National Enquirer reports Governor Palin had an affair around 1995-96ish. Their proof is the assertion of an ex-con who heard about the affair after National Enquirer paid him $75,000 for his knowledge.
Okay, I made up the $75,000 part, but that is my guess about the amount National Enquirer paid for his testimony. This is how National Enquirer finds witnesses - truth: they walk into local bars and start handing out money to people who know people, until they get to the key person they need, then they strike a bigger money deal with that person. That's the truth, and the following is also truth:
Palin's alleged lover's estranged wife's brother's wife's sister's brother is the ex-con. Got that? No? Me neither. Let's write it this way:
Palin's alleged lover's
brother is the ex-con who testifies that he heard about the allegation.
Got it now? Good. The rumor might be all over America in a few days or weeks. Now you are on the inside.
Thing is, even if Palin had had an affair in 1996, voters would not care. Palin's ensuing 12 years of successful marriage would've exonerated her in voters' eyes.
It would be delicious to watch Dems - who gave Bill Clinton a 1997 pass on committing perjury and obstruction of justice in efforts to cover up an affair - now make a case that a Palin affair in 1996 is relevant in 2008. For the delightfulness of that scene, I almost wish the Palin lie were true. Might James Carville then comment on Palin? Sweet buttermilk battered skillet-fried chicken! A man can dream.