It is no secret that John Edwards, the Democratic U.S. Senator from North Carolina, is the trial lawyers' anointed candidate for president.� He was a trial lawyer himself before multimillion dollar verdicts and audiences of only 12 people at a time no longer satisfied his compulsion to serve humanity.

Trial lawyers have lots of money.� They want lots more, which is why "greedy" is the adjective frequently used to describe them.� Never accused of being shortsighted underachievers, they are willing to invest to get lots more.

Of the $7.4 million that John Edwards claimed as contributions in his first quarter of presidential campaign reporting, $4.5 million came from lawyers, lawyers' families and employees.

In Senator Edwards' report, 20 people listed as "paralegals" and nine listed as "legal assistants" each gave $2,000, the maximum contribution allowed per individual per election.� Two Washington Post reporters - Thomas Edsall and Dan Balz - who can smell a story in a swamp, decided to ring up some of those large contributors and see what's up.

They rang up Michelle D. Abu-Halmeh, "a law clerk at the Little Rock [Arkansas] firm Turner & Associates PA [who] said she had not found it difficult to send $2,000 to the Edwards campaign.� She said her boss, Tab Turner, 'asked for people to support Edwards,' assuring them that 'he would reimburse us.'"

Lawyer Turner, who spends a great deal of his time suing automobile and tire manufacturers, doesn't seem to like telephones very much either and responded to the reporters only by e-mail.� "He replied:� 'The answer to your direct question is no, she is not going to be reimbursed.� She apparently cannot be reimbursed under some rule relating to campaign finance.'"

Apparently?� Some rule?� Well, that's right, Mr. Lawyer Turner, Esquire, Sir.� There is apparently some rule relating to campaign finance that prohibits asking people to make campaign contributions under the condition that those contributions will be reimbursed.

In practice, the law is probably as effective as "some rule" that prohibits frivolous lawsuits, but it is neither new nor arcane.� Even laymen and "homemakers" (a large political donor base), not schooled in the law, understand it.

Its purpose is to prohibit citizens, even trial lawyers, from exceeding contribution limits through deception.� Its purpose is to prohibit small groups of the well-heeled from exercising excessive influence over elected officials, although, again, in practice, it may be as effective as "some rule" that prohibits frivolous lawsuits.

Does anyone believe that "President" John Edwards would sign any tort reform legislation trying to rein in rampant abuses of our legal system?� Of course not.� As a distinguished (meaning rich) former trial lawyer, he understands much better than the rest of us that shopping for aggrieved clients to sue deep pocketed pigeons for phantasmagorical verdicts must be exactly what the Founding Fathers intended.

Those lawsuits are estimated to cost every man, woman and child in this country $650 a year, but in the world of John Edwards and his cronies at the trough, it is infinitely better for us to give that money to trial lawyers than spend it on SUVs, which may roll over on us, or Big Macs, which may make us fat.

Senator Edwards' campaign has said it will return the entire $10,000 contributed by employees of Turner & Associates PA.� What the hell, $7,390,000 is still the largest take among presidential candidates.� An Edwards spokesperson also said the "campaign has no plans to examine the legality of other contributions," but would surely act "if presented with information about that."

That's okay, because The New York Times is reporting that the "Justice Department's public integrity section has opened a criminal investigation" into the donations made to Edwards by employees of the Turner law firm.� Somehow, we have the feeling, and it's just a feeling, that this investigation will be more vigorously pursued than some of recent memory.

Cynics might venture that all that trial lawyer money for Edwards' presidential bid may represent the first time their deep pockets get clipped.� Polls in North Carolina steadily show Edwards losing his own state by a landslide in a head-to-head match with President Bush, should the president decide to run for re-election.