Uncategorized

Setting the record straight on John Edwards

My colleague Rob Schofield has a great piece today on a glaring irony about the Edwards prosecution I’ve heard from a number of people:  How can someone, regardless of his substantial and undeniable personal failings, be prosecuted for an offense when his chief pursuer and prosecutor is engaging in essentially the same behavior with campaign donations as he runs his own political campaign?

12 Comments

  1. Alex

    May 4, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    John Edwards violated campaign laws and deserves to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If not, why do we have such laws ?

  2. david esmay

    May 4, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    Alex, apparently there’s a trial underway in Greensboro looking into it. George Holding needed some limelight around Guilford County and created a stump for himself.

  3. david esmay

    May 4, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    and, ah, Citizens United eliminated those laws.

  4. Hawkeye

    May 4, 2012 at 1:28 pm

    So, you’re saying that Edwards is guilty of violating campaign laws before the jury has heard the facts of the case and taken time to deliberate to return a verdict?

    The case is about whether-or-not he violated campaign laws. The prosecution believes they has a case and can prove he did. The defense believes that they can prove otherwise.

    You have a right to your own opinion but not to your own facts as to Edwards violating campaign laws.

  5. Adam Searing

    May 4, 2012 at 1:54 pm

    Hawkeye, I said “being prosecuted” not “convicted” – there is a difference! The point Rob makes is that what Edwards is charged with – getting millions of dollars in campaign contributions that he ordinarily wouldn’t be able to get – is exactly what the prosecutor who brought the charges is doing in his current campaign for Congress. The reason the prosecutor can get away with this is the Supreme Court “Citizens United” case last year that basically got rid of any real constraints on political giving. So, where is the justice in potentially putting someone in prison for 20 years for behavior that the prosecutor is openly engaging in right now?

  6. Frank Burns

    May 4, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    The only journalism that went on during this tawdry event, was from The National Enquirer. Everybody else was silent on this. The new media were inclined to print bad news on their favorite son at the time.

  7. Frank Burns

    May 4, 2012 at 2:45 pm

    Allow me to edit my mistake:

    The news media was not inclined to print bad news on their favorite son at the time, just as they are doing with their current favorite son Obama.

  8. Hawkeye

    May 4, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    Adam, I obviously did not make myself clear. My comment was directed to Alex.

    To say “John Edwards violated campaign laws …” is not a fact but rather an opinion. But the opinion does smack of the mentality of; if you’re changed with something you must be guilty otherwise why are you being charged.

    Of course there could be a political motive behind Alex’s opinion but that would be an opinion. I don’t know that for a fact.

  9. Erik

    May 5, 2012 at 5:26 am

    Andrew young extorted this money Via the old lady and took advantage of here frail mind and state to do it and I bet the attorney was just as involved in this scheme. They were hoping Edwards became president and that the world would be their oyster with this scheme to blackmail him.

  10. Alex

    May 5, 2012 at 8:18 am

    I have a question? Supposedly John Edwards is worth over $30 million dollars, so why didn’t he use some of his own money to keep the bimbo quiet rather than resorting to this elaborate scheme of extorting money from a 100 year old woman. He is an attorney , and knew darn well the implications of mixing campaign funds with hush money.

  11. david esmay

    May 5, 2012 at 9:29 am

    @Alex, who the hell knows. One thing is for certain, the trial is strictly for political theater. While Edward’s behavior was deplorable, the prosecution’s case is getting weaker by the day and the defense hasn’t really started.

  12. maria

    May 7, 2012 at 12:10 am

    @Alex John Edwards didn’t want to use his own money because Elizabeth Edwards was in charge of their finance is what I read. Then his friend, Mr. Baron volunteered to pay for “Ms. Hunter fund” as a gift. Later on Mr Andrew Young approached Mrs. Bunny Mellon and got $750,000 which went into his own pocket mostly without John Edwards full knowledge. Looks like, more details will come out next week regarding the money trail.