John Edwards Indicted on Felony Charges by Federal Grand Jury

MSNBC—June 3, 2011— John Edwards has been indicted by a Federal Grand Jury in Raleigh, NC this morning for allegedly misusing campaign money to coverup an affair with Rielle Hunter. These are criminal charges. He rejected a plea deal.Copyright MSNBC/NBC Universal (News) 2011 § 107.Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include — (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Sen. John Edwards indicted by federal Grand Jury investigation misuse of campaign funds plea deal bargain Rielle Hunter criminal felony charges Today Show
Video Rating: 4 / 5


  • CherubimandAngels

    I so agree with you.

  • ytgv3fc7

    @fal2grace And yet no charges against the bankers who stole all the money to get their bonuses!!
    THIS is where the charges SHOULD be happening

  • fal2grace

    @deadman12078 you’d think an attorney would at least be that smart.

  • deadman12078

    Wear a rubber

  • clintonearlwalker

    @acplight First) that depends on whether he is convicted and of how many charges. Also, he may still plead guilty. From what I’ve read he’s facing 6 charges, it said the prosecutors usually seek at least some prison time for a white collar criminal. Second) These politicians almost never have to do any time in prison, if he does it will probably be in a country club Federal prison. The prosecutors will have a tough time getting any prison time for this guy.

  • CelticReject

    @blueorangelettuce You never could. You only BELIEVED that you could trust them.

  • fal2grace

    @meluaufeet I’m rather glad she wasn’t around for this.

  • goldcurrent1

    Its a start, I guess. Next the JP Morgan/Goldman Sachs cabal. AKA the real financial terrorists.

  • withholeyshoes

    Let’s tal about the daytrading SEC protected sscheme and their p & D scams which every trader knew they were participating in.

    Let’s talk!

    What does my comment have to do w/ J Edwards…nothing, until I read who was arguing to be right.

    I lost a shitload of money on SEC protected day-trading scams!

  • blueorangelettuce

    We can’t trust anyone anymore.

  • acplight

    can anyone tell me about how long will he spend in prison?

  • doc7474

    Now I’m not defending Edwards here but it was said in this report he got that $700k for personal problems, not campaign funds. I’m guessing the reporting wasn’t complete..

    John Edwards is still slime. RIP Elizabeth.

  • meluaufeet

    Rest in Peace… Elizabeth

  • bweazel

    @2010GOP None of these moneys flowed through his campaign account. And none of these moneys were even paid to him directly, but he did see an indirect benefit of not having his name smeared. The only law that was broken here was the excess of contributions, which the donors should be held legally responsible for. Are they? Nope. Person A, B, C and D appear to be getting off completely for this.

    They sure use the phrase “protect and advance” a bunch. The donations did not advance him at all.

  • withholeyshoes

    @2010GOP … do you have children?

  • bweazel

    @2010GOP Again, it is not embarrassing to have a different opinion. This is how law works. Interpretation of the law and the event in question. I’m not saying that what he did was right, but I do not believe it is illegal or a misuse of campaign funds, since he did not use the funds from his campaign funds, he received the money in question, under the table and off the books, to help keep an embarrassing situation below the radar. This is not corruption to anyone but his late wife.

  • 2010GOP

    @withholeyshoes: If a single father went & robbed a bank, should he not do any time because he has kids?

  • withholeyshoes

    @2010GOP … do you have children?

  • bweazel

    @withholeyshoes Nope.

  • navtel

    slime puke lawyers are a plight.. if they get caught lying they should go to jail.. i hate lawyers.

  • 2010GOP

    @bweazel: It should be embarrassing when you put forth your opinion w/out knowing or understanding the facts …. go read the full indictment:

    abcnews . go . com / Site / page?id=13752809

  • withholeyshoes

    @bweazel … kiss & make up

    Do you have children?

  • AschersOil

    All darkness shall be brought into the light.

  • bweazel

    @2010GOP Nahhh, giving an opposing view is never embarrassing. I’d say continuing to be uncivil and childish to a person who has been nothing but nice to you is more embarrassing, but hey, to each their own.

    No, I won’t stop trying to debate the law. It is all arbitrary anyways, and is always up to change. So we should always debate it. I see no fraud concerning his smaller donors. The larger donors clearly gave him this money, off the books, for this purpose alone.

  • bweazel

    @2010GOP What I see here are people trying to retroactively reclassify private donations for something indirectly related to his campaign. It is entirely different for him to use money, entrusted to him by small donations deposited to his campaign fund, than it is for him to be taking large, under the table, private donations, for the sole purpose of bribing the woman he had an affair with.

    If they can show me where he misused moneys from his campaign fund then we’d have a case. Just my opinion