'Theft by suckering'

America's political system has a new disgraced face

  • Follow Editorials

John Edwards’ crimes were tough to prove, even tougher to stomach.

Let’s be real: Few honest observers doubt he did what they said he did – use huge campaign contributions to hide a mistress and illegitimate child from view in the 2008 presidential election in order to convince the public he was every bit the gallant knight he portrayed himself to be.

He didn’t know anything about it all. Yeah, right.

But the beauty of our criminal justice system is that, even in highly politicized cases, the burden of proof for the government is a high threshold. In this case, that bar couldn’t be hurdled.

Yet, if what Edwards did wasn’t a crime, it oughta be. Call it “high cynicism” or “theft by suckering.” It doesn’t get much more brazen. Big donors were used to keep mistress Rielle Hunter both quiet and comfortable and off the public’s radar, in order to further the false image he tried to get us all to buy.

John Edwards – known for his pretty-boy looks and locks and a charm so seductive that an alternate juror was even accused of flirting with him – is now the disgraced face of an American political system that couldn’t possibly become more vapid and superficial but probably will, as a result of his getting off scot-free.

Much as Bill Clinton singlehandedly lowered the standards of a nation by having illicit sex in the Oval Office itself and perjuring himself under oath about another affair, only to survive impeachment, so the Edwards case ratchets down the already low public opinion and frequent narcissistic behavior of politicians.

Edwards even tried to play the self-flagellating victim on the courthouse steps after being acquitted on one charge and winning an apparently decisive mistrial on five others. Give it a few weeks. If this case follows precedent, the man who did all the above while his wife was dying of cancer will soon be lampooning his sins in funny commercials or on late-night television, and won’t that just be endearing and redemptive.

Meanwhile, Edwards aide Andrew Young established a new low for toadies – not only helping Edwards hide the mistress and child, but even publicly claiming the child was his. Somehow, he got his wife to go along with the embarrassment.

Note to self: No politician is worth that kind of prostration. Let the Edwards affair be a red flag to suckers and sycophants everywhere: Be careful at what golden calfs you toss your coin.

Comments (33) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/04/12 - 10:19 am
6
2
No...you have the right to be
Unpublished

No...you have the right to be shot when you attack them and beat their head until it bleeds though. Big difference.

Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/04/12 - 10:26 am
6
1
If someone did THIS to you,
Unpublished

If someone did THIS to you, would you stop them if you could?

http://www.opposingviews.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/300x250/feat...

Retired Army
17512
Points
Retired Army 06/04/12 - 10:30 am
3
7
Edwards has had his trial,

Edwards has had his trial, Zimmerman has not so in the eyes of our jurisprudence system Zimmerman only shot an unarmed man. I don't see why you brought Zimmerman into this to start with, but should Zimmerman be found guilty in a court of law, by a jury of his peers, it will rest with the jury's perceived veracity of Zimmerman, since Zimmerman shot and killed the only other witness, after he was told to quit following him.

Zimmerman himself has put that quality at risk by his own mouth, lying to a judge and the world about his funds and passport.

Objectively, how should any of us perceive Zimmerman's capacity for the truth at this point?

Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/04/12 - 10:35 am
6
2
It is amazing your capacity
Unpublished

It is amazing your capacity to prove me correct and not even realize it. The unbelievable effort to rationalize the demonization of Zimmerman before a trial, and defend ANYTHING socialist, black, or Democrat on a daily basis.

The reason I brought up Zimmerman, which I already stated is to demonstrate that YOU will see him as guilty until proven innocent, but not if he is in the above stated demographics.

CobaltGeorge
155137
Points
CobaltGeorge 06/04/12 - 10:45 am
7
0
Innocent

At this given point in time "He is still Innocent" Period

Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/04/12 - 10:47 am
5
2
That was kind of my point,
Unpublished

That was kind of my point, Cobalt.......don't you see the hypocrisy I was pointing out?

Carleton Duvall
6305
Points
Carleton Duvall 06/04/12 - 10:49 am
6
2
RA wrote

Carelton writes: "Happens all the time. There are experts that attorneys hire to help them select a jury in high profile cases. These guys know how to select people who would be favorable to the defendant."

And the prosecution doesn't?

Good question. I am not sure. Maybe if they have enough money budgeted for a case they would. Since you seem to know why don't you enlighten us, oh! informed one.

justthefacts
21342
Points
justthefacts 06/04/12 - 10:52 am
6
2
7 Thumbs down

It has nothing to do with your principles. Where did the editorial or anyone on here say the verdict should be ignored and JE should be incarcerated?

Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/04/12 - 10:53 am
6
2
JTF....no one did. RA just
Unpublished

JTF....no one did. RA just seems to know what you are thinking.

And Mr Duvall. I doubt RA will tell you. The other day I asked him to back up an accusation he made, and he INSISTED that I do his research for him.....you know...guilty until proven innocent.

Carleton Duvall
6305
Points
Carleton Duvall 06/04/12 - 11:00 am
5
2
Shea_Addams

I can only hope.

harley_52
22984
Points
harley_52 06/04/12 - 11:05 am
5
2
Edwards is a sleaze, he got

Edwards is a sleaze, he got away with all the charges because he has the money necessary to do so. Lots of otherwise guilty sleazes get away with crimes because of their money/power. Ted Kennedy, O.J. Simpson, Bill Clinton, just to name three.

Shea_Addams is absolutely correct about the hypocrisy of the left in these discussions. Anybody remember all the crimes they insisted GWB and Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, and Alberto Gonzalez had committed without a single conviction?

One observation is that Obama's Justice Department has a pretty poor record in prosecuting these democrat politicians. Makes one wonder if they're really trying, or just throwing the cases to let them off the hook?

Carleton Duvall
6305
Points
Carleton Duvall 06/04/12 - 11:09 am
5
0
Here's the answer

In addition to these staff costs, prosecutors, like defense
attorneys, hire experts and consultants, including consultants to assist with jury selection and
witness preparation

faithson
5133
Points
faithson 06/04/12 - 11:48 am
3
3
the whole case was a political lynching

the NC federal republican prosecutor went after Edwards with a political vengeance that as usual out stepped his actual case against Edwards. campaign law lawyers saw this train wreck from the beginning if you ever read or listen to discussions from those in the know. There was NO basis in case law to prosecute Edwards, NONE... The prosecutor 'created' charges against him that had NO bearing in existing law. No wonder the jury could not come to a unanimous decision, there was to much 'sway' in interpreting just what Edwards was guilty of. And by the way, the prosecutor is now running for attorney general of NC, He got what HE needed out of this, political name recognition. gotta love where our politicians come from.

harley_52
22984
Points
harley_52 06/04/12 - 11:47 am
4
2
"And by the way, the

"And by the way, the prosecutor is now running for attorney general of NC, He got what HE needed out of this, political name recognition. gotta love where our politicians come from."

If losing a high profile case against a certifiable sleaze bag who shamed, disgraced, and humiliated his dying wife is the kind of "political name recognition" the guy was looking for, then I have my doubts about his capacity to win ANY election.

But, you never know......

Willow Bailey
20580
Points
Willow Bailey 06/04/12 - 01:08 pm
4
1
Carleton is right, again It's

Carleton is right, again It's extremely helpful to have big guns and all the money you need to solve your problems.

As to the stating of opinions regarding his guilt; opining is the purpose here.

Retired Army
17512
Points
Retired Army 06/04/12 - 02:04 pm
2
4
Willow, darlin', If ever(God

Willow, darlin', If ever(God forbid)you should be accused of a crime, be acquitted of that crime would you want an opinion column then labeling you as a criminal?

That's inciting mob justice and is not what America is about.

Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/04/12 - 02:07 pm
4
2
RA, If someone did THIS to
Unpublished

RA,

If someone did THIS to you, would you stop them if you could?

http://www.opposingviews.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/300x250/feat...

I notice you never answer that question.

harley_52
22984
Points
harley_52 06/04/12 - 04:29 pm
4
1
"That's inciting mob justice

"That's inciting mob justice and is not what America is about."

Yeah....just ask the "Occupy Wall Street" occupiers and the SEIU thugs bussed to various violent "protests" around the Nation, including those in Wisconsin. Oh, don't forget the "code pink" bunch and the various "green" groups that torched businesses and housing developments.

Willow Bailey
20580
Points
Willow Bailey 06/04/12 - 05:01 pm
5
1
High Five, RA!

RA, I've never cared much about what anyone else thought, so I don't suspect I would begin to in that scenario. People are going to form opinions based on their own experiences and knowledge, that's life and I can live with it.

But seriously, how silly can anyone be in the John Edwards case, anyway? Jury members included. As if Edwards didn't know his "hot headed hattie", wasn't being financially cared for by his campaign contributors. He sure as heck knew he wasn't writing a check out of his and Elizabeth's account, now didn't he? Shame on him, his jurors,and all those who participated in his cover up.

Better to be rich and in trouble, than poor. Better to be attractive and charismatic and in trouble, than unsightly and obtuse.

Here's your "High Five", I am in accord with you on your 10:30 a.m. comment, all the way.

Carleton Duvall
6305
Points
Carleton Duvall 06/04/12 - 05:14 pm
4
1
Willow

I agree also about the 10:30am post. It was a rare moment of senility for the General.

JohnBrownAug
1962
Points
JohnBrownAug 06/04/12 - 05:16 pm
6
1
DesertCat6, well, that's kind

DesertCat6, well, that's kind of the company line of innocent until proven guilty, but you would have to live in a cave to have not formed an opinion about some cases, including this one in my opinion.

Frankly, I form opinions before trials all the time, often times I still think someone is guilty who is found not guilty such as OJ and don't mind voicing my opinion. Of course, I, others who speak out and the media are not officers of the court and no where does the law say we shouldn't speak out. To your benefit, you are able to compartmentalize better than I can.

Carleton Duvall
6305
Points
Carleton Duvall 06/04/12 - 06:29 pm
3
2
Retired Army wrote

And 6 posters(so far) agree with this, yet there are 7 who don't agree with the principle of my stand,

Please, RA, for a person who doesn't notice Thumbsies up and Thumbsies down you surely bring the subject up a lot. Since you confuse me please tell me if you look at them or not.

KSL
126279
Points
KSL 06/04/12 - 06:45 pm
4
2
RA, please don't confuse

RA, please don't confuse being innocent and being found innocent in a court of law.

And unless you were there and were a witness, you don't have a clue as to what occurred between Zimmerman and Martin.

Retired Army
17512
Points
Retired Army 06/04/12 - 11:01 pm
1
1
I now know that Zimmerman

I now know that Zimmerman lied in a court of law about his financial position and to the Department of Homeland Security about his "lost" passport.

Goes to credibility, wouldn't any rational person think?

Retired Army
17512
Points
Retired Army 06/04/12 - 11:03 pm
1
2
Ummm, by the way even

Ummm, by the way even Zimmerman's lawyer thinks there is an uphill battle to regain credibility. That's a bad sign when your own lawyer publicly admits such a thing. Reeeeeeeeal bad.

Shea_Addams
1337
Points
Shea_Addams 06/05/12 - 12:54 pm
2
0
Still not answering RA? I
Unpublished

Still not answering RA? I wonder why?

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs