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

To: autumnraine
And for the other Freepers who want to say "How could Obama afford that?" Uhhh, I guess he doesn't. Apparently campaign money is now eligible to be spent to FIGHT showing you are eligible to be POTUS.

I pointed out last fall that the Vitter case allows campaign funds to be used for all kinds of legal cases including (in Vitter's case) lawyers fees for cases unrelated to the election. I always said Obama was not paying millions to fight COLB cases because I knew that the same people who bought and paid for his election were paying for this crap. So the argument that "Why shouldn't he just spend $12 to show the original certificate" is just as invalid as ever. The people who want Obama to remain in power have essentially unlimited funds.

100 posted on 04/19/2009 5:33:33 AM PDT by palmer (Cooperating with Obama = helping him extend the depression and implement socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: palmer; LucyT; Candor7
I pointed out last fall that the Vitter case allows campaign funds to be used for all kinds of legal cases including (in Vitter's case) lawyers fees for cases unrelated to the election

Not only is that a patently false statement and misrepresentation of the case, it is also meant to obfuscate Obama's highly unethical, if not outright illegal, use of campaign finances to subvert the Constitution and to deny the individual rights it grants to citizens.

It also happens to be typical leftist avoidance behavior: any time anyone mentions Obama's illegal activities, say something that Bush or another Republican politician did and make it sound just as bad, as if "two wrongs make a right."

The FEC ruled that Vitter could not use $160k in campaign funds to offset his legal fees from the DC Madam lawsuit. The FEC did, however, allow him to claim $38k in legal fees relating to (a) when his subpoena lawyer consulted with Vitter and his media relations staff regarding news management and news statements; (b) for his subpoena lawyer's legal consultations with his lawyer working with the Senate Ethics Committee, and (c) for some miscellaneous expenses.

Perhaps more noteworthy are the statements made by the FEC Democrats. They said that Vitter should not be able to use campaign funds to pay for legal fees in his attempt to quash the subpoena or monitor the Palfrey trial, saying those expenses had nothing to do with his status as a senator.

"Allowing Vitter to use his campaign funds would be giving a green light to lawmakers to use campaign funds to pay for divorce lawyers or lawyers to represent them in other cases where they might face bad publicity," Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said.

I'm sure that Ms. Weintraub would also mention the Vitter case when confronted with Obama's campaign finance bailout to Bob Bauer. Let's see what happens when this complaint lands in the lap of the FEC.

"To put it plainly, these expenses are the result of some pretty unofficial activities."

SOURCE: http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/byauthor/253948

102 posted on 04/19/2009 10:10:11 AM PDT by Polarik (("Forgeries don't validate claims -- they repudiate them"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | 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