When word first came down this afternoon that the John Edwards jury had reached a verdict, the cable nets were calm, deliberate, and OMG! When it turned out to be only a partial verdict at that point … AAAAARGH!
Click here for larger version and check out more TPM videos here.
The government’s case against John Edwards was always a reach. The partial verdict announced just now confirms it. Edwards was found not guilty on one count, and a mistrial was declared on the five others. It remains to be seen whether the Justice Department will move to try the case again.
The official portraits of George W. and Laura Bush, unveiled today at the White House.
So it turns out the jury reached a verdict but not the verdict in the John Edwards trial. Unanimity on only one count — no unanimity on the remaining 5 counts. It was not revealed how the jury came down on the one count, but it is reportedly the count having to do with whether Bunny Mellon’s payments for the keeping and hiding of Edwards’ mistress exceeded the FEC contribution limits. The judge, as is customary, sent the jury back to continue deliberating.
The verdict is reportedly in and will be announced shortly. Follow all the latest developments on the John Edwards trial at TPMLivewire.
North Carolina Republicans have come up with a novel strategy to combat a future threatened by a rise in sea levels, which scientists agree will continue to accelerate thanks to global warming: Pass a law pretending it won’t happen.
I woke up this morning to read an astonishingly bad piece of reporting/analysis from Politico, publicly chin scratching about the apparently massive press bias against the Romney campaign. But a piece in GQ sums it up better than I could so let me quote the key passage … Read More
Rep. Hoekstra, fresh off calling for a federal office of birtherism is now calling the whole issue of birtherism an “absolutely ludicrous discussion.”
A three-judge panel of the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston has ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.
Most have moved on from this. But TPM Reader JH has a good take on just what Eduardo Saverin got out of his US citizenship. One little discussed issue is that coming to the US was in part triggered when Saverin’s name showed up on a list of potential kidnap-for-ransom targets in his native Brazil …
I’m not a lawyer, but as an historian I have always understood that concepts of citizenship in the Western world, particularly the English-speaking world, rested on centuries of English law holding, in part, that in return for the protection of the Crown a citizen owed the monarch his allegiance. You could renounce the allegiance, but while you depended on the protection of the Crown you were bound by certain obligations, including taxation and going to war if that was required.
I believe Senator Schumer stated things very accurately. According to TPM’s account: “The senator emphasized that the Brazilian-born Saverin and his family immigrated to the United States out of fear for their safety while he was a young boy, and said it’s immoral to dodge his responsibilities after having benefited tremendously.”