Posted on 09/20/2009 9:54:01 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
According to people familiar with the grand jury investigation, prosecutors are considering a complicated and novel legal issue: whether payments to a candidate’s mistress to ensure her silence (and thus maintain the candidate’s viability) should be considered campaign donations and thus whether they should be reported. When Mr. Edwards was running for president, and later when he still held out hope of a cabinet position in the Obama administration, two of his wealthy patrons, through a once-trusted Edwards aide, quietly provided Ms. Hunter with large financial benefits, including a new BMW and lodging, that were used to keep her out of public view.
Mr. Young, who has since renounced that statement, has told publishers in a book proposal that Mr. Edwards knew all along that he was the child’s father. He said Mr. Edwards pleaded with him to accept responsibility falsely, saying that would reduce the story to one of an aide’s infidelity.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/us/politics/20edwards.html?hp
At one point, Mr. Young wrote, Mr. Edwards asked Mr. Baron if he could find a doctor who would falsify a DNA report.
Who paid the gift taxes on all this crap? The skirting (and possible breaking) of the campaign laws may or may not bear fruit for the prosecution, but it seems like a simple and straight forward prosecution based on a scheme to avoid income taxes might just be the easiest cat to skin here - unless of course this is all just for show and they don't have any intentions of skinning any cats, much less any sleazy, low-life philandering ambulance chasers.
The laws only apply to the ‘little people’. I wouldn’t suggest any of us try that!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.