Looks like the NY Times lay the bait for the complaint:
“Last Thursdays New York Times ran an article about Fred Thompsons non-candidacy entitled A Campaign Undeclared, Not Invisible, the crux of which was that Fred Thompsons sorta-kinda campaign was sorta-kinda borderline illegal. The story suggested that Thompsons testing the waters Web site amounted to a stealth campaign in cyberspace, and that existing election laws didnt cover such activities. Then there came a curious little factoid sixteen paragraphs in:
The [Federal Election Commission]s regulations say a testing-the-waters candidate may not conduct campaign-type activities in close proximity to the election or over a protracted period of time. Mr. Biersack said the agency would need to have a complaint to act.
So they would need to have a complaint to act, eh? I remember reading that article last week and wondering how much time it would take for that shoe to drop, since the Times dangled it in front of Thompson foes so darn enticingly. Enter blogger Lane Hudson you might remember him from such Internet-related stories as Mark Foleys sexual instant messages and e-mails to a page who, according to the Associated Press, has decided hell be the one to file the complaint and question Thompsons tactic.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/08/21/publiceye/entry3188886.shtml
Yeah colour me shocked. SHOCKED, I say!
Oh, I forgot about our boy Lane’s ties to the Foley deal.
He’s quite the little piece of work, our boy Lane.....