Edwards Staff Had Affair "Doomsday" Strategy (VIDEO)

UPDATE: Joe Trippi, former top aide to John Edwards, told CNN Monday that the "doomsday" story is is "complete bullshit."

"No one that I know had such a plan, I wasn't involved in a plan like that, it didn't exist, it's a fantasy," Trippi said in a phone interview.

* * * * *

On "This Week" Sunday, ABC's George Stephanopolous revealed that some on John Edwards' staff had devised a "doomsday" strategy to sabotage the campaign should he get close to the Democratic nomination.

Stephanopolous brought up the plan when his panel discussed Elizabeth Edwards' candid interview with Oprah about her husband's affair.

ABC contributor George Will suggested former Sen. John Edwards was irresponsible to continue fighting for the Democratic Party nomination while having an affair.

"Think about what a tragedy it would have been if he had won?" Will said.

Stephanopolous then said that while many on the candidate's staff were oblivious, members of Edwards' inner circle had started to believe the affair rumors. The group secretly agreed to bring down their boss if it looked like he was going to win the nomination -- a "doomsday strategy" to "blow it up."

"They were Democrats first," Stephanopolous said.

Watch:

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[eliasboudit]

07:16 PM on 05/11/2009

EVERYONE - Every Politican has a skeleton or two in their closets - even Obama!

Give it time - it always comes out.

People did not want to believe Clinton had a problem and well, it imploded.

[citizensrus]

07:04 PM on 05/11/2009

Here is my issue. Just speaking of politicians that support my policy positions on matters of law and state.
Bush may or may not have cheated on Laura, may or may not have loved Laura or vice versa..he may or may not have been gay. The Republicans do keep their secrets as best as they can. I also think they use sabotoage and pay women to bring down their opponents. Why wouldn't they. They have their CIA "disappear" people. They wiretap.
They out undercover agents. They lie us into war. They authorize torture.
Yet, because Bush is not a flagrant or a "caught" adulterer..he's the better man?
I believe Cheney was on the list of a very prominent escort service in Washinton D.C....but we will never know that for sure. Republicans keep their secrets.
On the other hand, I find it ludicrous that affairs are anything more than affair. The idea of trust betrayed, lies..etc ..well, that's the whole business of an affair. It starts and end with a lie.. And 60% of married men in America have affairs. In Latin America its 85% of married men.
Why should it matter to anyone. Did anyone think Jack Kennedy was faithful? Should it have been public knowledge if he was or wasn't if his wife accepted the reality? Should it have cost him his career?

[Indie2008]

06:58 PM on 05/11/2009

Anyone would have to be gullible to believe that story, Most political aides are not that ethical!

[just4shiggles]

06:43 PM on 05/11/2009

Thank goodness for Obama!!!!! I don't care if Edwards was such a jerk that he would do that to his poor wife, but this country was in desperate need for a good man in the white house. This scandal would have probably guaranteed a republican win had Edwards been the democratic contender. I can't even fathom just how bad off we would be under the guidance of a McCain/Palin administration! I shudder at the thought!

[eliasboudit]

07:15 PM on 05/11/2009

Wow, I didnt know Obama walked on water!

[JRsNana]

01:49 AM on 05/12/2009

You know, those stupid little "walked on water" type lines are already getting really old. We get that you hate the President. We TOTALLY get that you hate the President. Some of us don't hate him. Some of us actually like him. Some of us are just happy to have a President we can like again. Can we just have that? Huh? What would be the harm? We just lived through a harrowing 8 years of Republican rule that almost destroyed our country. Now, we have someone who is trying to fix everything they broke. It's a daunting task. Made more daunting by you people bashing EVERY SINGLE THING he says or does. Please understand. I don't think he's perfect. I never expected him to be perfect. I just wanted him to do his best. For everyone. Including the people who hate him. Like you. And he is doing his best for everyone. Especially for the people like you who hate him. Great country isn't it?

[mwoman]

06:29 PM on 05/11/2009

Personally I don't care if John Edwards had an affair or not. That's his business, and his wife's. I do not hold that against him. I could care less what he does with his life. What I don't like is the conceit of these people who think they're so much better than everyone else...otherwise why not spill the beans earlier? Instead of showing some principles at a time when people were so enamored with them, they became crafty and deceitful. They took a huge tumble.

[SaraNader]

05:52 PM on 05/11/2009

For those of you not living in an agriculturally-based state, COMPLETE bullshit has both hay and corn in it.

[citizensrus]

05:45 PM on 05/11/2009

"Studies find that more than one in five Americans do have an affair, at least once in their lives, and that women are now about as likely as men to cross the line."
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/oct/20/health/he-infidelity20

[trunk65]

05:27 PM on 05/11/2009

it is never pleasant when a popular candidate gets caught doing something that was akin to political suicide, especially when it is one you supported as a viable candidate for the president of our country. That said, at least it wasn't with an underage page, a seedy encounter with a same sex partner in a public bathroom, or a gay affair of a gay-basher. I feel badly for his wife and family, and his political career is probably over. He screwed up, plain and simple, but his weakness in marriage still pales in comparison to the sex scandals perpetuated on us by those who claim the higher moral ground.

[jeanrenoir]

05:57 PM on 05/11/2009

I've got a very close friend who lives in Chapel Hill. He's a yellow dog Democrat, and he's always said that Edwards has NEVER been liked or admired in Chapel Hill, one of the most liberal towns in America. Edwards is cut from the same cloth as Slick Willy. Maybe the Republicans ARE hypocrites, but they sure are better at keeping secrets, if that's the case, than the Dems. Fortunately, the perfect rebuke to the whole narcissistic mindset of "liberals" like Bill Clinton and John Edwards who make a mockery of liberal ideals with their personal sliminess is Obama himself. Finally, in Obama, the moral childishness of the Sixties Boomer code of "if it feels good, do it" is shoved onto the ash heap of history by a guy who's every bit as liberal as Bill, HIll, Elizabeth, or John, but who walks the walk of personal family values, as well as offering the country exceptionally effective leadership in achieving the goals of public liberal politics--like universal health care--which no earlier Democrat has been able to deliver. Edwards is simply what we derided in high school as a "face man," and a completely smarmy, hypocrite to boot. Good riddance. And Elizabeth was none too admirable in working to foist this jerk on America herself. Another Hillary, blinded by her own political ambitions, which she could only achieve as an enabler of her husband's adultery.

[Ellyllon]

09:29 PM on 05/11/2009

I don't care much what he's 'really' like or what his neighbors say - but ... Republicans are better at keeping secrets? Truly? I mean, we have the phrase 'wide stance' in our national vocabulary now. If they've kept the 'real' secrets, I'm afraid to hear them.

[Json]

05:10 PM on 05/11/2009

You tell em, joe! His staffers weren't going to sabotage Edwards...they were going cover for him all the way to white house!
How dare anyone imply that Edwards' campaign staff cared more about country than they did about Edwards future career! Those people are sycophants first, and Americans second!

[citizensrus]

05:19 PM on 05/11/2009

I never once thought Obama would not win the Democratic Primary.
But if Edwards had won..my question is, aside from his affair..what kind of President would he have been in matters of STATE?

[Ellyllon]

09:29 PM on 05/11/2009

He'd have had a camera-girl following him all over the place, recording each vital breath he took, no doubt.

[KarmaTheDog]

05:33 PM on 05/11/2009

No where does Joe Trippi insinuate that his staff was going to cover for John Edwards, he merely denied that there was a plan to sabotage the Edwards campaign. Because one doesn't sabotage doesn't mean they are covering for.
It seems that you are inferring something that isn't necessarily there.

[GeorgeP922]

04:43 PM on 05/11/2009

I wouldnt be surprised if Joe Trippi was telling the truth or a lie.

What we see here are strategists caught in the cross fire of a scandelous campaign.

The same rumor mongering happened at the close of the Clinton and McCain/Palin campaigns.

These strategists and employees don't get paid for not working, so they need to keep their reputations.

Either story, that they knew and kept quiet buy would have sabotaged for the sake of nation and party, sounds good, short sighted but good.

And the other was nobody knew, anyways, lets let this go, and we should NOT penalize their strategists.

Clinton Strategists and surrogates, so far have gotten off pretty easy so far, it wouldn't be fair that we come down on Edwards people when they had the respect to put party first ahead of ego EVENTUALLY. (Although you guys remember when Edwards tried to jocky for VP, by negotiating his endorsement?!? :D )

[Json]

04:22 PM on 05/11/2009

This story just makes everyone look bad. If his staffers didn't know about the affair, they are idiots. If they did know and had had a secret plan to destroy him, they are scumbags.
I think the best reason we should be glad he didn't get the nomination and possibly the presidency is that the president is forced to delegate a ton of work and Edwards has shown little ability to surround himself with competent or loyal people.

[citizensrus]

04:47 PM on 05/11/2009

Great post.

[roshni]

05:35 PM on 05/11/2009

True.
Edwards should be the least popular guy amongst those who believed in him.

[mwoman]

04:19 PM on 05/11/2009

(In reality, Trippi said, Edwards' senior advisers immediately discounted the rumors, first reported by the National Enquirer in the fall of 2007, and never raised the possibility they might be true.)

From that point on, I noticed that women have lots of unresolved problems with other women. Maybe some of them will never be resolved. Maybe competition is too embedded in primitive instincts? From that point on, I started to see women blame the "other" woman for the break-up of their marriage. Elizabeth is a perfect example of this. Why do these women keep attacking the other woman first instead of their men who were active participants in the betrayal? Very sexist, I thought. But Elizabeth took it up a notch when she referred the other woman and the child coldly. The thing that drew me to Edwards' story was her battle with cancer. Now her words began eroding that bridge. I don't know about you, but I think I've had enough of this story.

[KarmaTheDog]

04:38 PM on 05/11/2009

Here's why, and it's not only women though you here about it more often with women because men dominate politics, because the married woman, in this case Elizabeth Edwards, has much more invested in her husband than a woman she doesn't know. Call it rationalization or whatever you want, but it's a lot easier to dismiss a woman you don't know than someone who you've built a life around and had children with.
If my wife were to have an affair, perhaps I could forgive her and come to some reconciliation, but I would have no use for the other man, and I would have no qualms about referring to him in the most derogatory terms I could think of.

[mwoman]

05:00 PM on 05/11/2009

Makes sense. I suppose.

[roshni]

05:37 PM on 05/11/2009

There's still a question of reality. She is trying to make it sound as though RH stalked her husband and dragged him into the affair. He lied to EE for a long time and has not yet acknowledged the child. He is a dog in my book and she is in denial. The fact that she has a lot invested in him makes him more of a dog.

[citizensrus]

04:56 PM on 05/11/2009

I attack the other woman because that other woman knows perfectly well what she is doing. And men are vulnerable in that area..their ego, their sexual drive, and the rationalizations that come up together with lust. Men are only human, and they are men, usually the drive to succeed is driven by the drive to have sex.
I think the bigger the ego the harder they fall..for the other woman.
Blame the man, of course, but guess what..but many woman choose to stay with that man after the affair. Because that's her man and they spent as much energy helping him get to the point other woman want him ..its her investment too.
I've watched woman seduce married men who have much to offer. Whether doctors, lawyers, millionaires, politicians, entertainers, musicians, actors. They will go to any length to get that man.

[Retrofuturistic]

04:18 PM on 05/11/2009

Narcissism at its best.

[Budokan]

04:15 PM on 05/11/2009

Why ANYONE would ever believe George "stab 'em in the back" Stephanopoulous is beyond me.

[3dtrix]

03:55 PM on 05/11/2009

BS - not BS - who cares? I sure don't. Edwards was voted off the island before the tribes united, and that's so long ago he's filed under election trivia. He's got less of a chance for a third act than whats-her-name from, from - you know - the one who can see Russia while she watches reruns of her abstinence program.

[HHarvey]

11:27 PM on 05/11/2009

LOL! Good one.