John Edwards owes U.S. $2.1 million, officials say

[Freddie Stubbs]

Raleigh, N.C. -- Federal election officials say John Edwards owes taxpayers more than $2.1 million in public matching funds received after he dropped his 2008 run for the White House, yet disclosure reports show his failed campaign is still spending freely.

Edwards' hopes for the Democratic presidential nomination imploded in a sex scandal four years ago that left him facing criminal charges. But reports filed last week show his 2008 primary campaign spent $836,712 in 2011 on airfare, hotel rooms, cell phones and other expenses.

The largest 2011 expense, $315,000, was paid to Utrecht & Phillips, the Washington law firm fighting last year's unanimous FEC ruling that Edwards must return its remaining funds to taxpayers.

And more than $266,000 was paid in 2011 for salary, payroll and health insurance premiums.

more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/08/MN651N4OO8.DTL&type=politics

[BeyondGeography]

1. Two Americas indeed

The one that works for a living and the one that scams.

[Festivito]

2. Why are'nt we waiting until the judge declares this.

'Officials say' is not a reliable wordimg, in fact it sounds like a planted story that comes out just before an opposite verdict. MSM plays the 'says' loudly and plays the verdict after a lost dog story.

[patrice]

5. 1+

[karynnj]

16. The FEC did declare that - 6 to 0 per the story

Note that the FEC is bipartisan and all the Democrats agreed that he needs to pay the money back. It's not really very complicated. It has to do with the period for which he can be given matching funds - and it ended when he left the race.

The more troubling things are the strange charges last year - a charge for water when there is no office? Those may have an explanation - and it may have nothing to do with Edwards other than he is has no one in charge - and he is not in charge either.

[zbdent]

3. somehow I doubt he's the only one ...

but then, I doubt anybody else would be getting the "liberally-biased media" coverage ...

[eyewall]

4. right.

[patrice]

6. 1+

[Blue_Tires]

19. I was about to say the same thing

Not excusing Edwards, but Sarah Palin among others is a thousand times shadier...

Hell, she'd probably welcome the publicity of a federal indictment

[alphafemale]

20. Sarah Palin had her spouse with cancer humiliate himself publicly?

And left him for a new hot honey as he died. Really?

John Edwards is cut from the same cloth as Newt Gingrich.

But Democrats toss such swine, we don't consider them contenders for office.

[Blue_Tires]

21. I meant financially shady

as shitty as JE was to his wife, there's no law to indict him on...

[alphafemale]

22. Public scorn is good enough in this case.

Dodged that bullet. Thank good the truth came out soon enough.

[Trillo]

7. What is another frame?

• Never take federal matching dollars.
• Never run for election, as the feds will allegedly and metaphorically hunt you down and shoot you dead.
• ...?

[hr]

Just trying to analyze all the angles, instead of just the explicit.

For the purposes of staying on topic, maybe a deal can be worked out where he gets the same ratio the Feds pushed to give the banks. 26 B (settlement value) vs 800 B (very approximate cumulative retail value of foreclosures subjected to robosigning over several years). Thus 26/800=X/2.1M, X = $68,250

Would the feds take $68,000 from John Edwards to make this "Go away" so we can all move forward and never look back again? If not, why would the Feds give the banks such a good deal, but not a human citizen?

[cbdo2007]

8. We sure dodged a bullet with him.....

I never pegged him as being this dishonest.

[tblue]

9. I must be the only person who still likes John Edwards.

I hate what he did to his wife. Hate how he destroyed his family and his future. Hate how he blew it all WHILE RUNNING for POTUS!

But he was the only politician who spoke about the poor in every single speech, and not as an aside. I loved that about him then and I still do. His loss is our loss.

He effed around at the worst possible time. He fell in love, it appeared to me. There's no excuse and there's no way to fix it. But I don't feel any need to heap any more hatred on the man than he's getting already. He has to live with this and I think that's punishment plenty.

If he ran for office again, I would vote for him if I could.

[patrice]

10. You aren't. That's exactly why he was my second choice, after Bill Richardson (for being courageous

enough to say bring ALL troops home and turn over all bases yesterday and begin regional diplomatic effort in Iraq that includes Palestine & Israel).

Edwards, like Howard Dean, had NOT received the imprimatur of the DLC to be talking about Wall Street and the hedge funds that he, Edwards, KNEW SO WELL, so the party has abandoned/turned-on him.

I fucking hate it when Democrats don't support their own!!! That's very likely to be in-fighting amongst PROFESSIONAL operatives who benefit one way or another from the candidates that they support, so they benefit from attacking other Dems.

[karynnj]

17. Edwards was DLC the entire time he was in the Senate

and while running the second time was paid $500,000 for a "few days work - doing what he wanted where he wanted to do it" by a hedge fund. I guess you are right he knew hedge funds well - and thought they were a good place to study poverty. (The study poverty line contained at almost as much chutzpah as Newt's excuses.

As to Richardson, there were said to be major problems in his ethics and behavior that kept him from being considered for VP in 2004 and 2008 - and kept him out of Obama's cabinet.

To you know that he and Democrats allied to him had a vested interest in some of the Native American vote not being counted in 2004? There were whole precincts where the tally for Kerry was zero, the tally for Bush very low and most people not voting for President even though they voted for all the lower lines on the ballot. This included one area that Ted Kennedy and Vanessa Kerry visited and had a huge, very enthusiastic crowd. The reason it made a difference to Richardson, is the Presidential vote determines how the areas are weighted in Democratic primaries. Before much investigation could be done, Richardson ordered the machines wiped.

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. He sure did a good job telling you exactly what you wanted to hear

I'm much more interested on a person's action, rather than their words.

[Kingofalldems]

12. Same here---about actions vs. words and such.

I must have ESP, because when I first read OP headline I knew who posted it.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

15. .

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. It's no secret that I am not a fan of John Edwards and his duplicity

[MNBrewer]

13. I still like him, too

His Two America's theme has been resurrected by OWS.

[SammyWinstonJack]

23. I still like him and I would vote for him again.

But he has been destroyed politically and I am sure it was done on purpose.


He was talking about something the one-percent didn't want the 99 percent to think about, and they certainly didn't want him in the WH.

[24601]

24. No offense, but what was it about him that made you believe his campaign BS? He always came off to

me as way too slick to be true. People who pay $400 or more for haircuts don't give a rat's ass for non-elite barbers who struggle to make it everyday. If he'd lie, cheat & steal about the most important promise he ever made in his life, why would he ever give a 2nd thought about lying through his teeth to get elected to get even more power? A lot of folks were taken in by this seasoned snake-oil salesman. His loss isn't our loss - it's our gain - it's just too bad we can't just drum him out of the party - but we're stuck with him & his legacy.

Scum like him are the Leona Helmsleys of government with their view that "Rules are for little people - and I ain't little people." He makes Jim & Tammy-Faye Bakker look like amateur grifters.

[Nye Bevan]

26. You think he really cared about the poor?

He carefully analyzed his competition in the race for the nomination and decided that pushing the "two Americas" concept made political sense. All he was doing was attempting to maximize his probability of winning.

His concern for the poor was about as sincere as everything else he has ever spouted in his life.

[LiberalLovinLug]

14. I still support him as well

Of course he did a dishonorable thing, cheating on his wife, and its all the more appalling knowing of Elizabeth's condition.

But geez, according to this website:
http://womansavers.com/infidelity-statistics.asp

22 percent of married men have strayed at least once during their married lives.
14 percent of married women have had affairs at least once during their married lives

He's treated like a murderer or child molester by the MSM and dare I say, by some on DU as well.
Yes we all have to know how to RESIST RESIST RESIST, but whether it was Cupid or Pan than wounded him, it was a very human sin. And he must have fell hard to risk so much at the time. Give the guy a break.

[karynnj]

18. No he is treated as someone who held himself up as a leader and asked for people's trust

All candidates have to ask their followers to trust them and believe in their good intentions. Most Presidential candidates have a track record - a history that people can know them by. Life is messy - and no one is perfect, but most Democrats at that level can point to decades of actions that show who they are. Those that do not have that, must rely mostly on trust alone. That was the case with Edwards.

They not only had to trust what he said, they needed to trust that he had changed from the positions he held in his 6 years in the Senate and even from the positions he had in the 2004 primary. His 2008 platform was closer to Kerry's 2004 position than his. In spite of that, he gained the trust of enough people - and the media - to make him a top tier candidate in 2008. That was a gift.

I had noticed that when he disowned his IWR vote, that he lied about what his position was in 2002 and later. This bothered me because this was a solemn moment where he should have 100% sincere and not posturing. I would bet that few people here even noticed that - or considered it important. Edwards was now ok by their eyes.

The same thing happened in his TV "confession" that he did have an affair. He lied about the time line and, in doing so, lied about being the father of his young daughter.

Remember what I said about Edwards, more than most politicians, needing trust, do you really think that enough people would believe what he says in the future - no matter how eloquently he says it? His talent as a lawyer and a politician was he could make people believe him. The talent - the words, the wide blue eyes - are still there, but he now has a very public record of being dishonest.

Maybe there are enough people with enough desire to believe, but I doubt it.

[Nye Bevan]

27. What percentage of married men have cheated on their cancer-stricken wives? (nt)