Do you think Edwards is going to jail?

[Archae]

I really doubt John Edwards will go to jail or even be convicted.

[gateley]

1. No.

[Lex]

2. Even tho he is a gigantic asshole, the prosecution hasn't proven

their case about breaking Federal campaign rules, imho.

[PDJane]

3. If he does, I want to know why others aren't there, too.

[HiPointDem]

27. +1. If he does go, it will be him and martha stewart: The biggest financial criminals of our time!

[physioex]

4. I posted this earlier....

But our criminal justice system is atleast prosecuting Edwards. And where is when it comes to Lehman Brothers, Enron, etc??

[AnotherMcIntosh]

5. Possibly. Like Blagojevich, he's a Democrat.

When's the last time that you saw a big-name Republican being prosecuted? Why are self-admitted war criminals walking around free, rich, and happy?

[tritsofme]

15. I can think of an easy example, Blagojevich's GOP predecessor.

He is in jail right now. It would be pretty silly to defend a low life like Blagojevich.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

16. Illinois is a state that is target-rich with corrupt politicians. They have known about

Blagojevich for years and yet they only indicted him on the day after he visited laid-off employees at Republic Windows & Doors, whose employer had its line of credit cut off by the Bank of America, and said that the State of Illinois would no longer do business with the B of A.

In the most basic terms, the B of A had more clout than he did. Blagojevich went to prison. But not one bankster from the B of A is in danger of doing that. Not one.

George Ryan went to prison, but not because of any effort to help laid-off employees. Illinois is a pay-to-play state. Among other things, he received campaign contributions by unqualified persons who wanted commercial driver's licenses so that could make money driving big trucks. His investigation began when an unqualified driver caused the death of a number of members of a family, including a number of children. It was public knowledge. Even with his clout, he couldn't avoid an investigation at the time.

Holder was not the AG at the time. Let me know when Holder starts prosecuting some Republicans.

[tritsofme]

19. Your B of A conspiracy theory is pretty silly too.

It is more likely he knew an indictment was immininent, and that event was a PR stunt. Softening up the jury pool, he was called out as much at the time.

The whole trying to sell the President-elect's Senate seat to the highest bidder thing seems a much more likely candidate for what triggered the indictment.

But cute and creative theory nonetheless.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

21. I'm putting you on the ignore list. Good bye.

[tritsofme]

25. lol

[graham4anything]

6. It is immaterial if someone else didn't go to jail

Edwards would sell his best friend out (and did).
Hope he gets the max.

This crap about others has nothing to do with this.
Remember, how can dems say they are better than repubs while hiding one of their own?
Bringing Blago into the conversation, well, the repub (Ryan) before him is in jail. As are plenty of repubs. Some of course had pardons (like Libby and the Iran/Contra crew,and couldn't be
tried. So saying that is only a distraction.

It's more comparable to the Treyvon Martin killing case and the alleged shooter Zimmerman and his lawyer saying there was some sort of fight happened prior. All immaterial. What mattered is Treyvon had no weapon and was followed, stalked then shot and killed in cold blood by someone who stalked him to his house. That is all that matters.

toss the book. A regular person wouldn't even have the cash to pay for lawyers and would be
in jail already.

[JDPriestly]

7. The question is whether Edwards is guilty of violating a law. I don't really think so.

Did he use campaign contributions for private purposes? Or did he receive a gift of money from a friend to use to get him out of a jam?

You may think he is a heel, but being a heel and being a criminal are two very different things.

[grasswire]

8. word

I think it was probably smart for Edwards to stay off the stand and thereby focus the jury on the question of the law. Was there a crime? That's the question.

[graham4anything]

9. Surely you jest

Fleecing an elderly person is also considered a crime
And I believe he did use campaign contributions for private purposes(Himself)
Gift? Surely you jest.
If he were not a politician that Miss Mellon was giving money to, she would not have given anything

And I thought Johnny and Elizabeth were rich... If he were so innocent, why didn't he use his own money? He could well afford it.

Watergate had funny money funnelled too. And people went to jail (and Ford pardoned Nixon).

It's time for Democrats to take responsiblity for their own.
(and if John cared so much about his original family, he wouldn't USE his daughter like he has the last few weeks. Has he no shame at all?

[cali]

11. he's not charged with fleecing anyone.

virtually every expert thinks this is a trumped up political case. I detest Edwards but I've followed this case closely and the prosecution didn't prove their case

[graham4anything]

12. he can just bat his eyes and hope he has a fan deciding

whether he is found guilty or not, depends not on his guilt or innocence but if he has a fan
deciding.
Sort of like the Claus Von Bulow trial.

Miss Mellon thought she was making a political donation.
Very convient we have one central guy dead so he can't talk, so history can be rewritten.
Whether they prove their case or not is besides the point.
Maybe he can make it rain too.
Everyone still wonders how Karl Rove got away with it too.


from wiki
it seems like it is a direct way to circumvent election laws. Seems to be no doubt of it.
Maybe if the gov't just read wiki.

Mellon expressed interest in the John Edwards campaign as early as 2004, because he reminded her of President Kennedy, but when she called his campaign office with an offer to help, no one recognized her name and she wasn’t called back.[4] That changed when Edwards sought the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination. In August 2008, Edwards' campaign finance chairman Fred Baron told NBC News that he had been providing financial assistance to both Rielle Hunter and Andrew Young without Edwards' knowledge. He further stated that no campaign funds were used. Mellon gave more than $725,000 to John Edwards over an eight-month period (through decorator Bryan Huffman) beginning in May 2007. The check falsely referred to as “chairs”, “antique Charleston table” and “bookcase.” During this period Mellon wrote a note to Young saying: “I was sitting alone in a grim mood — furious that the press attacked Senator Edwards on the price of a haircut. But it inspired me — from now on, all haircuts, etc. that are necessary and important for his campaign — please send the bills to me... It is a way to help our friend without government restrictions.” The funds were believed to be used to secretly support Hunter, with whom Edwards had an extra-marital affair and child. The FBI interviewed Mellon at her estate in Upperville, Virginia, on two occasions in 2010.[6] Then in early December of that same year, her son, Stacy Lloyd, III, grandsons, Stacy Lloyd, IV and Thomas Lloyd, along with grandson Thomas Lloyd's wife, Ricki Lloyd, appeared before a grand jury in Raleigh, North Carolina.[11] On June 3, 2011, Edwards was indicted on using campaign funds to help cover-up an affair and pregnancy during the 2008 presidential campaign. Mellon was widely believed to be 'Person C' described in the indictment.[3] Just one week prior to his indictment in late May 2011, Edwards visited Mellon at her Upperville estate. Following his indictment, the judge forbade Edwards to speak with any potential witnesses. People close to Mellon said that the money was a personal gift and that she had no idea how Mr. Edwards used it.[6]

[cali]

18. the prosecution didn't even come close to proving that Mrs. Mellon

thought she was making a political donation- and there was NO Testimony or documents that provided evidence for your specious claim, my friend. And are you actually suggesting that Mr Baron was done in by JE or his agents. How thrilling. How nefarious. How utterly absurd.

The point is all about proving the case.

[graham4anything]

26. Absurd?

Where would you get that? Mr. Baron's illness was well known. It's always easy to lay blame on a dead guy,as they cannot call on a dead guy to reply... same as Edwards got all that sympathy over his dead kid by mentioning him thousands of time (funny thing is normally, parents don't go around doing that, especially those famous.They keep that talk within their own family.
George Strait, for instance, lost his daughter in a similar accident and to this day almost never has talked about it in public.

The government proved their case millions of time in the past, just to have one juror
out of 12 spoil the pot.
The ultra rich (Edwards) normally do not go to jail, no matter the political party.
And women seem to go gaga over him even to this day.
Why they didn't also use other sides of this fiasco can only be speculated on. (Maybe asking someone 102 to testify was something they knew wasn't possible, especially as she has such a liking of him to this day it seems, who knows.
If Mr. Baron were still alive, I wonder how much easier it would have been for the government especially if Mr. Baron were threatened with a long term sentence and was given a deal for immunity or something like that. There are very few people who would do what as an example Barry Bonds "trainer' did for him.


I for one believe O.J. Simpson was innocent of all charges, as the jury said. But then, seems alot of people to this day don't believe that, and nobody except for O.J., would have received the jail sentence he did in Vegas.
And, unless Edwards knows something about the jurors and how they are going to vote (which would be illegal too, wouldn't it and I am not saying he does), I think Edwards side is bluffing with their bravado.

Obviously you couldn't put him on the stand. Putting his daughter on the stand would make him look like a bigger slime if he didn't testify. So it all boils down to the jurors. And whether they feel one way or another.

People these days want justice. It's not ten years or twenty years ago. I think he will be found guilty of something and given a small sentence.

He is after part of the 1% isn't he. People nationwide are none too happy with the rich and their own set of rules. (In celebrity world, it indeed is the difference between say OJ or Robert Blake, and what happened to Phil Spector. Times have changed.) IMHO

[cali]

10. nope, and I'm not convinced the fuckwad should.

Either be convicted or go to jail.

[tritsofme]

13. I doubt it, but I bet he would learn more about poverty in prison, than at a hedge fund.

John Edwards in prison would certainly entertain me to no end!

[kentuck]

14. I hope not..

I would think the Obama Justice Dept had better things to do than investigating John Edwards. We do not put character on trial. We put crimes on trial.

[tledford]

17. No. The prosecution is purely political, there is no case. eom

[cynatnite]

20. I don't know, but I lean towards not...

He's a rich white guy who may have committed a white-collar crime.

But then, the prosecution wanted to make sure that even puppies, kittens and Jesus hated him. It's possible.

[stevenleser]

22. Yes - I think juries tend to vote on their emotions as much as the facts

I think they will hate Edwards for his infidelity and that as much as anything else will cause them to vote to convict.

[TBF]

23. Unfortunately that could happen -

it looks like he was a horrible husband but may not have broken the law. But I wouldn't blame the jury for hating him and that could bring a conviction.

[Raine]

24. No, I don't think so. nt