Tweet
Why Now, John Ensign?
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) has yet to answer the most pressing question arising from his admission of an extramarital affair: why now, 10 months after his affair with a staffer ended, is he coming forward to air his dirty laundry?
That question has been posed to him by his hometown paper, the Las Vegas Sun. But so far, Ensign has declined to answer that and other important questions.
<span style="font-style: italic">While some news organizations have published unsubstantiated reports alleging the senator had been blackmailed by his mistress's husband,</span> the Sun reports today that neither the FBI nor the Las Vegas police department is investigating any claim that the couple - <span style="font-style: italic">both of whom worked for Ensign </span>- tried to extort hush money from him.
The Sun asked pointedly what we, too, have been wondering: "Has Ensign contacted authorities about the alleged extortion? If not, why not?"
"What other reason could Ensign have for revealing the affair?" came the second question. The paper said it has posed this and other questions to the senator's office directly, but has gotten no response.
The woman with whom Ensign had the affair, Cynthia Hampton, the former treasurer of Ensign's political committees, came forward yesterday to acknowledge the affair. Her husband, Douglas Hampton, served as a senior aide to Ensign in his Senate office.
As the Washington Post story notes today,<span style="font-weight: bold"> Cynthia Hampton's salary doubled in 2008 during the time she had the affair with Ensign. Her husband got an additional two weeks of pay in April 2008 (two months before the affair ended) and their son was put on the payroll until the affair ended in mid August 2008.</span>
The Sun asked today, " Were payments to the Hamptons, documented in Senate and federal election records, intended to ensure their silence about the affair?"
It's a question, along with others, we are anxiously awaiting to have answered. As the Washington Post editorialized today, Ensign "didn't explain why he had decided to disclose the affair, but Politico and other media outlets reported that the husband of the woman involved asked him for a substantial amount of money. It's an assertion that warrants further explanation."
Of course, the Post editorial page is none too pleased with Ensign for his trick amendment to the D.C. voting rights bill that would deny the District its right to write gun-control laws. "He claimed his interest was in gun rights, not in blocking democracy for the District," reads today's editorial. "If that were so, he might have simply moved to disallow the District's gun-regulation legislation; he didn't bother to try. More to the point, he would never, in a million years, strip Nevada officials of their right to write local laws or in any other way visit upon them so extreme a sovereignty-stripping measure. But then, what works for Mr. Ensign at any given moment is the only thing that seems to matter."
<span style="font-style: italic">For the meantime, Ensign's colleagues continue to pray for him and hope pesky reporters will let the sinner sin in secrecy</span>.
As Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said yesterday, "I have plenty of sins, and I'm not going to tell you about them."
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) has yet to answer the most pressing question arising from his admission of an extramarital affair: why now, 10 months after his affair with a staffer ended, is he coming forward to air his dirty laundry?
That question has been posed to him by his hometown paper, the Las Vegas Sun. But so far, Ensign has declined to answer that and other important questions.
<span style="font-style: italic">While some news organizations have published unsubstantiated reports alleging the senator had been blackmailed by his mistress's husband,</span> the Sun reports today that neither the FBI nor the Las Vegas police department is investigating any claim that the couple - <span style="font-style: italic">both of whom worked for Ensign </span>- tried to extort hush money from him.
The Sun asked pointedly what we, too, have been wondering: "Has Ensign contacted authorities about the alleged extortion? If not, why not?"
"What other reason could Ensign have for revealing the affair?" came the second question. The paper said it has posed this and other questions to the senator's office directly, but has gotten no response.
The woman with whom Ensign had the affair, Cynthia Hampton, the former treasurer of Ensign's political committees, came forward yesterday to acknowledge the affair. Her husband, Douglas Hampton, served as a senior aide to Ensign in his Senate office.
As the Washington Post story notes today,<span style="font-weight: bold"> Cynthia Hampton's salary doubled in 2008 during the time she had the affair with Ensign. Her husband got an additional two weeks of pay in April 2008 (two months before the affair ended) and their son was put on the payroll until the affair ended in mid August 2008.</span>
The Sun asked today, " Were payments to the Hamptons, documented in Senate and federal election records, intended to ensure their silence about the affair?"
It's a question, along with others, we are anxiously awaiting to have answered. As the Washington Post editorialized today, Ensign "didn't explain why he had decided to disclose the affair, but Politico and other media outlets reported that the husband of the woman involved asked him for a substantial amount of money. It's an assertion that warrants further explanation."
Of course, the Post editorial page is none too pleased with Ensign for his trick amendment to the D.C. voting rights bill that would deny the District its right to write gun-control laws. "He claimed his interest was in gun rights, not in blocking democracy for the District," reads today's editorial. "If that were so, he might have simply moved to disallow the District's gun-regulation legislation; he didn't bother to try. More to the point, he would never, in a million years, strip Nevada officials of their right to write local laws or in any other way visit upon them so extreme a sovereignty-stripping measure. But then, what works for Mr. Ensign at any given moment is the only thing that seems to matter."
<span style="font-style: italic">For the meantime, Ensign's colleagues continue to pray for him and hope pesky reporters will let the sinner sin in secrecy</span>.
As Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said yesterday, "I have plenty of sins, and I'm not going to tell you about them."
Comment