"A centerpiece of Edwards' candidacy was his public image as a devoted family man," the indictment said. "Edwards knew that public revelation of the affair and the pregnancy would destroy his candidacy by, among other things, undermining Edwards' presentation of himself as a family man and by forcing his campaign to divert personnel and resources away from other campaign activities to respond to criticism and media scrutiny regarding the affair and pregnancy."

In an aggressive and apparently novel application of the law, prosecutors said the money constituted campaign contributions because it was intended to protect Edwards' political career from ruin. They said the spending was illegal because Edwards should have reported it on his campaign finance filings and because it exceeded the $2,300-per-person limit on contributions.

Details.