Tag Archives: democrat

Jeb Bush: Deficits Are For Democrats to Worry About

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I analyze the news for you:

What Jeb Bush said this morning:

Everybody freaks out about the deficit….But if we grow our economy at a faster rate, the dynamic nature of tax policy will kick in….I’m more optimistic.

What he meant:

We should freak out about the deficit only when a Democrat is president. I’m a Republican. When Republicans are president we don’t worry about the deficit. We just cut taxes on the rich.

You’re welcome.

Original link:  

Jeb Bush: Deficits Are For Democrats to Worry About

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Jeb Bush: Deficits Are For Democrats to Worry About

Behold the Craziest Ad of the 2016 Elections—So Far

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Ah, fall. When the leaves turn, decorative gourds grace supermarket shelves, and fringe candidates film themselves firing shotguns at things they don’t like.

When Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.) defeated an incumbent Democrat five years ago by accusing him of supporting a 9/11 “victory mosque” in Lower Manhattan, she probably didn’t expect to find herself in the crosshairs of tea party activists anytime soon. But since coming to Washington after an upset victory in the 2010 Republican landslide, she’s dabbled in moderation. In just the last year, Ellmers voted against a bill that would have prohibited abortions after 20 weeks, and she opposed repealing President Barack Obama’s executive orders on immigration. In 2014, she won a tough primary but cruised to victory against Democratic nominee (and American Idol contestant) Clay Aiken. In an act of heresy for a former tea party star, she’s gone on record defending so-called RINOs—short for “Republican in Name Only.”

In 2016, she faces stiffer competition. Her top primary challenger, a former county GOP chair named Jim Duncan, is neck and neck with her in fundraising. And another challenger, former North Carolina GOP spokeswoman Kay Daly, just aired an ad in which she blows Ellmers away with a shotgun. Metaphorically, of course.

But really, get a load of this:

What! Let’s go scene by scene.

0:01:

The first words of the ad are, “This feminist…”

0:08:

“…Ellmers voted to let homosexuals pretend they’re married!”

0:11:

“She’s a RINO who voted to fund Obamacare and raise the debt ceiling.”

0:19:

The ad then accuses Ellmers of offering special protections to immigrant child molesters.

0:23:

A clip of Ellmers using air quotes as she says the word “RINO,” looped three times.

0:27

Daly announces that she is “hunting RINOs,” fires a shotgun, and invites others to do the same. And…scene.

In an email touting the ad on Thursday, Daly warned that Ellmers “Hispanders” to undocumented immigrants, whom the candidate refers to variously as “interlopers” and “deportables.” She also took aim at Ellmers’ support for gender equality, referring to the Ellmers-backed Equal Rights Amendment as “the one lesbians used to burn their bras over” and touting the congresswoman’s support of “Hillary Clinton’s Feminist Museum bill” (otherwise known as the National Women’s History Museum).

Daly has her work cut out for her before she can take down the incumbent congresswoman. But she does have the backing of Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, and her ad picked up steam after it was aired in the Raleigh market during last week’s GOP debate. If nothing else, we’ll always have this crazy ad.

View post:  

Behold the Craziest Ad of the 2016 Elections—So Far

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Behold the Craziest Ad of the 2016 Elections—So Far

Sigh. It Might Still Be Possible To Recover Hillary Clinton’s Deleted Personal Emails.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Today, the company that manages Hillary Clinton’s email server says that although her personal emails were deleted, the server was never “wiped.” Thus, it might still be possible to recover the deleted emails.

That’s it. That’s the news. But somehow the Washington Post managed to occupy three reporters and 1,500 words telling us this. You can skip most of it. Here’s the only part that matters:

On Saturday, Sens. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairmen of the Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, respectively, said they would push for the deleted e-mails to be reviewed if they can be recovered.

Gee, no kidding. I’m sure the nation’s security hinges on this. And if Hillary’s personal emails are successfully recovered, I’m equally sure that a few of the most embarrassing ones will somehow get leaked to friendly reporters.

Hillary Clinton is well aware of what happens when a Republican Congress starts investigating a prominent Democrat. That’s why she deleted her personal emails in the first place. The 2015 version of the GOP is apparently bent on proving that nothing has changed since the 90s.

Meanwhile, we will all ignore the fact that Jeb Bush did the exact same thing and nobody seems to care. Funny that.

Originally posted here:  

Sigh. It Might Still Be Possible To Recover Hillary Clinton’s Deleted Personal Emails.

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sigh. It Might Still Be Possible To Recover Hillary Clinton’s Deleted Personal Emails.

Palin Ponders the Infinite: Does the Lamestream Media Ever Ask Hillary About Her Favorite Bible Verse?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Huh. I almost forgot about the Palin-Trump lollapalooza. But it’s all on YouTube, and it was pretty boring. Palin’s word salad was subpar and it was just the same-old-same-old from Trump. My favorite part was this bit from Palin:

So you get hit with these gotchas, like most conservatives do. For instance, asking what’s your favorite Bible verse. And I listen to that going, what? Do they ask Hillary that?

Indeed they do! On August 27, 2007, in a nationally televised debate, Tim Russert asked every Democrat on the stage to share their favorite Bible verse:

RUSSERT: Before we go, there’s been a lot of discussion about the Democrats and the issue of faith and values. I want to ask you a simple question.

Senator Obama, what is your favorite Bible verse?

OBAMA: Well, I think it would have to be the Sermon on the Mount, because it expresses a basic principle that I think we’ve lost over the last six years.

John talked about what we’ve lost. Part of what we’ve lost is a sense of empathy towards each other. We have been governed in fear and division, and you know, we talk about the federal deficit, but we don’t talk enough about the empathy deficit, a sense that I stand in somebody else’s shoes, I see through their eyes. People who are struggling trying to figure out how to pay the gas bill, or try to send their kids to college. We are not thinking about them at the federal level. That’s the reason I’m running for president, because I want to restore that.

RUSSERT: I want to give everyone a chance in this. You just take 10 seconds.

Senator Clinton, favorite Bible verse?

CLINTON: The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I think it’s a good rule for politics, too.

RUSSERT: Senator Gravel?

GRAVEL: The most important thing in life is love. That’s what empowers courage, and courage implements the rest of our virtues.

RUSSERT: Congressman Kucinich?

KUCINICH: I carry that with me at every debate, this prayer from St. Francis, which says, Lord, make me an instrument of your peace, and I believe very strongly that all of us can be instruments of peace. And that’s what I try to bring to public life.

RUSSERT: Senator Edwards?

EDWARDS: It appears many times in the Bible, What you do onto the least of those, you do onto me.

RUSSERT: Governor Richardson?

RICHARDSON: The Sermon on the Mount, because I believe it’s an issue of social justice, equality, brotherly issues reflecting a nation that is deeply torn and needs to be heal and come together.

DODD: The Good Samaritan would be a worthwhile sort of description of who we all ought to be in life.

RUSSERT: Senator Biden?

BIDEN: Christ’s warning of the Pharisees. There are many Pharisees, and it’s part of what has bankrupted some people’s view about religion. And I worry about the Pharisees.

Hillary Clinton’s choice wasn’t very original, I admit, but neither was Obama’s. Biden, as usual, provided the most entertaining answer: “I worry about the Pharisees.” I guess we all do, Joe. In any case, the lamestream media had no problem asking, and the Democrats all had no problem answering. See? It’s not so hard.

What’s your favorite Bible verse? I’d recommend Mark 12:38 “Beware of the scribes.” I think Palin would agree that it’s good advice for any era.

Link:

Palin Ponders the Infinite: Does the Lamestream Media Ever Ask Hillary About Her Favorite Bible Verse?

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Palin Ponders the Infinite: Does the Lamestream Media Ever Ask Hillary About Her Favorite Bible Verse?

4 Reasons Why a Biden Run Would Help Sanders

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The politerati are getting a slight break from Trumpalooza these days, thanks to the Biden Bump. The veep has been actively discussing a possible presidential run with Democratic donors and strategists as he moves toward a final decision, and political handicappers have upped the odds that Biden, still coping with the recent death of his 46-year-old son Beau, will enter the fray. This has led to a torrent of speculation about what Biden will do and what a last-minute leap might mean for the 2016 race. Could it hurt the once-inevitable-but-now-email-burdened Hillary Clinton by providing Nervous-Nellie Democrats with an alternative? Could it help Clinton by offering her a more establishment-oriented sparring partner to vanquish—which would yield a positive narrative for her campaign?

The other day, Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent seeking the Democratic nomination who has drawn thousands to rallies and boomed in recent polls, was asked how a Biden bid would affect the contest. He characteristically pooh-poohed the question. “Politics is not a soap opera,” he said. “What impact it will have on the race, I honestly don’t know. I mean, I wish I could tell you, but I don’t. Will it help or hurt me? Will it help or hurt Hillary Clinton? I just don’t know.”

Yet there are several reasons why a Biden run would be good for Sanders.

Continue Reading »

See original:  

4 Reasons Why a Biden Run Would Help Sanders

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 4 Reasons Why a Biden Run Would Help Sanders

Al Franken Wants to Ban Bullying of LGBT Students. Will Republicans Let Him?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Every congressional session for the past five years, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) has introduced legislation to protect LGBT students from harassment and bullying at public schools. Every time, it hasn’t so much as received a vote on the Senate floor. But on Tuesday, Franken thinks his long-suffering bill might finally win passage.

Since 2010, Franken has introduced the Student Non-Discrimination Act, a simple measure that would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation—just as schools are already required to prevent discrimination due to sex, religion, or race. School administrators would be “expected to step in and set a policy that kids can’t do this,” Franken said in an interview with Mother Jones on Monday. “They can’t bully kids because they’re LGBT. If they do, they’ll be told not to and face disciplinary action just like a kid who bullies kids because they’re black, or because they’re Asian, or because they have a disability.”

It wouldn’t be just kid-on-kid harassment that Franken’s bill would ban; school officials themselves wouldn’t be able to treat LGBT students differently based on their identities. Public schools would no longer be able to bar students from attending prom with a same-sex date, for example.

According to his Franken’s office, the measure is schedule to be voted on Tuesday as an amendment to the Senate’s bill to amend No Child Left Behind. “In the last Congress we got 64 votes in the Senate for ENDA—that’s the Employment Non-Discrimination Act—and that is basically setting the same rights to adults that here we’re trying to extend to kids. This, to me, is a lower bar. I think that we can do this,” Franken says. “I think that it will be a close vote, the make-up of the Senate has changed since the last Senate, but I don’t quite understand why my colleagues would not extend these rights to children.”

Despite that optimism, it’s unclear whether enough Republicans will line up to support Franken’s measure on Tuesday. So far just one Republican, Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, has signed on as a co-sponsor. “I’m going to be certainly lobbying my colleagues and try to convince them that we’re senators, but we’re also grown-ups, and we should be there for these kids,” Franken says. “Think about your own kid, going to school with anticipation or going to school with fear.”

During a speech on the Senate floor Monday afternoon, Franken offered a litany of statistics showing why LGBT students need extra protection from harassment. About three out of four LGBT students reported verbal harassment in a 2013 National School Climate survey. From that same study, 35 percent said they suffered a physical assault at school, and almost a third missed at least a day of school within the month of the survey due to fear for their safety. “You can’t learn when you’re afraid, when you dread going to school,” Franken told Mother Jones. He says he became fully invested in solving the problem after a raft of suicides of LGBT student and other bullied teenagers hit the Anoka-Hennepin County school district in Minnesota from 2009 to 2011.

Even if Franken’s amendment passes the Senate, it’d still have to clear the House during reconciliation, when Congress will try to merge competing education reform bills. Colorado Democrat Jared Polis put forward the same measure when the House debated a reauthorization of the education bill last week, but Republican leaders in the chamber declined to put it up for a vote. But Franken is hopeful, he says, since the White House has been “very supportive” of the measure and would help push it during reconciliation.

Read More – 

Al Franken Wants to Ban Bullying of LGBT Students. Will Republicans Let Him?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Al Franken Wants to Ban Bullying of LGBT Students. Will Republicans Let Him?

A GOP Operative Just Got 2 Years in Prison For Breaking Super-PAC Rules

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Department of Justice scored a victory Friday morning in the fight to rein in the campaign finance Wild West that has come with the rise of super-PACs: A GOP operative in Virginia was sentenced to two years in federal prison for breaking a small, but crucial, campaign finance law in the 2012 election. It’s unclear whether this signals a sustained effort by the Justice Department to crack down on campaign finance law violators. But one thing’s for sure: it’s more than the grid-locked Federal Election Commission has done to enforce the law in this area.

There isn’t much that a super PAC can’t do under the 2010 Citizens United ruling. These outfits can raise and spend unlimited cash, soliciting funds from individuals and corporations alike. The one thing that can’t happen is coordination between a super-PAC and a candidate for elected office. And that’s the issue that was at the heart of the Justice Department’s case against GOP operative Tyler Harber, once named a “rising star” by Campaigns & Elections magazine (since revoked), who was sentenced to two years in prison for illegal coordination and lying to the FBI.

Since Citizens United, it’s been fairly clear that rules against coordination were being short-circuited, if not broken outright. Candidates’ political aides have resigned from their campaigns only to resurface at the helm of super PACs supporting that very same candidate; parents and spouses of candidates have created super PACs and pour money in; most significantly, in the run up to 2016, Jeb Bush has merged his campaign with his super PAC, allowing him to raise unlimited amounts of money and hobnob with mega-donors, while hiding behind the excuse that he is not formally a candidate. Campaign finance reformers have cried foul over Bush’s use of this loophole, but the reality is no one is likely to do anything about it. The FEC is, for all intents and purposes, putting itself on the bench this election cycle.

Continue Reading »

Original link – 

A GOP Operative Just Got 2 Years in Prison For Breaking Super-PAC Rules

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A GOP Operative Just Got 2 Years in Prison For Breaking Super-PAC Rules

Lindsey Graham Has an Entirely Reasonable Position on Climate Change, Sometimes

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The story was originally published by the Huffington Post and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

When Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) officially entered the race for the Republican presidential nomination on Monday, he also joined an exclusive club: that of GOP candidates who have acknowledged climate change.

How the 2016 contenders will deal with climate change


Jeb Bush on Climate Change: “I’m a Skeptic”


Marco Rubio Used to Believe in Climate Science


Rand Paul Is No Moderate on Global Warming


Scientists: Ted Cruz’s Climate Theories Are a “Load of Claptrap”


Scott Walker Is the Worst Candidate for the Environment


How Hillary Clinton’s State Department Sold Fracking to the World


Jim Webb Wants to Be President. Too Bad He’s Awful on Climate Change.


Martin O’Malley Is A Longshot Presidential Candidate, and a Real Climate Hawk


Is Elizabeth Warren Really a Leader on Global Warming?


Is Bernie Sanders the Best Candidate on Climate Change?


George Pataki Leads 2016 GOP Crowdâ&#128;¦

Graham, who is in his third term in the Senate, has gained a reputation as one of the few Republicans who has, in the past, acknowledged the science finding that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet and has worked across the aisle on legislation to deal with it. Among the Republican presidential contenders, former New York Gov. George Pataki is the only other candidate who has been proactively engaged on climate.

But while Graham gets a lot of credit for his views on the climate, his record on the issue has been mixed and at times contradictory.

In 2009 and 2010, Graham joined with Democrat John Kerry and independent Joe Lieberman to draft legislation that would have created a cap-and-trade system to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Graham also openly embraced the issue, arguing in January 2010 that addressing climate change “is a worthy endeavor.” And he did so acknowledging that he might get some political pushback on the issue.

“I have come to conclude that greenhouse gases and carbon pollution is not a good thing,” Graham said at the time. “Whatever political push back I get, I’m willing to accept because I know what I’m trying to do makes sense to me…I am convinced that reason, logic and good business sense, and good environmental policy, will trump the status quo.”

Graham consistently made the point that addressing climate would be good for energy independence, job creation and national security.

It was all well and good for a few months. But then, just days before the trio was expected to officially introduce their climate legislation, Graham walked away from the effort, upset that Democratic leadership might move on an immigration bill before their package.

In the weeks after that, things got a little weird, with Graham saying things to reporters like:

“I’m in the wing of the Republican Party that has no problem with trying to find ways to clean up our air. We can have a debate about global warming, and I’m not in the camp that believes man-made emissions are contributing overwhelmingly to global climate change, but I do believe the planet is heating up. But I am in the camp of believing that clean air is a noble purpose for every Republican to pursue. The key is to make it business-friendly.”

He also said he would vote against the legislation he spent months helping craft.

Asked to clarify his position on climate change the following day, Graham said that the “science about global warming has changed” and that he thought it had been “oversold.”

“I think they’ve been alarmist and the science is in question,” he told reporters. “The whole movement has taken a giant step backward.”

I’d been covering the climate bill—and Graham—extensively at that time, and found it a perplexing response from someone who had, just four months earlier, argued that the Senate shouldn’t move a “half-assed bill” that lacked restrictions on carbon emissions. So I asked him again, to which he responded:

At the end of the day, I think carbon pollution is worthy of being controlled, whether you believe in global warming or not. I do believe that all the CO2 gases, greenhouse gases from cars, trucks and utility plants is not making us a healthier place, is not making our society better, and it’s coming at the expense of our national security and our economic prosperity. So put me in the camp that it’s worthy to clean up the air and make money doing so. This idea that carbon’s good for you. I want that debate. There’s a wing of our party who thinks carbon pollution is OK. I’m not in that wing.

In the years since, Graham’s statements have moderated again, somewhat. And he’s managed to maintain support from groups like the Environmental Defense Fund, whose president co-hosted a fundraiser for him in April 2014. In remarks last March, Graham stated that climate change is “real, that man has contributed to it in a substantial way” and criticized the Republican Party for lacking an environmental platform. But then he added that “the problem is, Al Gore’s turned this thing into religion.”

At his official announcement on Monday, Graham alluded to climate change without mentioning the “c”-word directly. “We must have energy independence,” Graham said. “And I believe in the process it is possible to create a safe, clean environment and create well-paying jobs for Americans of all generations.”

Graham’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment about his official campaign position on climate change.

Jump to original: 

Lindsey Graham Has an Entirely Reasonable Position on Climate Change, Sometimes

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, global climate change, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lindsey Graham Has an Entirely Reasonable Position on Climate Change, Sometimes

The Slow-Mo Scandal That Could Crush Scott Walker’s Presidential Hopes

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In 2010, Scott Walker was the young, hyperambitious executive of Milwaukee County and one of three candidates angling for the Wisconsin Republican gubernatorial nomination. Part of his official duties included overseeing Operation Freedom, a charity event that raised money for veterans and their families. When Walker’s chief of staff caught wind that $11,000 of the nonprofit’s money had gone missing, Walker had his office ask the local district attorney to investigate. Now that he’s seeking the Republican presidential nomination, he probably wishes it hadn’t.

The prosecutors caught the scent of more than just missing funds, coming to suspect that members of Walker’s staff had blurred the lines between official business and politicking. When Walker balked at handing over more documents, the DA asked a judge to open a so-called John Doe investigation. Unique to Wisconsin, a John Doe is a wide-ranging secret inquiry similar to a federal grand jury probe. For nearly three years—during which time Walker was elected governor, won a showdown with public-sector unions, and survived a recall attempt—prosecutors collected thousands of documents, interviewed dozens of witnesses, and even raided homes and offices in search of evidence. Eventually, they filed criminal charges against six people connected to Walker.

The fallout from the probe isn’t the only legal drama Walker must contend with as he inches toward a 2016 presidential run: A second investigation has been following the money behind his campaign to defeat the 2012 recall effort. Walker has called the whole ordeal a “political witch hunt,” and his allies say he will emerge not only unscathed, but reenergized. Yet the ongoing controversy has cast a pall over the rising Republican star and has exposed the inner workings of a political machine that allegedly flouted election laws and wooed anonymous dark-money donors, teetering between campaigning and corruption.

Is your judge for sale? Read how dark money is taking over judicial elections.

The initial John Doe investigation centered on the discovery that members of Walker’s county staff had routinely engaged in political activity on official time, working to bolster his political fortunes and those of the state GOP. Their transgressions ranged from minor oversights to flagrant violations of the fundamental premise that taxpayer money and government resources cannot be used for political ends. For example, Walker’s constituent services coordinator, Darlene Wink, devoted hours of work time to posting pseudonymous pro-Walker comments on local news sites. She also worked on county time planning fundraisers for Walker. According to documents collected by the prosecutors, Wink knew her activities skirted the line. Once, after asking a colleague how to erase chat messages, she wrote, “I just am afraid of going to jail—ha! ha!

Prosecutors also found that Walker’s deputy chief of staff, Kelly Rindfleisch, spent much of her time at her county job actually working on behalf of Walker’s campaign and that of his ally running for lieutenant governor. To keep her communications from becoming public, Rindfleisch used a private email account while exchanging more than 1,000 messages with Walker’s campaign staff. These messages illustrate how Walker’s office and his gubernatorial campaign were at times indistinguishable, with the county staff trying to cover their tracks. In an email discussing how to plant damaging stories about Walker’s 2010 primary opponent, Rindfleisch wrote, “This needs to be done covertly so it’s not tied to Scott or the campaign in any way.”

Just how deeply had politics pervaded Walker’s supposedly apolitical office? In court, prosecutors highlighted one particularly troubling example. In July 2010, a concrete slab fell from a county parking garage, killing a 15-year-old boy. Knowing that journalists would file public records requests about the accident, Walker’s campaign sprang into action. Hours after the boy’s death, Walker’s campaign manager ordered Rindfleisch to “make sure there is not a paper anywhere that details a problem at all.”

The probe led to six convictions. Rindfleisch was sentenced to six months in jail. Wink pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors. A Walker aide and an appointee both received two-year prison sentences after admitting to embezzling more than $70,000 from Operation Freedom. And a railroad executive who’d donated to Walker’s campaigns admitted to an illegal scheme in which he pressed his employees to donate to Walker and reimbursed them for it; he received two years of probation.

Walker, though, insisted he had no knowledge of any of the abuses going on under his nose. (Rindfleisch’s desk was 25 feet from his office.) As his former employees and associates were sentenced, he catapulted to national stardom as a conservative governor in a blue state who took on organized labor and survived. But he wasn’t in the clear yet.

In October 2013, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed the second John Doe investigation. This time, the targets were bigger, including Walker’s anti-recall campaign, two top gubernatorial aides, and some of Wisconsin’s most prominent conservative advocacy groups. What came to be known as John Doe II focused on whether Walker’s campaign had illegally coordinated with big donors and conservative groups to defeat the recall. In other words, the investigation went to the core of the post-Citizens United era, in which deep-pocketed outside groups may not officially coordinate with candidates’ campaigns even as they raise unlimited funds for them.

In the summer of 2014, a federal judge unsealed documents detailing the prosecutors’ contention that Walker, his campaign, and aides had illegally funneled money to a network of 12 supposedly independent conservative groups and directed their spending to fight the recall. At the center of the probe was the Wisconsin Club for Growth, a dark-money group that was run by RJ Johnson, who was also an adviser to Walker. Court filings accidentally published online revealed that a mining company had donated $700,000 to the Club; soon after, Walker signed a mining bill that the company had lobbied for. In one email, one of Walker’s campaign consultants suggested ideas for raising cash for the Club, including “Take Koch’s money” and “Get on a plane to Vegas and sit down with Sheldon Adelson. Ask for $1m now.”

The Doe II investigation is currently on hold after pingponging among judges—some of whom have allowed it to proceed while others ordered it shut down. Its fate now rests with the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which has agreed to hear three separate challenges to the investigation. Four of the court’s seven members are conservatives whose most recent election bids were supported by $10 million from the Wisconsin Club for Growth and Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the state’s main business lobby. Prosecutors have petitioned at least one of those justices to step aside, but to no avail. The Wisconsin Supreme Court is expected to rule on Doe II as soon as this summer.

Walker, who is also expected to officially announce his candidacy this summer, has sought to turn the probe to his advantage, characterizing it as terrifying government overreach. In April, he told an Iowa radio station that “even if you’re a liberal Democrat, you should look at the investigation and be frightened to think that if the government can do that against people of one political persuasion, they can do it against anybody, and more often than not we need protection against the government itself.”

Original article: 

The Slow-Mo Scandal That Could Crush Scott Walker’s Presidential Hopes

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Slow-Mo Scandal That Could Crush Scott Walker’s Presidential Hopes

Scott Walker May Have Just Scored 2016’s Biggest Sugar Daddies

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Charles and David Koch have already made it clear that they plan to do everything in their power to prevent Hillary Clinton (or, in case she stumbles, any other Democrat) from winning the presidency. The moguls hope to garner $889 million for the 2016 election from their networks, much of it bound to be channeled through their favorite Dark Money organizations. At one single summit in late January they managed to raise $249 million from friends and allies.

And now, it looks like the Koch brothers may have landed on their standardbearer for all that spending. As the New York Times reported:

On Monday, at a fund-raising event in Manhattan for the New York State Republican Party, David Koch told donors that he and his brother, who oversee one of the biggest private political organizations in the country, believed that Mr. Walker would be the Republican nominee.

“When the primaries are over and Scott Walker gets the nomination,” Mr. Koch told the crowd, the billionaire brothers would support him, according to a spokeswoman. The remark drew laughter and applause from the audience of fellow donors and Republican activists, who had come to hear Mr. Walker speak earlier at the event, held at the Union League Club.

If the Kochs do decide to back Scott Walker, according to the Times, the money would come from them personally, rather than their network of affiliated groups. But with a combined net worth of over $85 billion, Charles and David could set up a vehicle that would outspend nearly anyone while barely tapping into their bank accounts. Seeing the brothers get behind Walker isn’t terribly surprising. The pair invested heavily in his initial gubernatorial campaign and have aided him in his subsequent elections.

Not so fast, though, Politico‘s Mike Allen cautioned this morning. Despite David Koch’s remarks, he provided Politico a statement disavowing any endorsement. As Allen wrote, the brothers say they are undecided and still plan to hold “auditions” at their summer donor conference. In addition to Walker, the lineup of people under consideration reportedly includes Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and, most surprisingly, Jeb Bush.

Whoever ends up gaining the Kochs’ support would have unparalleled fundraising might, and would have to be considered a favorite for the Republican nomination. And their ascent would be the latest example of the power of the ultrarich in the age of the super PAC: Winning broad support from small donors doesn’t matter when the affections of two individuals willing to spend astronomically could upend the entire campaign.

More:  

Scott Walker May Have Just Scored 2016’s Biggest Sugar Daddies

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Scott Walker May Have Just Scored 2016’s Biggest Sugar Daddies