Johnny Law Catches Up To Papa John...

[Scooter]

So if Levi Johnson pays child support to Bristol Palin for their daughter (thus avoiding a dispute which could go public and damage her mother's political career), does that count as a campaign contribution for Sarah Palin?

It makes about as much sense as the theory behind this case.

[Lord Jim]

Well, it looks like this thread is going to be easy for me....

I can pretty much just keep posting "I agree with Guin" and I'll be covered...

This was a sad personal issue for all involved

I certainly feel sympathy for his late wife, and I feel enormous sympathy for his children, (all of his children) who are obviously completely innocent victims in this....

But for Good Time Johnny himself? Not a bit of it....

He's not a victim; he's the perp. He had it easily within his power to avoid having caused all the pain and misery he has wrought to those close to him and he did not do so. This is not the case of a "good man" who had a moral slip; it's the case of venal man who put his own gratification (ego and otherwise) above any consideration for anyone else and then in a cold and calculating manner used everyone around him to try and cover his tracks in the hope of again being able to try to satisfy his ambitions. He deserves no sympathy whatsoever.

One claim no one can make is that Obama's Justice Department has any political gain in pursuing this.

There is no indication at all that she was going to go public;

Jeepers, you don't suppose that all that cash and the big house could have had anything to do with that do you?

Naw, not a chance....I'm just being overly cynical....

[Guinevere]

So if Levi Johnson pays child support to Bristol Palin for their daughter (thus avoiding a dispute which could go public and damage her mother's political career), does that count as a campaign contribution for Sarah Palin?

It makes about as much sense as the theory behind this case.

Child support is based (usually) on legislative theory presumption of entitlement (which can be overcome) and can be enforced by courts. Gifts and campaign contributions are wholly voluntary, so no, not even close to similar.

[Lord Jim]

So if Levi Johnson pays child support to Bristol Palin for their daughter (thus avoiding a dispute which could go public and damage her mother's political career), does that count as a campaign contribution for Sarah Palin?

That seems like a fairly poor analogy to me for a number of reasons. (Palin isn't an official candidate for anything, the out of wedlock birth was complete public knowledge, and Johnson has already done everything he can think of to make a dime damaging Palin, to name just a few)

Here's a better one:

Suppose Palin were running an official campaign for the Presidency, and Johnson hadn't already spouted off with every damaging thing he could come up with. He and Bristol split, and suddenly a big contributor to Palin's campaign gives Johnson a free house and a large cash payment.

[Scooter]

Or how about this...

The producer of a reality show pays Levi Johnson to come on and his complete assholery reminds everyone of what a complete idiot Sarah Palin is for letting him get within 100 miles of her daughter. Does that count as campaign contributions for her rival?

[Scooter]

One claim no one can make is that Obama's Justice Department has any political gain in pursuing this.

It certainly doesn't do them any harm.

And if it can get a court to agree to this kind of extension of the definition of campaign contributions, then it has expanded its power to prosecute. That's usually considered a gain for prosecutors.

[Sue U]

There is no indication at all that she was going to go public;

Jeepers, you don't suppose that all that cash and the big house could have had anything to do with that do you?

Naw, not a chance....I'm just being overly cynical....

They had been having an affair since 2006; the National Enquirer had been hounding them since 2007. Her first interview wasn't until April 2010 (a softball affair with GQ). Draw your own conclusions. Seems to me the idea was simply to remove her from the campaign and provide her with some protection of her privacy.

Suppose Palin were running an official campaign for the Presidency, and Johnson hadn't already spouted off with every damaging thing he could come up with. He and Bristol split, and suddenly a big contributor to Palin's campaign gives Johnson a free house and a large cash payment.

Makes for bad PR, but not a criminal violation.

[Guinevere]

Oh please, "provide her with some protections for her privacy" is lawyer code for keeping her out of the public eye pso she doesn't torpedo the campaign.

[Sue U]

Okay, so is "keeping her out of the public eye" -- at her own request -- a "campaign contribution"? If someone had paid for a secluded house for pregnant old Bristol Palin during (and after!) the 2008 campaign, would that have been a campaign contribution?

[Gob]

I love American politics, it's the purest form of philosophy...

And I typed that with a straight face too....

[oldr_n_wsr]

I'm glad my only mistress is (was) alcohol.
Can I get in trouble for using campaign funds to buy gatoraide?

[dales]

Gatorade and vodka, works for me.

Along with some fine NorCal homegrown marijuana to smoke.

Summer is only a few weeks away!

[Guinevere]

I'm still reading through the indictment, but if the money was simply to house the mistress, and give her some "privacy" why all the subterfuge? Why did Bunny Mellon make patently false notations on her checks -- trying to pass them off as payments for various antiques?

[Andrew D]

When you are reading through the indictment, are you engaging the presumption of innocence? Are you presuming that everything asserted in the indictment is false?

I haven't been following this matter closely, but wasn't Mr. Edwards trying to keep the mistress a secret from the late Ms. Edwards? Wouldn't that require the same kinds of alleged subterfuge?

I don't much care one way or the other about Edwards. But I am very suspicious about the way the campaign-financing laws are being used here.

Suppose that a friend of mine is running for office. He has fallen on hard times, and he is unable to make his mortgage payments. Life has been good to me lately, and I do not want to see my friend and his family lose their home, so I step in and make his mortgage payments for him.

If he had defaulted on his mortgage, the foreclosure would have been a matter of public record. That would have made him look like a deadbeat, and his campaign would have gone down in flames. By making his mortgage payments for him, I prevented that from happening.

Does that mean that by stepping in to keep my friend and his family out of disaster, I have contributed campaign funds?