money hidden in a box of chocolates.
Not because I approve of him in any way, but because I disapprove of the government's case and certainly don't like the convoluted manner in which they are trying to apply support she received as "campaign contributions" unreported. This smarmy prosecution seeks to expand government powers even further into the private lives of individuals. He didn't break a law, (moral codes yes) when he got his mistress pregnant. It's not against the law to give someone who isn't a candidate some money to live on. No law against lying to newspaper reporters. What if he'd said he had a honey with a bun in the oven? Would they prosecute him THEN if his friends gave her money to live on? No, of course not. Why? Because they'd have no case, therefore they still have no case just because it wasn't known till later.
<b>Edwards was aware of the private financial support that helped keep the
mistress satisfied and secluded. Prosecutors believe the private gifts
should have been considered campaign contributions since they aided his