As John Edwards fights felony campaign-finance charges that could put him in prison and strip away his license to practice law, heís getting support from unlikely corners of the conservative media.
This support, we hasten to add, in no way excuses Edwardsí reprehensible behavior in his adulterous affair with Rielle Hunter and the subsequent attempts to conceal he was the father of the child she conceived. Rather it raises a question: Is the federal case against Edwards really worth pursuing?
The right-tilting Carolina Journal apparently thinks not. ěTo act like a heel is not to be a criminal,î publisher John Hood said in a report carried by Reuters news service. ěWe have to distinguish between Edwardsí disgusting behavior and allegations of criminality.î
Meanwhile, over at Fox News, commentator Ellen Ratner describes the indictment as a waste of ětaxpayer money and government time,î noting the trial could cost taxpayers $1 million. ěWith schools needing textbooks, tornado victims needing homes, this is a waste of our resources.î
Itís tempting to question the ultimate benefit of pursuing Edwards and to wish this sordid episode would simply vanish for good. Most of us have had more than our fill of it. However, if federal prosecutors believe Edwards violated campaign laws, they must pursue this case. To do otherwise would reinforce the perception that there are two systems of justice ó one for rich celebrities like Edwards and another for those of lesser means and influence. It also would suggest that campaign-finance violations donít merit the most diligent scrutiny, when in fact those laws help protect the integrity of our electoral system. Even if the $925,000 paid to keep the Hunter affair quiet doesnít come under the category of a campaign contribution, it arguably had a political purpose in seeking to help preserve Edwardsí White House ambitions.
Edwards once campaigned on the populist theme of ětwo Americasî ó the ěAmerica of the privileged and the wealthy,î in his words, and the America of those less fortunate. He railed against a double standard in society that favored the powerful over the poor, the boardroom elitists over the dispossessed. Rather than view these charges as the result of prosecutors succumbing to their own zealous ambitions, consider the indictment an extension of Edwardsí vision of equal justice for all. If these charges are unfounded, heíll have his day in court to prove it.