Posted on 09/29/2007 10:58:46 AM PDT by LdSentinal
Mickey Kaus has linked to the HuffPuff brigade which is becoming legit to the extent that they are actually sleuthing ultra-left Democrat candidates [or serving as a Hillary's Cat's Paw undermining the Silk Pony John-boy].
Now we all know that John the Hair-and-Makeup Man is cute, right? And his hyperbusy wife Elizabeth is going through all sorts of metamorphoses, right? So last year, an aspiring actress named Rielle Hunter & John's people did a few "webisodes" or in HP:
the videos were made with the apparent goal of bringing transparency to the political process. "I've come to the conclusion I just want the country to see who I really am," Edwards declared in the one webisode still public, "not based on some plastic Ken doll you put up in front of audiences."
Hold on, and permit me to link HP in this one instance, as the story becomes a real Hollywood intrigue affair.
So now the Huffington Post writer, Sam Stein, has been given the complete runaround as he tries to find out how the "webisodes" suddenly and completely vanished and the company that made them denies all knowledge of anything at all concerning their whereabouts, as does the Edwards campaign. Read the HP link to see how the plot thickens. On a site Sam Stein did unearth, Rielle Hunter, the webisode entrepreneur, is:
"formerly hard-partying girl who claims that she found enlightenment."
and the strange obstacles thrown in Sam Stein's way have in themselves a sort of bizarre strangeness that belies the original rave reviews that the "webisodes" originally garnered in 2005:
Within political circles, the videos were regarded as innovative, having successfully painted Edwards in a sympathetic, down-to-earth light.
Now, however, nearly all traces of the webisodes - as they became known - are gone. Links to them on the Internet no longer work. The Edwards campaign won't release the videos, and the production company behind the films is citing confidentiality agreements in refusing to talk.
This closed-off approach naturally aroused my interest. In the world of politics, rare is the candidate who passes on a chance for publicity. The campaign's explanation for stonewalling, moreover, struck me as dubious and at times evasive.
I had come to the Edwards' videos in a haphazard way: the byproduct of a story I was writing on new technology and politics. The webisodes were not, in any regard, a secret. Edwards' "behind the scenes" portrait had earned rave reviews in the blogosphere and even a small feature in Newsweek. But nothing had been written about the films since Edwards announced his presidential aspirations, and I wanted to know how the footage would play on the campaign trail.
What followed was a lesson in the profound irritations of political reporting. A call to Edwards' press shop led to an email to his One America Committee representative, which led, in turn, to a mind-bending exchange about campaign finance law, which culminated in a separate conversation with Edwards' deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince. Each time I was told that the One America Committee could not use "material that could be considered promoting the presidential campaign," and that Edwards' camp "no longer had access to most of the content."
Thwarted, I tried my hand with the movie's producers. A search for the filmmaker, Rielle Hunter, proved that Google does, in fact, have its limitations. No hits. The same held true with Facebook and Myspace - a bizarre level of anonymity for someone in the movie business.
The production company responsible for the webisodes, Midline Groove Productions, had a minimalist website. Through it, however, I was able to email Mimi Hockman, Rielle Hunter's partner, to ask if I could screen the tapes. She directed me to a Business Week website where the last remaining webisode link still functioned. But beyond that, I was rebuffed. Once again, the reasons seemed strangely artificial.
"Our contract expired last year," Hockman emailed, "and the Edwards camp owns all of the webisodes and footage."
(Hmmm.... The campaign had said it couldn't access the footage.) Could we at least talk off the record about the filming process?
"Nope," she wrote. "Not a chance."
My reportorial curiosity thoroughly piqued, I decided to dig further.
Who is Rielle Hunter? The Newsweek item said Edwards met the aspiring actress and filmmaker in a New York City bar. A call to the Screen Actors Guild elicited the following exchange:
Screen Actors Guild: "This performer chooses not to list her contact information in the membership database."
HuffPost: "So if I wanted to contact her about her work with web video?"
SAG: "Well, I don't know what to tell you. It's up to the performer to choose whether they are listed or not."
A check of the movie database IMDB.com listed her as a director and actor in the short Billy Bob and Them. And an Internet write up of a 2005 interview she apparently gave to Breathe Magazine described her as a "formerly hard-partying girl who claims that she found enlightenment."
How much did the videos cost? According to campaign finance reports, the One America Committee made four payments of $12,500 and two of $25,000, for a total of $100,000 to Midline Groove Productions in the second half of 2006.
Who else was involved? Credits from the webisode still on the Business Week site listed three additional production assistants. One of them, Sam Cullman, said he could not talk to me but lauded Edwards for his openness. Another assistant, Nick Chatfield, said on the first call to my editor that he wished the movies were available because he could use the publicity. On the second call (having evidently checked back with Hunter or the Edwards campaign), Chatfield said, "Don't call me again."
Most important of all: Was there, in fact, a legal reason that prohibited Edwards from showing the webisodes? One campaign finance expert told me that, "if used by the presidential campaign, the videos are considered an in-kind contribution, which is limited at $5,000 in value... Still," he added, "this is an abundance of caution." Others didn't tread as lightly. "Bullshit", "baloney", and "malarkey" were the words used by three eminent experts in the field to describe Edwards' stance.
Presented with this record, the Edwards campaign finally relented. But even then they proved surprisingly guarded.
Jonathan Prince offered to let me and my editor, Tom Edsall, watch the videos - apparently unaware that at one point his campaign claimed not to have access to them. But there was a proviso: we could only view the videos in Prince's presence.
We accepted the offer. But oh, how the story and my interests have changed. No longer am I working on a piece about new media and politics - boring! Now, I just want to know why these webisodes are shrouded in such mystery.
I don't think this story is going to roll over and play dead. Perhaps it is simply a "misunderstanding" of the sort that roiled the Kerry Campaign over an alleged affair.
But it would be interesting to see where all that money went, wouldn't it?
And discover who the mysterious anonymity-seeking "actress" Rielle Hunter really is.
I wonder if Ron Burkle has anything to do with the uncovering of this mystery of the disappearing "webisodes" and their filmmaker auteur, the mysterious Rielle?
...
“But it would be interesting to see where all that money went, wouldn’t it?”
No. It’s dull and boring.
I detest edwards, but who cares about this? It’s nothing.
If he had an affair, it might actually help his campaign being that he is a Democrat. Why pass up Clintonite resume material like that?
I would love to see Edwards win Iowa or New Hampshire just to see how the Clintonistas set about to DESTROY him!!
looks like edwards is about to feel the clinton touch. i think this story
could be interesting. page six may already have printed a blind item
about edwards planted by clinton minions.
Do you think they will expose an AFFAIR with a Woman or a MAN?? What’s your take?
If he is I don’t want to see it.
Tempest in a teapot?
i believe it would be an affair with a woman and yes, i think anything will
be done by clinton supporters to hurt all rivals. edwards should be on lookout for a falling kitchen sink. if ron burkle is involved, it can merely be a setup.
WIFE-O-BUCKHEAD.
Was Hsu executive producer?
The Hunter becomes the hunted.
NY POST ‘Page Six’: “JUST ASKING”
New York Post ^ | August 27, 2007 | Richard Johnson
Posted on 08/27/2007 2:44:31 AM PDT by tlb
WHICH political candidate enjoys visiting New York because he has a girlfriend who lives downtown? The pol tells her he’ll marry her when his current wife is out of the picture.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1887060/posts
Cripes...that could be ANY of them! Could be Hillary if Wife was Changed to Spouse.
I know next to nothing about Ron Burkle, but he’s in the Clintons circle so he HAS to be DIRTY!!!
When the Clintons put the knife in, you don't even feel it.
John Edwards is a pretty man, not that it matters what a candidate looks like. Except to democrats, maybe it matters to them because they seem to talk about it a lot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.