Posted on 04/07/2016 9:26:00 AM PDT by Red Steel
After Ted Cruz‘s big win in Wisconsin, Donald Trump immediately went on the offensive, claiming that Cruz ‘illegally’ coordinated with a super PAC to produce damaging anti-Trump ads. Under FEC rules, candidates are not supposed to directly coordinate with super PACs which are allowed to raise unlimited funds from individuals, companies, and other groups. We did some digging into Trump’s claim, and found that he may, in fact, have a case. The rules around what it means to ‘coordinate’ are murky. LawNewz.com consulted with election law experts who agree that Cruz got himself into some gray area with at least one super PAC ad in which he was featured.
First, some background.
When confronted Wednesday morning on MSNBC about what evidence the Trump campaign had of this so-called illegal coordination, Trump’s Senior Campaign Advisor Barry Bennett said: “They (super PAC) set up an event — paid for by the super PAC, and he (Cruz) comes and gives a speech. It’s total coordination…they then film it and turn it into commercials.”
Okay, so let’s break this down. According to a 2011 FEC advisory opinion, Cruz is allowed to show up at super PAC-sponsored events. In fact, according to The Washington Post, the pro-Cruz super PAC Keep The Promise “has been effectively serving as an extension of Cruz’s official campaign, hosting major rallies for him from South Carolina to Utah. The senator from Texas appears at the events as a ‘special guest.'” As we said, that is allowed. Nothing is illegal. In fact, the FEC website says: “The Act and Commission regulations state that federal candidates and officeholders may not solicit non-federal funds, but may attend, speak at, or be a featured guest at fundraising events where non-federal funds are being raised.”
However, where Cruz entered into some muddy water is the allegation that “(the super PAC) then filmed it and turn it into a commercial.” Under federal regulations, super PACs can’t exclusively videotape interviews with the candidate that they are promoting. For example, Ted Cruz would be barred from scheduling a video shoot with a super PAC for an ad they plan to air in New York. That would be coordinating. So now, the interesting legal question for Cruz’s case, can the super PAC use footage and sound from Ted Cruz at one of their events in a campaign ad? He’s allowed to be at the event, but can they film it and then use it as an ad? Does that count as violating the rules? The answer is: we don’t know, it could be.
“This activity arguably falls into the gray area — it’s unclear how the FEC rules would apply to this political advertising strategy,” Paul Ryan with the non-partisan Campaign Legal Center told LawNewz.com. Here’s an example of an ad featuring Ted Cruz that appears to be shot at least partially shot at a Keep The Promise super PAC event:
To be clear, election experts we consulted for this story agree that the FEC has not determined whether what Cruz did is legal or not. An official from the FEC told LawNewz.com that this isn’t something that Commission has ever addressed. It is definitely a murky area.
“Sham (super PAC) events could be used as a way of getting around the coordination rules,” Ryan said, noting, though that the FEC guidelines on coordination are very lenient, and ‘woefully inadequate.”
Now, it’s not clear when the footage from the super PAC-sponsored event was shot, or who shot it. Keep The Promise has not returned an email asking for their response to this story. Neither has Ted Cruz. In order to violate coordination rules, there is a three prong test. One of the elements prohibits “material involvement of candidate or party or the agents of either in the development or dissemination or the communication.”
“What used to be a black and white line between the super PAC and the campaign is totally merging into some kind of fuzzy middle. It’s got to be stopped,” Bennett, Trump’s Senior Campaign Advisor said.
In order to find out for sure whether or not Ted Cruz violated the law, the Federal Election Commission would have to issue an opinion. But what can be said, is the super PAC entered into some uncharted waters in a post-Citizens United campaign season, where cash-infused super PACs can heavily influence the election.
This is what happens when a candidate (or his supporters) have nothing to run on, so they have to use slime/slander against their competition.
What is extremely interesting to me is that this is what liberals/progressives do......and not a generally accepted tactic by Republicans.
Every time I see this type unsubstantiated crap.....or the stuff about Cruz mistresses, Cruz hookers and Rubio is gay, it just makes me believe that Trump is a Democrat running in the Republican primary as a spoiler.
Trump supporters.........you are DESTROYING Trump's chances to get backing from other candidates supporters should he get the nomination.
If that is your goal.......then keep it up.
If you truly want Trump as President......quit sabotaging him.
Agreed.
The best thing that can come from this election now is that maybe these tabloid asinine blog posts will dry up and go away...
This is one of the fake news sites.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3418444/posts
I can tell just by the name.
I knew it before the confirmation in the Washington Examiner report.
Note who posts them.
Nope, founder is Dan Abrams:
This is one of the fake news sites.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3418444/posts
Reposted with Abrams spelling correction.
I can tell just by the name.
I knew it before the confirmation in the Washington Examiner report.
-——————————’
You “just knew it” “can just tell by the name”
Well you are stating misinformation...not true.
Well, I actually read the article that was part of thread you posted in your zeal to discredit...Law Newz is not mentioned in article. Sooo there is NO CONFIRMATION.
Then I did this activity Freepers SHOULD do called research...
The site founder, Dan Abrams is a well known analyst for major media networks...like ABC. I recognized the name immediately because he is/was co-anchor on Nightline.
This site was founded by Dan Abrams:
http://lawnewz.com/dan-abrams/
http://www.dan-abrams.com/
Dan is the founder of the Abrams Media Network, which includes Mediaite.com, TheMarySue.com, LawNewz.com, RunwayRiot.com & TheBraiser.com. He co-founded GossipCop.com & the NYC restaurant, White Street and created and sold Sportsgrid.com. He is also a best-selling author & the Chief Legal Affairs Anchor for ABC News. Previously, Dan served as the General Manager of MSNBC where he defined the network as “The Place for Politics”. During his tenure, the network saw its most significant ratings and profit gains to date. He also hosted “The Abrams Report”, a nightly legal affairs program, and the acclaimed “Verdict with Dan Abrams”. Additionally, and most recently, he was the co-anchor of “Nightline” on ABC News.
Frankly I think Dan Abrams website may have more Creds than an unsourced staff article written by National Examiner.
Did it ever occur to you that perhaps Abrams sees an opportunity for a new website during an election year?
Very sloppy...no research.
True, all one has to do is clear the rubble and see the truth staring you in the face.
I guess with the entire GOPe money brokers covering your behind, cruz can do anything at all.
And here I was led to believe we were fighting against the uniparty - silly me.
Thanks for the reminder.... One more 'word' to add to my 'word list'.
SubMareener I almost started yelling at you! Second sentence was critical! LOL
Trying to promote thoughtful discussion, not just knee-jerk reaction, here. Sarcasm was designed for that. There is so much gorilla dust in the air that it is hard to see the deceptions.
Sounds like more illegal activity. But Teds OK with that, right?
Oh, no, that would be CNN. CNN that stated carson was going to change his clothes and aired the veteran rally. scratch my back a little more to the left. ahhhhhhh!
He possibly applied this adage when his campaign claimed that Carson had quit the race, Cruz later telling Carson, “sorry.”
First on CNN: Ted Cruz apologizes to Ben Carson
Ninety percent of FOX coverage of Trump is negative. Hannity does give him an easy interview in stark contrast to all the other comments on the Five or Bill 0'Reilly Have you watched the Kelly File?
Cruz supporters.........you are DESTROYING Cruz's chances to get backing from other candidates supporters should he get the nomination.
As if the Cruzer's didn't start it.
posted on 11/30/2015, 9:03:59 PM by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to to God!)
Trump wants to secure the borders, enforce the law, end anchor babies, end sanctuary cities, build a wall, deport them all, secure the borders, secure the nation, including sending the refugees back!
No one is better at border security, national security than Trump.
Sounds pretty damn conservative to me.
Want to talk about cutting taxes, cutting spending, cutting regulations, cutting government, cutting cronyism, cutting corruption, growing the economy, putting our people back to work, making America great again?
Trump does. And he sounds pretty damn conservative to me.
Want to defend God, family, guns, country? Want to build the greatest military ever so no one dares mess with us?
Trump does. And he sounds pretty damn conservative to me.
Want to build a coalition including conservatives, capitalists, blue collar workers, veterans, gun owners, religious people, minorities, freedom-loving Americans of every stripe?
Trump does. And he's doing it. And that sounds pretty damn conservative to me!
Reagan Revolution meet the Trump Revolution.
No excuses for the tone. None needed.
You may remember that there were many Romney supporters here last election.
Maybe not Satan, but Naps is already classing him with Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao Zedung.
See posts 78 and 85: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3418170/posts.
All three are listed in the Top Ten Most Evil Dictators of All Time and between them were responsible for the deaths of 96.7 million deaths.
Sleaze may sell newspapers/magazines, but it's the kiss of death for Republican politicians.
In stark contrast to Trump earning his bragging rights for being a master deal-maker, this issue with Cruz allegedly violating an election law tells me that Cruz is not necessarily a good negotiator.
More specifically, instead of working with people to get what he wants, Cruz seems to be employing the adage, “it’s easier to get forgiveness than permission.”
In fact, he possibly applied this adage when his campaign claimed that Carson had quit the race, Cruz later telling Carson “sorry.”
First on CNN: Ted Cruz apologizes to Ben Carson
So far in the presidential race, it is easier to be a Trump apologist than it is to be a Cruz apologist imo.
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.