[sphinx]

He's not being facetious. He's referencing Bill Clinton's illegal fundraising in 1995-96. I also recall the man who was inartful enough to get recorded shaking hands with BillyJeff as he slipped though the door, saying "James Riady sent me." (That's James Riady of the Lippo Group.) But of course, that was Clinton, who broke every campaign finance law in the book while the dems on the FEC locked arms and refused to investigate.

In this Bush violation, my question is whether the Bush SuperPAC knew it was an improper contribution. There are standard due diligence checks that should have been performed as a matter of routine. I also wonder to what kind of account the contribution was made. Corporate donations can't be used for federal campaign, or "electioneering," purposes. But they can be used, subject to various complex regulations, for non-electioneering purposes, provided that the corporation is itself a lawful donor.

The details in the story are sketchy, but I gather that the corporation in this instance may well have been eligible to contribute, with the violation arising from the fact that the contribution was specifically directed by a foreign national. I.e., a U.S. citizen officer should have said "do it;" not a foreign officer. There may be several sticky wickets involved in this one. I have no idea whether the PAC will appeal. It would probably cost more to contest the case than it is worth. But if there is an appeal, I would not be surprised if the FEC loses. Always remember that the FEC is trying to enforce quite byzantine regulations implementing a patently unconstitutional law. Its regulations and enforcement actions are often tendentious. The FEC losing is always to be hoped for.

The reason I'm skeptical in this case is that Team Bush had scads of money and had locked up a large proportion of the establishment Republican campaign professionals. The operation was well staffed. The Bushes -- all of them, George Herbert Walker, Jeb and George II -- were sticklers for playing by the book. Leave aside whether you liked the Bushes or not; they weren't cheaters. They were notoriously squeaky clean on fundraising. Everything was lawyered, the i's were dotted and the t's were crossed. And they had no reason to cheat; they never lacked for fundraising prowess.

[thinden]

bbb

[A strike]

He absolutely was being facetious. How could you possibly think otherwise?!

[blueplum]

Corporate donations can't be used for federal campaign, or "electioneering," purposes. But they can be used, subject to various complex regulations, for non-electioneering purposes, provided that the corporation is itself a lawful donor.

how can the corp be a lawful donor when it is run by two foreign nationals with foreign residences (meaning not eligible voters)? and isn't there a limit on what a corp can donate?