There were two money bomb events that were not coordinated by the official campaign. Read: Events, which means publicity to donate on a specific day, not actual fundraising. People still were directed to go to the official website and donate. Duh.
That allowed him not to file the required info with the FEC. If HE raised this money, that makes that claim of independence a lie.
No, it means you're delusional. All of Paul's donations are in real-time and the running tally is open to the public. The campaign follows all FEC rules and regulations.
My post was strictly tongue in cheek. Your post makes me think that you might be a (shudder) Paulbot.
Speaking of delusional people ....
.
.
.
.
.
The above was public (as if all of this isn't) and meant for anyone to comment on. The rest of this is really only meant for you. Others may comment (how can I stop them?) but I don't intend to respond to Ron Paul zealots EVER.
I don't think that you (Extremely Extreme Extremist) are suggesting that you know, for a fact, that Ron Paul's campaign has filed any (I emphasize ANY) paperwork that is required (under the current idiotic (McCain/Feingold) laws) to make his being directly involved (which includes "directing people" to the other efforts) with the obscene (neo-NAZI, Klan, MoveOn) "fund raising" stunts that have gone on so far and that "he's not involved in" a criminal act based on that involvement under current law? Or are you just "trusting Master Ron?" If you're relying on trust then you have disappointed me big time. Based on other posts by you, even those I've strongly disagreed with, I have assumed that you were up to the task. Please don't disappoint me.
I'm seriously asking for evidence. I don't think that there is anything anyone can say (that I'll believe... yeah, yeah, "nice dodge") which will convince me to support Ron Paul, but your post disturbs me, big time.
Now, I 100% approve of the "Ron Paul blimp for profit" operation as a way to screw with and make irrelevant the current upside down CFR rules (but you must know that's being run by a Romney supporter, don't you?). The thing we need is immediate reporting of donations and donors, not restrictions on who can donate or how much. That's at the heart of the first amendment. I just have no reason (based on extensive research) to believe that Ron Paul actually supports that sort of openess. He's a "libertarian" of convenience, so far as I can tell.
I am a Conservative (capitol C) and will not accept anyone's challenge to that claim without an argument. However, I describe my conservatism as my being a "cynical liberal." I believe in all of the "ideals" that liberals claim to champion, ending racism, helping those who can't help themselves, etc., I just don't believe for a second that Jesse Jackson, Teddy Kennedy, RON PAUL OR MIKE HUCKABEE are going to deliver on any of their lying "populist" promises.
I'm interested in things that work. All of the things I'm aware of that work have been labeled "conservative" by "liberals," "progressives," "communists," "democrats" and their fellow travelers (including Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee). I guess that makes me a (true) Conservative.
Also, please drop the childish insults. It may not be beneath you, but it's beneath me, for I am the underminer! <nasty evil smarmy (and hopefully funny) grin>
You are one patient individual. I salute you!