When the news came out that a Washington businessman had pleaded guilty to the federal crime of making multi-million dollar illegal contributions to Democrats including Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, I started wondering how the media would react. In truth, I expected the liberal press to either ignore the story or to defend Hillary. It seems that I underestimated the mainstream media. Sure, we had some places that ignored the story and others that defended Hillary, but the biggest group attacked those who had reported the story in the first place. The story line from the media was something like this: "How dare they connect these illegal contributions to the Clinton campaign!" "There is no proof that anyone at the Clinton campaign knew the contributions were illegal!"
My favorite example of this genre of faux outrage comes from Eleanor Clift, a hack writer who never has anything bad to say about a Democrat. According to Clift, it is outrageous that articles called the contributions received by Clinton advisor Minyon Moore "illegal". Think about that. We have a political operative at the top of a presidential campaign. She gets huge contributions from one man which are used to fund street teams for the Clinton campaign. The contributions do not get reported by the campaign to the Federal Election Commission as required by law. The contributions are many times the maximum amount allowed by law to be contributed. Even the expenditures on the street teams are not reported to FEC. Is there any doubt that the Clinton campaign knew that the contributions were illegal? People who spent years raising funds for campaigns supposedly did not know that there was a maximum size of contributions and that those contributions had to be reported? Really?
Look, we now have a criminal guilty plea from the businessman involved in this scheme. We know for a fact that a crime was committed and that the funds went to the Clintons. It is inconceivable that the Clinton campaign did not know the nature of these contributions especially since they were allegedly used to fund "off books" activities for Hillary. To be fair, we have no proof yet that Hillary herself was aware of what was going on here, although it is likely in my opinion that she did. It is not, however, outrageous to say that Minyon Moore received "illegal" contributions. Eleanor Clift is going to need a new line of defense. Maybe she could try this one: Minyon Moore and the Clinton campaign thought that if they liked their illegal contributions, they could keep them.
My favorite example of this genre of faux outrage comes from Eleanor Clift, a hack writer who never has anything bad to say about a Democrat. According to Clift, it is outrageous that articles called the contributions received by Clinton advisor Minyon Moore "illegal". Think about that. We have a political operative at the top of a presidential campaign. She gets huge contributions from one man which are used to fund street teams for the Clinton campaign. The contributions do not get reported by the campaign to the Federal Election Commission as required by law. The contributions are many times the maximum amount allowed by law to be contributed. Even the expenditures on the street teams are not reported to FEC. Is there any doubt that the Clinton campaign knew that the contributions were illegal? People who spent years raising funds for campaigns supposedly did not know that there was a maximum size of contributions and that those contributions had to be reported? Really?
Look, we now have a criminal guilty plea from the businessman involved in this scheme. We know for a fact that a crime was committed and that the funds went to the Clintons. It is inconceivable that the Clinton campaign did not know the nature of these contributions especially since they were allegedly used to fund "off books" activities for Hillary. To be fair, we have no proof yet that Hillary herself was aware of what was going on here, although it is likely in my opinion that she did. It is not, however, outrageous to say that Minyon Moore received "illegal" contributions. Eleanor Clift is going to need a new line of defense. Maybe she could try this one: Minyon Moore and the Clinton campaign thought that if they liked their illegal contributions, they could keep them.
No comments:
Post a Comment