Does hiding a politician’s baby mama violate election law? We shall see.
After a two-year investigation, federal prosecutors believe they have a strong case against John Edwards in his efforts to cover up his affair with campaign videographer Rielle Hunter. There have been no charges yet, but sources close to the Justice Department believe that an indictment could come within days or weeks.
“It would be surprising now if he wasn’t indicted,” said Stephen Saltzburg, a former federal prosecutor and George Washington University law professor [in an MSNBC story]. “If John Edwards was aware that money was being paid to hide his mistress… and it was done to help his campaign, then he’s in trouble.”
Popular VideoThis young teenage singer was shocked when Keith Urban invited her on stage at his concert. A few moments later, he made her wildest dreams come true.
From the MSNBC story:
Federal prosecutors are trying to prove Edwards had a hand in the payment of more than $1 million provided by two key supporters…money used, according to numerous sources, to keep Hunter quiet and out of sight. Prosecutors are examining whether the money spent on Hunter should have been treated and reported as campaign contributions, since keeping her way from the press was crucial to Edwards remaining a viable candidate.
So what’s your take? Should expenditures to keep Rielle Hunter out of the public eye have been reported as campaign spending?