Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Hillary's 33 State Deal for the White House
Topic Started: Apr 22 2016, 03:55 AM (392 Views)
Gizmolove
Member Avatar
Gizmolove
HILLARY'S 33 STATE DEAL WITH THE HILLARY VICTORY FUND:

APRIL 1, 2016
How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

Collusion between the Clinton campaign and the DNC allowed Hillary Clinton to buy the loyalty of 33 state Democratic parties last summer. Montana was one of those states. It sold itself for $64,100.

The Super Delegates now defying democracy with their insistent refusal to change their votes to Sanders in spite of a handful of overwhelming Clinton primary losses in their own states, were arguably part of that deal.

In August 2015, at the Democratic Party convention in Minneapolis, 33 democratic state parties made deals with the Hillary Clinton campaign and a joint fundraising entity called The Hillary Victory Fund. The deal allowed many of her core billionaire and inner circle individual donors to run the maximum amounts of money allowed through those state parties to the Hillary Victory Fund in New York and the DNC in Washington......
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/


Did the Hillary Victory Fund Break the Law?

The Bernie Sanders campaign is picking a fight with the Democratic Party, and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

On Monday, the Sanders campaign raised the possibility that the Hillary Victory Fund, a joint-fundraising committee for the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and 32 state Democratic Parties, may have committed “serious apparent violations” of campaign-finance laws.

At the heart of the matter is a claim that the fundraising effort may be improperly subsidizing the Clinton campaign. A letter sent by Brad Deutsch, the Sanders campaign attorney, to DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, suggests that money spent by the fund has benefited the Clinton campaign in a way that could constitute “an impermissible in-kind contribution from the DNC and the participating state party committees.” The fund “appears to operate in a way that skirts legal limits on federal campaign donations and primarily benefits the Clinton presidential campaign,” a press release sent out by the Sanders campaign warned....
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-dnc/478875/



Did she really need New York? How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

The money was either transferred to the Hillary for America or Forward Hillary PACs and spent directly on the Hillary Clinton Campaign, often paying the salaries and expenses within those groups, or it was moved into the DNC or another Clinton PAC. Some of it was spent towards managing the Hillary merchandise store, where you can buy Hillary t-shirts and hats and buttons.

The fund is administered by treasurer Elizabeth Jones, the Clinton Campaign’s chief operating officer. Ms. Jones has the exclusive right to decide when transfers of money to and from the Hillary Victory Fund would be made to the state parties.

One could reasonably infer that the tacit agreement between the signatories was that the state parties and the Hillary Clinton Campaign would act in unity and mutual support. And that the Super Delegates of these various partner states would either pledge loyalty to Clinton, or, at the least, not endorse Senator Sanders. Not only did Hillary’s multi-millionaire and billionaire supporters get to bypass individual campaign donation limits to state parties by using several state parties apparatus, but the Clinton campaign got the added bonus of buying that state’s Super Delegates with the promise of contributions to that Democratic organization’s re-election fund.

If a presidential campaign from either party can convince various state parties to partner with it in such a way as to route around any existing rules on personal donor limits and at the same time promise money to that state’s potential candidates, then the deal can be sold as a way of making large monetary promises to candidates and Super Delegates respectable.

The leadership of a very broke Montana Democratic Party decided in August of 2015 that this was a seductive deal they were willing to make. And by the end of that year scores of $10,000 donations came in from out of state.

Montana’s list of out of state donors to the state campaign reads like a Who’s Who of the Democratic financial elites. The names vary little from the list of high donors to the other 32 states that signed on to the Hillary Victory Fund....
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_73767.shtml
When it comes to lying, cheating, or stealing, consult your DNC or GOP handbook.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

I think it is a bit strange that “Counterpunch”, “The Atlantic” and “Axis of Logic”, and indeed, Senator Sanders himself, fails to mention that Senator Sanders entered into the same joint fundraising pact with the DNC as SOS Clinton.

The difference is that he has not bothered to raise much money for the DNC or for any of the State Democratic committee or for any other Democratic candidates.

I wonder why????

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bernie-sanders-2016-fundraising-dnc-215559
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gizmolove
Member Avatar
Gizmolove
It's a bigger picture than Bernie Sanders, (it's a movement). It's a bigger picture than (any) "democrat".
SOME DEMOCRATS JUST DON'T GET THAT.

Bernie Sanders finds ‘the right candidates’

"But Jane Sanders said something interesting on the show last week. Asked whether her husband might be willing to help other campaigns financially, she said Sanders would definitely lend a hand – for “the right candidates.”

Yesterday, we got a better sense of what that means. Politico reported:
Bernie Sanders is raising money for a trio of progressive House candidates who have endorsed him, a move that comes just weeks after he faced friendly fire for not committing to fundraise for down-ballot Democrats. […]

The trio of candidates – New York’s Zephyr Teachout, Nevada’s Lucy Flores, and Washington state’s Pramila Jayapal – is running in primaries that pit them against more establishment-aligned foes.
In a fundraising solicitation that went to donors yesterday, Sanders wrote, “I’ve told you throughout this campaign that no candidate for president, not Bernie Sanders, not the greatest president you could possibly imagine, can take on the billionaire class alone. When I am elected president, I am going to need progressives in Congress who are willing to continue the fight we started in this campaign.”

The pitch makes the case for Teachout, Jayapal, and Flores, and the letter included a link to a fundraising page in which donors were offered a choice: make a contribution that would be divided evenly four ways (the three congressional candidates and Sanders), or specify a personalized allocation for the contribution.

And in some ways, this new endeavor is itself emblematic of the larger Democratic fight..."
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bernie-sanders-finds-the-right-candidates

HILLARY CLINTON IS SUPPORTING THE STATUS QUO; BERNIE SANDERS IS SUPPORTING THE PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT.
When it comes to lying, cheating, or stealing, consult your DNC or GOP handbook.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic »
Add Reply