The Edwards ‘scandal’: when bad bloggers pursue bad stories

It’s been an annoyingly silly campaign season, dominated by the media’s inexplicable interest in haircuts, cleavage, and madrassas, but the interest in John Edwards’ adultery “scandal” — which appears to have been made up out of whole cloth — is clearly a new low.

Mickey Kaus, the in-house blogger for the Washington Post-owned Slate, began pushing this nonsense late last week, based on a report in a supermarket tabloid. You know the story was cheap when Mickey proclaimed, “This isn’t the first time kausfiles hasn’t met Drudge’s journalistic standards!”

Edwards denied the rumor, saying, “The story is false.” Kaus said this denial was far too vague. Edwards later added that the rumors are “completely untrue” and “ridiculous,” before concluding the story was “made up.” Mickey was troubled by this, too.

[“Made up”] by the Enquirer? Or by one of the people the Enquirer cites? Either way, it’s a direct attack on the integrity of someone (not necessarily a smart move for a politician in Edwards’ position)….

It’s as if Mickey is doing a bad imitation of someone trying to make a fool out of himself.

On the one hand we have a scurrilous story about a presidential candidate and a former staffer. The candidate denies the story, the staffer denies the story, and there’s no evidence to suggest either is lying. On the other hand we have a supermarket tabloid and a strange blogger who’s convinced the baseless story has credibility.

Why would the Washington Post want to finance this?

Matt Yglesias tried to set Mickey straight.

Basically what we have here is that if we assume the anonymous hearsay is true and the on-the-record first-hand denial is false, then Edwards is either mishandling the story by denying it too vaguely (“the story is false”) or else is mishandling it by denying it too directly (“made up”) but what if the story’s not true? No doubt by now we’ve had all the legitimate news organizations in the country looking into it and it seems that . . . nobody can come up with any evidence. As we saw with Scott Beauchamp, and the fake John Kerry intern affair story, if you just operate from within an assumption of guilt it’s very hard for someone to prove his innocence but that’s why we . . . don’t operate with an assumption of guilt!

Kaus responded that that National Enquirer may have “not-at-all-conclusive emails” between Edwards and the woman. This, apparently, is a rationalization for continued interest in a story that apparently has no foundation in reality. Oh my.

Better yet, Ezra reminds us, “[T]his isn’t the first time Mickey Kaus has fastened on an unproven, and likely untrue, story about a Democrat’s infidelity and hyped it to high heaven. Anyone remember Alexandra Polier, John Kerry’s supposed illicit lover? Kaus had a helluva time with that one.”

As a rule, bloggers who get picked up by major news outlets tend to be top-rate pros — Yglesias, Greenwald, Drum, Wolcott, etc. With that in mind, how Mickey Kaus keeps his pro-profile gig remains a mystery.

Is Kaus married? People who cheat are often unwavering in there accusations of other people’s infidelity. He seems to have an obsession with the sex lives of Democrats. I think he protests too much.

  • Why would the Washington Post want to finance this?

    Because they like funding sub-moronic blowhards that have no grasp on reality.

    Look at Howard Kurtz.

  • It amazes me how many people are unaware that Mickey Kaus is quite insane. It’s not exactly a new development. All the warning signs were there throughout the 2003 presidential primary campaign. He seemed to finally snap sometime in the Spring of 2004 and as far as I’m aware he hasn’t so much as visited earth to check messages since. But I’m probably not the best authority on what he’s been doing since then. I stopped paying much attention to him some time back. As for why other people still do, to whatever extent that they in fact do, well he does have a that resume and a Harvard law degree. Assuming the people he works for don’t actually read his stuff, they probably just regard him as “controversial” — you know, like Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh. So basically, he’s tenured. He can say any crazy damned thing he wants.

  • A-Hole Yellow Journalism 101. Accuse someone of doing something illegal or illicit. Complain their denials aren’t strong enough until the defendant is pulling his or her hair out screaming “It’s not true, god damn it! How many times do I have to tell you it’s not true?!?!?!” Then complain that the defendant doth complain too much, no one would get that angry unless they have SOMETHING to hide, Also, with a little bit of luck, you now get the defendant cracking up on camera or on-mic, so you can snort “if he/she can’t handle A LITTLE BIT of exploration into his/her personal life, how will he/she handle such an important job? Time to throw in the towel.”

    This is why (theroretically) defendants on trial are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. If you want to believe the worst about someone, you’re not going to be easily swayed.

  • I think I get it. If they can dig up some infidelity committed by the Democrats, then it will cancel out what we know is the infidelity committed by the Republicans, and then that issue will die. Since Rudy cannot get elected with that dogging him, they have to neutralize it, and I’m guessing – with tongue firmly planted in cheek – they figured someone who was vain enough to spend $400 on a haircut would certainly cheat on his sick wife, right?

  • Kausfiles has been worthless since I started reading blogs in 2002. I have never understood why some progressive sites, such as TPM, give a link to him. Carpetbagger, since you are connected with TPM, find out why. Kaus is a snake in the grass, worse than Joe Klein (without as big a forum, of course).

  • Mickey Kaus has been in need of a good ass-kicking for a long time. That this traitor is allowed to call himself a “Democrat” is the real scandal.

  • I’ve always made a point of not besmirching the integrity of the people who invent complete lies about me. After all, you wouldn’t want to make them mad. They might invent even worse lies. Not a smart thing to do. Instead, I prefer hired goons. It’s amazing how well a couple of pipes and a chain work at getting people to recant false statements…and the true ones, for that matter.

  • With that in mind, how Mickey Kaus keeps his pro-profile gig remains a mystery.

    He keeps it because he reliably delivers lies into the media bloodstream for the RW Noise Machine.

  • Yet, while Kaus fills the air with scurilous, unsupported charges of infidelity against Democratic candidates, he refuses to address widely published reports that he himself blows goats. Since some confidential sources contend that many of the goats Kaus allegedly fellated were under age (they were KIDS, for God’s sake!), it makes his silence all the more damning.

  • The Mickey Mouses of pundickdom will always believe what they want to believe; it’s a waste of energy to hope they’ll ever change and learn to pay attention to reality.

  • Teacher! Teacher! I know why WaPo is financing this…

    Because Mickey Kaus is having an affair with Mark Penn. DUH!

    It’s so much fun to debunk complete and utter trash, isn’t it…

  • Comments are closed.