Edwards admits to affair - Page 5

7960 · 08-13-2008, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Based on an actual event with proof. The Edwards "affair" isn't stopping with him admitting the affair...now it goes off towards his financial dealings. When the Enquirer reported it, they didn't have the Edwards confession as proof.

they had a source who provided emails, timelines, details..........according to you woodward and berstein should have stopped their investigation because all they had "proof" of (well, proof good enough for you) was some guys doing a B&E.

They had a single PAID person feeding them rumors.

you know the source was paid? how?

7960 · 08-13-2008, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

A "source" has to provide PROOF to a LEGIT news source BEFORE they print a story. If the Enquirer received such proof from this source, where is it? The Dan Rather shit had proof...but it was falsified proof. Still...there was at least something.

Lawls........ in your world fake proof of something that didn't happen is better than not seeing proof of something that is now beyond doubt.

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

they had a source who provided emails, timelines, details..........according to you woodward and berstein should have stopped their investigation because all they had "proof" of (well, proof good enough for you) was some guys doing a B&E.

Who said they should stop investigating?

Originally Posted by 7960

you know the source was paid? how?

A source told me.

7960 · 08-13-2008, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Who said they should stop investigating?

you, because they had no proof anything else happened.

A source told me.

and now I'll hold you to the same excellence in journalism you're holding the NE to...show me your proof.

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

Lawls........ in your world fake proof of something that didn't happen is better than not seeing proof of something that is now beyond doubt.

Who said it was better? How are we to know what's faked and what isn't? A story with some kind of proof > rumor. If the proof is false, then obviously the story was crap...that doesn't automatically mean that rumor is put on a pedestal.

motivez · 08-13-2008, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

you, because they had no proof anything else happened.

and now I'll hold you to the same excellence in journalism you're holding the NE to...show me your proof.

A journalist never reveals his sources. The ability of The Donkey Punch - The hardest hitting news to report the news would be severely damaged if he were to do that.

motivez · 08-13-2008, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

Lawls........ in your world fake proof of something that didn't happen is better than not seeing proof of something that is now beyond doubt.

Being shown the proof and being able to analyze it is far superior than being asked to take it on rumor and suspicion alone.

Of course, it doesn't really matter now because it's been proven true, but for future stories..

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

you, because they had no proof anything else happened.

Didn't say that at all. They should NOT REPORT before they have proof or evidence. Has nothing to do with investigating.

Originally Posted by 7960

and now I'll hold you to the same excellence in journalism you're holding the NE to...show me your proof.

I would say that the editor of the Enquirer saying they did is pretty much proof.

"Ultimately, a source came forward and was* likely paid for the information *that blew the lid off of the story; the tabloid's editor said "you can assume" the Enquirer paid for it. The story exposed Edwards as a liar for contending for two years that such an affair never happened."

7960 · 08-13-2008, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Who said it was better? How are we to know what's faked and what isn't? A story with some kind of proof > rumor.

but it wasn't a rumor, it was a story with a source and emails and background details and timelines and ............... oh fuck it. if you're going to keep lying and saying it was just a rumor then there's no use.

7960 · 08-13-2008, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Being shown the proof and being able to analyze it is far superior than being asked to take it on rumor and suspicion alone.

when does that ever happen?

nightly news says "according to a source", the papers say "according to a source"............. it's rare that we learn who the source was or what evidence they used to corroborate their story.

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

but it wasn't a rumor, it was a story with a source and emails and background details and timelines and ............... oh fuck it. if you're going to keep lying and saying it was just a rumor then there's no use.

Ok, then let's see those emails? What exactly do emails from a girl to a girlfriend actually prove? If your wife was shown emails from one of your co-workers saying "hey, I love him and we'll be together forever" does that mean they are 100% true?

They heard a rumor...had a blabbermouth feeding them stories and details...that's it. There is nothing in there that makes it reportable.

7960 · 08-13-2008, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Ok, then let's see those emails?

Except for (ironically) the Dan Rather report where he gave you FAKE proof, YOU NEARLY NEVER SEEN THE PROOF WHEN THEY'RE REPORING THE STORY.

this is like talking to my dog, except he understands 14 words

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

Except for (ironically) the Dan Rather report where he gave you FAKE proof, YOU NEARLY NEVER SEEN THE PROOF WHEN THEY'RE REPORING THE STORY.

Completely false. When they say "A White House memo..." guess what? They have the memo. Let's see..."A White House memo" or "A paid source tells us"....TOUGH decision as to which has more credibility.

Originally Posted by 7960

this is like talking to my dog, except he understands 14 words

And you're a cockbag but who's keeping track?

7960 · 08-13-2008, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Completely false. When they say "A White House memo..." guess what? They have the memo.

and YOU get to see it?

nope.

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

and YOU get to see it?

nope.

If it's online, yes. At the least I can actually go looking for it and find it. And again, what's more credible? The term "White House memo" or "friend of someone's email"?

If the Iraq war was started over a camel race and Cheney said in an email "I can't believe they doped that camel in that race...let's go to war with them" you would want to see the email, no?

7960 · 08-13-2008, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

If it's online, yes. At the least I can actually go looking for it and find it. And again, what's more credible? The term "White House memo" or "friend of someone's email"?

when Rather's not above making up documents to prove a point he wants to be true "White House memo" doesn't have any more weight than an email from a friend.

If the Iraq war was started over a camel race and Cheney said in an email "I can't believe they doped that camel in that race...let's go to war with them" you would want to see the email, no?

before going to war? sure.

but burden of proof is a little different for sending kids to war than it is for believing a piece of shit lawyer had an affair on his dying wife.

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

when Rather's not above making up documents to prove a point he wants to be true "White House memo" doesn't have any more weight than an email from a friend.

You guys will ride the Rather train to the end. Newsflash...properly researched stories will reveal false proof.

Originally Posted by 7960

before going to war? sure.

but burden of proof is a little different for sending kids to war than it is for believing a piece of shit lawyer had an affair on his dying wife.

Oh, I see...so the private business of a guy you hate is really no big deal. Got it.

7960 · 08-13-2008, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

You guys will ride the Rather train to the end. Newsflash...properly researched stories will reveal false proof.

and as in the edwards affair case it will also reveal the truth.

Oh, I see...so the private business of a guy you hate is really no big deal. Got it.

when he's running for president on a platform of honesty and integrity, yep.

but when he was asked and said no, then vehemently denied it, then claimed to not even know her, then finally admitted (quote) "When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99 percent honest is no longer enough."

He did it, he was asked, and he not only denied it but he now he's somehow managed to put himself on a pedestal because the story had some of the details wrong. When asked a "yes/no" question you can't say "no" when the answer was "yes" and claim to have been 99% honest.

Donkey® · 08-13-2008, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

and as in the edwards affair case it will also reveal the truth.

when he's running for president on a platform of honesty and integrity, yep.

but when he was asked and said no, then vehemently denied it, then claimed to not even know her, then finally admitted (quote) "When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99 percent honest is no longer enough."

He did it, he was asked, and he not only denied it but he now he's somehow managed to put himself on a pedestal because the story had some of the details wrong. When asked a "yes/no" question you can't say "no" when the answer was "yes" and claim to have been 99% honest.

He's a politician. They all lie in some way, shape or form. I hope you don't think otherwise.

DosEquis · 08-13-2008, 02:55 PM

I dont understand why we care about this anymore. I can see 1/2 a day coverage on it saying "edwards lied, sperm died" he could be the dad. After that the story should have been done with.

He is no longer a senator, no longer running for vice president or president. It should be covered on a show like Extra or Entertainment Tonight with the rest of the britney spears type stories if it is to be covered. At this point i consider it his own personal business between him, his family, and his mistress.