Don Rich's Links

No links in this category.
JUNE 1, 2012 3:47PM

Why Justice Was About Right With Edwards: C of MICE

Rate: 2 Flag

 For MEB, you have always been loved, and that will never change.

What John Edwards did as to sexual transgressions is not for any individual mortal to cast judgement upon, according to the Christian doctrine "Let he who hath not sinned cast the first stone," although of course we all will make judgements, and cast stones.

Personally, I almost wish it at all hadn't happened as to exposure, as I liked the Edwards story a lot, as to loss of a child, and then trying to make sense of it through public service, since a great uncle grew orchids after the death of his only son.

Unfortunately, that wasn't the case with Edwards as to a totally private way of grieving, as the campaign contribution issue wasn't trivial, as in the title of the post: C of MICE.

MICE is an acronym from British espionage, as to what leverage can be acquired over another person in order to make them do what you want, rather than what they would do out of their own sense of duty.

Russians call it "compromat," and it has always been Ivan's favorite, as to be humiliated publicly is something that large Egos dread the most, by defintion, which means once you lock down comprise on someone like that, you have as Ivan likes to say, someone "by the short hairs."

In this case, Edwards was just unlucky that he was weak as to whatever motive generated the approach, quite possibly just a groupie or someone seeking a fortune, and as to weakness, everybody has one.

As to the real issue of the Edwards case as to why being pilloried almost had to be done, almost implicitly to warn other candidates in the future if nothing else, MICE stands for Money, Ideology, Compromise, and Ego (career frustrations, lack of acknowledgement of self-perceived worth being a big source of espionage recruitment, historically speaking, as with Robert Hansen at FBI Counter-Intelligence, Russia division, the single worst episode of American spycraft in our history as to damage. Why did he do that? Because he thought he should have gone farther in the Bureau, and so it amused him to look at people higher ranking than them as he destroyed the ground underneath them, plus envy of their money.)

As to Compromise and the Edwards case, for a candidate for President to have a mistress, and especially a mistress with an out of wedlock child, is in today's media environment something that voters needed to know, especially because if Edwards thought his wife couldn't handle it's exposure, than any party who discovered that could be life and death security issue in a Presidential candidate, and a general policy issue, as to leverage.

Just think if he had won, and had ever done anything beneficial for any interest of the Mellon family, and then the truth were revealed, as to how dangerous that situation really was, and people talk about such things for all sorts of reasons, Ego being among the most common, again, dangerous among powerful people as to a risk.

That risk assessment would be the case for a Major in the intelligence Services, who if he/she even had the affair exposed would lose his/her security clearance instantly, and have to resign from the service, if lucky, with a less than honorable discharge.

On the other hand, once there was exposure of that Edward's issue, it's not really that much of a criminal matter per se, which seems to be about what the jury thought in the end.

That means there was definitely a sin, sort of a crime, and in having some really harsh moments of private life exposed, which one hopes everyone forgets for Elizabeth Edwards sake, save as to the cost of certain things in life, some very awful punishment, rather much like Scott Turow's first novel: Presumed Innocent.

If you remember that novel, life often imitating art, there was a prosecutor, later played by Harrison Ford, who had an affair that he desparately wanted to keep away from his semi-mentally stable wife.

He almost got convicted for the crime, and then at the end of the novel, in a very, very chilling scene, realized that the reason the evidence against him was so convincing, even DNA from his semen at the crime scene, was because his wife was letting him know that she knew.

After the crime was "solved," there was punishment, as they got divorced, the set-up for the brilliantly ambiguous note on which Turrow finished his novel:

"There was a crime, and there was punishment (i.e. loss of family)."


Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
Interesting point of view.

I thought the charges against Edwards were silly. Adultery isn't a crime and covering it up isn't campaigning. And lying about sex is nothing if it isn't human.

He did some bad, bad things. Jail isn't for bad. It is for real crime.
The punishment seemed to fit the 'crime' (sin). He lost his political career, for the most part and he put his children through media hell. That will not end for some time, sadly for them. The real question of whether or not he used campaign funds to coverup his mistress/baby, was never really answered and likely never will. Time lets dead dogs lie.

I think the facts aren't really in dispute. The only real question was if the money he used were campaign funds.

In one charge, the jury acquitted him unanimously -- and said they weren't.

In the others, they were split, but it sounds like the majority felt they weren't campaign funds.
I saw a funny tweet by Albert Brooks about the verdict: "Congratulations to John Edwards for completing screwing up his life--and getting away with it."

I'd like to see them go after the Mellon heiress who tried to give him money to pay his mistress and keep it a secret. If that's not the kind of corruption campaign finance laws are supposed to go after, nothing is.
The thing is for me Nick, if you have someone give you stupid money, say a vicuna coat, like Nixon of the Checkers speech, or, you have a hotel given to you on a regular basis, like Sherman Adams under Ike, people will assume that there is some influence. Maybe there is, maybe not, as there are people who like helping friends out as to a vision, and that's ok,, but, because of possible leverage, I think that has to come out. That's why being in politics isn't fun.
Back in the day, maybe that gets swept under the rug, and maybe it should be, although a child is pretty far compared to just adultury, since the child is always waiting to pop up again.
I have symathy for Edwards wanting to protect his family, but really, once that went down, trying to hide that and run for President was pretty out there, as once he got close, people will make something like that come out. To be fair to him, wealthy prominent people are targets sometimes for all sorts of weird ambitions, so, maybe he didn't go looking for that, and, judge not that ye not be judged is a good rule, as however is basic ;everage issues. Some people can't be openly in office for that reason.