#EdwardsTrial: Prosecutors drop remaining charges against John Edwards

It’s over:

GREENSBORO, N.C. Federal prosecutors dropped all charges Wednesday against John Edwards after his corruption trial ended last month in a deadlocked jury.

Jurors in North Carolina acquitted the former presidential candidate on one count of accepting illegal campaign contributions and deadlocked on five other felony counts. The judge declared a mistrial.

Prosecutors will not seek to retry Edwards on the five unresolved counts, according to a U.S. Justice Department statement.

Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer, who oversees the agency’s criminal division, said prosecutors knew the case, like all campaign finance cases, would be challenging. But he said it is “our duty to bring hard cases” when warranted.

“Last month, the government put forward its best case against Mr. Edwards, and I am proud of the skilled and professional way in which our prosecutors…. conducted this trial,” he said.

I wrote a couple of weeks ago that I would not be sad to see the DOJ drop its case against Edwards.  Frankly, I’m sick of hearing about him and wish every time I do that he would just fade into the background.  Not only that, but his family didn’t ask to be put through what he’s put them through, and he will serve a “guilty” sentence on the charge of being a heartless jerk off for the rest of his life, which is punishment enough for his transgressions in my book.  That said, hopefully he’ll work on ways to redeem himself, which is something that will between him and  his family, friends, and – ultimately, of course – God.

Moving right along …

 

Because Nanny Bloomberg is too nice

**Posted by Phineas

The New York City Board of Health is considering whether to approve Mayor Nanny Michael Bloomberg’s ban on soda drinks larger than 16 ounces. Bloomberg’s proposal generated some controversy at a recent board meeting, because many members don’t think it goes far enough:

At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods.

One member, Bruce Vladeck, thinks limiting the sizes for movie theater popcorn should be considered.

“The popcorn isn’t a whole lot better than the soda,” Vladeck said.

Another board member thinks milk drinks should fall under the size limits.

“There are certainly milkshakes and milk-coffee beverages that have monstrous amounts of calories,” said board member Dr. Joel Forman.

Oh, why stop there? At steakhouses, waiters should pre-cut steaks and chops into Board-mandated bite sizes to reduce the danger of choking, and then watch to make sure you chew enough times and don’t eat too fast. Or maybe ban red meat altogether? Hot dogs should be strictly vegan, and cheese and meat banned from pizza. Stores should only sell non-fat milk, and deep-fryers should require a license to buy. (But don’t include Mikey in any of that.)

Aside from the raging nanny-ism, there’s something else disturbing here: the members of the Board of Health are appointed by Bloomberg, presumably because he likes the way they think. Other than a public comment period (and how much good do we really think that will do?), there is no check on their power to regulate the most basic behaviors of NYCers; the elected representatives of the residents of New York City, the city council, apparently have no say. It might take an act of the legislature to tell Mikey to “knock it off.”

(And you know it’s bad when the NY legislature denounces government overreach.)

Are the people of the Big Apple happy with this? Do they want government dictating the finest, most petty details of their lives? Because it won’t stop here. I guarantee it. Bureaucrats will always want to expand their tin-pot empires, and nannies will always find new areas in which we can’t be trusted to make our own choices.

This is how liberty is lost: not in sudden coups, but in little regulatory usurpations, each of which, on its own, might seem reasonable and “for our own good,” but, when added up, turn the freeborn citizen into an infantilized ward of the State.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

“Major economic speech” by Obama planned for Thursday

Via The USA Today:

President Obama will seek to draw economic contrasts with Republican opponent Mitt Romney in what campaign aides are billing as a major speech on Thursday.

In announcing the address at a community college in Cleveland, the Obama campaign said the president will describe his vision as “ensuring that our economy is built to last and restoring economic security for the middle class.”

Obama also plans to condemn Romney’s vision, which the campaign said is “based on the same failed economic policies that brought on the worst crisis since the Great Depression.

“Romney Economics is familiar and troubling,” said the Obama campaign. “More budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy; fewer rules for Wall Street — the same formula that benefited a few, but that crashed our economy and devastated the middle class.”

Obama is not expected to unveil any new policy proposals of his own; the president is still trying to persuade Congress to adopt elements of a jobs bill he proposed last year.

(Bolded emphasis added by me)

Translation: there’s nothing new here. It’ll just more of the same old song and dance we’ve been hearing for the last three and a half years, jacked up on spinsanity with a generous helping of predictable Democrat class warfare and demagoguery – given in front of (presumably) a captive audience of college students (shocking).

In other news, dog bites man.

BTW, here’s Obama’s fundraising schedule for this week, in the event you actually thought his “presidential responsibilities” excuse for not campaigning for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett in the Wisconsin recall election was legitimate. Just sayin’ …