Replies

No controlling legal authority?

Bribery just ain't what it used to be...

Gore and the Monks

For the Times to draw a parallel between George W. Bush's legal fund-raising and Al Gore's Buddhist temple fiasco is just breathtaking. At the Buddhist temple event, a non-profit organization illegally funneled at least $65,000 to the DNC through straw donors -- the monks -- who were reimbursed with temple funds for their political contributions . Two of the "donors" were foreign nationals, and the event was orchestrated by a woman, Maria Hsia, who a Senate committee found has acted as an agent of the Chinese communist government and who has since been convicted of felonies stemming from the fundraising scandal. As detailed in a report of the Senate committee on governmental affairs, the Buddhist temple activity "clearly violated federal election laws barring political contributions made through 'straw donors' and meets the legal definition of a 'criminal conspiracy.'" In addition, federal law, 2 U.S.C. Sec. 441e(1), prohibits foreign nationals from contributing to American political campaigns. What the Buddhist temple event was about was not simply "awkward pictures" and the definition of a fund-raiser, but serious violations of federal law. There is no evidence that Mr. Bush has engaged in this sort of behavior. And there is no reason to believe that Mr. Gore and his campaign would pay any more attention to the rules after the passage of campaign finance "reform." If Mr. Gore's campaign didn't obey the existing laws the last time around, why should we trust him to write new laws or to obey them once they are passed?

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39b273852fc1.htm