Posted on 06/20/2012 12:00:35 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Translation: A President’s critics should be entirely transparent, but not a President or his campaign. The New York Times reported last night that the Obama campaign has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission to force independent group American Crossroads to disclose all its donors (via Instapundit):
The lawyer for President Obama demanded on Tuesday that Crossroads GPS disclose its donors, saying in a complaint to the Federal Election Commission that the group is plainly a “political committee” subject to federal reporting requirements.
In the complaint, obtained by The New York Times, Robert F. Bauer, the campaign’s chief counsel, writes that the group — founded by Karl Rove, among others — can no longer shield the identity of its donors by defining itself as a “social welfare” organization.
Bauer also sent a letter to Karl Rove and AC president Steven Law demanding disclosure immediately. But guess what was missing?
Jonathan Collegio, a spokesman for Crossroads, questioned Mr. Bauer’s motivation, saying that the president’s lawyers only seem to take issue with groups that benefit Republicans. He noted that Mr. Obama’s campaign has embraced Priorities USA Action, a Democratic group.
“They send cabinet members to raise money for Priorities,” Mr. Collegio said. “Issue ads are apparently evil — unless they’re run by liberal groups, in which case Obama thinks they’re O.K.”
Mr. Collegio said that unless Mr. Obama’s campaign sends a similar letter to Priorities, people “will clearly see this for the dog and pony show that it is.”
Why not just give the Obama campaign the list of donors? It’s not as if they’ll launch a campaign of intimidation against individuals who put their money into opposing this administration. Obama’s allies won’t demonize them for their political activism, right? Because that never happens.
If Obama wants transparency, he had nearly four years to reform the campaign-finance system to deliver on that promise. It’s easy. Remove contribution limits to candidates, require 48-hour disclosure of all campaign contributions, and revoke tax-exempt status for all political action organizations. That would funnel the money to the candidates themselves, who are held accountable for their messaging by the voters in the election, and eliminates almost all of the nonsensical interventions and categorizations of cash by the FEC. At the very least, Obama could have set the example first by forcing disclosure on his own side before siccing the lawyers on his critics. He’s not interested in transparency … only in intimidation.
Invoke their own version of “executive privelege” and tell them to step off!
Obama grants Holder request on 'Furious' documents as contempt vote looms
Exactly!
“There are no red states or blue states, just the United States” B. H. Obama
He will achieve his promise by eliminating those who make red states red.
If you want Obama’s, just open the Hollywood phonebook and the Buhddist temples and Mickey Mouse from 123 Main Street, Anytown USA 12345..
ummm... no, you cannot have it
obviously, the president is trying to attack poitical enemies... and protecting the list of donors is protecting their freedom of expression and right to association
eat it, 0failure
oh yea... btw... where did you get that social security number? and while you’re at it, please explain to the class how a british subject can also be a natural born citizen
Sorry, Obama Supreme Court gave them Supreme Court Privledge
Tell them that the minute Obama frees up all the documents he’s hidden about his past and his involvement in F&F then we’ll do the same.
Until then, STFU.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/05/dubious-donations-gangster-government-edition.php
Excerpt:
DUBIOUS DONATIONS (GANGSTER GOVERNMENT EDITION)
We have published a series of posts on Obama’s “dubious donations” — i.e., the Obama campaign’s invitation of fraudulent and illegal giving through the disabling of basic credit card/debit card verification devices. I wrote
about the Obama campaign fundraising operation in the October 2008 New York Post column “Dubious donations.” The Post subhead observed: “Bam’s Web site invites fraud.”
more:
Obama talks a good game on transparency and openness, but he’s ready to flout the law by avoiding AVS and to break his high-minded campaign promises.
In the 2008 campaign cycle, he promised to take public financing for the general election. He broke that promise when it became apparent he could raise far more money on his own.
During much of this cycle, he’s been criticizing Republican super-PACs as a perversion of the political process. But when he saw that Republicans might be able to raise as much money as Democrats, he broke that promise too and authorized Cabinet members to appear at fundraisers for the super-PAC headed by his former deputy press secretary.
Democrats outraised Republicans in 2004 and 2008. Evidently Obama considers it grossly unfair that they might not do so this year. That’s not how things work in Chicago.
They really hate the First Amendment, don’t they?...........
What a sniveling, little hypocrite this swish is...
Lots of folks claim that money is the mother’s milk of politics, but I don’t believe that.
In my opinion, it’s 100 proof corn liquor.
Ping.
There can be no doubt that Obama is a raging hypocrite.
And yet, Rove is hardly above reproach either. If I’m not mistaken his group is a 501c4. Seems I remember reading about them taking a ten million dollar “anonymous” donation late last year.
Whatever. The whole lot of them is corrupt.
It’s time for conservatives to break free from the money/media paradigm, before it’s too late for the republic.
What if I send them CASH without any further information???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.