Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dsc

(52,129 posts)
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:54 AM Apr 2012

Regardless of one's opinion of Edwards, Maddow did a great service last night with her story

I live in Raleigh NC, which is where the US attorney who pursued this case, served. He is now running to be a Congressman from the Raleigh area in a newly drawn GOP friendly district (he would replace Brad Miller if he were to win). One of his biggest arguments to vote for him, his prosecution of Edwards and other Democratic office holders (yes Edwards isn't the first). He previously went after our governor on a whole host of things and ended up with a plea for some mickey mouse reporting requirement. He also prosecuted an agriculture secretary and a Congressman. All Democrats fancy that.

Now we have Edwards. The criminal case here is that two wealthy donors to Edwards used 900,000 to support Reille and Young in order to further his campaign instead of to merely help out a friend. The first reason makes it an illegal campaign contribution (which wouldn't be illegal now BTW) the second makes it a perfectly legal gift. Let me repeat this, if they gifted the 900k to Edwards because they liked him and wanted to help him keep this woman away to say save his marriage, then it is a legal gift. In every other case of illegal campaign contributions where there is literally no evidence whatsoever of a quid pro quo, the campaign pays a fine and makes it a day. Yet in this one case, out of literally thousands and thousands, which just happens to be of the most famous adulterer in the land, and just happens to have fallen into the lap of a man who wants to be a US Congressman, this case makes it to court. Maybe you are so mad at Edwards you don't give a damn about how federal law is and isn't enforced in NC, but I live here, and I do care. Maddow, thank you for telling the nation, our story.

42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Regardless of one's opinion of Edwards, Maddow did a great service last night with her story (Original Post) dsc Apr 2012 OP
She did a great job last night. madaboutharry Apr 2012 #1
Melanie Sloan (Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington--CREW) essentially has said hlthe2b Apr 2012 #2
du rec. nt xchrom Apr 2012 #3
Very interesting. JNelson6563 Apr 2012 #4
Thank you for posting. DURHAM D Apr 2012 #5
democrats in NC barbtries Apr 2012 #6
republicans gained control of our state legislature last term for the 1st time Lex Apr 2012 #25
absolutely a menace. barbtries Apr 2012 #27
A nearly million dollar gift? To a multi millionaire? Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #7
Just one thing... whathehell Apr 2012 #9
Her salary starts at 2.2 million a year. I did not say she was as rich as John, just that Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #14
Okay.. whathehell Apr 2012 #23
Reread the title of the post, please. 12AngryBorneoWildmen Apr 2012 #11
thank you SemperEadem Apr 2012 #13
John Edwards is a lying hate monger and hypocrite. Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #16
Well I just Want to Make Sure liberalmike27 Apr 2012 #17
that is apparent SemperEadem Apr 2012 #19
One of those still too bitter to get the point? aquart Apr 2012 #38
The only thing I ask myself about John Edwards is Loki Apr 2012 #8
He's using the Tom DeLay Defense Lasher Apr 2012 #24
Yes, she did. GoCubsGo Apr 2012 #10
I live in NC. And I care, too. Mira Apr 2012 #12
very insightful SemperEadem Apr 2012 #15
Thank you for putting this additional information up. Cerridwen Apr 2012 #18
Kay Hagen (D-NC) was in no hurry to replace George Holding either DefenseLawyer Apr 2012 #20
Question for you. If you don't mind..... Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2012 #21
In fairness they would be legal if spent without Edwards consultation dsc Apr 2012 #26
Thanks for mentioning Siegelman. patrice Apr 2012 #22
It shouldn't be the business of the courts to go into how a campaign spends it's money. RB TexLa Apr 2012 #28
No matter how much I detest someone fightforfreedom123 Apr 2012 #29
proud/amazed rec# 81! wow, wonder how many would *love* to unrec this! lol inna Apr 2012 #30
so many people mistakenly believe that it was *their* contributions inna Apr 2012 #31
Wonder how long will it take to get the dirt out of attorney Thinkingabout Apr 2012 #32
Edwards actually talked about poverty and the reasons for our failing economy-- JDPriestly Apr 2012 #33
yes, and his talk got him special attention dougolat Apr 2012 #39
From day one this was a scripted attack of what Edwards represented as a candidate. Ford_Prefect Apr 2012 #34
Agree totally. Holding is a piece of work unc70 Apr 2012 #35
or, he could have had the decency to use his own dough for hush money... dionysus Apr 2012 #36
It would have been hard to hide that from Elizabeth unc70 Apr 2012 #37
Edwards is pond scum, for many reasons. But I agree with your central point. Stinky The Clown Apr 2012 #40
Opposition research had this info immediately unc70 Apr 2012 #41
Did she say whether the generous two reported the gifts to the IRS & paid the requisite gift taxes? Egalitariat Apr 2012 #42

madaboutharry

(40,150 posts)
1. She did a great job last night.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:59 AM
Apr 2012

John Edwards made some very poor choices and behaved like a cad. I think he has very severe character flaws and is not a good person. But, I also believe that he is being railroaded with this prosecution. I think it is an abuse of the Justice system.

hlthe2b

(101,714 posts)
2. Melanie Sloan (Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington--CREW) essentially has said
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:59 AM
Apr 2012

the same... That this is a real BS prosecution--jury rigged for political purposes. She CLEARLY detests Edwards, but sees the rank hypocrisy in this prosecution.

And I have to agree--on both counts.

JNelson6563

(28,151 posts)
4. Very interesting.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:20 AM
Apr 2012

And what a sharp contrast to the other Edwards thread I see kicking around this am! Thank you for your thoughtful post on the matter, very informative.

Julie

barbtries

(28,702 posts)
6. democrats in NC
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:35 AM
Apr 2012

are targeted by the republicans. begs the question to my mind of what the republicans are doing.

Lex

(34,108 posts)
25. republicans gained control of our state legislature last term for the 1st time
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 12:44 PM
Apr 2012

in many many years and they've re-districted the state to make it more favorable to republicans at election time, slashed the education budget to pieces, tried to all but close our state parks, attempted to push through state-wide fracking, and put an "one man - one woman" state constitutional amendment on our ballot in May at the primaries.

They are menace to this state.


barbtries

(28,702 posts)
27. absolutely a menace.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:35 PM
Apr 2012

i hope the citizens recognize that, and i think they must. look what happened in Wake County, buyers' remorse. they've already put the pain on me because i have a son at ECU. i had to take him out of the dorm and now am supporting him in an apt in Greenville, and that is a hardship. if they get a chance they'll make it much worse.

kind of tragic when you think about NC as such a strong state for education.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
7. A nearly million dollar gift? To a multi millionaire?
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:41 AM
Apr 2012

I guess that makes sense to other extremely wealthy people like Rachel, to me it smells to the sky. The man had no actual need, as he personally is worth many,many millions. Why not just use his own cash? Oh, that's right, can't tell the Sanctified One Man, One Woman Lady.
Edwards campaigned using his own great marriage as an example of why God does not want gay people to get equal rights. "My daddy was a Deacon, traditional marriage is just a part of me, I can't help it. One man, one woman." He said that many times. Pointed at gay couples and said 'not as good as me'.
So you know, I'm not going to weep for a man who profited from slandering my family while cheating on his own and apparently getting funded to do so using money from others who also thought it was wise to use other people as a mask for John's own choice morality.
What he wished on me, I wish on him. I do not think he has any right to fair treatment, it is a tenant of my faith, it is just a part of me. My Daddy was a deacon, you know.

whathehell

(28,968 posts)
9. Just one thing...
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:55 AM
Apr 2012

I get your point regarding the "gift". He is a mutl-millionare.

Having said that, I don't think it's fair to dump on Rachel, especially on the basis of

an imagined "similarity" in wealth. I really doubt you can compare Rachel's wealth to that

of John Edwards. For one thing, he has about a twenty year head start on her.

Her point, essentially, was the "political nature" of these charges. She's not

defending his morals in ANY way.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
14. Her salary starts at 2.2 million a year. I did not say she was as rich as John, just that
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:30 AM
Apr 2012

she is extremely wealthy, and many millions is to me extremely wealthy for a person early in their career and of her age. She's stone cold rich. It changes a person's outlook. It just does.
All I'm saying is that when people go out of their way to slander me with lies for their own gain, I do not owe them a thing. And I'm apathetic to his so called sufferings.
You know, the shit John said toward gay people, that was political. So let's address the political nature of the charges the anti equality faction foists against gay people. John is far from the only one making those charges, you know. They all claim it is 'religious faith'. Was John showing his deep faith? Are the others who spout that nonsense? How many times will straight folks see this cycle and still accept those lies told against us? When will they start laughing in the face of these hypocrites?

whathehell

(28,968 posts)
23. Okay..
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:37 AM
Apr 2012

I guess my larger point was that Rachel is also gay,

and I don't think her report on Edwards had anything

to do with her economic status.


11. Reread the title of the post, please.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:05 AM
Apr 2012

Your hatred clouds your sense of justice. And, Oh Yeah, Rachel is a real Lovey Howell. Daddy-Deacon Schtick. Oy Vey.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
16. John Edwards is a lying hate monger and hypocrite.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:38 AM
Apr 2012

Sorry if you do not like my opinion. The man told lies against my community. When called on it, he looked into my own eyes and lied to me. He had an assistant call me at home to lie to me again. He spoke hate and poison against good people, purely for personal gain.
It was personal, I took it personally, and I still do. If he is wrongfully prosecuted, well, he offered up much false witness against others, unasked and out of his own free will.Nothing is done to him that he did not do to others.
He looked me in the eye and lied to me. Also, he did not manage to make a retraction of his trash talk after the truth came out. If he had made amends, I'd not hold it against him still. He did this, and he did not seek to make it right.
Sorry, I can't stand him.

liberalmike27

(2,479 posts)
17. Well I just Want to Make Sure
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:44 AM
Apr 2012

That we only prosecute Democrats, and when Democrats get in trouble, instead of circling the wagon, supporting them, and ignoring it like Republicans, we need to kick them out of congress, or wherever, and make sure a republican takes their place...wait...what am I saying!!

Democrats shooting themselves in the foot, over, and over, and over. It's like the Hilary Rosen thing--she says the truth, and ends up having no democrat do simple clarification, point out the class angle, say "Yea, I respect Ann Romney's decision, and of course she can AFFORD to sit at home and have her children raised by nannies." Nope, all the democrats end up not supporting a truthful statement, and have her on-air beaten down into an apology.

It's disgusting how democrats turn on their own, and give every single time. Thankfully this time, unlike Weiner's weiner picture, we're not losing a seat.

Are you folks getting how republicans win? They fight. They protect. They circle the wagons against threat. They keep seats they have. They guard their own, and they protect ideology over some silly sexual thing.

Lasher

(27,500 posts)
24. He's using the Tom DeLay Defense
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:40 AM
Apr 2012

If you can afford expensive lawyers, you can delay justice until after you're dead. This is one of the biggest failings of our criminal justice system.

GoCubsGo

(32,061 posts)
10. Yes, she did.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:01 AM
Apr 2012

I had no idea that this was a republican's political vendetta. I was under the impression that the prosecution was something brought on by Eric Holder's people to set an example that Democrats punish their wrongdoers. I am as pissed off at Edwards as anyone here, but this is complete bullshit. I hope the facts come out in the end, although I doubt that they will. Even if they do, people care more about the fact that Edwards is a turd than they do about a corrupt US attorney.

Mira

(22,378 posts)
12. I live in NC. And I care, too.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:26 AM
Apr 2012

I agree with your thoughtful presentation, and your praise of Rachel's work which I happened to see.
I was unimpressed with Edwards even when he was (briefly) my Senator, but as I see it he is showing some real personal courage now in letting this lawsuit go forth.


SemperEadem

(8,053 posts)
15. very insightful
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:32 AM
Apr 2012

I had no idea, but then again, I should not be surprised, that an ambitious, rapacious thug is at the heart of this "prosecution". Persecution is not prosecution: it's distorting the law to fit someone's political aspirations and ends. In that, there is no justice.

Most everyone dislikes Edwards with a seething passion--but twisting the law doesn't answer a bloody thing as to what he's done.

Cerridwen

(13,251 posts)
18. Thank you for putting this additional information up.
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:49 AM
Apr 2012

It helps to make things more clear as to what is happening.

 

DefenseLawyer

(11,101 posts)
20. Kay Hagen (D-NC) was in no hurry to replace George Holding either
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:54 AM
Apr 2012

Democratic politicians in NC seem quite content to see Edwards twist as well. Which is typical unfortunately. Republicans fight to the death against "politically motivated" prosecutions or investigations while Democrats fall all over themselves not to appear "partisan" or take a stand. Don Siegelman anyone?

Hassin Bin Sober

(26,272 posts)
21. Question for you. If you don't mind.....
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:07 AM
Apr 2012

How can prosecution move forward on a law, if the OP is correct, that has since been invalidated by the Supreme Court?

dsc

(52,129 posts)
26. In fairness they would be legal if spent without Edwards consultation
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 03:09 PM
Apr 2012

which they most certainly would have been post citizens' united. These particular donations if they had been given to the actual campaign would still be technically illegal.

 
29. No matter how much I detest someone
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:46 PM
Apr 2012

I will defend their rights. I will not allow the state and/or federal constitutions to be violated.

This goes for rapists, murderers, pedophiles, tea-baggers, Republicans, Republican double agents, Libertarians, Scientologists, Christian Taliban, Jewish Taliban or Scientologists.

inna

(8,809 posts)
31. so many people mistakenly believe that it was *their* contributions
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 06:00 PM
Apr 2012

that Edwards was lavishing on Rielle.

Beyond petty and a *really* low blow for the DOJ to pursue this case.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
32. Wonder how long will it take to get the dirt out of attorney
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:31 PM
Apr 2012

If this plays out like many others trying to bring down someone else yet all the while they are deep into their own dirt bag.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
33. Edwards actually talked about poverty and the reasons for our failing economy--
Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:41 PM
Apr 2012

"free" trade. He was the only one to point to the real problems we have and their causes.

In my view, if convicted he will be a political prisoner.

dougolat

(716 posts)
39. yes, and his talk got him special attention
Sun Apr 15, 2012, 05:31 AM
Apr 2012

like Spitzer and Wiener, but they got the megaphone treatment and the embarrassment alone was enough to take them down. Actually, Spitzer may have been facing some court action, but Wiener did nothing illegal (kind of a long-standing nasty flirtation habit) and the nonstop clamor alone had the Dem "leadership" in a panic. That hasn't worked on Reps; Vitter got applause and Craig limped on.
The Homeland security grid means only saints have breathing room, therefor Grayson and Kucinich must be saints, but they still get maneuvered out of Congress.
Still, the dishonest prosecution, a la Edwards, Siegelman, and others, urgently needs sunshine!

Ford_Prefect

(7,817 posts)
34. From day one this was a scripted attack of what Edwards represented as a candidate.
Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:00 AM
Apr 2012

It has never been anything else but politically driven. In OUR state no republican has been investigated for fundraising issues any kind in the last 20 years. The case against Edwards has been stage managed to shame progressives in the same way as the investigation of OUR governor. The purpose is to prevent voters from supporting Democrats and progressives. We have seen it before in NC.
The facts never get to the main stream news, only the hype and the distortions. Its the same old fear and hate program going back to Jim Crow days and probably beyond put up by the same folks.

My state deserves and needs better than this. My community does too.

unc70

(6,095 posts)
35. Agree totally. Holding is a piece of work
Sun Apr 15, 2012, 01:11 AM
Apr 2012

Not only has he been aggressive going after Edwards and various Dems, he is running (correction his Super PAC) is running really nasty and misleading attack ads against his GOP opponent Paul Coble, who is the nephew of Jesse Helms. 9-9-Nein

The redistributed Brad Miller about 50 yards outside his district. Eric Holder and DOJ gave approval of the redistributing mess in NC!!!!!!

Stinky The Clown

(67,672 posts)
40. Edwards is pond scum, for many reasons. But I agree with your central point.
Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:29 AM
Apr 2012

He (and I know I shouldn't speak ill of the dead) and Elizabeth, both, hid this whole mess from us as he was going for the nomination. They hid this mess as they were trying to make him the party standard bearer. They hid this mess as they were trying to make him the party standard bearer in a climate where we KNOW oppo research would have absolutely dug it up to be used against us and would have reduced to near zero our chances of winning the white house.

There was too much at stake for them to have done this *for their own personal ego and benefit*

None of that makes what a politically motivated prosecutor does any more moral.

unc70

(6,095 posts)
41. Opposition research had this info immediately
Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:53 PM
Apr 2012

Certainly the Obama campaign did. Hunter was talking about this to people almost before it began.

Hunter was well connected with the west coast blogger community and with the NYC artsy literary crowd (as Lisa Druck). She was emailing people all over the place.

Reporters sat on the story until after Iowa. My guess is that if it had become public before Iowa, Clinton would likely have been the nominee.

 

Egalitariat

(1,631 posts)
42. Did she say whether the generous two reported the gifts to the IRS & paid the requisite gift taxes?
Sun Apr 15, 2012, 03:17 PM
Apr 2012

If you give more than $12K to an individual, you have to pay gift taxes (which are very high).

If you give money to a political campaign, you don't have to pay the taxes.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Regardless of one's opini...