John McCain bigamist? Not really, but it's not pretty...
The LATimes "goes there" with a long piece looking at McCain's divorce, affair, and remarriage, the inaccuracies he's told, and how the Reagan's preferred the ex.
But I think the real news might be this,
I don't think obtaining a license is the same as marrying, so, it's not really bigamy, but it certainly doesn't look good. Wait for a campaign response before you go nuts on this one.
(I'm guessing this is Obama oppo research dumped to the LATimes. My question would be, how did the Bush oppo research miss this? Or did they simply not need to use it?)
Later: As far as I can tell thus far, "The senator and campaign declined to comment on the matter."
But I think the real news might be this,
Although McCain suggested in his autobiography that months passed between his divorce and remarriage, the divorce was granted April 2, 1980, and he wed Hensley in a private ceremony five weeks later. McCain obtained an Arizona marriage license on March 6, 1980, while still legally married to his first wife.
I don't think obtaining a license is the same as marrying, so, it's not really bigamy, but it certainly doesn't look good. Wait for a campaign response before you go nuts on this one.
(I'm guessing this is Obama oppo research dumped to the LATimes. My question would be, how did the Bush oppo research miss this? Or did they simply not need to use it?)
Later: As far as I can tell thus far, "The senator and campaign declined to comment on the matter."
posted by mikevotes at
7:31 AM
7 Comments:
If two people "obtain a marriage license" they're not legally married? Why not? What do you think "obtain a marriage licence" means?
My take is that the license is what makes a marriage legal and binding. The marriage ceremony itself is a personal and/or religious ritual which, though it may have tremendous personal signficance, has no legal significance.
By
Anonymous, at 10:29 AM
I don't know. I don't know the law, but practice is always get the license before the ceremony.
If you go to get a judge to do it, is that the license or is there a second official recognition.
I just don't know the law, and I figured if it was legally bigamy, that would've been the story's lede.
By
mikevotes, at 10:38 AM
No applying for a marriage license doesn't make you married. But here's the thing: I don't know how you can apply for a license unless you are LEGALLY ABLE TO GET MARRIED. So did McCain file a fraudulent application?
I'll bet cash money there's some question(s) on the forms that ask about eligibility. And there's probably a clause that say "I, the undersigned, swear the information provided hear is factual and true."
By
-epm, at 11:48 AM
It doesn't say he applied for a license. It says he obtained one. The wording implies that the license was actually issued.
By
Anonymous, at 12:21 PM
Anon. Yes, yes, I see your point. The thing is a marriage license is a license to get married. It's not a certificate of marriage. There's still the civil process of oath taking in front of witnesses and conducted by an authorized agent of the state (judge, justice of the peace, recognized clergy...).
The point I was making -- and I think you'd agree -- is that I believe McCain misrepresented himself (perjured?) to the state of AZ when he applied for (and was issued) this license to marry. There is just no way I can image this was a legitimately obtained license.
By
-epm, at 12:58 PM
Guys, again, I don't know the law here, but this is pretty ugly to me.
So far, still a blank wall from the McCain campaign as far as I can tell.
I guess you can't spin this fact.
By
mikevotes, at 2:19 PM
Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now keep it up!
By
Anonymous, at 12:13 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home