|
During the 2012 Iowa Republican Caucus a State Senator named Kent Sorenson switched his endorsement from Michele Bachmann to Ron Paul. It now turns out that he was paid $73,000 by the Paul campaign to do this.quote:Paul's campaign committee doled out $80,000 in legal fees this spring, according to federal campaign finance reports -- nearly twice as much as it spent on legal costs in all of 2013. Paul would go on to come in a close third place in the caucus. He was on pace to receive the most votes until a surprise New Years Day surge by Rick Santorum in a CNN poll just a few days before the event. Paul's campaign would stick around in Iowa, get its delegates elected to subsequent rounds and eventually have the majority of the Iowa delegation (futilely) vote for him in nomination at the convention. The state party was taken over by his allies for several years, finally being ousted last winter. Ron Paul's grandson-in-law, Jesse Benton led Paul's 2008 and 2012 campaigns, as well as Rand Paul's 2010 Senate campaign. This year he was running Mitch McConnell's Senate campaign, a move that he privately admitted was purely in service of Rand's Presidential ambitions: get Mitch on your good side, hope he's the new Senate Majority Leader, and see what favors accrue to Rand in the coming years. That would probably include favorable scheduling for Rand's pet bills and fundraising support. quote:“Between you and me, I’m sort of holding my nose for two years because what we’re doing here is going to be a big benefit to Rand in ’16, so that’s my long vision,” Benton said in the call. Paul is believed to be gearing up for a run for president in 2016. The other problem for Benton is that Sorenson says that "Jesse definitely knew" about the payment to switch his endorsement. As a result, Benton resigned today from the McConnell campaign. quote:Recently, there have been inaccurate press accounts and unsubstantiated media rumors about me and my role in past campaigns that are politically motivated, unfair and, most importantly, untrue. I hope those who know me recognize that I strive to be a man of integrity. While Demitri Kesari is no longer associated with the Pauls, Benton was the clear choice to run the Rand 2016 Presidential/Senate campaign. That's probably still the case, but there are documents still sealed in the Sorenson investigation that may implicate him further. The question now is what effect this will have on Mitch's re-election and Rand's political ambitions.
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
I a world where the modern politician has eschewed simple pleasures for byzantine real estate deals, shady non-profits, and revolving door regulatory appointments it's good to know that Ron Paul still supports good old fashioned "Here's a big pile of cash, vote for me" bribery.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
The best part is that we all questioned McConnell hiring this guy in the first place. This'll sever any recent goodwill between the two Senators from Kentucky.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:I a world where the modern politician has eschewed simple pleasures for byzantine real estate deals, shady non-profits, and revolving door regulatory appointments it's good to know that Ron Paul still supports good old fashioned "Here's a big pile of cash, vote for me" bribery. But it's fiat money, not "real" money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
These dudes pull like $200,000/year to start, you can seriously get a senator to endorse you for just $70 grand? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:These dudes pull like $200,000/year to start, you can seriously get a senator to endorse you for just $70 grand? Iowa State Senator, not US Senator. So it is more like $25,000 a year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Joementum posted:While Demitri Kesari is no longer associated with the Pauls, Benton was the clear choice to run the Rand 2016 Presidential/Senate campaign. That's probably still the case, but there are documents still sealed in the Sorenson investigation that may implicate him further. Can you run a presidential/senate campaign from jail?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Caros posted:Can you run a presidential/senate campaign from jail? Yes. Debs ran for his second time I think while in jail for draft resistance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:I a world where the modern politician has eschewed simple pleasures for byzantine real estate deals, shady non-profits, and revolving door regulatory appointments it's good to know that Ron Paul still supports good old fashioned "Here's a big pile of cash, vote for me" bribery.  but did he pay in FIAT CURRENCY or Krugerrands?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:Yes. Debs ran for his second time I think while in jail for draft resistance. Err, I was talking the campaign manager, but that is a good point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
It was purestrain, baby. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
I kind of don't care about this. I'm not really sure if I should, but it seems to me that politicians bribe each other for influence all the time. The fact that this was done blatantly with a pile o' cash instead of for some sort of favor points (redeemable for a job or future support) seems to make this slightly more honest rather than less so. Sure if we could get rid of all of the influence trading I'd also have a problem with this but if the only idea here is that 'well, he did something illegal and we can nail him so we're going to' I'm not sure I really care. I'm not saying don't move forward on the prosecutions, because I don't really have any sympathy here either, but it does seem kind of pointless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
I assume the reLOVEution defense has been, "Campaign finance laws shouldn't exist anyway, they're unconstitutional and in violation of all that the blah blah blah blah..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
He's not being prosecuted for the bribery either. The problem is that the Paul campaign mis-reported the spending as "legal fees" and the FEC wondered why they suddenly needed $73,000 more in legal fees one month.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Because of all these Goddamn liberal laws and regulations!
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Joementum posted:He's not being prosecuted for the bribery either. The problem is that the Paul campaign mis-reported the spending as "legal fees" and the FEC wondered why they suddenly needed $73,000 more in legal fees one month. These are clearly the people we want running the country.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Qublai Qhan posted:I kind of don't care about this. I'm not really sure if I should, but it seems to me that politicians bribe each other for influence all the time. The fact that this was done blatantly with a pile o' cash instead of for some sort of favor points (redeemable for a job or future support) seems to make this slightly more honest rather than less so. Sure if we could get rid of all of the influence trading I'd also have a problem with this but if the only idea here is that 'well, he did something illegal and we can nail him so we're going to' I'm not sure I really care. I'm not saying don't move forward on the prosecutions, because I don't really have any sympathy here either, but it does seem kind of pointless. You're personally all evil in the world. Our system is gamed to the point where most corruption is legal. Finally somebody comes out and does something actionable and you pipe up just to groan out "I can't be bothered." Don't be bothered to post then, or to breathe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:You're personally all evil in the world. Our system is gamed to the point where most corruption is legal. Finally somebody comes out and does something actionable and you pipe up just to groan out "I can't be bothered." Don't be bothered to post then, or to breathe. We disagree on much, I agree on this. I mean seriously, the entire game has evolved to have a veneer of credibility. If you can't at least go through the proper channels, you're a either incredulous, lazy, incompetent, or a combination of those, and not someone who deserves to be in a position of authority.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
The most shocking thing about Blagojevich selling Obama's old seat was how completely blatant he was about it. That's not to say we shouldn't aggressively prosecute corruption in politics, but it definitely adds something when people are just so drat incompetent at it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Bribery is essentially legal, you simply have to funnel the money through the proper channels, which hilariously is money laundering. But hey, that's legal too! So yeah, it's embarrassing that the suitcase full of cash is still used in American politics. Why are you taking all those jobs away from the lawyers and the 527 staffers?!?! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:Bribery is essentially legal, you simply have to funnel the money through the proper channels, which hilariously is money laundering. But hey, that's legal too! You can still use a briefcase full of cash, as long as you keep a record of the serial numbers of the bills and attribute them as received in quantities under $200. If you're going to deliver a suitcase of cash to a bank for deposit, keep detailed records of the precisely legal route through which the precise bills were received.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 08:24
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You can still use a briefcase full of cash, as long as you keep a record of the serial numbers of the bills and attribute them as received in quantities under $200. If you're going to deliver a suitcase of cash to a bank for deposit, keep detailed records of the precisely legal route through which the precise bills were received. Wow, you appear super familiar with that information
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You can still use a briefcase full of cash, as long as you keep a record of the serial numbers of the bills and attribute them as received in quantities under $200. If you're going to deliver a suitcase of cash to a bank for deposit, keep detailed records of the precisely legal route through which the precise bills were received. Look man, I've given up fighting the system, do you have a low level office grunt position available? I'll sell out for 1.5x my student loans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:
Jokes on him since the guy got bribed got paid in something worthless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Not even the common decency to have some other organization do a money drop, let alone attempt to launder in any way possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Joementum posted:He's not being prosecuted for the bribery either. The problem is that the Paul campaign mis-reported the spending as "legal fees" and the FEC wondered why they suddenly needed $73,000 more in legal fees one month. Is it actually illegal to bribe someone to endorse? I mean endorsement is a private action, it's not done in any official capacity, right? Heck, many primaries are party-run affairs so there's not even a state-run election involved some of the time (though obviously not this time).
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Is it actually illegal to bribe someone to endorse? I mean endorsement is a private action, it's not done in any official capacity, right? Heck, many primaries are party-run affairs so there's not even a state-run election involved some of the time (though obviously not this time). The answer is, depends how you do it. A flat out, 'If X then Y' ask is 100% illegal and should be prosecuted. An, 'If X then maybe Y or possibly Z' is legal, as long as it isn't phrased, 'If X then Y, and possibly Z'. Now, the Supreme Court is a bit mixed on whether 'If X then either Y or Z' is legal. I'd expect to that resolved in whether they take up Blago's appeal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 21:33
|
|