Dems Gloat Over Trump Indictment Report, Forget About John Edwards And Will Be Humiliated In The End

Democrats across the country are gloating over a new report claiming former President Donald Trump will be indicted soon in a case over payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels. But they forget one important precedent, John Edwards.

John Edwards was a Dem politician who had an affair and paid his mistress and was indicted. According to The Washington Examiner: “In 2011, Edwards faced similar charges for payments issued to his mistress by private donors during his failed presidential bid. He was acquitted on the basis that the payments were meant to conceal the affair from his wife for personal and reputational reasons, not from the public for political reasons.”

According to The New York Post: “Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg has notified attorneys for Trump, 76, that the former commander-in-chief will be given the opportunity to defend himself next week in front of the grand jury hearing evidence in the case before the indictment comes down, according to the New York Times. 

“Trump is likely to decline the offer – which is usually only presented to potential defendants when criminal charges are close to being filed – the outlet reports.”

Former prosecutor Glenn Kirschner gloated on MSNBC: “99 times out of 100, this is the last stop before an indictment.”

From Politico:

The Justice Department has dropped its prosecution of former Sen. John Edwards over nearly $1 million in payments his backers made to support his pregnant mistress during the 2008 presidential campaign.

The formal dismissal of charges was filed in federal court in Greensboro, N.C., on Wednesday. The decision came less than two weeks after Edwards’s trial on the campaign finance-related charges ended when a jury deadlocked on five felony counts and voted to acquit him on one charge.

The one-page filing concluded a prosecution that sparked significant criticism of the Justice Department by campaign finance lawyers who deemed the case legally flawed and by Democratic activists who considered it a form of political payback from a Republican prosecutor in North Carolina.

“We knew that this case — like all campaign finance cases — would be challenging. But it is our duty to bring hard cases when we believe that the facts and the law support charging a candidate for high office with a crime,” Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division Lanny Breuer said in a statement.

Breuer did not elaborate on prosecutors’ reasons for abandoning the case. He simply noted the jury’s division on most counts and said: “In the interest of justice, we have decided not to retry Mr. Edwards on those counts.”

Edwards’s defense team welcomed the decision to drop the case.

“While John has repeatedly admitted to his sins, he has also consistently asserted, as we demonstrated at the trial, that he did not violate any campaign law nor even imagined that any campaign laws could apply,” defense lawyers Abbe Lowell, Allison Van Laningham and Alan Duncan said in a joint statement.

“We are confident that the outcome of any new trial would have been the same. We are very glad that, after living under this cloud for over three years, John and his family can have their lives back and enjoy the peace they deserve.”

.@glennkirschner2 on new NYT reporting on Trump invited to testify before a Manhattan grand jury in hush money probe: “99 times out of 100, this is the last stop before an indictment.” pic.twitter.com/QfOFNldcfU

— 11th Hour (@11thHour) March 10, 2023

Maggie Haberman on Trump indictment story: “It’s a misdemeanor they’re trying to push up to a felony. It’s an exotic case…that’s a difficult case for a prosecutor.” pic.twitter.com/VDNKuguWOj

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) March 10, 2023

A potential indictment against Donald Trump — who is also a current presidential candidate — poses challenges for prosecutors.

Here’s what we know about the case. https://t.co/87IbXLWB4h

— The New York Times (@nytimes) March 10, 2023