We feel badly for the children: their mother is dead and their father is an absolute disgrace and snake of a human being. But for John-boy? He's earned everything that is coming to him.
Disgraced politician John Edwards is said to be deeply depressed - to the point of being suicidal - over the prospect of a criminal trial that could end with him being jailed if found guilty. The 57-year-old former Presidential candidate reportedly told a close friend: 'I won't go to jail. I'd kill myself first!'
He has lost 20lb in the last year and is a 'broken spirit,' reports the National Enquirer.
'I'd kill myself first!'
-- John Edwards
According to the Enquirer, a close source said: 'I think John is suicidal. He knows that if he's indicted, prosecutors will try to get him to serve jail time and make an example of him.
'He's absoluetly despondent over the fear of prison. Over the last year, he's lost about 20lb and friends are concerned that he's escaping reality with booze.
'In early March, his legal team told him there was a strong chance he could be indicted, and John completely lost it. He cried his eyes out and said, "I won't go to jail. I'd kill myself first!"'
The Enquirer first broke the story of Edwards's affair with blonde divorcee Rielle Hunter. A series of exclusives charted his sordid double life and his efforts to cover up the birth of his love child, daughter Frances Quinn, who is now three.
The former North Carolina senator has been under federal grand jury investigation since April 2009 for alleged payments to take care of Miss Hunter in violation of campaign rules. Probes have been carried out by both the IRS and the FBI.
Complicating matters for Mr Edwards is the actions of Andrew Young, the former aide who helped cover up the affair by claiming he was Frances Quinn's father. Mr Young, who later admitted he lied to protect Mr Edwards, wrote a book about his role in the cover-up.
Now Mr Edwards is said to be worried about the prospect of Mr Young taking the stand as the prosecution's star witness. Mr Young has claimed that two wealthy supporters of the Edwards camp pumped vast sums of money into the campaign for the cover-up.
The case of the mysterious alleged sex tape involving Mr Edwards is also gathering pace. Mr Edwards has had to give evidence over Miss Hunter's request to get the purported 'private and personal' recording back from Mr Young. Miss Hunter is suing Mr Young for the return of the tape that reportedly Mr Edwards performing sex acts on her.
Mr Young's wife, Cheri, said on Oprah Winfrey's show last year: 'I won't give any fine details, but I'll tell you yes, he is naked. He is performing sexual acts. The woman is holding the camera. He is aware he is being taped.'
According to the Wall Street Journal Mr Young has described the tape as like 'watching a traffic pile-up occur in slow motion - repelling but also transfixing.'
Now Edwards fears for the future of his family. His three oldest children - Harvard-educated lawyer Cate, 28, Emma, 12, and Jack, ten - are still mounring the passing away of their mother Elizabeth, who died of breast cancer in December.
A second source told the Enquirer: 'John isn't hiding the fact that he's terrified of going to prison, but he's also extremely distraught about what will happen to his children.
'He's severely depressed and even John's parents, who are very close to him and their grandkids, are on edge.'
Mr Edwards recently took his three oldest children to a beach resort fior as getaway. According to the Enquirer, the source said: 'John's children are all that he has left, and the trip was a way for him to say goodbye. 'He doesn't want to leave the children, but he says he can't go on living like this. His spirit is broken.'
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/07/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I feel sorry for the kids, whether he goes to jail, kills himself, or stays free, but not for this creep.
#6
Well, there are two Americas, right, Breckboy? Except in both, nobody gives a sh1t about you. Do it or go to jail, either is fine with me
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/07/2011 7:57 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Dear John: Stay away from jail and offer them an option: a stint for an indefinite number of years, like the war itself, in Afghanistan's eastern border -- without pay, of course. You can have many women (all are suspect Taliban, though) journalists to cover your "heroic" deeds.
Posted by: Oscar Greating2685 ||
04/07/2011 8:16 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Darth: I was debating the pic I used ('Breck Boy') versus the pic Fred has of the bottle of rye and the pistol.
It wasn't easy to decide.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/07/2011 8:59 Comments ||
Top||
#9
The dems wanted this clown to be vice president.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey ||
04/07/2011 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I can see him screwing up shooting himself and suing the gun manufacturer
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/07/2011 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#11
You hear that, Elizabeth? I'm comin' to join you, honey!
Every now and then I still see the occasional Prius with a Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker on it. Sometimes there's an Obama sticker pasted over the Kerry/Edwards sticker but they made the Obama stickers smaller so you can still see what's underneath.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
04/07/2011 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#14
'When things get tough, kill yourself'. Is this the lesson this man is trying to teach to his kids? His wife had cancer. Her message: 'When things get tough, don't give up, fight hard'.
Kids see what their parents do. Everything is a lesson.
#17
In a world so full of dangerous happenings and grave threats, its great to see a story that is both humorous, educational and sure to have a happy ending from my perspective, the only way better is if this POS could shoot himself, and still go to jail to be someones special cellmate. Thanks!
#18
Let the wheels of justice grind slowly along. Edwards can throw out self-threats all he wants. Who gives a rat's behind? He can cry to the prison Chaplin (or Imam) all about it. Relatives will take care of the children and hopefully teach them good values that Dear Olde Dad never did.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/07/2011 21:06 Comments ||
Top||
In case there was any doubt, the White House on Tuesday issued a formal statement opposing a bill now before the House that would bar the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases for the purpose of combating climate change.
The bill, known as the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, could come up for a vote as early as Wednesday and is almost certain to pass when it does. It has virtually unanimous support among the Republican majority and will probably draw votes from a few Democrats from coal and oil producing states.
The measure, sponsored by Representatives Fred Upton, Republican of Michigan, and Ed Whitfield, Republican of Kentucky, would overturn the E.P.A.s finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose a danger to human health and the environment. That finding, based on a broad scientific consensus, is the basis for pending regulation of carbon emissions from vehicles and large stationary sources like power plants, factories and refineries.
Republicans assert the new rules are a hidden energy tax that will significantly raise production costs and drive jobs offshore.
Administration officials have spoken out against the bill in speeches and congressional testimony, but President Obama had not formally threatened to veto it. On Tuesday, the White House issued a strongly worded statement that erases any doubt.
The administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 910, which would halt the Environmental Protection Agencys common-sense steps under the Clean Air Act to protect Americans from harmful pollution, the statement says. H.R. 910 would also increase the nations dependence on oil and other fossil fuels as well as contradict the scientific consensus on climate change.
Senator James Inhofe, the most outspoken climate change skeptic in Congress, has introduced identical legislation in the Senate. The Senate is also considering a number of amendments that would eliminate or delay any federal regulation of greenhouse gases. The timing of votes on those measures remains up in the air.
The White House statement says that over its 40-year history, the Clean Air Act has markedly cleaned the nations air and saved hundreds of thousands of lives, while electricity production and prices have remained stable. It also says that the bill would undercut efforts to make cars and trucks more fuel-efficient and would worsen the threat of global warming.
Finally, H.R. 910 would contradict public health experts and scientists and strip E.P.A. of its authority to develop sensible standards for currently unchecked carbon pollution and thus prevent E.P.A. from following its statutory obligations as interpreted by the Supreme Court, the statement concludes.
If the president is presented with this legislation, which would seriously roll back the Clean Air Act authority, harm Americans health by taking away our ability to decrease carbon pollution and undercut fuel efficiency standards that will save Americans money at the pump while decreasing our dependence on oil, the statement says, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill.
- -- - -- - -- -
The Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis has estimated that 160,000 cases of premature death, 130,000 heart attacks, 1.7 million asthma attacks, and 13 million lost work days have since been prevented due to the EPAs work in reducing fine particle and ozone pollution. These same regulations have helped to lower numbers of mesotheliomarelated deaths down to under 3,000 a year. This is an especially remarkable statistic when you consider that the prognosis for mesothelioma life expectancy is only 14 months long.
In case there was any doubt, the White House on Tuesday issued a formal statement opposing a bill now before the House that would bar the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases for the purpose of combating climate change.
The bill, known as the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, could come up for a vote as early as Wednesday and is almost certain to pass when it does. It has virtually unanimous support among the Republican majority and will probably draw votes from a few Democrats from coal and oil producing states.
The measure, sponsored by Representatives Fred Upton, Republican of Michigan, and Ed Whitfield, Republican of Kentucky, would overturn the E.P.A.s finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose a danger to human health and the environment. That finding, based on a broad scientific consensus, is the basis for pending regulation of carbon emissions from vehicles and large stationary sources like power plants, factories and refineries.
Republicans assert the new rules are a hidden energy tax that will significantly raise production costs and drive jobs offshore.
Administration officials have spoken out against the bill in speeches and congressional testimony, but President Obama had not formally threatened to veto it. On Tuesday, the White House issued a strongly worded statement that erases any doubt.
The administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 910, which would halt the Environmental Protection Agencys common-sense steps under the Clean Air Act to protect Americans from harmful pollution, the statement says. H.R. 910 would also increase the nations dependence on oil and other fossil fuels as well as contradict the scientific consensus on climate change.
Senator James Inhofe, the most outspoken climate change skeptic in Congress, has introduced identical legislation in the Senate. The Senate is also considering a number of amendments that would eliminate or delay any federal regulation of greenhouse gases. The timing of votes on those measures remains up in the air.
The White House statement says that over its 40-year history, the Clean Air Act has markedly cleaned the nations air and saved hundreds of thousands of lives, while electricity production and prices have remained stable. It also says that the bill would undercut efforts to make cars and trucks more fuel-efficient and would worsen the threat of global warming.
Finally, H.R. 910 would contradict public health experts and scientists and strip E.P.A. of its authority to develop sensible standards for currently unchecked carbon pollution and thus prevent E.P.A. from following its statutory obligations as interpreted by the Supreme Court, the statement concludes.
If the president is presented with this legislation, which would seriously roll back the Clean Air Act authority, harm Americans health by taking away our ability to decrease carbon pollution and undercut fuel efficiency standards that will save Americans money at the pump while decreasing our dependence on oil, the statement says, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill.
- -- - -- - -- -
The Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis has estimated that 160,000 cases of premature death, 130,000 heart attacks, 1.7 million asthma attacks, and 13 million lost work days have since been prevented due to the EPAs work in reducing fine particle and ozone pollution. These same regulations have helped to lower numbers of mesotheliomarelated deaths down to under 3,000 a year. This is an especially remarkable statistic when you consider that the prognosis for mesothelioma life expectancy is only 14 months long.
#4
I'm sure there are lots of unused voting machines which have yet to have their ballots counted. Not to mention all the boxes of ballots which were accidentally forgotten in the trunks of union members...
#5
You'd like to think that the Pubs caught the Dummycrats on this one, but I'm with CF on this: the Dummycrats are thorough professionals at stealing elections, and the Pubs are just amateurs.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/07/2011 21:38 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"the Dummycrats are thorough professionals at stealing elections, and the Pubs are just amateurs"
True, Dr. Steve, but at least they can't challenge the 7000+ votes from Washaugau (sp? or whatever); the Democrat counter got up in front of the news media and said the votes were legitimate (she's the vice chair of the state Dem party or some such - bet she pays dearly for her honesty).
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/07/2011 21:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
This was NOT a vote counting issue. It was a vote reporting issue.
Here in Illinois we've perfected coordinated vote counting and reporting issues, as in, how many votes does the machine need to report so we'll need to get them counted.
In Wisconsin, the GOP got lucky that it's county simply forgot to report perfectly countable, AND, counted votes.
Devious wags suggest the GOP could have planned this simply to see if the Dems were up to something similar, but local sources indicate simply incompetent reporting of the totals.
Very interesting that the MSM didn't seem to notice anything amiss, which indicates they were only looking for amissness in democratic areas. Wonder why?
In a political bombshell, the clerk in a Republican stronghold is set to release new vote totals giving 8,000 votes in the state Supreme Court race back toward Justice David Prosser, swinging the race significantly in his favor. [Picture of local union clown to the right --->]
The Waukesha County clerk's office has told state elections officials that they will be adjusting the vote totals to give incumbent David Prosser more than 7,000 new votes, said Mike Haas, staff attorney for the state Government Accountability Board.
"Waukesha will be adjusting their vote totals by 14,000," Haas said the Accountability Board was told. Supposed to be a news conference at 5:30 (CST? CDT?).
Do the DemonRats have enough ballot boxes in car trunks to counter this?
Popcorn, anyone? :-D
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/07/2011 18:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 1363, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes. The White House doesn't offer one specific substantive point in opposition to HR1363.
This might be a big bluff, but the President may be looking for a way to rally his dispirited base.
#4
He can act big and tough, but in the end pass it because of the hardships it would cause the troops in a time of war.
If the bill passes the senate fairly easily, expect this strategy to come to pass. That way teh 0ne can look tough, but caring and willing to be "bi-partisan".
#5
I never understood WHY Congress is expected to pass one single MASSIVE unreadable budget proposal per year. A budget is everything spent, taken in, sold or borrowed on.
Massive budget bills are just another form of politics for the playaz.
#6
I went through this back when Reagan shut things down twice, and Clinton once. Reagan made sure we got paid on time, all pay and allowances, by way of an executive order to DoD and the Dept of the Treasury. Clinton used that same order as his template too.
That Obama is NOT willing to pay the military during a shutdown, despite the precedent from Regan and Clinton, well that just speaks volumes about him.
May God strike that Obama dead this instant.
Biden would be a relief after this malevolent clown.
#7
Has there been a time since the Civil War that the US Military didn't get paid? I thought that was one of the enduring traditions... that the payroll would arrive to troops no matter where they were and under what conditions.
#8
Yes, twice Congress missed payroll. I was there during the Carter years. The Donk Congress was intent on punishing the military for obeying civilian leadership during the Vietnam war. Continuing resolution not passed. Troops told not to try to cash checks. About a week later we got another short term continuing resolution. Next month same deal, no continuing resolution. Troops told not to bounce checks. Command made provisions for troops to bring in families to eat at the mess halls. Finally they passed a third continuing resolution for the remainder of the fiscal year. Money was tight, so they involuntarily extended everyone's overseas tour by three months to cut movement expenses. This was during the time a very part of the Army was stationed in Europe, so transportation was the pot they raided.
#10
That's ok obama. You can stick my retirement and current pay right up your ass. I got by without it before. I can get by without it again. If it helps get your sorry ass outta the White House in 2012 it will be well worth it.
Mr. Lotp was a junior officer during Carter's presidency. We had a child to support and lived in a very expensive part of the country - on the economy, since there was no base housing available there. Variable housing allowance didn't start until 81, so we did indeed feel the strain of those lost paychecks.
#12
But - I was working in Silicon Valley at the time ... my pay helped. The real outrage was that we had first rate enlisted and NCOs in the same boat.
There were enlisted on food stamps before VHA. Did I mention (spit)???
#14
Yes, lotp, food stamps for the troops. However at the time there was no MOA between US Dept of Agriculture and DoD for getting the stamps to the troops overseas [the states administered it in CONUS IIRC], so the families overseas couldn't get them for the commissary at the time. I watched a lot of good officers and NCOs leave in the late 70s so they could give their families a future beyond the military ghetto.
For information. Let's not speculate until Mr. Trump does, or does not, find evidence. After all, we all know what we think. Only, if anyone can get the evidence by sheer dint of spending money and throwing around celebrity prestige, it's The Donald. And if he can't find anything conclusive, that will hurt Mr. Obama's quest for a second term as well, as people ask why he doesn't release the information just to prove his opponent wrong.
Washington (CNN) -- Self-proclaimed birther Donald Trump is now so doubtful of President Obama's birthplace that he's sent a team of his own investigators to Hawaii in hopes of getting to the bottom of the issue.
That's according to Trump himself, who, in an interview with NBC, warned his investigators just might uncover "one of the greatest cons in the history of politics and beyond."
"I have people that have been studying it and they cannot believe what they're finding," Trump said an interview that aired Thursday Morning.
Asked if he has assigned people specifically to search in Hawaii, Trump said, "Absolutely."
The business mogul, who in a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll is tied for second place among potential presidential candidates, also suggested the president is involved in an ongoing cover-up over the matter.
"He spent $2 million in legal fees trying on to get away from this issue, and if it weren't an issue, why wouldn't he just solve it?" he said. "I wish he would because if he doesn't, it's one of the greatest scams in the history of politics and in the history, period. You are not allowed to be a president if you're not born in this country. Right now, I have real doubts."
#1
I was thinking, maybe he sould run for office, but the article says he will not run. Yet.
Referring to Trump's hints about running, Christie added, "I wouldn't call it stunt, but I think he's very outspoken and... he loves to be on the stage and to express his opinions."
And if the current holder of the office can get elected, why not The Donald?
Posted by: Bobby ||
04/07/2011 14:14 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Hmmm... This video is no longer available.
Thugs in shock?
Posted by: Bobby ||
04/07/2011 14:17 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Another heavily edited video - but not bad. Even though they cut him off halfway through one of his points.
And his comments on Tenure is 100%. Everyone else has to prove themselves every day - why should teachers and professors be any different?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
