Another poster said: "this was a purely political case, and the jury knew it." ----------------------------
I agree, and further more I will be surprised if the case is NOT retried.
The republicans (read corporations) will take advantage of any thing they are presented with (or anything they can fabricate) to win the presidency if possible, but most important of all, to regain full control of both houses of congress. And after the Bush/Cheney fiasco they need a lot.
I remember the 1990's republican charade against Clinton. While the republicans were not successful in taking over the presidency from Clinton, they managed to maintain control of both houses of congress for 12 years (including the first 6 years of the Bush/Cheney administration).
The average American tends to think that the president makes all the laws but the fact is that while Presidents have Veto power they cannot legislate any new laws nor can they prevent veto-override to pass any law they may not want.
President Reagan began the downfall of America in 1981, not because of anything he himself passed or deregulated but because he was a professional actor who brilliantly followed the scripts given to him by the producers at the time (today they are generally known as CEO's). Clinton, to a large degree did the same thing. (NAFTA). Bush Jr. did basically the same except that he did not appear to be as intelligent as his predecessors and with the second Pearl Harbor (911) giving them even more control, the devastation has been almost complete. Today, the corporations control all branches of the government, including the Supreme Court. Party affiliation really means nothing anymore.
In the 19th century the people of this country expanded America's size from coast to coast and increased our international prominence. This was continued into the 20th century through both world wars and, I am 100% sure that, if those people were suddenly faced with the kind of government we have today they would immediately remove the corrupt leaders, by force if necessary. Today all we have left are weak and divided citizens who haven't the intelligence, courage, or integrity to do anything but fight amongst themselves while they and their country are being destroy
"I don't think God's through with me. I really believe he thinks there's still some good things I can do," he said. *****************************************************************
It sounds like he's coming back as a Republican!
Don't these wacko frightened Republicons have anything better to do than mess up trials. DOn't they have some Wall Street Bankster criminal to prosecute. Moron right wing wackos.
This is another rich and powerful figure taking a walk on the rest of us. He is guilty of being a total sleaze and a pig. Send him to Iran as a present.
Just another powerful, rich lawyer getting a pass on justice. So what's new? Is anyone else tired of this crap? So what can be done about it? Right, nothing. This will happen again just as soon as some other wealthy powerful politician or industry giant does some despicable deed. And justice for all - as long as you got the green.
Was it "in Wonderland" or "Beyond the Looking Glass" that Alice met the Red Queen, that battleax of a woman whose answer to everything was "Off with their heads!"? There are an awful lot of Red Queens on this thread tonight....
NOBODY thinks John Edwards is a prince of a man. We ALL think Elizabeth Edwards deserved much better than she got. Even those of us who sent Edwards a few dollars of (yes!) "campaign funds" in 2008 are never going to cast a vote for him for any political office.
But Edwards was on trial for specific crimes. And the prosecution failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he committed any of those crimes. That's what the jury decided, and it's also what most people who have followed the trial closely have concluded.
The law under which Edward was charged defines "campaign funds" as contributions "for THE purpose" of winning elections. That's why the Federal Election Commission ruled that the Mellon/Baron money did NOT constitute "campaign funds": because, while winning the election many have been ONE of their purposes, their PRIMARY purpose was to hide the affair and pregnancy from Elizabeth Edwards. (Bunny Mellon even paid gift tax on her payments; roughly $750,000!)
But an aggressive and partisan Republican U.S. Attorney in North Carolina who had aspirations to higher office decided that he could convince a jury that the law didn't really mean "THE purpose"; it only meant "A purpose." The judge, who was a Republican activist before she rose to the bench, gave the prosecution a good deal of latitude, most obviously in not permitting former FEC commissioners to testify that the FEC had determined the money WASN'T "campaign funds." But even with a pro-prosecution judge, the jury was smart enough to recognize that there's a difference between "the" and "a."
John Edward broke a lot of commandments, but he didn't break the campaign finance laws. Other than "Thou shalt not kill," we don't generally send people to jail for breaking commandments; we send them to jail for breaking laws. That's a good thing. Satisfying as it might have been to see this selfish, narcissistic jerk in handcuffs, heading off to jail, we really DON'T want our anger to empower prosecutors to twist and distort the law to imprison people who didn't commit the crime they were charged with. As The Innocence Project could tell you, that happens enough already....
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
----------------------------
I agree, and further more I will be surprised if the case is NOT retried.
The republicans (read corporations) will take advantage of any thing they are presented with (or anything they can fabricate) to win the presidency if possible, but most important of all, to regain full control of both houses of congress. And after the Bush/Cheney fiasco they need a lot.
I remember the 1990's republican charade against Clinton. While the republicans were not successful in taking over the presidency from Clinton, they managed to maintain control of both houses of congress for 12 years (including the first 6 years of the Bush/Cheney administration).
The average American tends to think that the president makes all the laws but the fact is that while Presidents have Veto power they cannot legislate any new laws nor can they prevent veto-override to pass any law they may not want.
President Reagan began the downfall of America in 1981, not because of anything he himself passed or deregulated but because he was a professional actor who brilliantly followed the scripts given to him by the producers at the time (today they are generally known as CEO's).
Clinton, to a large degree did the same thing. (NAFTA).
Bush Jr. did basically the same except that he did not appear to be as intelligent as his predecessors and with the second Pearl Harbor (911) giving them even more control, the devastation has been almost complete. Today, the corporations control all branches of the government, including the Supreme Court. Party affiliation really means nothing anymore.
In the 19th century the people of this country expanded America's size from coast to coast and increased our international prominence. This was continued into the 20th century through both world wars and, I am 100% sure that, if those people were suddenly faced with the kind of government we have today they would immediately remove the corrupt leaders, by force if necessary.
Today all we have left are weak and divided citizens who haven't the intelligence, courage, or integrity to do anything but fight amongst themselves while they and their country are being destroy
*****************************************************************
It sounds like he's coming back as a Republican!
It's nice to read posts made by intelligent people.
Anyone trying to make this as a pure partisan issue is a foll being taken advantage of.
----
Worthy of a bump.
NOBODY thinks John Edwards is a prince of a man. We ALL think Elizabeth Edwards deserved much better than she got.
---
Speak for yourself, twit.
Elizabeth swore John's lies were true, so she was as big a piece of crap as he is.
NOBODY thinks John Edwards is a prince of a man. We ALL think Elizabeth Edwards deserved much better than she got. Even those of us who sent Edwards a few dollars of (yes!) "campaign funds" in 2008 are never going to cast a vote for him for any political office.
But Edwards was on trial for specific crimes. And the prosecution failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he committed any of those crimes. That's what the jury decided, and it's also what most people who have followed the trial closely have concluded.
The law under which Edward was charged defines "campaign funds" as contributions "for THE purpose" of winning elections. That's why the Federal Election Commission ruled that the Mellon/Baron money did NOT constitute "campaign funds": because, while winning the election many have been ONE of their purposes, their PRIMARY purpose was to hide the affair and pregnancy from Elizabeth Edwards. (Bunny Mellon even paid gift tax on her payments; roughly $750,000!)
But an aggressive and partisan Republican U.S. Attorney in North Carolina who had aspirations to higher office decided that he could convince a jury that the law didn't really mean "THE purpose"; it only meant "A purpose." The judge, who was a Republican activist before she rose to the bench, gave the prosecution a good deal of latitude, most obviously in not permitting former FEC commissioners to testify that the FEC had determined the money WASN'T "campaign funds." But even with a pro-prosecution judge, the jury was smart enough to recognize that there's a difference between "the" and "a."
John Edward broke a lot of commandments, but he didn't break the campaign finance laws. Other than "Thou shalt not kill," we don't generally send people to jail for breaking commandments; we send them to jail for breaking laws. That's a good thing. Satisfying as it might have been to see this selfish, narcissistic jerk in handcuffs, heading off to jail, we really DON'T want our anger to empower prosecutors to twist and distort the law to imprison people who didn't commit the crime they were charged with. As The Innocence Project could tell you, that happens enough already....