John Edwards, the third-placed, left-leaning former Democratic Party presidential candidate, was in the running for the VP slot with Obama, now he is in disgrace. Tonight he will admit in an interview to be broadcast on ABC News that he had an affair with a staffer. Edwards denied the truth until now:

“I’ve been in love with the same woman for 30-plus years,” Edwards added, about his wife Elizabeth, who is suffering from incurable cancer, “and as anybody who’s been around us knows, she’s an extraordinary human being, warm, loving, beautiful, sexy and as good a person as I have ever known. So the story’s just false.”

The most interesting aspect of the matter is the craven attitude of the U.S. press. No major newspaper touched the story for weeks, the National Enquirer was the only national paper to touch the story for a long time and Fox News the only broadcaster to report the truth. Bloggers ran with the story whilst the New York Times and Washington Post remained silent. A shameful conspiracy of silence. Elizabeth Edwards has cancer.

The mistress has a baby, which he still denies fathering, despite photos of him cradling the child being in circulation. Just as well or he might have to return his 2007 Father of the Year Award.

See also Gawker and Hitsville.

UPDATE : He laundered hush money to the mistress from his campaign funds as payments for her producing YouTube videos. A twist we haven’t had before.

Caroline Flint on Newsnight last night was hilarious – “Kirsty, Kirsty, Kirsty” she kept forlornly shouting on the two-way to studio.

In all fairness she has the worst job in government right now – Housing Minister. It can’t have helped that some moronic briefing to the Sun has brought a stagnant property market to a complete halt – why exchange now when if you wait until September you can save thousands in stamp duty? Which genius clumsily leaked the plan scheduled for September?

Damian McBride has the hotline to the George Pascoe-Watson…

Remember the end to spin that Gordon’s premiership ushered in?

PR Week reports that a new spin merchant chief press officer role has been created at Downing Street.

When appointed, the new chief press officer will report to interim head of news Tom Hoskin. Downing Street is currently seeking candidates… the role ‘involves helping to run the press office day to day and ensuring that we have all we need to carry out the daily lobby briefings’.

Gordon’s charisma and engaging personality are bound to make Number10TV a vote winner. Rosa Prince has written a story about the forthcoming launch of the channel. (The story mistakenly links to the spoof site Number10TV.com).

All this is so Gordon can reach voters without having to answer tough questions from TV interviewers. Don’t they already have a YouTube channel? Isn’t this just a waste of taxpayers money to promote the PM which should really be paid for by the party?

Sir Michael White this morning confirms the accuracy of Guido’s exclusive report yesterday. Through gritted teeth the left-wing journalist reported that “right-wing bloggers celebrated what they see as two Brownite scalps”. Too right.

Comical Wilf told Sir Michael that there is nothing to see here, the savaging that the Institute’s trustees got from the Charity Commission was “brilliant”, he told the Telegraph: “The Commission’s report was excellent in every respect and it is only because it was so good that I am able to step down now at this time” and that he always intended to resign as director, presumably Lord Haskel, donor to Brown’s leadership campaign and chairman of the trustees, always planned to resign as well.

Nothing then to do with the direct criticism of the trustees, finding “evidence of unchallenged party political comments being made at Institute events by politicians and also party political comments made by or on behalf of the Institute… combined with the predominant involvement of Labour Party politicians in the Institute’s activity, compromised the Institute’s independence. Bearing in mind the previous engagement between the Commission and the trustees in 2001/02 on this matter, the Commission concluded that the trustees had not safeguarded or adequately supervised the risks posed to the independence and reputation of the Institute… the trustees had allowed the Institute to become exposed to concerns that is supported Government policy and was involved in party political activity inappropriate for a charity”.

Haskel was damned as “not sufficiently engaged to ensure the proper supervision of the charity”.

Guido doesn’t entirely agree with Iain Dale that the “Institute will cease to be”, it will however cease to be what is was, a slush fund for Gordon Brown. It will become a more normal think-tank, not a partisan vehicle for one politician’s ambitions.