Edwards Not Guilty On Count #3; Live Feed: Edwards Gives Statement on Trial
GLORIA BORGER, CNN ANCHOR: A verdict in the corruption trial of former Senator John Edwards. He is acquitted on one count and the five other counts have been declared a mistrial. A very good day for John Edwards in this verdict. He faced 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million fine. That is not going to occur. This was a risk John Edwards took. He rejected a plea agreement, decided instead to go to trial on what was a very sordid case and a complex campaign finance case. Again, John Edwards acquitted on one count, five counts mistrial. Let me go to Joe Johns in Greensboro to kind of reset the scene for us. Joe, you watched those jurors day in and day out struggle with this. In the end, they could only come up with a verdict on one count. What happened here to the prosecution's case?</s>JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Tough case, tough law, tough facts, and politics probably played a role in it, too. Gloria, I just wanted to show you this. This is the verdict sheet that the judge always gives to the jury. They work off of this sheet as they go through the counts to try to determine the guilt or the innocence of the individual who's on trial. And as you can see, the way it's put here, no unanimous decision, and it goes all the way through. No unanimous decision on five of the counts. The only one that has an "X" here next to guilty or not guilty is count three. That is a count from 2008 involving alleged illegal contributions from Rachel "Bunny" Mellon in Virginia to John Edwards. So, the jury just didn't buy it, at the end of the day, as that seemed to be the case, and the rest of it was just too difficult to decide. It was clear from the body language of these jurors, now, looking in hindsight, that they really were torn on many of the issues that were put before them. And while John Edwards took a gamble in some ways, his attorneys took a gamble, too. Abbe Lowell deciding to keep their defense lean and mean after something like 14 days of testimony from the prosecution, the defense only took three days to put on its case and kept it very tight and focused on the issue of whether campaign finance laws have been broken. Again and again they said, he may have committed a lot of sins by cheating on his wife and having an affair with a mistress, having a child with a mistress, but he committed no crimes. And from this, it looks as though the jury agreed with him, Gloria.</s>BORGER: Let me bring in David Frum, a former Republican presidential speechwriter. David, as you well know, the decision was made not to have John Edwards testify. That his attorney, Abbe Lowell, did not want him to testify. So, that turn out to be a smart move?</s>DAVID FRUM, CONTRIBUTING ED., NEWSWEEK & DAILY BEAST: Look, I am -- I have no appetite to see John Edwards go to prison, and to the extent this case is about John Edwards, I think we can have some human sympathy. But to the extent, this case is about what is about to happen to the American campaign finance system, I think we should be very, very afraid. Supposing John Edwards had been elected president and supposing this story had been kept secret, as you say, we don't know very much about these campaigns anymore and we know a lot less than we used to these days. Wouldn't he have owed a colossal favor to Fred Baron (ph)? Wouldn't he have been in a position where he could not have refused anything Fred Baron (ph) ask? And if this verdict stands --</s>BORGER: Or his aide, Andrew Young, I might add.</s>FRUM: Exactly. We are in a situation where vast, undisclosed amounts of money can be raised outside the campaign finance system, for a presidential candidate, to use for any purpose, including buying the silence of people with damaging information about them. That is a very scary outcome. I think with this and combined with Citizens United, we have a lot of annoying paperwork requirements, but there's no campaign finance system in the United States at all anymore. We have gone back, essentially, of a system of unlimited, secret donations for any purpose.</s>BORGER: Right. Jeff Toobin and I were talking about that earlier, and he called it wild, wild west. And let me just bring in Mike Duffy for a moment, who covers politics, Washington bureau chief for "Time" magazine. Do you agree that, now, this kind of is sort of anything can happen when it comes to campaign finance at this point?</s>MIKE DUFFY, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, "TIME": We've known for a long time that these are really hard cases to prosecute, but I think the Edwards team had a special wild card, and that was John Edwards. This is a man, who before he was a vice presidential candidate or a presidential candidate or even a defendant, was one of the best courtroom readers North Carolina had ever seen. He knew how to read a jury, he knew how to read a judge. He was really good at that. And his defense team had him as a consultant in his own case. And you could see, that's why they did --</s>BORGER: Not as a witness.</s>DUFFY: Not as a witness, and they had made that decision not to. So, I think that was just another "X" factor in this outcome. I think both sides had been expecting for days that it would end with him walking.</s>BORGER: So Jeff Toobin, talk a little bit about what this means about money in politics now?</s>JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: It means that this is really something that is being deregulated. The message of Citizens United, the message of this trial is that the legal system is less and less involved in American politics, at least, the financing of it. And we are simply leaving it to the private market. You know, I thought David Frum made a very good point about how dependent John Edwards would have been on Fred Baron (ph). How about if Newt Gingrich were elected president, how dependent would he have been on Mr. Adelson, who essentially single handedly funded his campaign.</s>BORGER: Or what about being dependent on unknown donors that the candidate may know about, but maybe we don't?</s>TOOBIN: Right. At least at the moment, disclosure requirements are still OK with the Supreme Court. They still uphold the requirement that donations to Super PACs have to be identified by who gave the money. But, as a result of Citizens United and the cases that followed, there are no limits on how much anyone can give. So, we have situations now where single people underwrite entire political campaigns as it was with Mr. Adelson and the Gingrich presidential campaign. Here you have a situation where a great deal of money changed hands between Bunny Mellon, Fred Baron (ph), and people associated with John Edwards, and that is not something that is part -- you know, we now know, a jury has found as criminal. Now, my mentor in journalism was Michael Kinsley, and he likes to say, the scandal isn't what's illegal, the scandal is what's legal, because it's what society chooses not to punish that tells you sort of where you are as a society. And I think all this money sloshing around with nobody being prosecuted, nobody stopping it, that tells you much more in a way than any criminal prosecution will tell you.</s>BORGER: Mike Duffy?</s>DUFFY: We were also seeing both parties say nothing about this. They're both going to be at this trough for this entire political cycle. Neither party is really saying, hey, let's fix this. I don't think John Edwards is going to start a fourth career and become ever campaign finance performer. So, over and over, I think what we're going to see is just a period where there are no rules, and this is --</s>BORGER: Well, let me bring in Paul Begala. Are you still with us?</s>PAUL BEGALA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I am, Gloria. I've agreed to Mike Duffy's (ph) but that's not true. I'm part of the Super PAC that's supporting a president, yet, I want to see the system reformed. The president, I'm pretty sure about this, has even called for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. So, it's not true that both sides like the current system. It is true that both sides are participating in the current system. But let me put a little finer point on it. Even before Citizens United, individuals could give unlimited amounts to independent groups. That's how we got the swift boat attacks on John Kerry or various liberal billionaires who help fund progressive independent organizations. Citizens United was about corporate money. And so to take David Frum's analogy further, what if the next time there's some scandal like this, instead of wealthy friends, and I knew Fred Baron, he was a dear friend of John Edwards, instead of wealthy friends, what if it is corporations? And that need never be disclosed, because it could be done through various groups. A corporation could give money to some other group, the group could then support your mistress, in the case of Mr. Edwards, Senator Edwards, and you would not just even owe your friend, Fred Baron, you would owe X, Y, Z corporation. And that's the new wrinkle of really pernicious and worrisome wrinkle --</s>BORGER: Paul --</s>BEGALA: -- corporate money.</s>BORGER: Paul, let me interrupt you for a moment, if I might. We're just about to get a statement from John Edwards. You see him there with his mother and his father and his daughter, Cate. We're told he's not going to take questions, but will speak.</s>JOHN EDWARDS, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, we wanted to say first thank you for the jurors and their incredibly hard work and their diligence. They took their job very, very seriously, as we saw both during the trial, the attention they paid to the evidence during the trial, the presentations of the lawyers, and the fact that they've now spent nine, almost nine full days deliberating, trying to reach a fair and just result under the evidence in the law. And all I can say is, thank goodness, we live in a country that has the kind of system that we have. And I think those jurors were an exemplar for what juries are supposed to do in this country. They were very, very impressive. The second thing I want to say just a word about is responsibility. And this is about me. I want to make sure that everyone hears from me and from my voice that while I do not believe I did anything illegal or ever thought I was doing anything illegal, I did an awful, awful lot that was wrong. And there is no one else responsible for my sins. None of the people who came to court and testified are responsible. Nobody working for the government is responsible. I am responsible. And if I want to find the person who should be held accountable for my sins, honestly, I don't have to go any further than the mirror. It's me. It is me and me alone. The next thing I want to say a word about is for the people that I love, because it's been an incredible experience for me to watch my parents, my dad just turned 80, my mom, who's 78, tromp up here from Robin to North Carolina every day to be with me and to support me. And I love them so much, and they did such a wonderful job raising me and my brother, Blake, and my sister, Cathy, who I also love dearly. I also want to say a word about my own children. Cate, who most all of you have seen, has been here every single day. She has been here no matter what, no matter how awful and painful a lot of the evidence was for her. Evidence about her dad, evidence about her mom, who she loves so, so dearly, but she never once flinched. She said, dad, I love you, I'll be there for you, no matter what. And I'm so proud to have had her with me through all this process. And then, finally, Emma, who turned 14 recently, Emma Claire and Jack, who just turned 12, who I take care of every day. And, I've not been able to see them quite as much, but I see them in the morning, I get their breakfast ready, get them off to school, and then, we get home at night and we all eat supper together, and I love them both so dearly. And they're such an important part of every day of my life. And then, finally, my precious Quinn, who I love more than any of you could ever imagine. And I am so close to and so, so grateful for, so grateful for Quinn. I'm grateful for all my children, including my son, Wade, who we lost years ago. But you know, this is the last thing I'm going to say. I don't think God's through with me. I really believe he thinks there's still some good things I can do. And whatever happens with this legal stuff going forward, what I'm hopeful about is all those kids that I've seen, you know, in the poorest parts of this country and in some of the poorest places in the world, that I can help them, in whatever way I'm still capable of helping them. And I want to dedicate my life to being the best dad I can be and to helping those kids who I think deserve the help and who I hope I can help. Thank you all very much.</s>BORGER: That was an amazing statement from senator, former senator, John Edwards, who spoke about the legal case, but really spent most of his time taking responsibility for his personal actions. And he said, if I want to find a person responsible for my sins, it's me and me alone. And then named all of his children whom he loved, including Quinn, the child he had out of wedlock with Rielle Hunter, and his son Wade, who died in a car crash at the age of 16. And then, he made a statement saying, I don't think God is through with me. I'm hopeful there are things I can do and I want to dedicate my life to helping people. Let me go right to Joe Johns who's there on the scene to get your reaction -- Joe.</s>JOHNS: Yes. The first thing, I think, you have to say is, that's the kind of statement that you would have expected him to say to a jury if he could have said to a jury and was not subject to cross-examination, which he would have been if he testified. Clearly, he's remorseful for all that he did. I was going to say, all that happened, but all that he did, and clearly, he's now trying to look forward, even though he sort of pointed out in that statement, he doesn't know what's going to happen going forward on retrial or no retrial of these charges, which the prosecution, the United States government, has the option of doing if they want to. Now, the other thing that was very interesting in there, Gloria, I mean, you pretty much covered everything, but very interesting that he referenced all those kids I've seen in the poorest places of the world. John Edwards had suggested that one of the reasons he fought very hard and actually took this case to trial was because he wanted to retain his freedom and his law license, because he wanted to start some type of poverty law practice to help some of the poorest people in the world as you know, for years and years, back during the time when he was running for president, he talked about poverty, the two Americas, the least among us. It's been a continuing theme in his life, and it's pretty clear that he wants to continue with that theme, presuming he doesn't have anymore legal exposure here. But that, of course, is still an open question. A lot of speculation that the government wouldn't try to bring a case like this again. There's been some other speculation that the government just might want to bring a case like this again simply because during an election year, the Obama administration might think twice about playing favorites for a Democrat in a state like North Carolina. Be that as it may, it's down the road and who knows what's going to happen next. A big day for John Edwards, one of the biggest of his life, not to mention for his lawyer, Abbe Lowell, who took this case against a lot of people's recommendations, perhaps, and went ahead and won it for him.</s>BORGER: OK, Paul Begala, David Frum, I want to get your reactions quickly to what we just saw from John Edwards -- Paul.</s>BEGALA: Well, you know, what you saw there was a terribly emotional man. I think you'd have to have a heart of stone not to feel at least something for the guy, particularly, when he talked about that baby who he had disavowed on national television when she was born. And you could clearly see that he knows the pain that he's caused. I think that's a good thing. You know, the only dumb thing as Scott Fitzgerald (ph) ever wrote was that there are no second acts in American life. There are second and third and fourth acts, as we have seen. But Senator Edwards has got a long way to go. I think he probably did himself some good. I do -- I was -- the one omission, Joe Johns already pointed out, he needs to thank that lawyer of his, Abbe Lowell, who did a remarkable job.</s>BORGER: Right -- David.</s>FRUM: Well, I have no appetite to see John Edwards punished further. He's been dragged through the limelight in a way that that has to be pretty horrible for him and for his family. But I think we will rue this day. If this is a legal precedent, we have just ripped off the last limits on what people who might be president can do with the money they ask for from powerful friends.</s>BORGER: OK. And let me just go to Mike Duffy, quickly, about you've covered John Edwards, you've watched him a lot.</s>DUFFY: I'm aware of how good a speaker he can be. Even having said that, that was one of the most, I think, unprecedented moments of self-contrition I've seen in a while. Who knows of you, you know, genuine it is. I can't speak to that. You can't imagine that he's going away. I think he's -- I see a charitable foundation in his future somewhere.</s>BORGER: Here is John Edwards leaving the courthouse now, heading into his car. There is his daughter, Cate.</s>DUFFY: The pick-up truck.</s>BORGER: The pick-up truck. Let me ask you, Mike, you know, I heard a little bit in the end of his speech, the two Americas that we used to hear so often on the campaign trail when John Edwards ran, and also when he ran as vice president on the ticket with John Kerry.</s>DUFFY: You just can't make any predictions anymore about what becomes of someone like this. He's just -- it's in his blood. We'll see what he does. But he is not done.</s>BORGER: No, I don't think so. Jeff Toobin, I want to bring you in on this. He did thank the jurors for their hard work and their diligence. And he thanked God he lived in this country, because -- and thanked the legal system, because in a way, more than anyone else, John Edwards seemed to have faith in this legal system and decided not to cut any kind of a deal before going to court.</s>TOOBIN: He knows his business. And he was a trial lawyer long before he was a politician, and he was apparently one of the best in the country. He was famous for not taking many cases. He was not one of these plaintiff lawyers who took a high volume of cases. He would investigate cases very carefully and decide these are the ones that I think can generate a tremendous amount of money in damage awards, and he had an extraordinarily high batting average. He decided to roll the dice with this jury, and he won. I mean, you know --</s>BORGER: Right.</s>TOOBIN: Frankly, I mean, you know, I'm not sitting there in Washington with you. I thought it would have been better if he simply stopped after he said, this is all my fault. It sounded a little bit like a campaign speech to me after that.</s>BORGER: Oh!</s>TOOBIN: You know, helping young people and all that. You know, like, why don't you just go off and do something privately. I mean, I just think, you know, what he did was wrong. He, I think, was prosecuted in a case that shouldn't have been brought. But, I mean, I think that's it.</s>BORGER: And he did take responsibility, which is something we don't hear a lot in political speeches.</s>TOOBIN: I thought that was the best part of his statement. Hse said, this was just my fault. He repeated the refrain that Abbe Lowell, his lawyer, did so effectively, which is that I'm a sinner, but I'm not a criminal. But I thought that was enough.</s>BORGER: OK, Jeff Toobin, thanks so much. All of these fine folks will be with us. Stay with us. We're going have much more on the John Edwards verdict and other news, so stay with us for the next hour.</s>EDWARDS: And this is about me. I want to make sure that everyone hears from me and from my voice that while I do not believe I did anything illegal or ever thought I was doing anything illegal, I did an awful, awful lot that was wrong.