<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Edwards Jurors Explain Why Guilty Verdicts Weren&#8217;t Possible</title>
	<atom:link href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/</link>
	<description>The latest Politics news and blog posts from ABC News contributors and bloggers including Jake Tapper, George Stephanopoulos and more.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 22:15:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: suswa</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26731741</link>
		<dc:creator>suswa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2012 06:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26731741</guid>
		<description>Well, hello, tabloid mania fueled by Republicans in North Carolina.  The Citizens United case now makes it possible for PACs to fund candidates without disclosing the funders. Our conservative Supreme Court kind of shot itself in the foot...if they wanted their Republican Party to succeed in going after John Edwards. Karma.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, hello, tabloid mania fueled by Republicans in North Carolina.  The Citizens United case now makes it possible for PACs to fund candidates without disclosing the funders. Our conservative Supreme Court kind of shot itself in the foot&#8230;if they wanted their Republican Party to succeed in going after John Edwards. Karma.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara E Bj</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26694861</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara E Bj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 05:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26694861</guid>
		<description>Personally, I have never figured out why people get so worked up about this sort of vague crap and always want people charged criminally for personal stuff.  

He was out of the running as soon as the whole tacky affair came out.  That was the end of his presidential run and any other political ambitions he may have had.

But, why in the world we would want to spend taxpayer money chasing down criminal charges over what a person was thinking is strange to me and stupid.  That money that was spent on this trial could have gone to better use.

I would not have been able to find him guilty of a felony based on a guess of what he was thinking at the time.  I would have needed either for him to divulge what he was thinking or for someone to have a full-proof test that reads minds.  Most men who try to hide their cheating through secret payoffs are trying to hide it from their wives.  Who else would they be trying to hide it from, realistically.... seriously...  And, if that was also what he was trying to do, the judge made it very clear that no crime was committed.

I hate the way that the justice system functions at times.  Bringing someone up on charges should be a cut and dry thing with a Grand Jury FIRST proving that a crime has actually been committed.  Basically, the jury had to decide whether there was any crime at all and no jury should have to decide that.  They should only have to decide if the right person was arrested for committing the crime that was definitely committed.

This would be funny if it weren&#039;t so sad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, I have never figured out why people get so worked up about this sort of vague crap and always want people charged criminally for personal stuff.  </p>
<p>He was out of the running as soon as the whole tacky affair came out.  That was the end of his presidential run and any other political ambitions he may have had.</p>
<p>But, why in the world we would want to spend taxpayer money chasing down criminal charges over what a person was thinking is strange to me and stupid.  That money that was spent on this trial could have gone to better use.</p>
<p>I would not have been able to find him guilty of a felony based on a guess of what he was thinking at the time.  I would have needed either for him to divulge what he was thinking or for someone to have a full-proof test that reads minds.  Most men who try to hide their cheating through secret payoffs are trying to hide it from their wives.  Who else would they be trying to hide it from, realistically&#8230;. seriously&#8230;  And, if that was also what he was trying to do, the judge made it very clear that no crime was committed.</p>
<p>I hate the way that the justice system functions at times.  Bringing someone up on charges should be a cut and dry thing with a Grand Jury FIRST proving that a crime has actually been committed.  Basically, the jury had to decide whether there was any crime at all and no jury should have to decide that.  They should only have to decide if the right person was arrested for committing the crime that was definitely committed.</p>
<p>This would be funny if it weren&#8217;t so sad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barnes</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26666911</link>
		<dc:creator>Barnes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26666911</guid>
		<description>One of the issues that I do understand is what about the tax liability. If Edwards received a $1MM gift doesn’t he owe taxes on it?   If he ran it through his campaign accounts would that be fraud?  

Does anyone have an idea how the DOJ looked at the tax liability?  All we can hope for is that the IRS will come down on him for 1/3 of the $1MM plus penalties.  Maybe his baby’s momma will have to go back to work!  That would finally be some justice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the issues that I do understand is what about the tax liability. If Edwards received a $1MM gift doesn’t he owe taxes on it?   If he ran it through his campaign accounts would that be fraud?  </p>
<p>Does anyone have an idea how the DOJ looked at the tax liability?  All we can hope for is that the IRS will come down on him for 1/3 of the $1MM plus penalties.  Maybe his baby’s momma will have to go back to work!  That would finally be some justice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alans4</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26665161</link>
		<dc:creator>alans4</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26665161</guid>
		<description>These jurors are beyond stupid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These jurors are beyond stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rlynh</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26664371</link>
		<dc:creator>Rlynh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:00:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26664371</guid>
		<description>Well, it may not be clear that Edwards belongs in jail, but it&#039;s pretty clear that his political career is over.  And that&#039;s a win.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, it may not be clear that Edwards belongs in jail, but it&#8217;s pretty clear that his political career is over.  And that&#8217;s a win.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26663671</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:52:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26663671</guid>
		<description>So we have a woman who got pregnant by some unknown guy, who&#039;s then given thousands of dollars by two completely separate billionaires, and these are considered gifts. I&#039;m sure it was out of the kindness of their hearts, nothing to do with the election. Even if Edwards didn&#039;t know, wouldn&#039;t it have been better to convict him to send a message that this won&#039;t be tolerated, then let the appeals process handle the fallout?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So we have a woman who got pregnant by some unknown guy, who&#8217;s then given thousands of dollars by two completely separate billionaires, and these are considered gifts. I&#8217;m sure it was out of the kindness of their hearts, nothing to do with the election. Even if Edwards didn&#8217;t know, wouldn&#8217;t it have been better to convict him to send a message that this won&#8217;t be tolerated, then let the appeals process handle the fallout?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carol Walters</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26660621</link>
		<dc:creator>Carol Walters</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:12:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26660621</guid>
		<description>Agreed what an idiot but goldigger too! &quot;I giggled when I saw that they wrote I flirted with John Edwards.&quot; A non-idiot, non-goldigger reponse would be outrage&quot; how could anyone think I would flirt with a scumbag, morally bankrupt human being like John Edwards&quot;. Watch out Rielle she looking to replace you or she&#039;ll be posing in Playboy next!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed what an idiot but goldigger too! &#8220;I giggled when I saw that they wrote I flirted with John Edwards.&#8221; A non-idiot, non-goldigger reponse would be outrage&#8221; how could anyone think I would flirt with a scumbag, morally bankrupt human being like John Edwards&#8221;. Watch out Rielle she looking to replace you or she&#8217;ll be posing in Playboy next!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: newcountryman</title>
		<link>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/edwards-jurors-explain-why-guilty-verdicts-werent-possible/#comment-26644781</link>
		<dc:creator>newcountryman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/?p=684191#comment-26644781</guid>
		<description>In an interview with jurors they said they thought he was guilty but there wasn&#039;t enough evidence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In an interview with jurors they said they thought he was guilty but there wasn&#8217;t enough evidence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>