John Edwards, 2004 DEMOCRATIC VP Candidate, Faces Prosecution For Affair Cover Up

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2011 10:28 PM GMT
    On July 6, 2004, Kerry announced that Edwards would be his running mate; the decision was widely hailed in public opinion polls and by Democratic leaders. Though many Democrats supported Edwards' nomination, others criticized the selection for Edwards' perceived lack of experience. [He just had a different kind of experience.]

    John Edwards Faces Prosecution For Affair Cover Up
    Former presidential hopeful said to be weighing a plea bargain to avoid going to trial.

    http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/05/25/john_edwards_indictment_justice_department_reportedly_green_ligh.html

  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    May 25, 2011 10:51 PM GMT
    Fine
    and whatever the investigation uncovers he needs to face the music

    UMMM .............. icon_rolleyes.gif

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTINKKueL47q7qdL7ADBQ6
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    May 25, 2011 11:52 PM GMT
    Now Socal, doesn't feel better to make your own thread about it, rather than blurt it out in an overly emotional manner on Christian's thread? LOL

    icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 1:08 AM GMT
    When Arnold Schwarznegger announced his candidacy for the CA Governor, his decision "was widely hailed" by Republican leaders.
    Although there were many Democrats and Independents who criticized Schwarzenegger for his "percieved lack of experience". (He just had a different kind of experience.)

    As in - banging his housekeeper right under his wife's and children's noses with no regard whatsoever for their feelings or for common deceny.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 1:15 AM GMT
    HndsmKansan saidNow Socal, doesn't feel better to make your own thread about it, rather than blurt it out in an overly emotional manner on Christian's thread? LOL

    icon_lol.gif

    It wasn't emotional at all, sorry to disappoint. You misread me. I made this thread to show how ridiculous these kind of threads are, but my point is probably a bit too subtile for many of the RJ lefties.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    May 26, 2011 7:50 AM GMT
    14mw5dj.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 9:22 AM GMT
    This is yet another straw man argument by socal.

    Who among us "RJ lefties" is leaping to Edwards defense?

    The difference between us and the right is that when someone on our side screws up, we want them held accountable. But the list of right-wing and Republican politicians who have done worse than Edwards, gotten away with it and been defended by the Republican Party and conservatives is as long as my arm.

    John Ensign (accused of virtually the same thing as Edwards)
    David Vitter
    Newt Gingrich
    Arnold

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 11:07 AM GMT
    It's interesting that a Democratic president's DoJ is pursuing this case against a former Democratic VP candidate.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 11:25 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidThis is yet another straw man argument by socal.

    Who among us "RJ lefties" is leaping to Edwards defense?

    The difference between us and the right is that when someone on our side screws up, we want them held accountable. But the list of right-wing and Republican politicians who have done worse than Edwards, gotten away with it and been defended by the Republican Party and conservatives is as long as my arm.

    John Ensign (accused of virtually the same thing as Edwards)
    David Vitter
    Newt Gingrich
    Arnold


    And the above republican whores are current day. Edwards whoring around is old news.

    If SoCal wants to reach back into the 2000's, maybe we should dig up other republicans, including Mark Foley and the toe tapping guy, Larry Craig! Hypocrites extraordinare...these guys voted and spoke out gays, while doing gay things behind closed doors. And what Foley did was legally pedophilia. He should have been jailed, but the republican congress destroyed the evidence before leaving office.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 12:20 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL saidAnd what Foley did was legally pedophilia. He should have been jailed, but the republican congress destroyed the evidence before leaving office.

    Is that literally true? I hadn't heard this. Not the Party of Family Values, whose members equate gays with pedophilia, but then protected a pedophile when it was one of their own? I'd like to hear more about this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 1:44 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    White4DarkerFL saidAnd what Foley did was legally pedophilia. He should have been jailed, but the republican congress destroyed the evidence before leaving office.

    Is that literally true? I hadn't heard this. Not the Party of Family Values, whose members equate gays with pedophilia, but then protected a pedophile when it was one of their own? I'd like to hear more about this.


    Oh yes, The Family Values Congressional Republicans had the evidence that Foley was a probable molester, but never investigated...Hastert just swept it under the rug. They let it go on, despite the fact that underage boys were all around Foley.

    Also, this excerpt from Swamp Politics says it all....
    The case took a long time to close, the (Florida Department of Law Enforcement) report noted, in part because Foley refused to allow investigators to examine his congressional computer hard drives, protected as privileged material which only Foley could release.

    http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/mark_foleys_pagemail_case_clos.html

    If anybody had valid, reasonable accusations of their being a child molester, they would insist on the cops taking their hard drive for examination...but only if they were innocent.

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    May 26, 2011 2:41 PM GMT
    Rather than the tit for tat to try and paint one side as worse than the other, why don't we just agree that their are scummy, lecherous, philandering, lying cheats among politicians in BOTH parties. For every horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the right, there is an equally horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the left. Anyone who says differently is simply being disingenuous
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 2:53 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidRather than the tit for tat to try and paint one side as worse than the other, why don't we just agree that their are scummy, lecherous, philandering, lying cheats among politicians in BOTH parties. For every horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the right, there is an equally horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the left. Anyone who says differently is simply being disingenuous


    Except Dems are not a) touting themselves as the party of family values and b) not trying to legislate who can marry who, or outlaw abortion, etc. Again, it's the hypocrisy.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    May 26, 2011 3:04 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    Except Dems are not a) touting themselves as the party of family values and b) not trying to legislate who can marry who, or outlaw abortion, etc. Again, it's the hypocrisy.



    Hypocrisy is hardly unique to just the Republicans, Christian icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 3:09 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidRather than the tit for tat to try and paint one side as worse than the other, why don't we just agree that their are scummy, lecherous, philandering, lying cheats among politicians in BOTH parties. For every horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the right, there is an equally horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the left. Anyone who says differently is simply being disingenuous

    I'm not sure your 50-50 view is accurate. I'd put it at more like 80-20, "advantage" Repubs. With the added element of hypocrisy regarding the Repubs, because they're the ones much more likely to transgress in the very same areas in which they're trying to legislate for others, as with their "family values" crusade.

    Or of immediate interest to us here, when some in the right wing preach against gay rights, but practice gay sex themselves, albeit in the closet. I'd use the old phrase "adding insult to injury" but I don't think that's adequate to the seriousness of the situation, at least for the gay community.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 3:14 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidRather than the tit for tat to try and paint one side as worse than the other, why don't we just agree that their are scummy, lecherous, philandering, lying cheats among politicians in BOTH parties. For every horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the right, there is an equally horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the left. Anyone who says differently is simply being disingenuous


    I think it is a fair criticism in that it is social conservatives who moralize and want to legislate what happens in the bedroom making the hypocrisy considerably more striking (and objectionable). On the other hand, it's remarkable how the media largely covered and seems to actively not report on these issues when it comes to Democrats in the US and more broadly, those on the left elsewhere (which makes a lot more sense when you recognize that substantially more journalists self identify as both elitists and left of center).

    It is simply a question of power and hubris that there are scumbags no matter the party.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 3:17 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    Christian73 saidThis is yet another straw man argument by socal.

    Who among us "RJ lefties" is leaping to Edwards defense?

    The difference between us and the right is that when someone on our side screws up, we want them held accountable. But the list of right-wing and Republican politicians who have done worse than Edwards, gotten away with it and been defended by the Republican Party and conservatives is as long as my arm.

    John Ensign (accused of virtually the same thing as Edwards)
    David Vitter
    Newt Gingrich
    Arnold


    And the above republican whores are current day. Edwards whoring around is old news.

    If SoCal wants to reach back into the 2000's, maybe we should dig up other republicans, including Mark Foley and the toe tapping guy, Larry Craig! Hypocrites extraordinare...these guys voted and spoke out gays, while doing gay things behind closed doors. And what Foley did was legally pedophilia. He should have been jailed, but the republican congress destroyed the evidence before leaving office.



    Are you talking about Gerry Studds D and BJ Barney D regarding their 'fun times' with 17 year old congressional pages?
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    May 26, 2011 3:28 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    I'm not sure your 50-50 view is accurate. I'd put it at more like 80-20, "advantage" Repubs. With the added element of hypocrisy regarding the Repubs, because they're the ones much more likely to transgress in the very same areas in which they're trying to legislate for others, as with their "family values" crusade.

    Or of immediate interest to us here, when some in the right wing preach against gay rights, but practice gay sex themselves, albeit in the closet. I'd use the old phrase "adding insult to injury" but I don't think that's adequate to the seriousness of the situation, at least for the gay community.



    YOU would put it at more like 80-20, but that doesn't mean your opinion is necessarily grained in truth. If you're speaking specifically about "gay rights" perhaps you have a point, but looking at the broader landscape, I would argue that there are hypocrites on both sides and one isn't any better than the other.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 4:23 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Art_Deco said
    I'm not sure your 50-50 view is accurate. I'd put it at more like 80-20, "advantage" Repubs. With the added element of hypocrisy regarding the Repubs, because they're the ones much more likely to transgress in the very same areas in which they're trying to legislate for others, as with their "family values" crusade.

    Or of immediate interest to us here, when some in the right wing preach against gay rights, but practice gay sex themselves, albeit in the closet. I'd use the old phrase "adding insult to injury" but I don't think that's adequate to the seriousness of the situation, at least for the gay community.

    YOU would put it at more like 80-20, but that doesn't mean your opinion is necessarily grained in truth. If you're speaking specifically about "gay rights" perhaps you have a point, but looking at the broader landscape, I would argue that there are hypocrites on both sides and one isn't any better than the other.

    I was thinking not only in terms of nature of the offense, but frequency as well. The usual right-wing reply is to throw up Jack & Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Elliot Spitzer, John Edwards, all fairly vanilla indiscretions, none of them gay, and not while waging an anti-gay, family values crusade. And over a 50-year history it isn't that intense. (I'll even throw in FDR with Lucy Mercer as a New Deal bonus).

    Whereas I think the more recent roll-call of Repubs is a bit more impressive. And as I wrote above, hypocritical in their campaigning on, and legislating for, family values and anti-gay rights for others. The very things they were not doing themselves in their private lives, but sought to regulate the private lives of others on these same matters. I think that's a good definition of hypocritical.

    And so maybe we should make a list of disgraced legislators, and see how the numbers tally.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 4:27 PM GMT
    A related data point: http://www.slate.com/id/2195914/#latedict an internal memo from the LA Times -

    From: "Pierce, Tony"
    Date: July 24, 2008 10:54:41 AM PDT
    To: [XXX]
    Subject: john edwards
    Hey bloggers,
    There has been a little buzz surrounding John Edwards and his alleged affair. Because the only source has been the National Enquirer we have decided not to cover the rumors or salacious speculations. So I am asking you all not to blog about this topic until further notified.
    If you have any questions or are ever in need of story ideas that would best fit your blog, please don't hesitate to ask
    Keep rockin,
    Tony


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 5:06 PM GMT
    And BTW, just to return focus & clarify: Edwards is not being charged for his infidelities, offenses which I condemn in their own right. Rather, his problem is the use of Federal campaign funds as part of his cheating. That makes it a Federal crime, and a felony.

    I'm not aware of any Democrats, here or elsewhere, trying to rationalize what he did, nor exonerate him. Which contrasts sharply with the Republican response when one of their own is caught in similar circumstances. Their loyalty might be commendable were their morality not so deplorable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 9:24 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    CuriousJockAZ saidRather than the tit for tat to try and paint one side as worse than the other, why don't we just agree that their are scummy, lecherous, philandering, lying cheats among politicians in BOTH parties. For every horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the right, there is an equally horrendous and sensationalized scandal on the left. Anyone who says differently is simply being disingenuous


    I think it is a fair criticism in that it is social conservatives who moralize and want to legislate what happens in the bedroom making the hypocrisy considerably more striking (and objectionable). On the other hand, it's remarkable how the media largely covered and seems to actively not report on these issues when it comes to Democrats in the US and more broadly, those on the left elsewhere (which makes a lot more sense when you recognize that substantially more journalists self identify as both elitists and left of center).

    It is simply a question of power and hubris that there are scumbags no matter the party.


    That's ridiculous.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 26, 2011 10:05 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 saidIt is simply a question of power and hubris that there are scumbags no matter the party.

    That's ridiculous.

    riddler is falling back on the worn-out counter that "they all do it, so everyone is guilty." There are 2 issues with his approach.

    1. They DON'T all do it, and you slander good people with the bad when you make that claim. That's a generalization riddler himself would be quick to criticize.

    2. The right-wing tactic here is to discourage liberals voters from coming out. But right-wing voters will come out no matter what, undeterred by a little corruption & scandal. They are more team-players than liberals, less concerned about "intellectual" issues like ethics & morality. So if you bad-mouth both sides, you're mainly suppressing the liberal vote, not the conservative. A clever tactic, actually, and you can see it being played here.

    Shouting "THEY ALL DO IT!" hurts mainly the liberals, as well they know, not the conservatives, who are largely immune from self-reflection and any sense of guilt. Plus this is a gay, and largely non-conservative site, except perhaps in relation to economics. Therefore saying "they all do it" is unlikely to impact a large number of social conservatives here, who comprise a very small number of members. The target is the rest of us. Too bad these guys have no facts to back up their assertion (aka falsehood).