where was he from? "Chechnya. We've come here to help," he said.For the terrified residents of Gori and surrounding villages, it didn't seem like help. Yesterday morning, as the Russian tanks advanced from their base in South Ossetia they passed through Georgian controlled-villages, telling residents to hang out white flags or be shot.Behind them, according to people fleeing those villages, came a militia army of Chechen and Ossetian volunteers who had joined up with the regular Russian army. The volunteers embarked on an orgy of looting, burning, murdering and rape, witnesses claimed, adding that the irregulars had carried off young girls and men.
There are accounts slowly coming out of Georgia about the behavior of Russian soldiers in Georgia. Unlike the criticism leveled at American troops, the Russians--like Muslims, Chinese and other groups favored by the left--do not get much press, either here or at home. No marches on the Russian Embassy, no Europeans going to the streets. Nothing--except allusions by the left--or Obama--that Bush is at fault.
It is now time to collect some of the outrageous tales coming out of this seemingly-civilized section of the world; to review Putin's troops and expose their Rules Of Engagement. Maybe it is time for a refresher on why our parents and grandparents hated Russia, why so many immigrated to America.
Mari's Tale
Monday, August 18, 2008
21 year old girl raped by "soldiers" (eye-witness reports)
Elene Gelashvili, 21 years old, is a refugee from the village of Nikozi:
"When the fighting started in Cxinvali, we all took shelter in the cellars of our houses…our house wasn't hit by a bomb, but there were dead and wounded all over the place. We couldn't stay there any longer and decided to walk by foot towards Gori. On the road a driver picked us up and took us to Gori with his minibus.
He told the young girl to cover their heads with a veil and act as if you were elderly people, the Russians and Ossetians are everywhere, they are stopping cars and if they like some girl, they take her right away. "Act, as if you were old women!" My friend Mari said, "What a nonsense, how should they take us away"; we implored her, but she was such a hard-head….
We hadn't even passed a kilometre, when we were stopped by 30 armed Russians. A skinny guy put is head into the minibus, saw Mari and pulled her out of the car. All in all there were three men in the bus, which they started to beat with their guns. Then they told the driver to drive on, I still have Maris pale face on my mind….
Two days later we were still in Gori but planned to go to Tbilisi, when we heard of a girl, that had been tortured by soldiers; I couldn't breathe anymore…….I said to myself "if that would really be Mari, she´d be alive at least. I asked some soldiers for her and when I finally found her I hardly recognised her….she had blood all over and was in a terrible state. They had taken her to a village near Cxinvali and about 50 men had raped her there. Then they had put her on drugs and mutilated her. She begged them to kill her…"
Aliko's Tale
It´s hard for me to speak about those things, but I have to, cause all have to know how inhuman and sadistic these Russians are. Take them to court, I beg you…..
My wife has died when she gave birth to our twins, I raised our twins alone, after that also my grandchildren. When this horrible war started Ani was 17, Levan 15. Levan was torn into pieces in front of my eyes by a bomb, his body has been separated from the legs. Ani was taken to a house by soldiers, those murderers, I could hear hear wailing and moaning, but coudn´t do anything about it; I was lying on the ground, after they had beaten me up….
And those pigs still weren’t satisfied with raping her, they told her: “Run, if you make it away from here within 10 seconds, you´ll be free. The deafened and weeping child ran away and was shot by them when they hadn´t even count to three. My dear grandchild."
Tina's tale
"Happened incredible thing: Russian barbarians demolished our gorge. They bombed houses; houses with people inside were in flames. We left our homes and escaped, the road was horrifying: bombs were exploding in front of us damaging cars and people. I saw a car packed with people blew up, human intestines were flying in the air. Some women from my village chose other way to leave the gorge, through river and forests. Cars were carrying bodies of young boys. The gorge is full of dead bodies who were not buried and have been left for crows to eat. I saw a woman who bowled up in front of her house, she was split in many many parts. Wounded asked for help, but there was nobody able to help them. I saw how Russians put two men in sacks and shoot them… Elders stayed in gorge. My parents stayed there. My dad has diabetes and can’t walk. I know their life is in danger, they know it too and they are waiting for death."
Russians robbing a bank
GEORGIAN President Micheil Saakashvili is accusing irregulars associated with the Russian army of raping and looting their way across his country.
"This army travels around with irregulars, travels around with marauders, travels around with rapists, travels around with arsonists, robbers and with looters," Mr Saakashvili said today."
"Saakashvili said Russian forces have run amok. "Russian tanks are going for villages inhabited by Georgian populations and throwing people out of their houses, putting people into concentration camps that they are setting up in those villages, and separating men and women," he told CBS News.
"They are taking things like even furniture, toilet seats, killing people, terrorizing people."
And The Mainstream Media does not think that Mr Putin's army deserves anything but a mild reprimand--and a hint or two that Georgians brought this on themselves.
by pat
images:
* Getty
* make them accountable
* muktadhara
* the we
sources
http://www.ireport.com/docs/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://russiangeorgianwar.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
http://www.news.com.au/
http://www.nypost.com/seven/
"Assumptions are sometimes useful, sometimes worthless. Assumptions based on someone's lies should be labeled, 'ABOSL'."
--DBKP's Guide to the Aspiring Writer
We always read the comments to stories here at DBKP. In fact, one of our mantras is, "The comments are part of the story".
Another is, "Sometimes, the comments are better than the story".
One comment alerted us to a story, Is Rush Limbaugh Reille Hunter´s Sugar Daddy?, written by Dee, at Immigration Talk with a Mexican American. Dee is anything if not economical: she shoehorns a lot into her story.
Think of Edwards story. The timeline! He is convinced it is NOT his baby because his last quickie with her was in April. She is not impregnated until late May. His ego does not allow him to consider IVF.
We mention this because it points out a danger that all writers--DBKP included--face; i.e., of basing assumptions on a public figure's lies. The lies are found out and POOF!, there goes all your theories.
In the John Edwards scandal, the biggest two assumptions were made by the Mainstream Media and plague them today as they struggle to explain to their readers why they didn't trust them with information on this story before August 8.
The first: that John Edwards told the truth. The second assumption was that because the National Enquirer reported the information, it couldn't be trusted, not even enough for them to do their own investigations, prior to late July.
As we point out in our soon-to-be published writer's guidelines: Assumptions are sometimes useful, sometimes worthless. Assumptions based on someone's lies should be labeled, 'ABOSL'.
NOW, we're not picking on Dee: we're sure that after you read her story, you'll come to the conclusion that she's got her tongue in her cheek. She seems so pleasant in her comments to DBKP's stories, we're sure of it.
One item did strike us, Dee's quote that, "The odds of a first time pregnancy after 40 are astronomical."
From Older mothers - facts and figures:
Additionally, there is an almost 50% increase from ten years ago in the number of women over forty who are now having babies. The rate for women aged 40 and over increased fastest, by over six per cent from 11.5 per 1,000 women aged 40-44 in 2005, to 12.2 in 2006.
The number of live births in England and Wales to mothers aged 40 plus was 12,103 in 1996 and 23,706 in 2006.
Again, here's more info from the United Kingdom. From
Parenting: Age Of First Time Mothers Shows A Sharp Increase:
The number of women having children in their 30s and 40s has climbed steadily over the last 20 years at a time when the overall birth rate has been dropping, in 2003, the fertility rate for women aged 35-39 and over 40 both increased almost 8%.
Later pregnancies are particularly evident among the wealthier social classes, where women persue a career before embarking on motherhood. The only draw back to later parenting is that as a woman gets older their fertility declines.
We realize that the data's from the U.K., not the USA. And there's precious little data about the pregnancy rates of mistresses over 40, but perhaps this might make a good project for some enterprising blogger.
The poster pictured at the beginning of this story? It's not there exclusively in reference to Dee or the Mainstream Media.
It hangs on the side of a computer at DBKP.
by Mondoreb
image: wsmonty
The InvestigateOSphere vs. The ProtectOSphere
Doug Ross: "Put simply, a tabloid and the blogosphere -- both of which have been ridiculed for years by the MSM -- broke and publicized an immense story regarding a major presidential candidate and potential cabinet member."
Ross presents his evidence and it's damning--for the Mainstream Media.
Exhibit A?
The above chart showing the number of people searching for information on "Rielle Hunter" on Google over the last nine months--because the only place they could get that information was in the pages of the Enquirer [John Edwards Love Child Scandal] and the few sites in the blogosphere who covered it for more than a day or two after the Enquirer printed its December 18 story. [Mickey Kaus at Slate, Doug Ross and DBKP all three covered the story after the initial reaction to the Enquirer story on the blogs.]
Number of times "Rielle Hunter" was mentioned on any MSM newscast--other than a few FoxNews mentions in July and August--or in any MSM newspaper, Time magazine or Newsweek prior to late July: zero.
The National Enquirer first revealed Hunter's name in December. A few blogs, including DBKP and this humble journal, picked up the story because there were a variety of variables that all pointed to the fact that Edwards was a sleazebag.
How the National Enquirer and the Blogosphere Forced John Edwards to Confess
Edwards' Drilling Problems
A comment on Ann Althouse's July 22, "Today is Fitzmas for Mickey Kaus":
David said:
"Do you suppose Edwards went to the hotel to see if he could drill himself out of the problem?
He certainly seems to have drilled himself into it."
by Mondoreb
image: DougRoss@Journal
Blogosphere: Doing the Research the Mainstream Press Won't Do
MSM: Trying to improve the Bottom Line?
Simon Scowl at Deceiver is upset.
He's discovered that the blogosphere, which was the only place--besides, of course, the National Enquirer--doing any digging into John Edwards' affair with Rielle Hunter and his cover up operation--is serving as the Mainstream Media's unpaid and uncredited Research Division.
Weird, huh? Deceiver was the only place talking about this stuff for at least a week and a half, and all of a sudden everybody else has been doing original research on it the whole time? Or maybe it doesn’t count as research when we do it, since we’re just a silly gossip blog with a hot-pink logo. Maybe that’s it.
Dear Serge F. Koveleski, Patrick Healy, Toby Lyles, and everybody else at the New York Times:
You know the blogs and tabloids beat you to this story. Everybody knows. It wasn’t exactly difficult, considering you guys waited almost three weeks for John Edwards to give you permission. You’re not going to salvage your reputation by pretending otherwise.
Also, somebody should talk to whoever writes your headlines. “Behind a Meeting That Exposed Edwards’s Affair”? Why not just type out an equivalent number of Z’s?
Signed,
Your uncredited researcher
Updates to story at DBKP.com: Mainstream Media Uses Blogosphere as Unpaid Research Wing in Edwards Scandal
DBKP also has been affected. A few weeks ago, the Times of London's SARAH BAXTER, inserted material from our July 23 John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer into her Times' story--without a word about the source where she stole the material.
We wrote about the plagiarism after being alerted by blogger, Doug Ross in MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?. Baxter's article (readers will have to do their own Googling--the Times gets no link here) gives the impression that she contacted National Enquirer's Editor-in-chief, David Perel and talked to him.
Our three letters to the Times remain unanswered. The Times Online still carries Baxter's story with our material, without attribution.
These two cases are not the only ones: one reader alerted DBKP yesterday that portions of a story posted on one network's website "sounded suspiciously like something you wrote about a few days ago".
We read the article and suspected a little--okay, a lot--rewriting may have occurred. But, what the hell? At least, some effort was expended by a Mainstream Media reporter furiously trying to get up to speed on a story Big Media blacked out for nine months with all the fervor of a religious zealot.
Of course, the MSM wouldn't have had to resort to these shady practices if just one of the members of their clubby community had investigated allegations surrounding John Edwards nine months ago: but that would've put a dent in the invitations to the wine-and-cheese parties.
The only investigation came from the National Enquirer and a few bloggers. But, you wouldn't know it if you watched the Big Media frenzy of this past weekend. Some stories didn't even mention the National Enquirer by name--it became an unnamed "tabloid".
John Edwards' "confession"--forced on him by the "tabloid trash" National Enquirer-- transformed the MSM from an early-July Rip Van Winkle into August 8 Woodward and Bernsteins. Don't believe that? Readers only have to stifle their gag reflex and tune in to the MSM coverage.
Readers--and writers--of the blogosphere can expect more of the same. With MSM "news" organizations cutting staff in an effort to stay afloat, stealing from the blogosphere serves as a profitable way to "cover" stories previously denied to readers.
The John Edwards scandal is only the latest battle between citizen journalists and a MSM in a death spiral. It won't be the last. Big Media has proved incredibly resistant to changing editorial policies that have driven readers and viewers to find other, less left-leaning content.
Polls show that the percentage of people who trust what the MSM writes hovers somewhere between carnival barkers and used car salesmen. More Americans believe in UFOs than believe the Mainstream Media is unbiased.
The media reaction: attack citizen journalists and hunker down behind excuses of "standards" that drove ex-customers away with the highly-selective nature those standards were applied. Oh, and practice a code of denial that would make John Edwards proud.
The Mainstream Media wants to improve their bottom line?
Clean house of editors intent on serving up the same cheesy gruel of socialist opinion masquerading as news. The public's been onto that scam for years: falling stock prices and ad revenues confirm it.
Or CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Time, Newsweek, and the New York Times could try billing the Democrat National Committee for PR services rendered.
P.S. Welcome to the club, Simon.
by Mondoreb
image: dbkp reference file
Pixelaneous #51:
The Many Faces of John Edwards
Edward the Confessor
We present for the reader's edification, these seven pictures. They are taken from the Friday Nightline featuring John Edwards, which many news outlets labeled a "confession".
Did John Edwards confess? Edwards did confess that he was a narcissist*, and a few other things. He said he had asked his family for forgiveness. Edwards said twice that "saying I'm sorry is inadequate"; he never mentioned what words would be adequate.
Now, we'll let the readers decide: was John Edwards contrite?
Seven picture taken from his interview on ABC's Nightline.
* - narcissit: A conceited, self-centered person
MORE PIXELANEOUS: * 50 - Candy Cigarettes: The Most Politically-Incorrect Candy * 49 - Science Fair Projects: Unlikely Winners * 48 - Summer Thunderstorm: Before and After Pictures * 47 - The Crazy World of Egg Stacking * 46 - Meaning of NASCAR Flags * 45 - Big Muskie: The Biggest Machine to Ever Walk the Earth * 44 - Hell's Belles: All-Female AC/DC Tribute Band * 43 - Machine Gun Shoot at Cheyenne Wells, CO! * Pixelaneous #41: Ouch! Some Painful Moments |
ALSO at DBKP:  Click on banner to access over 70 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal. |
So, readers, was John Edwards sorry about the affair and cover up? Was he sorry--or was he just angry--he got caught?
Was John Edwards sorry?
by Mondoreb
Brian Williams: Palestinians are like US Founding Fathers
DBKP: ...With Suicide Belts
Christine, don't you know that's how rumors get started?
One could write about nothing but the goofy psuedo-history dished out to the historically-ignorant by the Mainstream press and the never-ceasing workload would likely land the writer in the hospital for exhaustion.
The latest: CNN compared the Palestinian terrorists to Tibet's Dalai Lama.
From Van Helsing, Moonbattery:
It's not guesswork at CNN. Look how cleverly Christiane Amanpour slips her pro-terrorist propaganda into a piece about the Dalai Lama:
Our visit coincided with the events that commemorate each March 10, the date the Dalai Lama fled Tibet on horseback in 1959. He managed to evade the Chinese Communist forces, disguised as a soldier and escaping at night. The somber remembrance is a little like what the Palestinians do every year. They call it al-Nakba, or "catastrophe," which marks 1948 when they lost much of their land as the state of Israel was founded.
Amanpour may see similarities between the Palestinians and the Dalai Lama, but which would she rather see enter a crowded deli, either in Jerusalem or New York City, while eating lunch?
We thought so.
Van Helsing cites a Media Backspin article that lists the reasons the Palestinians are NOT like the Dali Lama and then concludes with some other egregious examples by the history buffs in the MSM.
The worst, in our opinion?
Brian Williams compared the Palestinian terrorists to our Founding Fathers.
NOTE: Next time we visit Mt. Vernon, be sure to catch the exhibit with George Washington's suicide belt.
Which brings up the image at the top of this post, a product of the glorious retro-Progressive minds at the People's Cube. PC Mastermind, Comrade Red Square:
Attention workers, peasants, and toiling unwashed intelligentsia! On Monday, July 30, 2007 our Party Organ was spotted by Rush Limbaugh, the biggest neo-imperialist criminal capitalist running dog of them all. The notorious author of See I Told You So described our "Founding Fathers" illustration by saying "It's a great, great, great cartoon because this is how libs see America today." See it here: Story #7: Great Editorial Cartoon on the Founding Fathers. He thought it was a parody!
If you're not familiar with the Cube, they are, "... a powerful Party Organ cemented by the most severe Party discipline. Our tight collective tolerates no limp-wrist candy-assed pansy liberals! We are doctors of dictatorship in charge of an outpatient Gulag facility whose mission is to cure weak liberalism with strong communism!"
If MSM news consumers would access more People's Cube and Moonbattery, and less history as taught by the professors at CNN and NBC, they would be better informed--not to mention, in a better mood at end of the news.
by Mondoreb
Sources:
* Rush Limbaugh Hails the People Cube's Editorial Cartoon
* CNN Compares Palestinian Terrorists to Dalai Lama
image: The People's Cube
The New York Times cite the "public's right to know" every time they reveal national security documents that aid and abet terrorists. However, when it comes to the Times' readers and the John Edwards Love Child Scandal, the "public's right to know" be damned.
--R.E. Bierce
The state of the media coverage--or rather, non-coverage--six days after the National Enquirer's reporters catch John Edwards at the Beverly Hilton visiting his mistress and their love child.
Two daily newspapers from the U.K. cover the news the American mainstream media won't. More specifically, the John Edwards Love Child news.
The Independent Sunday edition contained "Love child and mistress claims hit Edwards", while the Times also offered major coverage.
Guy Adams of the Independent has an entertaining account of the affair.
Amid scenes more suited to a Benny Hill sketch than the corridors of a luxury hotel, two journalists and a photographer chased Mr Edwards – whose wife Elizabeth is battling incurable cancer – around the building for several minutes. He eventually went to ground in the men's lavatory for a quarter of an hour, before being escorted from the premises by security staff.
The incident was reported in lurid detail by The Enquirer, and followed up in dozens of America's influential political blogs and news websites, which claimed that Mr Edwards and Ms Hunter were filmed entering the hotel room at 9.30pm.
The country's upmarket newspapers and major broadcasters refused to investigate The National Enquirer's claims. Tony Pierce, the editor of The Los Angeles Times, went so far as to order staff "not to cover the rumours or salacious speculations". Its unofficial blackout appeared to be holding firm until Friday night, when the presenters of Fox's 9pm talk show, Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes, ran a report that confirmed several major details of the Beverly Hilton incident, and asked: "Why were the reporters chasing Edwards, and why is this story nowhere in the mainstream media?"
As mentioned, The Times also carried big coverage of the scandal in yesterday's Sunday edition. We're not nearly as enthusiastic about that story however. The Times' reporter, Sarah Baxter, lifted quotes from DBKP's John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer without giving credit to DBKP.
[Nearly 3 days after we alerted the Times to the problem, they still have not acknowledged it. Someone at the Times is aware of the problem, however. Two comments left on the story voicing plagiarism concerns went unpublished, while other comments--submitted later--were. MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?. What we once thought was surely an oversight is now apparently Times' policy.]
Doug Ross, who discovered the problem, has the story: "Sunday Times runs John Edwards-Mistress-Love Child story, rips off blogosphere"
But, as the Soviet government found out, it's hard to control the flow of information in the Digital Age. The lesson remains lost on MSM editors, but it's a lesson that will be taught nonetheless. Media watchers scurry to find a pulse on a MSM that insists on selling a dying product of warmed-over liberal socialism and "all the news we decide you can handle" to the dwindling few who rely on them for "news".
There's no pulse on a corpse.
However, the American media blockade of the story is slowly being penetrated. The Hartford Courant's Kevin Rennie raises a point that MSM editors might consider:
Edwards serpentined around the hotel, before reaching the rooms where both his alleged paramour and baby were staying, according to the Enquirer, which appears to have had a platoon of reporters in strategic spots. Edwards probably thought he would not be noticed when he left at 2:30 in the morning, so he alighted upon the lobby from an elevator. Reporters greeted him when he stepped out.
The former presidential aspirant and vice presidential nominee took refuge in a men's room until hotel security could escort him out and block the five reporters who wanted a few words with him. Edwards later issued a brief statement criticizing the tabloids. He didn't address the love child story, though it was the right time to deny it if it isn't true. Whether it's true or not, his behavior was bizarre for a potential attorney general.
--Kevin Rennie, Hartford Courant: A Star Turn For Elizabeth Edwards
Did Wikipedia join the MSM news blackout of the Edwards affair?
[See: John Edwards Scandal, The Press: Edwards Campaign’s Curious Connections with Rielle Hunter Excite No Mainstream Curiosity and John Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere, among others.]
Apparently so. Newsbusters carries an account: Wikipedia Disallows Any Mention of Alleged John Edwards Scandal.
Wikipedia, which allowed verb tenses for their Tim Russert entry to be changed from present to past tense about a half hour before the official announcement of his death, is suddenly going ultra legal in its refusal to allow their John Edwards entry to be updated with mention of the alleged scandal which was reported in the National Enquirer with many of the details confirmed by Fox News. Suddenly Wikipedia has become a stickler for confirmation detail before the Edwards entry can be updated. To get an idea of how much Wikipedia is twisting itself into a pretzel to justify their refusal to update their John Edwards entry, one needs only to look at their pained, but comedically entertaining, discussions of this matter in their "Tabloid scandal accusations" section:
Gawker also notices, as it continues its yeoman work this time around on the story with "John Edwards' Wikipedia Page Strangely Love Child-Free".
Gawker stepped in with enlightened coverage to supply an Internet searching for news of the affair, the site's Pareene noting that there will always be ways for the creative to disseminate information.
"(Kudos, of course, to the enterprising editor who buried mention of this scandal in this unread entry on a book by Rielle Hunter's ex-boyfriend Jay McInerney.)"
In a curious bit of irony, Newsweek mentioned more about Rielle Hunter's involvement with Edwards in 2006 than after the Enquirer broke the story in October 2007. In an article titled, "John Edwards, Untucked", Johnathan Darman wrote more about Hunter and Edwards than Newsweek's readers have seen since.
In the midst of a short theme sequence that begins each Webisode, the camera lingers over the former senator's behind as he tucks a starched white shirt into his pants. Still, [Rielle] Hunter, now under contract with Edwards's organization, says she sees the untucked John Edwards coming more and more to the fore.
--Jonathan Darman | NEWSWEEK: Politics 2008: John Edwards, Untucked
Newsweek's readers are left to own devices to supply any updates of the "untucked John Edwards" after that Christmas Day 2006 article.
The New York Times continues its formidable non-coverage.
Occasional DBKP contributor, R.E. Bierce writes: "The New York Times cites the "public's right to know" every time they reveal national security documents that aid and abet terrorists. However, when it comes to the John Edwards affair, the "public's right to know" be damned. That information is too sensitive for its readers to handle.
The public's right to know is Times' puffery, to be trotted out whenever its editors feel like giving aid and comfort to an enemy that has already killed over 3000 American on September 11."
Six days on after it's been verified Edwards was at the Beverly Hilton with Rielle Hunter--in the same room--and the MSM is monolithic in its refusal to inform its readership.
Maybe the expected appearance of pictures in this week's edition of the National Enquirer will change their attitudes.
It will be then that their rapidly-disappearing customer base will finally get information that's been available all this time--elsewhere.
by Mondoreb
images: National Enquirer; dbkp file
All Obama, All the Time
by Nancy Morgan
Right Bias
We interrupt this program for a breaking news alert:
"Obama Has Landed Safely Back In The US."
America breathes a collective sigh of relief. Conservatives rejoice also, anticipating a long awaited break from 'All Obama, All The Time.' Alas, it is not to be.
Obama continues to dominate the old media, with 24/7 coverage of his every utterance. Talking heads ruminate endlessly and in depth, on the 'historic' tour just completed by their new president in waiting. With the appropriate oohs and aahs, our old media elites expound on Obama's gravitas, his presidential appearance, his new foreign experience which, coincidentally, Obama states, has confirmed all his preconceptions about Iraq and Afghanistan. How utterly prescient!
Obama, like many on the left, inhabits a world occupied solely with like-minded individuals. Having spent his whole life in the company of socialist and Marxists activists, liberal academics and fellow elites, Obama has made the all too common mistake of believing that his world view is the only one. The correct one. Hence, his surprise was undoubtedly as great as CNN's Christiane Amampour's, when she abjectly reported that she was "surprised by the lack of euphoria" following his 'historic' speech.
Missing from Obama's body of knowledge and experience is any semblance of appreciation for the fully half of Americans who have never inhabited his world. Those pesky conservatives. The right-wing nuts who cling to their guns and Bibles out of a sense of desperation. The idiots who believe global warming is not man-made and the outdated traditionalists who favor free market solutions over government solutions.
You know the type, the ones that are offended that Obama removed the American flag from his campaign plane before jetting off to kow-tow to Europe and condescend to Iraq. The ones that resent the man from nowhere who has the audacity, if not the credentials, to lecture the world on proper behaviour. The ones that dare to question the lies, oops, I mean spin, that issues forth from camp Obama daily.
The latest kerfluffle involves questions about why Obama chose to work out at the Ritz instead of visiting with the troops. Conservatives have the audacity to suggest it was because the military wouldn't allow Obama to bring photographers with him to record his close ties with America's soldiers. You know, the American warriors that are responsible for the very freedoms Obama broadly assigns to the world. No photo op, no visit from on high.
There are even those on the right that dare question the Obama camp's estimate of the reported 200,000 that gathered to hear his Berlin speech. The attendance figures reported by German public television ZDF were 20,000, not the 200,000 figure the Obama camp gave to a complaisant media. Some Americans were even rude enough to question why no American flag was present during Obama's 'historic' Berlin speech.
Adding insult to injury, right-wing bad boy, John Bolton, had the temerity to suggest, "The successes Obama refers to in his speech - the defeat of Nazism, the Berlin airlift and the collapse of communism - were all gained by strong alliances defeating determined opponents of freedom, not by 'one-worlders'."
To top it off, right-wing bloggers actually fact-checked his speech. In a direct assault on Obama's self-anointed right to fashion reality according to his own whim, a London paper found several 'misstatements' (that's liberalspeak for lies) in his historic speech. The audacity!
Ignoring any views that don't conform to his own grandiose view of himself, this 'lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard graduate who has no substantive records of accomplishments' has instructed his aides to start planning his presidential transition.
Nothing in Obama's life has prepared him for the defeat he is bound to suffer come November. All because his pollsters, his advisors and his wife neglected to remind him that all the adulation in the world means squat unless followed up with a vote and, unfortunately, the adoring throngs in Europe can't vote, yet.
Obama has managed to alienate increasing numbers of oh so ordinary Americans who do vote. Like the average American who is more impressed with actions than words. Like the little people who work hard, play by the rules, love God and country and know instinctively that expertise with teleprompters does not a leader make.
The average Joe wants a president who is a citizen of America, not a citizen of the world. They most certainly don't want a president who apologizes for his own country in foreign lands. Even the unsophisticated guy in flyover country knows better than Obama that relying on the old media for accurate information on how Americans think and feel is a fool's game.
Obama will be genuinely surprised when McCain is elected president in November - a presidency that Obama has already claimed as his own. He will undoubtedly question how McCain could have won when Obama doesn't even know a single person who voted for him.
All those meanies on the right have to do is continue to give the Big O more rope.
by Nancy Morgan
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and a news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina, where she writes "Culture Watch" weekly.
Article may be reprinted with attribution. Bio available on request.
John Edwards Love Child Story Goes International
No Attribution in TimesOnline Edwards story
Is This a New Business Model for a Mainstream Media in Trouble?
"We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsman both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us."
--Larisa Alexandrovna, Huffington Post & at-Largely
DBKP.com was alerted yesterday to both a good news-bad news situation by Doug Ross, of DougRoss@Journal.
The good news was the TimesOnline had used several of our quotes from our interview this week with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer, in a story it ran on John Edwards' run-in with the Enquirer's reporters at the Beverly Hilton while visiting his mistress and their love child.
The bad news was that the Times reporter, Sarah Baxter, in her story, Sleaze scuppers Democrat golden boy never credited DBKP as her source for the quotes, which were taken word-for-word from our story, "John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer".
Doug has an account at "Sunday Times runs Edwards-Mistress-Love Child story, rips off Blogosphere".
As Doug points out: "When this story first broke in December I wrote that the blogosphere renders the mainstream media less relevant by the day.
Through its questionable behavior, the Times has done nothing to counter my assertion."
At first, we tended to attribute the non-attribution to an oversight. After all, the story was widely mentioned this week, among other places at Slate, The Corner at National Review Online, Ace of Spades HQ and made the front page of FARK.
But upon closer inspection, doubts began to arise. We sent a letter yesterday to the Times Editor-in-Chief asking that proper credit be given. We also sent a copy to the Times News Desk.
Easy enough, right? Just add the proper credit and link to the corrected story on-line and publish a small correction later for the print edition.
Then we received some disturbing news.
DBKP's LBG sent in an email: I posted a comment on the story at the Times yesterday noting that the reporter did not attribute the Perel quotes to the story written by DBKP. My comment was never published." She included her comment to the Times:
"The reporter who wrote this story did not attribute the original source of the Perel quotes, a story at Death by 1000 Papercuts.com."
I received another email shortly thereafter from Doug Ross with basically the same message.
Though other comments to the story made after both LBG and Doug Ross' had been published, their's were not. So, someone at the Times was aware of their concerns.
This got us wondering if this practice was widespread among the major media; we then started searching the Internet.
Yikes!
At least in America, the MSM is mining blogs for stories and flipping off the original creators/writers when reminded whose work they're using.
The Associated Press commenced suing bloggers quoting AP stories in June 2008. AP's Intellectual Property Governance Coordinator Irene Keselman had this to say in a letter to Cernig, of Newshoggers:
"... you purport that the Drudge Retort's users reproduce and display AP headlines and leads under a fair use defense. Please note that contrary to your assertion, AP considers that the Drudge Retort users' use of AP content does not fall within the parameters of fair use. The use is not fair use simply because the work copied happened to be a news article and that the use is of the headline and the first few sentences only. This is a misunderstanding of the doctrine of "fair use." AP considers taking the headline and lede of a story without a proper license to be an infringement of its copyrights, and additionally constitutes "hot news" misappropriation."
--Fair Use and the Associated Press
The above mentioned dispute involved Drudge Retort using excerpts--some as small as 18 words, according to many reports--under Drudge Retort's own headlines.
AP, thy name is hypocrisy.
Larisa Alexandrovna, Huffington Post and at-Largely wrote about a disturbing experience with AP in "MSM Plagiarism Strikes Again – AP Welcome to the Party"
On March 14, 2006, the AP did their own article, left out any attribution to me or my publication and lifted not only my research but also whole sections of my article for their own (making cosmetic changes of course).
We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsman both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us.
Alexandrovna goes on to state in the same article:
"Unfortunately this is far too common and has happened to me and to other writers and bloggers far too frequently. This time, however, we made a point of tape recording the AP apparatchiks admitting to taking our work and using it without attribution, stating "we do not credit blogs".
She then goes on to list six or seven of the most egregious examples of AP plagiarism at the time of her article, March 27, 2006.
More recently, the New York Times tried to take credit for the Iranian Missile Fauxtography.
The Iranian thugocracy doctored a photo adding in a fourth missile, most likely to cover up a failed one. The blogosphere exposed the manipulated photo. Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs [Iran's Photoshopped Missile Launch ] was the first to the scene. However, the New York Times blog, The Lede, is taking credit [in a Iranian image, a missile too many] for exposing this even though their report was given much later. FOX, obviously slacking on research, also credits the lede. Mac's mind: Ny Times Commits Plagiarism on Fake Iranian Missile Photos
The above article cited Ace, of Ace of Spades HQ, [Shock: NYT Blog Claims Credit For Fauxtography Story They Didn't Break] who said:
"Whether CJ (Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs) deserves all the credit, I don’t know. I do know the NYT deserves little of it, and ought to stop claiming otherwise."
Exactly.
The New York Times, forced to eat the bitter fruit from its looney-left editorial policies, may have hit upon the only business model that allows it to survive the death spiral of falling ad revenue, circulation and stock prices: lay off its news reporters and rely on ripping off content from the Blogosphere.
But the AP and NY Times are not alone.
There is so much news theft going on, in fact, that Hamilton Nolan, of Gawker, had to explain "The Golden Rule" in The Complete Guide to Stealing New Stories:
Media outlets can only steal outright from other media outlets that are not their direct competitors, and do not fall in their same class. First-class outlets: National TV news networks (including the big three on cable), the top five national newspapers, top-level weekly news magazines, and a select few websites like Drudge. Second-class outlets: Niche TV networks, local TV news affiliates, smaller metro papers, smaller but still well-respected news magazines, well-known internet news operations that don't fall in the top handful. Third-class outlets: Trade magazines, niche magazines, smaller local papers, niche internet news sites. Fourth-class outlets: Others.
Nolan also includes tips for the aspiring news thief.
All this occurs after many pompous, blow-hard pieces have been written by ex-members of the MSM, now posing as "professors of journalism", about the defects of citizen journalists, and bloggers, in particular.
This was all touched upon in "Citizen Journalism: “911, I’d Like to Report an Unregulated Blogger”. In that piece, David Hazinsky, an ex-NBC-reporter-turned-journalism-prof had railed against the 'dangers of citizen journalism'.
The premise of citizen journalism is that regular people can now collect information and pictures with video cameras and cellphones, and distribute words and images over the Internet. Advocates argue that the acts of collecting and distributing makes these people "journalists." This is like saying someone who carries a scalpel is a "citizen surgeon" or someone who can read a law book is a "citizen lawyer." Tools are merely that. Education, skill and standards are really what make people into trusted professionals. Information without journalistic standards is called gossip.
As we noted then: "One images Hazinsky in the pre-Revolutionary American colonies: he'd be the one beating on John Peter Zenger's printing press with a pitchfork--or shouting down Tom Paine."
So while the MSM dismisses bloggers and other citizen journalists as the great unwashed, it's not above "borrowing" stories from the rubes when it suits them.
As Alexandrovna noted, "What the AP and others are saying essentially is that, while "your work" is good enough for us to steal, you are not credible enough to cite."
"Trusted MSM news professionals" was our nominee for "Oxymoron of the Year".
Although DBKP did not yell, "Stop, thief!" when first alerted to the Times reporter using our work without credit, the more we researched the subject, the more it became apparent that that may have been the proper action to take.
We've been checking our email hopefully; we sincerely hope that an upbeat update will be added to this article.
We're loathe to lump the Times in with the likes of the NY Times and AP. We hope we're contacted--sooner rather than later.
by Mondoreb
NOTE: Ah my! We originally left out one source (see how easy it might be?) but caught it within 10 minutes of this article going up. We marked the quote as a quote--just forgot to include the link. It is now corrected.
Example of Why the MSM is the NME
by Babba Zee
Outraged Spleen of Zion
Allman Brothers ~ Whipping Post
The Washington Post did a total hit piece on this woman.
She's working on a new rule to change the way the government regulates workers' exposure to toxins.
The Post, in the service of the unions and Dems, slammed her on page A1.
U.S. Rushes to Change Workplace Toxin Rules
Political appointees at the Department of Labor are moving with unusual speed to push through in the final months of the Bush administration a rule making it tougher to regulate workers' on-the-job exposure to chemicals and toxins.
The agency did not disclose the proposal, as required, in public notices of regulatory plans that it filed in December and May. Instead, Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao's intention to push for the rule first surfaced on July 7, when the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) posted on its Web site that it was reviewing the proposal, identified only by its nine-word title.
You'll note the way the writer paints Misir as doing something out of the ordinary, as though she's trying to sneak through a new rule. Note also that they didn't call her for comment before publication.
The Left is about hit-and-run character assassination, and if you claim to be protecting workers, while also exposing the evils of the Bush administration, of course you're not bound by any rules.
My thinking is that it's not worth spending too much effort writing on the Post's comment board itself, because no one's going to sift through hundreds of posts to read them all.
It's better to get things like up on bigger blogs like Michelle Malkin or Free Republic.
Here are some key points to consider:.
1. Contrary to what the Post wrote, the new rule is not secret. It's a draft being reviewed by OMB, then everyone can comment on it once it's released.
2. No one knows what's in it, so the Post printed assumptions based on Deborah's previous comments about the existing process. The new rule will protect workers, but will make the process transparent, and most significantly, risk-based using science and actual facts, rather than faulty assumptions and emotion.
3. An abstract of the new rule can be found here: Requirements for DOL Agencies’ Assessment of Occupational Health Risks
4. They also smeared Deborah for previously being a White House ethics officer, insinuating that she must be a bad person because no one at the Bush White House is ethical. Every government agency has an ethics adviser to ensure compliance with ethics rules, such as accepting gifts, using government resources, speaking in front of certain groups, separating political activities from government service, etc. She was the screener who ensured compliance with ethics rules, and has never been faulted once for an incorrect ruling or advice; rather, she is ridiculed for her careful and ethical work.
The Left-wing bloggers have ripped her apart on this for the last year, even making fun of her last name (Misir is Hindu), usually writing that she was a White House "ethics adviser."
If you ever wonder why good people shy away from public service out of fear of being personally destroyed, here's another example. With her experience (she was previously an appellate lawyer for the Justice Department, arguing cases in front of Federal appellate courts), she could be in a private firm earning $300,000+/year; instead, she's in the trenches fighting for rational policies in industry, and being personally destroyed by the socialist network.
Want more Babba Zee? Check out these recent posts: * Spleenster "pat" asks: WHO TF is John Templeton, & why should you care? * EgyptAir forces Islamic prayers on flight out of JFK |
by Babba Zee
Source: Example of Why the MSM is the NME
images: Outraged Spleen of Zion
The Mainstream Media "cone of silence" surrounding the John Edwards Love Child Scandal is starting to crack.
One brave reporter in Houston, asked Edwards about the affair in LA.
The video is here: John Edwards at a Press Conference in Houston. As DBKP reader, Kelly put it: "Edwards looked like a deer in the headlights, and was very careful about how he parsed his words. He even stopped himself mid-denial and reverted to his stock answer."
Couldn't have said it any better, Kelly.
by Mondoreb
hat tip: Kelly!
John Edward, Rielle Hunter Affair: Interview, David Perel, Editor-in-Chief, National Enquirer
0 commentsDBKP Exclusive!
An Inside Look at How the National Enquirer
Scooped the Mainstream Media
In the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter Investigation
How did the supermarket checkout staple, The National Enquirer, scoop the combined forces of CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox News, Time Magazine, Newsweek, USA Today, New York Times and the rest of the mainstream press in the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter Love Child affair?
"Inquiring minds want to know."
After an hour-long interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer, we can now say with certainty: it was easy. The steadfast "cone of silence" placed on the story by the Mainstream Media made it easy for anyone willing to do the legwork to grab the story from a decidedly-uninterested "respectable" press.
Perel, who was promoted to Editor-in-Chief of the Enquirer in 2005, has overseen the John Edwards Scandal investigation from the very start and provided DBKP with some interesting insights on Edwards, the Love Child Scandal and the Mainstream Media.
Mondoreb: Hi David, congratulations on the National Enquirer's scoop of the mainstream press--again.
David Perel: Thank you. It was nice to finally have the "smoking gun".
Mondo: This story has been on-going over the last--what--ten months?
DP: Yes, something like that. Certainly, it's taken some time.
Mondo: Do you feel vindicated by the latest turn of events in the John Edwards Love Child Story--after the Enquirer's reporters cornered Edwards in the Beverly Hilton?
DP: Absolutely. We'd gotten information and tips that Edwards was seeing Rielle Hunter and the baby. On Monday, we got some good intel that there was going to be a meeting at the Beverly Hilton hotel and we got the information in time to get everyone in place when it happened. We had a big team on it.
Mondo: I seem to remember that back in December, when the Enquirer broke the second installment of the Edwards scandal, that you had seven reporters working on the story then. How many did you have at the Beverly Hilton this time?
DP: There were seven on this story, also.
[NOTE: Presumably, they were all in optimum positions, as Edwards ran into not only two Enquirer reporters trying to make his escape from the hotel, but at least one Enquirer photographer, as well.]
Mondo: It's been over ten months since the Enquirer broke the Edwards scandal; seven-plus months since the December story that named Rielle Hunter as the "other woman" and showed her visibly pregnant. What was the Enquirer doing in the last seven months that the major press organizations could have been doing, but didn't, that allowed you scoop them?
DP: We stayed on the story. We did it the old-fashioned way, with lots of legwork. We did what the major news organizations used to do: we knocked on doors, ran down leads and talked to people.
Mondo: Why do you think the "major news organizations" didn't do this?
DP: I think it was a matter of interest. We knew--even though we couldn't reveal them--that our sources were credible. We fact-checked their stories and they checked out. It was a giant puzzle and we started fitting the pieces together. But, we were interested in fitting them together; in doing the checking, the groundwork.
I think with all of the cut-backs the other news organizations has suffered, many of them may not have had the man-power or the resources to do what we did. It was a major commitment on our part to continue and stay on the story.
"At least three-dozen daily newspapers in the United States published the Craig news the day after the Roll Call scoop [on Sen. Larry Craig's foot-tapping troubles in a Minnesota men's room stall], according to Nexis, but this morning not a single U.S. daily mentioned the Enquirer piece."
--Jack Schaeffer, Slate: Why the Press Is Ignoring the Edwards "Love Child" Story, A Double Standard at Work
Mondo: Have you ever seen a more blatant--what we've called it--"media blackout" of any story the Enquirer has broken than the Edwards affair?
DP: No. Amazing, simply amazing. It wasn't a total blackout, but very nearly.
Mondo: Why do you think this was?
DP: A couple of things: partly a lack of ability and partly a lack of desire.
Mondo: Do you think it might have anything to do with the fact that reporters on the regular campaign beat get too "comfortable"? Maybe they're afraid of offending whoever they're assigned to cover; who is really their meal-ticket?
DP: Absolutely. It's a flaw in the system and certainly a flaw in the coverage.
What would it have taken for a reporter to stick a microphone in Edwards' face and ask him to confirm or deny certain details of the story we broke in December? What would it take for a reporter to stick a microphone in his face now and ask him to deny or confirm he was in the Beverly Hilton? What was he doing visiting Rielle Hunter there?
Edwards is supposedly on the list for vice-presidential candidates. Look at Edwards actions, his involvement with the cover-up, the size of the cover-up. It shows a bit of his character. People might not want someone that close to the presidency.
Mondo: If they knew about it...
DP: Yes.
Mondo: What were some of the difficulties in the Edwards investigation?
DP: The cover-up by the campaign, the scope of the cover-up.
I can tell you it was not easy locating Rielle Hunter. A couple times it was very hard finding out where she had moved. It took a lot of time, effort and resources.
Mondo: You were in contact with the Edwards campaign in December about the story. Did you give them a chance to respond to it before it came out?
DP: Yes.
Mondo: And they didn't?
DP: There was no official response from the campaign or its lawyers.
Mondo: The National Enquirer's record on breaking political scandals is pretty solid. What do you say to your detractors; the ones who dismiss anything you uncover with a "Well, it's in the Enquirer".
DP: Our detractors don't read the magazine. The ones who read it know we get it right.
Mondo: Isn't it just a way of avoiding having to address the facts; to attack the Enquirer?
DP: It's like reviewing a book you've never read. Or like, who was it, Maxim reviewing an album they'd never listened to.
Mondo: There was some rumblings about the first and second Love Child stories being the products of the Clinton camp. One of the Clinton backers has a share of your parent company, I believe. Any comments?
DP: It has nothing to do with the editorial side, which I run. They could say that back in December when Clinton was still in the race, but now, she's supposed to be uniting the Democrats behind Obama. So, it doesn't make much sense.
We follow the story, not the man. We cover both sides. We broke Rush Limbaugh's Oxycontin troubles, we did Jesse Jackson's love child and we broke a lot of the news in the OJ story. It's nothing personal--it's the story.
Mondo: You have more updates planned on this latest installment?
DP: We'll be updating the story several times. We're not finished yet.
Mondo: Any other comments?
DP: We were looking for the "smoking gun": time, place, day and date. Edwards could always "deny, deny, deny". Now, Edwards can't deny being at the Beverly Hilton and visiting Rielle Hunter. There were at least 10 eyewitnesses to the affair of Edwards running on the stairs and ducking into the restroom. I'm proud of the story. It speaks for itself.
Mondo: Congratulations on your scoop and thanks for talking with me.
DP: Any time. Keep in touch.
[A few other subjects were covered, some off-the-record and some on.]
by Mondoreb
Source: telephone interveiw with David Perel
images: National Enquirer.com
