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

To: doug from upland

Yes. The FEC's supposed ramped-up efforts are meaningful only to those who play by the rules. For all others, they're a non-factor. Why pay any heed whatsoever when there can be enormous advantage over more principled candidates and consequences, if any, occur well after the fact and are merely monetary?

Whatever fines the FEC manages to mete out 2 or 3 years after the election are cost of doing business to people like Hillary. Even then, as you say, Hillary wouldn't pay. Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool. Part deux.


12 posted on 02/02/2007 3:51:45 PM PST by Eroteme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Eroteme

For failure to declare over 721K in her 2000 campaign, the FEC finally fined her campaign 35K in Dec. 2005. They told her to file a fourth amended report. In Jan. 2006, she had filed on her behalf her fourth fraudulent report. The FEC has refused to do anything about it. Justice won't do anything about it. The Senate Ethics Committee refused to do anything about it. The MSM won't even report it.


13 posted on 02/02/2007 4:00:10 PM PST by doug from upland (Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | 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