How many SuperPacs does Hillary have? A lot.

[cali]

We’re going to dive into the web of financing for all of the presidential candidates, but as we have looked into several Republican candidates already — like Ted Cruz’s plethora of super PACs and Right to Rise’s pro-Jeb Bush advertising — we’re going to start this exercise over on the Democratic Party side with Hillary Clinton.1

We'll be delving even deeper into the Clinton money network soon, so keep your eyes peeled for part two. But for now, let’s get started!

Players you should know

To start with, here are the names you need to know and how they fit under our current campaign finance system.2

Ready for Hillary PAC (hybrid super PAC)
Ready PAC (hybrid super PAC, formerly Ready for Hillary)
Hillary for America (candidate PAC)
Priorities USA Action (super PAC)
Correct the Record (super PAC)
American Bridge 21st Century (super PAC)
American Bridge 21st Century Foundation (501(c)(4))
American Independent Institute (501(c)(4))
Media Matters (501(c)(3))
The Bonner Group
Now that you know who is involved, here’s the story we know right now of the money backing Hillary. It's rather lengthy so in this post we'll cover Ready for Hillary, Ready PAC, and Priorities USA Action. We'll be looking at the rest later in the week.

Ready for Hillary

First of all, it’s important to point out that the Hillary Clinton political fundraising machine started a full two years before she declared she was running for president. (At least, the one actually associated with her name did.)

On Jan. 25, 2013, Ready for Hillary formally organized by filing paperwork with the FEC. Clinton was directly involved with the super PAC at that point — you may remember the “Ready for Hillary” bus? Clinton was promoting her new book “Hard Choices” at that time (much like Ben Carson is promoting his book "Gifted Hands" now) and doing speaking events around the country.

<snip>

https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/12/01/super-pacs-dark-money-and-the-hillary-clinton-campaign-part-1/

[DanTex]

1. And yet in the primary, Bernie has gotten more SuperPAC support than Hillary.

Hillary's SuperPACs have their guns aimed at the GOP, as they should be.

[cantbeserious]

3. Prove Your Assertion - Otherwise - Stop Spreading Myths

eom

[DanTex]

4. NYT: Bernie Sanders Tops His Rivals in Use of Outside Money

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/us/politics/bernie-sanders-is-democrats-top-beneficiary-of-outside-spending-like-it-or-not.html

[cantbeserious]

7. Hit Peice By NYT - False Equivalency - That Is Not A Bernie SuperPac - That Is A Union SuperPac

Stop Spreading Myths.

[cali]

8. It's a lie based on a technicality. But you know that

fJan. 29 2016, 8:27 a.m.
Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images
The New York Times caused a stir by publishing a classic man-bites-dog style campaign finance story in its Friday editions titled “Bernie Sanders Is Top Beneficiary of Outside Money.” The article charges that despite his fiery campaign rhetoric against Super PACs and big money in politics, Sanders has gained much more from Super PAC spending than his Democratic opponents.

“In fact,” the Times reports, “more super PAC money has been spent so far in express support of Mr. Sanders than for either of his Democratic rivals, including Hillary Clinton, according to Federal Election Commission records.”

While more money has indeed been spent on a certain type of campaign spending in support of Sanders, the article leaves the wrong impression by suggesting that pro-Sanders Super PACs have outpaced outside groups supporting Hillary Clinton. If that sounds confusing, that’s because the Times article hinges on a technicality in campaign finance law.

When total Super PAC spending is measured, Clinton groups are leading the way.

The newspaper calculated totals using only “independent expenditures” spent by Super PACs. If the Times had taken into account all pro-Clinton Super PAC campaign spending from this cycle, outside money spent in support of Clinton is more than twice the amount spent in support of Sanders.


<snip>
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/29/nyt-outside-spending/

[DanTex]

11. No, it's the plain truth. It's laughable that you think that the Intercept is a trusted source to

comment on Sanders and Clinton.

The reality is that the differential is even more heavily tilted in Sanders' favor if you also include all the right-wing SuperPAC money running ads on his behalf. The NYT article counted "express support", which is also fine with me. The intercept wants to count some additional spending on Hillary's behalf, but ignore the additional spending on Bernie's behalf.

[cali]

5. That is so lame, I almost pity you

[DanTex]

6. Pity or not, it's the truth.

[cali]

9. No

[cantbeserious]

2. Money Corrupts Absolutely - HRC - Patron Saint Of The 1%

eom

[EdwardBernays]

10. Don't forget

The Victory Fund... Which got hundreds of thousands from Walmart.