"Not guilty." (Photo from Fox News)
Read the below article by Fox and see if you can spot the contradiction. (Don't peek.)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/03/former-presidential-candidate-john-edwards-indicted-by-federal-grand-jury/
And the answer is...............................................................
"There's no question that I've done wrong, and I take full responsibility for having done wrong. I will regret for the rest of my life the pain and harm that I've caused to others," he said in a brief statement outside a federal courthouse in Winston-Salem, N.C. after being arraigned."But I did not break the law, and I never ever thought I was breaking the law."
"Negotiations between Edwards' attorneys and federal prosecutors to settle on a charge to which Edwards was willing to plead guilty continued through Thursday but proved fruitless, according to people with knowledge of the negotiations. Prosecutors had insisted he plead to a felony, which would endanger his ability to keep his license to practice law."
3 comments:
When Pat Nolan pleaded guilty to corruption charges, resigned from the California legislature, and went to prison, his conservative Republican buddy, an old-fashioned guy from Orange County whose face and voice I remember better than his name told the press "Innocent people do plead guilty sometimes, and I'm convinced that's what happened here."
I don't think Edwards is innocent. But the "contradiction" is a rhetorical one that is invoked only when convenient.
No contradiction? So he says he never broke any law, but was involved in plea negotiations.
Gimme a break.
Explain that to Pat Nolan.
Are you familiar with an "Alford plea"?
Post a Comment