One of the big positions take by Democrats in recent election cycles is that America needs strict campaign finance laws. Candidates like Bernie Sanders rant about the Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court that allows corporations to make political contributions like any other legal person. Sanders says that big money will ruin our political system (of course, that assumes that the system is not already rotten.) Sanders ignores the big bucks that unions have always given to the Democrats. He also ignores the billionaires who give large donations mostly to the party that holds the White House. Hillary Clinton also talks about getting the money out of politics which is amazing. Hillary, after all, is part of the biggest money raising scheme in American political history, the Clinton Foundation. Hundreds of millions were given by various entities, both foreign and domestic, that had business before the State Department when Hillary was there. Still others have given to buy influence with the possible next president. Hillary, in turn, has used the Clinton Foundation to support her political machine during the years from 2008 to 2015. For example, one her long time political advisers was hired to "run" a small office for $400,000 per year. The Clinton Foundation also spent roughly $8 million per year for travel expenses, most of which seem to be for Bill and Hillary.
Today, there was another bit of news about campaign finance laws. The Hearst newspapers of Connecticut ran a story detailing how the state Democrat party illegally evaded the prohibition in Connecticut against state contractors and employees making political donations for state races. The Democrats raised millions in contributions from these prohibited sources, but the cash was put in the "federal" account. In other words, the contributions were directed for use in races for the House or the Senate. In the last race for governor, however, when money got tight, the Democrats "borrowed" enormous amounts of money from that federal account and used the cash for the state race. No one has yet been indicted, but as reported by Hearst, it certainly looks like many should be.
It's worth noting that the Hearst papers in Connecticut are strongly pro-Democrat, so for those papers to run with this story gives it particular weight. Hopefully, there will be a brave prosecutor who is willing to take on the state Democrat party in order to enforce the law.
Today, there was another bit of news about campaign finance laws. The Hearst newspapers of Connecticut ran a story detailing how the state Democrat party illegally evaded the prohibition in Connecticut against state contractors and employees making political donations for state races. The Democrats raised millions in contributions from these prohibited sources, but the cash was put in the "federal" account. In other words, the contributions were directed for use in races for the House or the Senate. In the last race for governor, however, when money got tight, the Democrats "borrowed" enormous amounts of money from that federal account and used the cash for the state race. No one has yet been indicted, but as reported by Hearst, it certainly looks like many should be.
It's worth noting that the Hearst papers in Connecticut are strongly pro-Democrat, so for those papers to run with this story gives it particular weight. Hopefully, there will be a brave prosecutor who is willing to take on the state Democrat party in order to enforce the law.
No comments:
Post a Comment