Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: doug from upland
$225,000 in-kind contribution ... He has testified under oath that he never gave any money.

Not that it's a big difference in this issue, but in-kind contribution Usually denotes that the contribution wasn't money, but some other form of 'donation'. Time, campaign materials, etc.

in-kind (ĭn'kīnd') adj.
Given in goods, commodities, or services rather than money: cash and in-kind benefits.
50 posted on 04/11/2006 10:04:46 AM PDT by BritExPatInFla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: BritExPatInFla

I appreciate your interest in determining what an inkind contribution would be that cost $225,000- Under FEC law, if a contributor pays expenses of a campaign, e.g. the expenses to produce the biggest fund raising event of the campaign, those payments to third parties that save the campaign the need to expoend its money, is a cash, in-kind contribution. I paid more than $1.2 million in these types of expenses for Hillary's campaign so she could raise $1.5 million in net donations from others, much of it hard money. Hillary is attempting to attribute $225,000 of my $1.2 million in payments for her benefit to Stan Lee even though he has maintained he never donated anything, because Stan made a loan to my holding company and I wrote on the check I was using the money for her campaign. Because I comingled the loan proceeds from Stan with more than $2 million in other money I had, the FEC agreed that it couldnt even try to attribute a loan as a contribution. But that didnt stop Hillary from lying to the FEC and the voters yet again.


104 posted on 04/12/2006 6:06:06 AM PDT by krucader_bravepages_com (the mother of all whistleblowers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson