I don’t understand why Democrats aren’t furious at this guy. He could’ve snagged the nomination and then become dead meat. If you gave money to John Edwards, weren’t you suckered? He lied to you. He deceived you. He could not be a viable candidate with his affair with Rielle Hunter.
Warren Buffett on John Edwards–Sue! Buffett on CNBC this morning [emphasis added]:
QUICK: You know, one of the things that the nation is watching is next week, the first of the conventions kicks off, the Democratic National Convention. Originally, John Edwards was expected to be speaking at that convention, but after some revelations and a spectacular fall about–some revelations about his private life, he will no longer be speaking at the convention. Warren, you’re somebody who has been supporting Barack Obama. Did you ever give money to John Edwards along the way?
BUFFETT: No, I didn’t–I didn’t give money to John Edwards. And, in fact, I think if I’d given money to him, I’d probably be asking for it back now. It’s an interesting situation because John Edwards essentially was soliciting money from people to further his ambitions for the presidency, and, you know, people sent him 50, $100, $200, and I would say that they sent it in while they were being misled by the person who was soliciting the money from them. And, you know, I think if I were Edwards, I might give up a haircut or two and refund at least, you know, the people that gave the 50 or $100, $200 items, because they– if they had known the facts, they wouldn’t have sent him the money, and he is the guy that didn’t give them the facts. I mean, he knew that, in effect, he wouldn’t be elected president. I mean, the story was out there during the campaign. He denied it, but it was out there. And, in fact, I’ve never heard of it, but it might be kind of interesting if somebody, some contributor, would bring a class-action suit on behalf of all these people who essentially were led to send money to a man under totally false circumstances, false pretenses, and where he knew it and didn’t tell them the truth.
QUICK: Hm, that’d be ironic for a trial lawyer…
QUICK: …to have a class-action lawsuit brought against him.
BUFFETT: I’ve seen a lot of class-action suits with less to it than this particular case. The facts are clear. I mean, he solicited money and he wasn’t telling the truth to the people he was soliciting it from.
QUICK: How–have you had any discussions? I mean, obviously, you talked to a lot of people who are high ranked in the Democratic Party. Is that something that’s been thrown around out there, or did you cook this up yourself?
BUFFETT: No, I don’t think–I don’t think I’ve heard of that. The–I don’t talk to a lot of class-action lawyers, but I really think–I think those people were defrauded. They sent money under–with the person who was soliciting the money from them misinforming them even when the National Enquirer came out with it during his campaign, he kept soliciting money and saying it isn’t true. I would think that they–it might be a pretty good class-action suit.
QUICK: Even to this day, he says that he–they had 99 percent of it wrong, even in the most recent interview John Edwards came up with, although he admits that he did have an affair with a woman.
BUFFETT: Well, he would have a chance at a class-action suit to respond to that.
Heh! … I would think this would be a difficult precedent to contain–can donors sue McCain because he didn’t, in fact, get "the message" from the defeat of his immigration semi-amnesty bill–and he knew it? Maybe businesses have to live with this sort of uncertain class-action threat when they dissemble. Politicians will never stand for it.