It is not the money, it is the taking away from me what he promised he would do on our behalf if elected. He would have made an excellent President but he chose to throw it all away.

It creeped me out, and made me very sad for Elizabeth. And I, too, know the unwitting denial that keeps her willing to believe that everything he's telling her is true ("it's over now; this time I'm telling you the truth!"), so she can just make it through the day.

I recognize the attitude he had--said all the right things, but didn't seem sincere to me. There was a cocky sort of edge to his admissions, that reminded me of the time when, though the parties said it was over, it wasn't. But, as long as both parties wouldn't admit to it, I could delude myself into ignoring my gut instincts so I could unwittingly play along with the lie to be able to make it through the day.

Fred Baron, who paid the money, issued a statement to Nightline saying Edwards didn't know about the money he paid to Hunter and that the details of such payments would remain private between Baron, Hunter and McGovern. (Meaning he wasn't going to tell Edwards.)

If this was an extortion attempt, and I now lean towards thinking it was, will the FBI be investigating?  Are grand jury subpoenas to Baron and Hunter on the horizon? Have they already been  issued?

Edwards said he got the call to meet with McGovern and Hunter that afternoon and he agreed only if McGovern was going to be present as well. He said the meeting request related to difficulties Hunter and McGovern were having. My translation: He knew they were going to ask for money. (This also would explain why he told Elizabeth there had been no resolution.)

Did Edwards call them on their threat by saying "fine, I'll tell the public" to end what would be a never-ending demand for money? Did he take it a step further and go to the FBI and report an extortion attempt? Is a grand jury now investigating? If so, could the Enquirer be under investigation for aiding and abetting extortion? Did the Enquirer pay for Hunter's rooms at the Beverly Hilton?

The affair itself is of no interest to me. This afternoon I was interested in the impact it could have had on the election had Edwards been the nominee or had Obama chosen him for the VP slot. I'm past that. Now my interest is in the possible criminal angle, and I'll repeat "possible." This is speculation on my part.

If John Edwards was being shaken down and decided not to be a victim, that would explain why he's going public now. He and his family shouldn't have to live under that kind of fear. No one should. If that's what happened, then I applaud him (and Elizabeth) for coming forward. They made the right call. The media frenzy will end soon and then they can get on with what really matters -- their efforts to reduce poverty and fix our health care system.

Was Edwards truthful with Nightline? AS to what he answered, probably, but I think he's holding  back. There's other stuff he's not telling.

There's also that picture of whomever holding the baby, it's from the inside of the hotel room.  How'd the Enquirer get that unless they 1. had a camera planted inside 2. someone else inside took it 3. it's fake. I'm aiming for fake as it's so blurry (it's 2008, there's no excuse for that pic to be THAT bad) and doesn't really look like Edwards.

And this is where people should begin to understand.  People will feel the need to talk about not the morality of it but still bemoan the impact to the democratic brand.

I say don't do it.  The media vultures swirl.  Don't play your part.  Be defiant.  I didn't like a lot of what john and elizabeth had to say.  I'll never forgive that ad after the debate.  But when he wasn't tearing down a fellow Dem, he did find a way to talk about populist issues in a way shunned by others.

I have nothing to say about this, even the legalities involved.

This part of your speculation is really hilarious however:
...could the Enquirer be under investigation for aiding and abetting extortion?

Edwards, if nothing else, would have been a strong public voice for universal healthcare. Now, that has been muffled, if not shut down. He won't be able to appear on any newser interview programs without facing questions about this, most likely.

Alas, our champions for universal healthcare are being marginalized, muffled, and without pressure, I don't see Obama doing very much. Not prudent. Might offend the big donors.

I think the one clear conclusion from this business is that it would have been disastrous if Edwards had been the nominee, and this story had played out as it has.

The natural question will be whether there are like stories about the remaining candidates that are festering under the surface.

I did not see the interview but I read the transcript.  He seems really cagey in some of his answers and things just don't add up for me.  That said, I honestly think that when the 2 am meeting went down he had not alerted anyone about what was going on; he had not been totally honest with Elizabeth about everything.  

I think possibly the affair lasted longer than he has admitted.  That his former campaign finance guy has/is paying Ms. Hunter sounds really, really bad.  I can't believe this was going on without Edwards' knowledge.  But I guess he could have put out the word to "take care of this but don't tell me the details" so he could say he didn't know what was going on.  Happens all the time.  

The more I think about it, the more I doubt much of what Edwards said.  The better answer to "Did Elizabeth know about the meeting in LA?" would have been "Right after I got the call that they wanted to have this meeting, I called Elizabeth and we discussed whether I should go, and we both decided I should."  Instead, he tells Woodruff that he only called Elizabeth after the meeting - and considering that he had been ambushed by the Enquirer, and there was video, he wouldn't have had much choice about telling his wife then.

No, there's a lot that doesn't add up, and I'm guessing there are more shoes yet to drop.

The worst part was when he responded to the blurry photo that shows a man resembling him holding a young child.  Was that him?  "I wasn't wearing a tee-shirt."  Is that Ms. Hunter's baby?  "I don't know.  I don't know who that baby is." Could it be you? "Well, it looks like me, but it could have been photoshopped.  Do you know how many babies I've held in the last two years?"  Edwards tried to look sincere and open, but came off seeming shifty and disingenuous.

And then there was the part about payments Ms. Hunter may have received to the tune of $15,000.  He doesn't know who paid it and he didn't ask anyone to do so.  He only learned about it recently from reporters.  But it turns out it was some campaign finance person.   He tries to smile brightly while he repeats that it wasn't done at his request or on his behalf.

He says he went to the hotel after being asked to "a meeting" to discuss Ms. Hunter's problems. His motive for going was to convince her not to go public with the affair story. Duh. Was Ms. Hunter shaking him down?  Woodruff doesn't ask, and Edwards doesn't say.

Edwards says he doesn't know whether his political career is over.  Says he wouldn't have been VP anyway.  Doesn't know whether it would be possible to be AG or someone else in Obama's cabinet.

I mean, he could easily have basically retreated into background noise, right? He had no public (or other, so far as I know) office. Why couldn't he just continue to deny it, and receded from public view?

Was he perhaps being forced into it by something his former lover threatened? By someone else?

Maybe she wasn't blackmailing him after all. Maybe Edwards has decided to spin it this way when in fact that's not the case.