Reply #70: My take on this:

[MonteLukast]

It's established that the affair went on in 2006. That's not as important. What would be more significant is if he were still with RH in 2007. Especially after March 2007, when EE announced her cancer had returned.
Remember, in order for the baby to be his, she would have to have been conceived-- they would have to have gotten together-- in May or June of 2007.

It's a lot less damaging for him to be in an affair before he announced his candidacy, though with our puritan society, it would still have created a huge problem for his campaign-- than if he picked up that affair later on, right in the middle of a by then full-blown campaign.
And other than the picture of him holding the baby and the fateful trip to California, there simply is no evidence he was with her at all after the first part of 2007.

The part that bothers me is when EE says, "It turns out that's not all it was, he'd allowed this woman into our lives even after he knew better."
That could mean he was still carrying on with her in 2007.
But it could still be referring to the length of time he spent with her in 2006. Which, my guess is, lasted several months.
And it also could mean that he may have ceased to be sexual with RH after she was no longer on his staff, but still felt some kind of emotional connection to her. Emotional affairs can be just as much cheating as sexual ones.
One thing is for sure: he knew enough of what he was doing was wrong, NOT to give her, or her firm, any more money directly from the campaign.

The thing that baffles me the most is that he DID take steps to distance himself from RH, as evidenced in EE's Time interview. He did ask his brother-in-law Jay to take over the filming duties. He did spill the beans to his wife early on, and he did release RH from the campaign in early 2007.