The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008


John Edwards

John Edwards Faces Federal Investigation

By Alec MacGillis
As John Edwards, the former senator, prepared for his second presidential run, he paid for advisers and burnished his image through a bevy of political action committees and nonprofit groups.

Now, those groups are among the potential targets for a federal investigation into Edwards' finances as he continues to face the fallout from his affair with a videographer who documented his travels between the two presidential bids. Since Edwards admitted the affair last year, questions have swirled about the $114,000 that one of his organizations paid to the woman, as well as about money that a wealthy Edwards supporter paid to help move her and her baby from North Carolina to California.

Edwards acknowledged over the weekend that a federal investigation was underway. "I am confident that no funds from my campaign were used improperly," he said. "However, I know that it is the role of government to ensure that this is true. We have made available to the United States both the people and the information necessary to help them get the issue resolved efficiently and in a timely matter. We appreciate the diligence and professionalism of those involved and look forward to a conclusion." A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's office in Raleigh declined to comment on the inquiry.

The investigation only adds to the troubles faced by Edwards, who has all but withdrawn from public since admitting the affair in August, save for showing up to watch University of North Carolina basketball games. His hopes of joining President Obama's Cabinet fell away. His family's considerable wealth is invested mainly with Fortress Investment Group, a hedge fund that has fared particularly poorly this year. His wife Elizabeth, who is battling breast cancer, is publishing a memoir in which she describes the pain caused by the affair and declares the videographer, Rielle Hunter, as "pathetic."

Edwards' political action committee, One America, paid Hunter a total of $114,000 for videos she shot of Edwards in 2006 that sought to show his offbeat side as he traveled the country promoting his anti-poverty plans. The last of those payments, for about $14,000, was made in April 2007 right around the time that Edwards' campaign paid One America, which was nearly out of funds at that point, about $14,000 for what was listed as a furniture expense.

After Edwards admitted the affair, his biggest financial supporter, Texas trial lawyer Fred Baron, told the Dallas Morning News that he had paid Hunter so she could get "out of North Carolina" and "into a stable place" in California, where she and her baby moved into a Santa Barbara home worth $3 million. Baron died two months later.

In addition to One America, Edwards-related organizations that sprung up after the 2004 election included the Center for Promise and Opportunity, through which he paid for his travel and aides' salaries; a related foundation that paid for a college tuition charity in Greene County, N.C., which Edwards touted on the campaign trail but shut down the same month the affair was revealed; an anti-poverty center at the University of North Carolina that is still holding occasional events; and a so-called 527 group that paid for pro-Edwards ads during the 2008 primaries and was fueled by six and seven-figure gifts from the Service Employees International Union and Bunny Mellon, the 98-year-old heiress.

Experts on campaign finance law say investigators are likely looking at whether there were false reports in how funds from Edwards' campaign or one of these groups were spent, whether any money was passed from the recipient to Hunter, and whether any campaign or nonprofit money was spent on providing a personal benefit.

"If there is a contribution going through an intermediary and they did not report the ultimate recipient that is gong to be a big no-no," said Sheila Krumholz, director of the Center for Responsive Politics. "If there is an attempt to cover up the true purpose of an expenditure, that could potentially be a big problem."

Posted at 6:48 PM ET on May 4, 2009  | Category:  John Edwards
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in | Digg This
Previous: Obama FEC Choice Draws Mixed Reviews | Next: POTUS Events: Middle East Focus

Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Thanks for nothing and goodbye. Can't call him nothing but a liar and a cheat. He should be sued for campaign contributions and any government financing that he might of claimed. Proof that our judicial system is no better than the criminals they condemn. Court order on the DNA of the child. And barred from any public office and the law practice.

Posted by: kimkimminni1 | May 6, 2009 10:23 AM

If we insist on delegating morality, kindness, wisdom, fairness, greed, the capacity to cheat or immolate other human beings as either liberal, conservative, Republican, or Democrat, it is no wonder we have a hard time being truly united as a country. John Edwards behavior, in a era when ones personal life is so publicly scrutinized is simply stupid, not to mention disrespectful of his wife. Other then that it it's human.

Posted by: hark53 | May 5, 2009 9:08 AM

I just don't get what happened to the democratic did they all turn into such lowlifes.?

Posted by: charlietuna666 | May 4, 2009 11:37 PM

I can't think of a lower thing for a man to do than to cheat on his wife while she's battling cancer. I hope she makes millions off her book and donates money to conservative causes that he hates.

Posted by: swmuva | May 4, 2009 10:03 PM

On the whole, actions like Edwards', while troubling, are less destructive.

Posted by: rooster54 | May 4, 2009 7:28 PM

I bet his wife doesn't think so. And a person who will violate the most sacred of trusts has proven they are capable of just about anything.

And please spare us the "liberals are kinder and gentler" psyhco babble. One look through the 20th century is proof enough that Liberals really enjoy immolating other human beings.

Fire bomb Hamburg, firebomb Dresden, firebomb Tokyo, Atom bomb Hiroshima, firebomb Hanoi, try to firebomb Havana. All Liberal, all killing innocent civilians.

Posted by: krankyman | May 4, 2009 8:48 PM

This leads to one very important question: WHO CARES?

Posted by: parkerfl1 | May 4, 2009 8:12 PM

John Edwards had the world by the tail --

It's simply amazing how stupid intelligent people can be....


Posted by: abby0802 | May 4, 2009 7:55 PM

I am so disappointed in this man. He had so much going for him and now I would not trust him on anything. He broke his wife's heart for what?

Posted by: sed81650 | May 4, 2009 7:44 PM

Did anyone see Warren Buffett's comments on the Washington Post? LOL!

Posted by: JakeD | May 4, 2009 7:41 PM

John Edwards - He thought he could be the next Bill Clinton, but he lacked Clinton's strong moral compass and high character!

Posted by: fjh3q | May 4, 2009 7:33 PM

Liberals have feelings, which is part of the reason they actually care about people. That same connection to the human energy which spontaneously emerges from the heart, can lead them to sometimes do things society has deemed unacceptable.

Neocons, on the other hand, have repressed their animal nature, so that they can appear conform to a patriarchal dogma, which is supposed to pass for religion, so they can remain preoccupied hoarding wealth and trying to dominate others. Their animal instincts are abandoned to the darkness of their subconcious minds, where they regress into primitive states, and reemerge in wanton acts of violence on a grand scale.

On the whole, actions like Edwards', while troubling, are less destructive.

Posted by: rooster54 | May 4, 2009 7:28 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2009 The Washington Post Company