Posted on 03/16/2017 11:59:10 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
Isn’t that illegal? (I know, not illegal for Clinton stooges)
He’s hoping some backstabber in the Trump org. will do this.
OMG...that picture screams “I suffer from extremely low T.”
Where the hell is Jeff Sessions these days, anyway?
Felonies are being committed everywhere, and no indictments have been announced.
MUST READ BOOK !
Killing the Messenger: The Right-Wing Plot to Derail Hillary and Hijack Your Government
David Brock. Hachette/Twelve, $28 (320p) ISBN 978-1-4555-3376-3
Why????
and I’d like a full investigation into James Alefantes
How is this not conspiracy to commit bribery?
Experts: David Brock Pushing Campaign Finance Boundaries
Dem operative remains on payroll of pro-Clinton super PAC despite coordinating with campaign
BY: Lachlan Markay February 1, 2016
http://freebeacon.com/politics/experts-david-brock-pushing-campaign-finance-boundaries/
Democratic operative David Brock continues to draw a salary from a group legally prohibited from coordinating with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign even as he runs a group that is working directly with her campaign to fend off Clinton’s many critics.
Experts say that the arrangement is legal, but demonstrates how Clinton’s political machine is circumventing campaign finance restrictions even as Clinton decries the corrosive influence of money in the American political system.
Time reported in September that Brock “had to cut off operational discussions” with American Bridge 21st Century, a pro-Clinton opposition research super PAC that he founded, in order to comply with legal restrictions on campaign coordination.
However, financial information filed with the Federal Election Commission on Sunday reveals that American Bridge paid Brock more than $58,000 during the second half of 2015, primarily through bimonthly installments of nearly $5,000.
American Bridge did not respond to questions about Brock’s continued role with the organization. David Brock also did not respond to a request for comment.
Brock is also being paid by Correct the Record, a super PAC that has pushed the legal boundaries of campaign coordination by directly working with the Clinton campaign on Internet-based pushback against the controversies that have dogged her presidential bid.
FEC records show that Correct the Record has paid Brock about $53,000 since July.
Super PACs are generally prohibited from coordinating with candidates and their campaigns. American Bridge is legally barred from communicating with Clinton or her team while she campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Correct the Record says it has found a loophole in coordination laws.
The group maintains that the online-only nature of its work—as opposed to broadcast communications or other paid media—allows it to legally coordinate with the campaign.
Experts say Brock’s roles at the two groups show how he has used sophisticated legal maneuvers to circumvent campaign finance restrictions designed to prevent corruption and the influence of high-dollar donors on the political process.
“In short, it looks like Brock is running a shadow campaign,” said Robert Maguire, a researcher and reporter with the Center for Responsive Politics.
He pointed to Brock’s involvement with other groups that are explicitly or in effect boosting her political efforts, a network that he called “the Brocktopus.”
“Several of those groups are providing her different forms of ground support—be it opposition research or slanted fact checking—and at least one of the groups is pretty openly coordinating with the Clinton campaign,” Maguire wrote in an email.
Brock is listed as the chairman and treasurer of American Bridge’s nonprofit arm, which reported paying him $80,000 for part-time work last year.
He is also the founder and chairman of nonprofit Media Matters for America and its advocacy arm. The two groups, which conduct opposition research on conservative media figures and organizations, paid Brock more than $300,000 in 2013, the latest year for which annual tax filings are available.
“The whole operation is neatly buckled up by some of the best Democratic lawyers in the country,” Maguire said. “If any loose ends start to show, they’ll certainly help him tidy it up.”
Maguire and other experts noted that while Brock is helping to blaze new trails in campaign finance law in the wake of Supreme Court rulings loosening federal restrictions, he is just one of a number of political operatives pushing the boundaries of laws governing political spending.
“Unfortunately, this isn’t an isolated instance, but rather part of an alarming trend where outside groups that are trying to influence our elections are flaunting the rule against coordination,” said Jenn Topper, a spokesperson for the Sunlight Foundation.
“Currently, there is little accountability from the Federal Election Commission or the IRS, who should be asking tough questions of these groups—and their leaders,” Topper said in an email.
The arrangement is fraught for Clinton, who has pledged new campaign finance restrictions in an effort to ward off a nomination challenge from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), a strident reform advocate.
Clinton has pledged to nominate Supreme Court justices who would overturn Citizens United v. FEC and other recent decisions liberalizing campaign finance laws.
In its Citizens United decision, the court ruled that the FEC could not censor a nonprofit group’s documentary about Clinton because it aired within 30 days of a primary election.
Alefantes keeps turning up, does’t he?
I have no good answer for that question.
LOL
CREEPY AS F_
Brock: Time for Bernie’s ‘purity bubble’ to be burst
By GABRIEL DEBENEDETTI 02/08/16
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/david-brock-bernie-sanders-218954
MANCHESTER, N.H. — Hours after former President Bill Clinton caught the attention of Democrats all across the country with the debut of his stinging critique of Bernie Sanders in a 50-minute stemwinder in Milford, N.H., one of Hillary Clinton’s top allies piled on to his critique — and previewed new attacks on the Vermont senator.
“I think that it’s about time that voters got a glimpse of reality, which is what’s happening, and President Clinton did that. It was a strong call to arms, particularly to her supporters — and I include myself in that — who have stayed too quiet in the face of those character attacks, and that’s over. What she correctly called the ‘artful smear,’ we need to call attention to,” David Brock, the founder of the Correct The Record rapid response and opposition research group that coordinates with the Clinton campaign, told POLITICO on Monday morning. “Senator Sanders is trying to live in the purity bubble, and it needs to be burst.”
The comments from the conservative-turned-Clinton ally followed the delivery of the former president’s ratcheted-up rhetoric just before the Super Bowl Sunday. The strongly-worded speech landed not long after tensions reach a boiling point in the Democratic primary, particularly after the two candidates clashed onstage at Thursday night’s debate, when Clinton said Sanders’ suggestions that she is beholden to Wall Street was an “artful smear.”
While some Clinton allies were happy to see the Big Dog turn attack dog, others had immediate flashbacks to 2008, when his harsh criticisms of Barack Obama backfired, particularly in South Carolina. But Clinton loyalists point to 2012 — when the former president stepped in to help Obama — as a more favorable comparison to Clinton’s role. (Sanders’ campaign didn’t respond to a request for a response to Clinton or Brock.)
160208_barack_obama_AP2_1160.jpg
Obama proposing clean-water cuts amid Flint outcry
By ANNIE SNIDER
“When you’re making a revolution, you can’t be too careful with the facts,” Clinton said on Sunday night, not mentioning Sanders’ name, but alluding to him throughout the speech — a break from his standard lines about how his wife is a positive change-maker. “The New Hampshire I campaigned in really cared that you knew what you were doing, and how it was paid for.”
Usually a more sedate presence on the trail, Clinton railed against Sanders’ health care plan and his critique of Hillary Clinton’s acceptance of money from Wall Street. He also compared December’s Democratic National Committee data breach to the Sanders camp stealing a car with keys in its ignition — a point Brock seized on, insisting Hillary Clinton “would’ve been hounded out of the race if her staff had done what his did, in stealing data and misleading the press about it, then raising money off it.”
And Bill Clinton mocked the Sanders camp’s repeated invocation of the political establishment when criticizing Hillary Clinton: “Anybody that doesn’t agree with me is a tool of the establishment,” he said in his summary of Sanders’ argument, a sentiment he repeated while introducing his wife in Manchester on Monday morning.
To Brock, the fiery speech was a clear signal to other Clinton allies to turn up the heat on Sanders, who leads the former secretary of state by double-digits in most New Hampshire polling, with just hours until the polls open.
“The Clinton campaign has stayed remarkably positive in the face of a relentlessly negative campaign from Sanders,” Brock said after Clinton’s speech, which he saw as an outline of future lines of criticism.
While Sanders himself has pledged not to go negative, Hillary Clinton and her aides have repeatedly accused him of running a negative campaign — and her chief strategist Joel Benenson even called his effort the “most negative” Democratic primary campaign ever. Meanwhile Clinton’s team has started distributing fliers outside of Sanders events that quote the PolitiFact New Hampshire site decrying Sanders’ “false” claims of endorsements or support from New Hampshire newspapers.
“These are all fruitful things to explore, they’re themes that I imagine will be developed going forward,” Brock added, elaborating on Bill Clinton’s points.
clinton_AP.jpg
2016
How Clinton plans to stop Sanders’ momentum
By ANNIE KARNI
Brock said more spotlight needs to be focused on policies where Sanders has changed his mind, similar to how Sanders has criticized Clinton: “[President Clinton] referred to Senator Sanders’ hypocrisy, and that is clear on a number of issues, like the fact that he did the bidding of the NRA for years, and when Secretary Clinton called him out on his record, he flip-flopped,” said Brock, referring to Sanders’ recent pivot to supporting legislation that amends a 2005 law he voted for that limited liability for gun manufacturers. He also alluded to the candidate’s switches on immigration policy.
“There’s a unanimous chorus of serious progressive commentators who find almost nothing of any substantive value in his so-called policies. It’s all slogans,” Brock added, suggesting such critiques would be amplified in the coming weeks.
Brock suggested Sanders himself should be called on his campaign’s missteps, which have each gathered local media coverage but never a great deal of national scrutiny. Between appearing to tout newspaper endorsements he didn’t receive in an ad — a version the Sanders camp says was never supposed to go public — and Sanders staffers in Nevada misrepresenting themselves as members of the politically powerful Culinary Workers Union, “if any of that were on the other foot, imagine what the response would be.”
On the topic of Sanders’ boisterous supporters — some of whose attacks Bill Clinton called “vicious trolling and attacks that are literally too profane … not to mention sexist” — Brock echoed the former president’s concerns, adding that Hillary Clinton’s large deficit among young voters can be partly explained by their online environment.
“If you study what’s being said in social media, the media that millennials are consuming, it is filled with misinformation and vicious lies and sexism in terms that you can’t even repeat from his supporters, from other trolls,” Brock said. “And you wonder why there’s such a gap in the millennial preference for Sanders over Hillary. I think if people took a look at what they’re seeing, that would account for some of [the deficit] — the fact that they have a misimpression of her.”
Brock needs to straighten out his own tax returns before he worries about someone elses.
Then he dated Jimmy Alefantis of Comet Ping Pong fame.
“Hillary Clinton ally David Brock has again offered money for information on President Donald Trump.
Brock, a Democratic operative who founded the progressive group American Bridge, said Tuesday night he is offering a $5 million reward to anyone who can provide him Trump’s “complete, legally obtained tax returns.”
_______________________________________________
Release your tax returns, Mr. Brock. I’m curious how you’re coming up with $5 million!
Oh, what? You don’t want your private financial information to become public? Who knew!?
When did releasing tax returns become some sort of requirement of a president? Mr. Trump earned his money legally, he has divested himself from private interests to serve his country. If there were anything negative or untoward that he did as a private citizen, he would have been sued long ago.
Leave it alone, idiot leftists.
Lawlessness.
I offer a $1 million reward for $10 million loot from Amazon.
This is a crime called Solicitation. There is no reason why Brock should not be prosecuted.
“It seems that offering money for anyone’s tax returns should be illegal. He’s offering money for something that will most likely require someone to commit an illegal act.”
It is.
“Solicitation of a felony is a felony.”
Exactly right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.