Edwards' Cover-Up Cost Clinton the Nomination

Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson thinks his gal would have won the nomination if only the Edwards scandal would have been revealed sooner, and he places some of the blame for that on the media:

Sen. Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic presidential nominee if John Edwards had been caught in his lie about an extramarital affair and forced out of the race last year, insists a top Clinton campaign aide, making a charge that could exacerbate previously existing tensions between the camps of Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.

"I believe we would have won Iowa, and Clinton today would therefore have been the nominee," former Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson told ABCNews.com.

Clinton finished third in the Iowa caucuses barely behind Edwards in second place and Obama in first. The momentum of the insurgent Obama camaign beating two better-known candidates -- not to mention an African-American winning in sucn an overwhelmingly white state -- changed the dynamics of the race forever.

Obama won 37.6 per cent of the vote. Edwards won 29.7 per cent and Clinton won 29.5 per cent, according to results posted by the Iowa Democratic Party.

"Our voters and Edwards' voters were the same people," Wolfson said the Clinton polls showed. "They were older, pro-union. Not all, but maybe two-thirds of them would have been for us and we would have barely beaten Obama."

Two months earlier, Edwards had vociferously, but falsely, denied a story in the National Enquirer about the alleged affair last October, and few in the mainstream media even reported the denial.

The lie "certainly had an impact on the election," Wolfson said.

Wolfson said the Clinton campaign was aware of the issue, but did not try to fan the flames.

"Any of the campaigns that would have tried to push that would have been burned by it," said Wolfson.

But he says he is mystified about the failure of the national media to pursue the story as it has allegations of other candidates' affairs.

"I can't say I understand the rules of the media and I'm not sure they do either," he said.

I'm still mystified by the media's decision to ignore the Edwards story, even as it became obvious that something was going on. I think they were afraid to be the outlet that not only impacted the Dem race, but embarrassed Elizabeth Edwards, who already had enough problems of her own. As it turns out Elizabeth was heavily involved the cover-up.

The media also may have known that removing Edwards would clear the way for Hillary, and given how in-the-tank the media have been for Obama, they may not have wanted that.

Howart Kurtz has more on the media's ignorance of this story.