But I almost laughed out loud when I saw a report today concerning the "source" relied upon by the National Enquirer in claiming that Sarah Palin had an affair in the mid '90s. The "report" is based on what a "family member" of the alleged adulterous man says he heard (aka "hearsay") about the situation, and I have to believe that even Enquirer writers blushed a little when writing about the "relationship" of the source (Jim Burdett) with Palin's alleged affair-mate (Brad Hanson):
[Jim] Burdett is a former brother-in-law of Hanson’s estranged wife Carolyn's brother, Craig Batton, and still speaks with many family membersI know it is difficult to follow, but read it again slowly (heck, you might be better off trying to diagram the relationship).
The fact that Lefties and Democrats have fostered this story is evidence of how UNHINGED they are about Sarah Palin. And to think that if they had just waited for her to do the Couric interview they wouldn't have had to cook up such lame crap to throw at her . . .
There's a difference between winning an election and deserving to win an election.
2 comments:
According to your statement Jim Burdett is a former relative of someone who was formerly related by marriage to the person Palin is accused of having an affair with. So what is that supposed to tell us about how credible he is?
Well, first of all, it's not "[my] statement" . . . but I think you're diminishing how remote of a "relative" this guy is from the guy who is purported to have (despite his denial) had an affair with Palin.
Yeah, he was formerly the brother by marriage of the former brother by marriage of the man in question. That ain't much proximity. It is certainly not credible enough for ME to accuse someone of marital infidelity . . . how 'bout you?
Post a Comment