The title of a recently released Yahoo! article is “John Edwards on mistrial: ‘While I DO NOT believe I did anything illegal, I DID AN AWFUL, AWFUL LOT THAT WAS WRONG’” (Web-site/URL:

“John Edwards appeared thankful outside the federal courthouse in Greensboro, N.C., on Thursday (May 31, 2012), after the jury in his corruption trial said that it could not agree on a verdict for five of six counts, forcing U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles to declare a mistrial. The one count the 12-member jury agreed on–count three–was related to $725,000 given to Edwards by Rachel “Bunny” Mellon, a wealthy Texas heiress. The jury found Edwards NOT guilty of that count”.

Edwards said: “I think THOSE JURORS WERE AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT JURIES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO IN THIS COUNTRYThey were VERY, VERY IMPRESSIVE“.   Edwards is only saying this because HE GOT WHAT HE WANTEDAgain everyone is SELF-SERVING/has SELFISH interests.

“On the courthouse steps, Edwards–flanked by his attorney, Abbe Lowell, his daughter Cate (who might be pregnant) and his two elderly parents–spoke for several minutes and remained mostly composed”. “I want to make sure everyone hears from ME. While I DO NOT  believe I did anything ILLEGAL, or ever thought that I was doing anything illegal, I did an awful, awful lot that was WRONG obviously. Edwards is only realizing this NOW? THERE IS NO ONE ELSE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY SINSobviously. I am responsible–none of the people who came to court and testified are responsible, nobody working for the government is responsible. I am responsible. It is ME and ME ALONE. Glad he realizes this now.

“Edwards appeared to choke up before he spoke about Frances Quinn, his four-year-old daughter with Hunter. “MY PRECIOUS (?) Quinn, who I love more than any of you can ever imagine“. THIS IS A CIRCUS.

“The defense argued that while he may have been a “bad husband“, he DID NOT violate any federal laws“. John Edwards WAS INDEED “a “bad husband”.

Finally, “in an email”, Robert Mintz, “a former federal prosecutor and partner at McCarter & English”, wrote: “This verdict reflects the struggle that this jury appears to have had in finding some clear cut evidence of criminalityDespite the government’s best efforts, the defense was able to appeal to the jurors’ sense of FAIR PLAY and JUSTICE, even when dealing with an extremely unsympathetic defendant whose credibility was SEVERELY damaged by HIS OWN conduct“. Againwe could easily ask John Edwards the question that ABC‘s BOB WOODRUFF asked him: “How could you have done this?”  (Web-site/URL: “However MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE the conduct [was] here, they COULD NOT agree that it added up to a CRIMINAL violation“. HoweverJohn Edwards will have the label “morally reprehensible” connected with his name for the rest of his lifeIf someone is “morally reprehensible”THAT’S A BAD DAY. AgainHIS POLITICAL FUTURE IS OVER/IN TATTERS.


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s