Manafort Campaign-Finance Charges Dismissed by Deadlocked FEC
Source: Bloomberg
Allegations that Paul Manafort schemed to funnel Ukrainian money to several Republican members of Congress have been dismissed because of the Federal Election Commission’s partisan gridlock.
The foreign money investigation was the first campaign-finance case stemming from the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, whose office successfully prosecuted Manafort for unreported foreign lobbying and other violations.
J. Whitfield Larrabee, a Massachusetts attorney, had filed an administrative complaint with FEC after Mueller charged Manafort in a criminal case.
Manafort, a veteran Washington lobbyist who in 2016 served for several months as President Donald Trump’s campaign manager, currently is serving a seven-year prison sentence.
Read more: https://about.bgov.com/news/manafort-campaign-finance-charges-dismissed-by-deadlocked-fec/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Michael Cohen and Elliot Broidy have to say
Oh yeah, and Sam Patten and that “friend” of Melanie’s who got a shit ton of $$$ off the inauguration
Meanwhile, fuck you, Manafort
[div class
Oh yeah, ask Sater too
Snip from Bloomberg article:
The commission attorneys accepted statements from lobbyists working for Manafort that they used their own money, not their client’s money, to make campaign contributions. The contributions were reported as made by lobbyists from the firm Mercury Public Affairs, headed by former Rep. Vin Weber (R-Minn.).
I could be misinterpreting the FEC's report but as I read it, this is like saying if someone accuses another of a crime, you the accuser must present solid legal evidence of the crime to the police at the time you make the accusation. In other words, save the cops the trouble and cost of collecting evidence.
How is it they propose the accusers would be able to get - for example - sworn testimony or documents from involved parties to present to the FEC? Further, the Committee accepted signed letters as credible evidence. Perhaps one of the DU legal heads can explain the logic behind this decision.
Apparently, they're claiming the evidence that was presented might be credible but is circumstantial in their view. What exactly would a watchdog organization need to present to them to warrant an investigation?
Link to FEC Report: https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7272/19044467979.pdf
KY........
......
