Guilty as sin, free as a bird

Mrs Webworker told me that Mark Levin said (so surely I have this exactly right) that the charges were all wrong in the first place. There weren't campaign contributions used as hush money, as it's been portrayed and as I had thought the case was. Instead, the prosecution was trying to say that because the hush money related to his status as a candidate, the hush money was campaign contribution. That's all I know about it. If so, the jury may have made a technically right decision. (I also will argue that the jury made the just — if not right — decision in the OJ trial, after I watched the whole prosecution portion.) It's awful when the prosecution fails, and actual guilt becomes irrelevant.

Not much question about what a snake Edwards is, as a candidate, a husband, and a man. He can now join Ayers in saying "Guilty as sin. Free as a bird." Would mentioning a far worse case of someone who shouldn't be free,
Brett Kimberlin, be too much topic-drift? :D