Under the Dome

George Holding won't talk about Edwards case he once prosecuted

A significant piece of Republican George Holding's campaign biography is his role as a U.S. attorney prosecuting the case against John Edwards. The Raleigh congressional candidate left his role before the case went to trial -- but what does he think about the case given Thursday's verdict?

Holding's not talking. 

His campaign strategist, Carter Wrenn, said Holding wouldn't comment about the case. "I don't think it's quite appropriate," Wrenn said Friday, referring questions to the current federal prosecutors.

But Holding's campaign did defend the cost of the prosecution in the May primary race. His GOP opponent Paul Coble called the Edwards prosecution political. "I think there is no question that Holding thought those two cases would take him to Congress," Coble is quoted saying.

At the time Wrenn issued a statement calling Coble's remarks "bizarre." "Paul Coble’s actually slamming George Holding for prosecuting Mike Easley and John Edwards – and saying those prosecutions were a waste of taxpayers’ money. We just entered the twilight zone," Wrenn said.

And now Holding's Democratic opponent in the 13th District is talking. "It seem like it was a stretch to convict him, as we see now," said Charles Malone. "I don't think it was the best use of taxpayer money."

Malone questions whether Holding's political leanings entered into his thinking on the case, calling it "suspicious." At the same time, Malone said public officials should be held accountable.

"It's interesting to me, though, that we spare no cost to convict people for their personal sins ... and not (prosecute) all the financial titans on Wall Street" for their behavior, he said.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Whos going to Investigate Holding?

Ok N & O, when will you start digging on Holding?  He wasted taxpayer dollars on going after both Easley and Edwards (and bragged about it throughout his primary) yet in close circles its known that there was coordination between the SuperPAC and the Holding campaign...thus breaking campaign finance laws himself. He also got money from lawbreakers like Stubbs (check the FEC records, Rob) yet no one is digging on this guy.  Is there a crush Rob?  We know he broke campaign laws, and what's better than being able to have more evidence on him than what he had on Edwards? 

Cars View All
Find a Car
Jobs View All
Find a Job
Homes View All
Find a Home

Want to post a comment?

In order to join the conversation, you must be a member of Click here to register or to log in.