John Edwards charged in felony indictment

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
#2
If this goes to trial - wow, talk about a salacious trial.

Yea, no sympathy from me, either. He's a worm.
 

NiteGuy

Former Staff
Jul 2011
17,044
13,690
Teardrop City
#6
of course he pleads not guilty
He's entitled to plead not guilty, and have the government prove their case, just like anyone else.

Doesn't mean he's not guilty as sin, only that he's allowed to claim he's not until the jury pronounces it's verdict. Personally, I think he's going down, and going down hard.
 
Aug 2010
29,683
2,134
See you in a new existence!
#7
Count me in as having no sympathy for him. Like Newt, cheating on a dying wife is lower than whale shit. If he's guilty of cheating the taxpayers, his constituents or donors, then he deserves the maximum penalty.

 

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
#8
A few interesting articles about John Edwards. Two that contend that a successful criminal prosecution may be difficult. And the third looking back at the Edwards 2008 presidential run, and the very real possibility that he could have been the Democratic nominee for President that year. Had he won the nomination, we'd likely have a McCain/Palin administration right now.


A Cover-Up, Not a Crime.

Why the case against John Edwards may be hard to prove.
By Richard L. Hasen Posted Friday, June 3, 2011, at 3:31 PM ET

John Edwards indictment: Was his affair with Rielle Hunter a "campaign expense"? - By Richard L. Hasen - Slate Magazine



The questionable legal case against John Edwards
By Editorial, Published: June 3

Criminal violations of federal campaign financing laws require proof that the conduct was committed “knowingly and willfully.”’ In the context of a regulatory scheme such as is involved here, these words of specific criminal intent require proof that the offender was aware of what the law required, and that he or she violated that law notwithstanding that knowledge, i.e. that the offender acted in conscious disregard of a known statutory duty or prohibition.

- U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 2007.

The questionable legal case against John Edwards - The Washington Post



How John Edwards nearly ruined everything
There were actually two moments when the 2008 Democratic nomination seemed within reach for him
By Steve Kornacki

How John Edwards nearly ruined everything - War Room - Salon.com
 
Oct 2010
22,674
5,689
In the empty heads of the right wingers I own
#9
A few interesting articles about John Edwards. Two that contend that a successful criminal prosecution may be difficult. And the third looking back at the Edwards 2008 presidential run, and the very real possibility that he could have been the Democratic nominee for President that year. Had he won the nomination, we'd likely have a McCain/Palin administration right now.


A Cover-Up, Not a Crime.

Why the case against John Edwards may be hard to prove.
By Richard L. Hasen Posted Friday, June 3, 2011, at 3:31 PM ET

John Edwards indictment: Was his affair with Rielle Hunter a "campaign expense"? - By Richard L. Hasen - Slate Magazine



The questionable legal case against John Edwards
By Editorial, Published: June 3

Criminal violations of federal campaign financing laws require proof that the conduct was committed “knowingly and willfully.”’ In the context of a regulatory scheme such as is involved here, these words of specific criminal intent require proof that the offender was aware of what the law required, and that he or she violated that law notwithstanding that knowledge, i.e. that the offender acted in conscious disregard of a known statutory duty or prohibition.

- U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 2007.

The questionable legal case against John Edwards - The Washington Post



How John Edwards nearly ruined everything
There were actually two moments when the 2008 Democratic nomination seemed within reach for him
By Steve Kornacki

How John Edwards nearly ruined everything - War Room - Salon.com
I'm thinking that if the prosecution gets anything on him, it will be small potatoes.

and John Edwrads, while having the best platform of any of the candidates, particularly on economics, was never in the running to beat Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, so I can't put much stock into the article.

He's a heel for what he did to his wife by cheating on her, but that's no one's business but between him and his wife when she was alive, and his kids.
 

jackalope

Former Staff
Jan 2010
51,139
17,672
Maine
#10
I'm thinking that if the prosecution gets anything on him, it will be small potatoes.

and John Edwrads, while having the best platform of any of the candidates, particularly on economics, was never in the running to beat Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, so I can't put much stock into the article.

He's a heel for what he did to his wife by cheating on her, but that's no one's business but between him and his wife when she was alive, and his kids.

He had a chance, or did before Obama got in, probably Anyway, that's the way my fuzzy memory remembers it. I was an Edwards supporter before the caucuses came to Maine in Feb of that year. In Feb, I caucused for Obama. Before Iowa, I was for Edwards. By the time it got to Maine, it was a Hillary-Obama race. Obama won the Maine caucuses.

Being a former Edwards supporter, I'm especially ripped. That bastard was trying to get our votes when he knew it would likely come all crashing down around his head. And, too, one of the reasons I was for Edwards in the first place, was his wife. Elizabeth spoke so well on his behalf So well.
 

Similar Discussions