Skip to main content

I am not one of the John Edwards haters.  I think many politicians have done what he has done, and many men have done what he has done.  But that is neither here nor there.  As I understand it, what Edwards is accused of is funneling campaign money to his girlfriend.  That is the long and the short of it.  His girlfriend was pregnant and he was married, but as far as I can see that has nothing to do with the actual charge.  The actual charge is it is illegal to funnel campaign money to your girlfriend.  Am I not right about this?  And John Edwards is facing a brutal trial and possibly 30 years in prison.  

So here is my problem.  Mark Kirk's ex-wife just accused him of the same thing.  And she should know because she was actually working inside of the campaign.  Here is the link to the Talking Points Memo story.  Shouldn't the justice department immediately start an investigation into this?  This is a pretty big crime from what I understand.  It is also morally reprehensible.  From the John Edwards example shouldn't this, if true, end Mark Kirk's career and send him to prison?  And shouldn't the justice department be using an enormous amount of resources to be finding out if it is true?

Now I know Mark Kirk has had a stroke.  I feel bad for him.  But John Edwards lost a child and his wife was dying of cancer, I kind of feel worse for him.  Now you can say John Edwards was cheating, but it seems Mark Kirk may have been cheating as well.  And actually it doesn't matter.  It doesn't matter if cheating was involved.  It doesn't matter if Mark Kirk is sick.  He did the same thing, and it should be just as big a thing if he did it as it is if Kirk did.  Holder's justice department, I am telling you, I demand justice!!  Justice now!!

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  If there are reasonable grounds (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctexrep, Smoh, pollbuster

    to believe Kirk may have violated the law, his stroke should not preclude an investigation.  

    I'm from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner Wing of the Democratic Party!

    by TomP on Tue May 29, 2012 at 08:29:44 AM PDT

  •  No He's Charged With Receiving Several Oversized (0+ / 0-)

    campaign contributions, and with using campaign money to hide his affair. There's nothing about him paying off his lover that I can see.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue May 29, 2012 at 08:35:10 AM PDT

    •  I'm not understanding the difference (0+ / 0-)

      The oversized campaign contributions I can understand.  Is that what the charge is, that the campaign contributions were bigger than allowable by the law.  But doesn't almost everybody do that, funneling money from different sources.

      Where I have trouble is what is the difference between giving campaign money to your pregnant girlfriend and giving it to your non-pregnant girlfriend.  The fact that giving the money may have kept the pregnancy from coming out is coincidental.  Is Edwards being tried for what he did or the motivation of what he did?

      •  Here are the charges and explanations (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rubyr, erush1345, FG

        Count 1: Conspiracy (maximum 5-year sentence)

        Edwards, a former U.S. senator from North Carolina, is accused of conspiring to receive and conceal contributions in excess of the allowed limits from Rachel "Bunny" Mellon and Fred Baron, a now-deceased Texas lawyer who was Edwards' finance chairman. Under the Federal Election Campaign Act, the most an individual could contribute to any candidate in 2008 was $2,300 in the primary election and $2,300 in the general election.

        Prosecutors argued that Edwards, while a candidate for federal office, accepted $725,000 from Mellon and more than $200,000 from Baron. Counts 2-5 reflect that accusation.

        Count 2: Illegal campaign contributions (maximum 5-year sentence)

        Edwards is accused of receiving contributions from Mellon in excess of federal limits in 2007.

        Count 3: Illegal campaign contributions (maximum 5-year sentence)

        Edwards is accused of receiving contributions from Mellon in excess of of federal limits in 2008.

        Count 4: Illegal campaign contributions (maximum 5-year sentence)

        Edwards is accused of receiving contributions from Baron in excess of federal limits in 2007.

        Count 5: Illegal campaign contributions (maximum 5-year sentence)

        Edwards is accused of receiving contributions from Baron in excess of of federal limits in 2008.

        Count 6: False statements (maximum 5-year sentence)

        Edwards is accused of hiding from his presidential committee the hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from Mellon and Baron, causing that committee to create and submit inaccurate campaign finance reports to the Federal Election Commission.

        The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

        by ctexrep on Tue May 29, 2012 at 08:48:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kirk can't be indicted, he has immunity (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, Samer, rubyr, ColoTim, thomask, schumann

    he's a republican.

    The definition of INSANITY: Voting Republican over and over and over and expecting the economy to get better.

    by pollbuster on Tue May 29, 2012 at 09:07:37 AM PDT

  •  Kirk's girlfriend was his campaign manager. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG

    She re-vitaized his career by getting him to throw himself behind the Tea Party. She was paid $143,000 a year, which doesn't seem like too much for a campaign manger.

    Kerk also had his ex-wife on salary, to keep her quiet. she was getting paid $40,000 a year. Depending on what, if anything, she was doing to earn that money, there may be grounds to investigate Kirk's payments to her.

    I do hope this will be investigated, though I don't see much connection between this and the Edward's case. I could care less what the Edwards jury finds, but his actions are ethically and morally indefensible.

    Here's my take on it - the revolution will not be blogged, it has to be slogged. - Deoliver47

    by OIL GUY on Tue May 29, 2012 at 10:24:03 AM PDT

  •  John Edwards IS a good man (0+ / 0-)

    I am writing in Edwards/Spitzer for president/vice president thiis year. Two men who fought hard for the 99% and got their asses handed to them by corporate controlled media and "justice department" (snicker) for doing so. That would be "change that really happens" instead of this Bush third termm we were lied into voting for.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site