He Must Be Guilty Of Something!

The National Review reluctantly rides to the defense of John Edwards, presenting arguments that were offered at the time of his indictment (.pdf).  Their gist:

The prosecution’s case is built upon a note from Mellon, who described herself as “furious” about the way in which Edwards was lampooned for his infamous $400 haircuts. “From now on,” she wrote, “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.” And she did indeed write some $725,000 in checks for sundry expenses — all of which went to Hunter, not to the Edwards campaign.

Because none of the money went to the campaign, and none of the money went for campaign expenses — inasmuch as maintaining a mistress is not a campaign expense — it is difficult to see why this should be prosecuted as a campaign-finance violation. At most, the evidence would seem to justify charging Mellon with conspiring to subvert campaign-finance laws, though in the event those laws were not subverted, since her money did not go toward financing the Edwards campaign.

Well, yes, that point has been raised; here is the WaPo reporting on Edwards' indictment:

The indictment triggered immediate criticism from a range of campaign finance and legal experts, who said the government’s case is unprecedented and appears weak. They questioned whether it would survive the fierce defense being mounted by Edwards’s lawyers, who say his actions did not constitute a crime.

“It’s not illegal to be a pig,” said Brett Kappel, a Washington campaign finance expert who has worked for Republicans and Democrats. “Is what Edwards did slimy? Absolutely. Everyone will agree it was reprehensible. But it’s not a crime.”

Some good-government groups welcomed the Justice Department’s decision to charge Edwards in a six-count indictment that says he helped solicit what prosecutors called nearly $1 million in illegal contributions from political donors. Prosecutors said his motive was to hide his mistress, Rielle Hunter, and her pregnancy from the public and media.

If this is just a feel-good, CYA prosecution by Eric Holder and the DoJ Public Integrity rodeo clowns who brought down Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, well, let them be embarrassed.

The idea of wealthy donors supporting the lifestyle - but not the campaign! - of their favored candidate feels like it ought to be illegal. One is left wondering whether the benefactor is buying favors or simply access, and whether a bribery charge might be possible. Still, "feels illegal" is not the standard that we like to see applied. I am not nor do I ever intend to be an expert on campaign finance law but the DoJ needs to bring real cases, not politically expedient ones.

Comments

[Jack is Back!]

Has this new photo of GZ's injuries been posted on the other thread? I just got it from WOKV in Jacksonville. Bond hearing today at 9am.

[Must be all the CO2 turning grass red.]

I have it on excellent authority that those are red grass stains, JiB.
===================

[henry]

And she did indeed write some $725,000 in checks for sundry expenses

Report her to the IRS for the gift tax violation.

[Jim,MtnView,Ca,USA]

The punch line that got away
http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2012/04/if-i-had-dog.html

[narciso]

AS much as disliked the Coiffed one, I don't see a case, here, 'Bunny' left a loophole that you could run a Star Destroyer through.

It seems like the CREW foolishness that they put Sarah and Christine through, because they could.

[Jane (where is Jon Corzine?)]

Gee, now I have to root for Edwards?

[NK]

TomM--all fair points. But a couple of things-- apparently the presiding District Court Judge disagrees, because I assume Edwards' motions to dismiss the charges as failing to allege a crime have been denied. Second-- I can muster no sympathy for Edwards-- he is the slimiest national politician in my lifetime-- and that's really saying something. Finally, this is further proof the Federal campaign laws are a complete sham. Make it all simple-- only individuals can give their own money to politicians-- no gifts or barter of any kind. Any amount given has to be posted by the donor and politician on a database within 24 hours. Let the politicians scream about who owns whom and voters decide. Any violation? Life in prison.

[narciso]

Juat like we did for Blago, Jane, 'root for the crook, it's important', vis a vis Fitz.

[DWPittelli]

Is it really legal to hand bags of cash to politicians, as long as there is no specific quid pro quo? (Is the only crime the apparent lack of gift tax paid by the giver?)

[NK]

OT-- if you all wondered why we all detest what Obama does, here's a brilliant short essay explaining why that is: he's not an American by background or ideology. It's like having a UN kleptocrat as POTUS:http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/04/19/dog-eating-and-obamas-identity/3/

[narciso]

Hey we had 'Mickey Mouse' giving money to Obama, and they didn't prosecute him, so no
there are no rules, although the Solon of Scranton's campaign, had to pay a 250,000 fine

[Jack is Back!]

Sandy Daze, GMAX and other RC's,

Another link at Jim's 8:19am takes you finally to this interesting report about how anti-Catholicism may have a part in sinking the Titanic:)

[narciso]

Meanwhile Gerry Rivers, ignoring the last 14!
plots against NY, takes after the Department's profiling policy, facepalm.

[Melinda Romanoff]

NK-

You haven't vetted Rahm enough to make that call.

[Jack is Back!]

GZ is in a suit with a waist shackle.

Looks like he has lost lots of weight - I didn't even recognize him.

[Richard Aubrey]

Another implication of the Edwards case is that only the Enquirer has the resources, the aggressiveness, and the public concern to do the real investigative reporting.
The alternative would be that the bigs ignored the Edwards case since they were in the tank.
Pick one.

[Jack is Back!]

Family of GZ's is now on the phone: George's wife is now on the phone. They have a notary on the phone also to verify that the person on the phone is in fact GZ's wife.

Telephone witnesses are sequestered.

Why are they doing this by phone if they live in the same area? Anyone have any idea?

[narciso]

Yes, but's when the last time they indicted a Mayor, TM you realize this has been the theme of the last month?

[Jack is Back!]

Have to go to the Post Office but this bond hearing is boring as hell.

[fdcol63]

"Why are they doing this by phone if they live in the same area? Anyone have any idea?"

Safety?

[NK]

MelR-- sounds like you had a safe drive. I'll assume the very possible worst of Rahm, Edwards is still slimiest. Why? Rahm is Rahm, if anything he plays up his own SOB status to boost his own rep. Edwards OTOH fabricated a public personna the exact opposite of his reality. That makes him slimiest IMO.

[NK]

RichardA-- whaddya mean 'were in the tank' the WaPo is still carrying water for him.

[narciso]

Well we've seen Ensign (who not only slept with his staffer but paid off her family,)
Mark 'Appalachian trail' Sanford, and David
Vitter, although 'the Breck Girl' is in the running.

http://theothermccain.com/2012/04/20/drip-drip-drip-mormon-mitt-meme-keeps-popping-up-in-mainstream-media/

[Danube of Thought]

Minus 16 at Raz today.

Trails Romney by 1.

[narciso]

Meanwhile it seems they strive for the reverse to be true, here;

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/best-buy-tvs-computers-and-hamas.php

[Tom Maguire]

Gee, now I have to root for Edwards?

I am gritting my teeth and thinking of it as rooting against Eric Holder.

[Thomas Collins]

In my list of despicable public figures, Edwards is in Rev. Al Sharpton territory. However, I don't believe the US Attorney should have brought these charges, even if they survive a motion to dismiss.

NK, I agree as a policy matter with your approach. Do you think that with your favored tough disclosure laws in place, there should be no need for dollar limits? I happen to think dollar limits favor the entrenched interests. A connected oligarch can always find bundlers to fill up his or her campaign coffers. If one's goal is to open up the process, give potential candidates with views challenging the oligarchs the opportunity to find sugar daddies or sugar mommies to finance their entire campaigns (recall the help Eugene McCarthy's campaign received from the Mott money before the current round of so-called campaign finance reform legislation was enacted).

[Captain Hate]

I am gritting my teeth and thinking of it as rooting against Eric Holder.

That puts it in terms I can agree with.

[Clarice]

I never believed they had a case against Edwards. They are banking on the jury's distaste of him. Every day I see more evidence that we are approaching the Soviet criminal law system..it's the character of the charged , not the evidence of a crime that matters.

I doubt any Republican pol could get a fair trial in DC, for example, no matter what crap the prosecution has offered the jury.

[Pofarmer]

Titanic Myths LUN

[narciso]

I've come around to your point of view, Clarice, specially with the effrontery of Welch, prosecuting Sterling, bringing in Rosen, Fitz going after Kirikaou, (did finally
find his book in the library) neccesitating
Shane having to testify,

[Captain Hate]

Every day I see more evidence that we are approaching the Soviet criminal law system..it's the character of the charged , not the evidence of a crime that matters.

More like the perception of the character of the charged. We've been on this slippery slope for quite a while, predating "hate crimes". The 4/10 WSJ had an excellent article about how innocent people are getting railroaded by the feds on spurious "lying to federal agents" charges. Orwell would be disgusted.

[AliceH]

Me, I'm rooting for the failure of another attempt to water down what is treated as criminal, and what is selected for prosecution.

Equality before the law relies on laws being understandable with reasonable effort, and justice relies on reasonable use of prosecutorial discretion. To the best of my knowledge, there is no "ick" factor that is appropriate in considering either of those elements.

[NK]

ThomasC-- I did not mention it, but I agree NO limits. Give a Dollar or a Billion, same rules-- full and immediate disclosure. Let the politician defend who he is getting money from, no more 'chicanery' of laundering money through PACs and bundling.

[Jane (where is Jon Corzine?)]

I am gritting my teeth and thinking of it as rooting against Eric Holder.

Okay, I'm in.I like rooting for justice and I love rooting against Eric Holder.

[bgates]

Because none of the money went to the campaign, and none of the money went for campaign expenses — inasmuch as maintaining a mistress is not a campaign expense

When I think about what would have happened to the campaign if the money were not spent, I'm inclined to think it was a campaign expense.

[daddy]

"Every day I see more evidence that we are approaching the Soviet criminal law system..it's the character of the charged , not the evidence of a crime that matters."

Sadly, can't disagree with a word of that.

[ECM]

+10 for this snippet:

If this is just a feel-good, CYA prosecution by Eric Holder and the DoJ Public Integrity rodeo clowns who brought down Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, well, let them be embarrassed.

Pure comedy--thanks man! Funniest thing I've read this week :)

[BR]

"It's like having a UN kleptocrat as POTUS."

Brilliant, NK!

A few days ago walking outdoors I thought, "He's not one of us," and by golly, Spengler wrote it too. There's telepathy going on :)