If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   John Edwards' defense rests on the definition of a single word. Surprisingly, that word is not "douchebag"   (gma.yahoo.com) divider line 96
    More: Followup, John Edwards, Bonita Springs, edwards, get to the point, Surfside, California, ignorance of the law, Rielle Hunter, HMM?  
•       •       •

12874 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 May 2012 at 6:28 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



96 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-14 03:05:16 PM  
Is it "is"?
 
2012-05-14 03:12:03 PM  

EvilEgg: Is it "is"?


and we are done.
 
2012-05-14 03:19:55 PM  

EvilEgg: Is it "is"?


Even more moronic: "the"
 
2012-05-14 03:29:23 PM  
Ya know what John, you can probably get some interest in that conversation having some beers with your lawyer friends... but you're trying to convince a jury here. Not gonna work.
 
2012-05-14 03:41:30 PM  
The purpose != a purpose. I vote PMITA Club Fed on the weekends, a hefty fine, and perhaps a strongly worded letter.

Who an I kidding with that whole "justice is blind" nonsense.
 
2012-05-14 03:43:12 PM  
Also, plz put an Autoplay warning in there, Subbs.
 
2012-05-14 03:48:48 PM  
On one hand, Edwards is scum ysing campain money for personal use. On the other hand, if he used campaign money to hide her from the press to save his bid, isn't that election related?
 
2012-05-14 05:02:23 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: On one hand, Edwards is scum ysing campain money for personal use. On the other hand, if he used campaign money to hide her from the press to save his bid, isn't that election related?


I'm not an expert, but I believe what you can and cannot spend your money on is well defined.

Hence- Super PACs, where the spending isn't really regulated or defined at all.
 
2012-05-14 05:02:30 PM  
Dude was a medmal plaintiff's lawyer. Who didn't see this shiat coming?
 
2012-05-14 05:30:25 PM  

downstairs: I'm not an expert, but I believe what you can and cannot spend your money on is well defined.


Well, that's the problem:
The statute governing illegal receipt of campaign contributions "means any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money... for the purpose of influencing any election for federal office."

If that was merely one purpose of several, or even not the primary purpose, does it count? And should the courts be the ones answering that, or should Congress fix the ambiguity in its law?
 
2012-05-14 05:52:27 PM  
"Is" was my first thought, but my second thought was "marriage", which as everybody knows is the union of one man and one one for the purpose of producing babies for a period of time no less than 24 hours, but not more than a successful term in the US Senate, unless the couple are traditionalist Mormans and the man wants to marry his twelve year old cousins, or the marriage takes place in a state where you can marry your nieces or one or more of the two partners are not white, in which case it will only be valid in Blue States unless the couple comes from a Red State and the Blue States fold like Superman on laundry day, i.e, Massachusetts, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, get a lawyer before you propose because without a pre-nup your ass is glass.
 
2012-05-14 06:31:46 PM  
farm6.static.flickr.com

/My 2nd greenlit thingy re Edwards :D
//Thanks Fark
 
2012-05-14 06:33:23 PM  
I think that if the legislators had intended the law to mean what John wants it to mean, then they would have phrased it as "the sole purpose." Otherwise this is a huge loophole for a great many existing laws since you can say, "yes, I intended to defraud them, but 0.01% of me just wanted a taco."
 
2012-05-14 06:34:15 PM  
Link

I'm impressed that is online.
 
2012-05-14 06:34:41 PM  
Love how they referenced Clinton......

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-05-14 06:42:05 PM  
The FEC said it was legal. That's good enough for me, and it should be good enough for the jury.
 
2012-05-14 06:42:10 PM  
I thought this guy was a spiritual medium?! Shouldn't have one of the spirits warned him about this situation?
 
2012-05-14 06:44:54 PM  
you mean "the" doesn't mean "the" ?
 
2012-05-14 06:46:29 PM  
Man, and here I was going with 'Derp'
 
2012-05-14 06:47:37 PM  

diaphoresis: Love how they referenced Clinton......

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 320x318]


How does the person who made the button know what male genital issue tastes like?
 
2012-05-14 06:49:29 PM  
Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?
 
2012-05-14 06:51:29 PM  

Corvus: Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?


Because its scandalicious!
 
2012-05-14 06:51:55 PM  
Eulalie?

/obscure
 
2012-05-14 06:59:30 PM  
I read this dude's book... Interesting stories, but I'm still convinced he's just doing cold-reading.
 
2012-05-14 06:59:50 PM  
Campaign finance laws are so slippery, when was the last time an elected official served any jail time for violating them?

Even Tom Delay is still out on bail pending his appeal. From an indictment made in 2005.
 
2012-05-14 07:01:01 PM  
And that word is "Santorum"
 
2012-05-14 07:01:12 PM  
i will not listen to obummer, i loath even it's voice!
 
2012-05-14 07:01:45 PM  
He brought his daughter, mom, and dad to the proceedings.
 
2012-05-14 07:03:17 PM  

whither_apophis: Eulalie?

/obscure


I think you're thinking of Larry "Wide Stance" Craig.

/it just wouldn't do for the word Eulalie to be all that obscure....
 
2012-05-14 07:07:22 PM  
The prosecution rested. Not the defense.
 
2012-05-14 07:09:02 PM  
You know who else...
 
2012-05-14 07:16:30 PM  

Corvus: Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?


Because if he is found not guilty, then future candidates can use campaign funds for whatever the hell they want, as long as they give $1 of said money to the actual campaign.
 
2012-05-14 07:23:58 PM  
Is it "haircut"?
 
2012-05-14 07:24:03 PM  
The Supreme Court has often ruled for a "plain language" interpretation of the law, as part of both the right to Due Process and the right to Equal Protection; this means you cannot invent meanings for words that don't exist in common usage, and you certainly cannot introduce new works into the text of the law. So if the prosecution is relying on an argument that "the purpose" could be read as "a purpose", they should have looked for a new argument before they rested.

/still embarrassed that I supported Edwards in 2004
 
2012-05-14 07:28:25 PM  
Can't wait to send this guy some hair soap prison shower fun.
 
2012-05-14 07:29:36 PM  

namegoeshere: Corvus: Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?

Because if he is found not guilty, then future candidates can use campaign funds for whatever the hell they want, as long as they give $1 of said money to the actual campaign.


Which will probably happen. Remember: Money = Speech. Why are you trying to trample on John Edwards' First Amendment rights?
 
2012-05-14 07:32:06 PM  
Howabout we just make a law that all campaign finance money goes into an escrow account to be held until after the election? The candidate spends his/her own money for the campaign and then gets reimbursed from the escrow account upon receipt of a properly audited accounting of his/her expenses...which presumably would not include "Money paid to my pregnant mistress to keep her quiet."

Yeah yeah, I know there are massive problems with this, but I just now made it up, so STFU.
 
2012-05-14 07:34:10 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: EvilEgg: Is it "is"?

and we are done.


One might even say "Clintoned in the Boobies."
 
2012-05-14 07:39:23 PM  
I'm surprised that anyone with two brain cells to rub together would try to use the old "It depends on what is is" defense. The last time a politician tried that tactic didn't it ultimately lead to the impeachment and disbarment of a president? Did they think that nobody on the jury would remember that fiasco and how transparent the attempt to wriggle out of that lie was and where it led to? All I can say is that the Democratic party dodged a bullet when he didn't get their nomination for president.
 
2012-05-14 07:39:56 PM  

EvilEgg: Is it "is"?


came... you win... bye
 
2012-05-14 07:45:00 PM  

namegoeshere: Corvus: Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?

Because if he is found not guilty, then future candidates can use campaign funds for whatever the hell they want, as long as they give $1 of said money to the actual campaign.


I get the feeling Corvus would be totally cool with Republicans using campaign funds to bury their shenanigans.
 
2012-05-14 07:47:10 PM  

fusillade762: namegoeshere: Corvus: Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?

Because if he is found not guilty, then future candidates can use campaign funds for whatever the hell they want, as long as they give $1 of said money to the actual campaign.

Which will probably happen. Remember: Money = Speech. Why are you trying to trample on John Edwards' First Amendment rights?


I'm pretty sure it's already happening. Just one example: Candidates who "suspend" their campaigns can still raise and spend all of that sweet, sweet money that is supposed to go toward their election efforts.
 
2012-05-14 07:48:46 PM  
Dude's a farking sucmbag. And the sad thing is, our elected officials aren't much better, because they have to play the game.

WHEN THE FARK ARE WE GOING TO GET CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM???????
 
2012-05-14 07:51:25 PM  
Linking to an autoplay page makes you an asshole.
 
2012-05-14 07:59:43 PM  
Prosecutors concluded their case last week by showing an interview Edwards gave to ABC News' "Nightline" program in which he clearly lied several times, including denying that he had fathered Hunter's baby.

Wait, a politician lied on TV? He should be executed.
 
2012-05-14 08:01:53 PM  

Rug Doctor: fusillade762: namegoeshere: Corvus: Does Edwards hold an office? Is he running for office? Then why do we care about this again?

Because if he is found not guilty, then future candidates can use campaign funds for whatever the hell they want, as long as they give $1 of said money to the actual campaign.

Which will probably happen. Remember: Money = Speech. Why are you trying to trample on John Edwards' First Amendment rights?

I'm pretty sure it's already happening. Just one example: Candidates who "suspend" their campaigns can still raise and spend all of that sweet, sweet money that is supposed to go toward their election efforts.


Spend it? Just fill a pool with it and go swimming.

Fark should follow Colbert's example and start a SuperPAC.
 
2012-05-14 08:03:20 PM  
www.thegrio.com

"Good one John!"
 
2012-05-14 08:06:07 PM  

llevrok: Can't wait to send this guy some hair soap prison shower fun.


Any prison he gets sent to is likely to be nicer than my home. And only slightly more rapey.
 
2012-05-14 08:06:44 PM  
The most important contribution to the analysis of the English definite article is Bertrand Russell "On Denoting" 1905 in the journal Mind. There is a substantial literature responding to that paper.

Philosophy matters.
 
2012-05-14 08:06:58 PM  

Theaetetus: downstairs: I'm not an expert, but I believe what you can and cannot spend your money on is well defined.

Well, that's the problem:
The statute governing illegal receipt of campaign contributions "means any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money... for the purpose of influencing any election for federal office."

If that was merely one purpose of several, or even not the primary purpose, does it count? And should the courts be the ones answering that, or should Congress fix the ambiguity in its law?


Yeah, it sounds like the law is flawed and needs fixing.
 
Displayed 50 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report