Hillary working to overturn Citizens United

[Sheepshank]

...lets just for a moment put aside the FACT that the two of them are locked in a law suit. Lets put aside the FACT that Citizens United benefits the Republicans to a much, much greater degree than any Democrat, including Hillary. Lets put aside the fact the Hillary has already made the proclamation that her Supreme Court nominees will have assured her that they would vote to overturn Citizens United.

Lets see what is in actual verifiable print, and not just conjecture and false opinion with absolutely no basis in fact:

http://action.citizensunited.org/17032/citizens-united-is-going-to-court-hillary-records-join-fight-gove/
Citizens United sued the State Department in federal court over its unlawful withholding of documents relating to Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State.

We are currently in pre-production on a sequel to our landmark film Hillary The Movie.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2015/10/citizens-united-hillary-clinton-schedules-214936
The Citizens United suit (posted here) specifically seeks records prepared by two of Clinton’s schedulers: Lona Valmoro and Linda Dewan. The group’s website also cites a passage in the book, “HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton,” that says Clinton’s White House meetings to discuss planning for the raid that killed Osama bin Laden were listed on her schedules solely with the vague notation “Meeting.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-hillary-clinton-citizens-united-supreme-court-20150518-story.html
Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that if elected president, she would make opposition to a Supreme Court ruling that cleared the way for unlimited political donations a litmus test for nominees to the high court.

"I will do everything I can do to appoint Supreme Court justices who will protect the right to vote and not the right of billionaires to buy elections," Clinton told about 50 supporters at a house party in Iowa.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/04/14/hillary_clinton_says_she_d_want_to_overturn_citizens_united_her_super_pac.html
Hillary Clinton started her 2016 presidential campaign in Iowa on Tuesday by pledging to push back against the influx of "unaccountable money" in American politics. Clinton hinted that she would support a constitutional amendment to counteract Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a Supreme Court ruling that has allowed her supporters to use super PACs to collect millions in donations on her behalf

.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-citizens-united-constitutional-amendment
While eying a potential presidential run that would surely be boosted by deep-pocketed super PACs, Hillary Clinton said Monday evening that she’s open to supporting a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which opened the door to the outside groups and the flood of money that poured into the political process with them.

They are shitting their collective pants and want to sink her candidacy asap...Hillary is no friend of Citizens United.

[Thinkingabout]

1. Of course the stories told by others thinks Clinton is the reason for CU, not so.

That is a story which needs to return to the gutter from winch it came.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. Get back to me when she returns the corporate money she has received for her campaign.

[Sheepshank]

5. Why would she do that in a campaign where it is legal?

You would want her to cripple her own campaign so you can have a feel good?

The reality is that the big money is currently legal, and she cannot hope to beat a Republican if she hinders her own campaign in the manner you describe. The point is to play on a level playing field. Demolishing Citizens United for all, not just to hinder one candidate.

I don't think anyone except the Republicans would be alarmed at trying to play on a level playing field. Overturning Citizens United does that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Because she complains about the corrosive power of money in politics.

Yet, indulges in the corruption herself.

[JaneyVee]

25. Get back to me when you give up capitalism.

[George II]

16. She hasn't received a single penny of corporate money. PERIOD! Why do people still say that?

[Sheepshank]

43. I admit that I often forget to zero in on that law

It's very important that we are all remixed, Hillary cannot give back something that is never in her possession?

[BlueCheese]

18. The law as it stands says that elections are a gun fight.

You want our candidates to bring only a knife?

We can work to change the rules, but I don't want to go up against the Republicans with any self-inflicted disadvantages.

[Maedhros]

67. Bernie is raising plenty of money from individual donors,

and not a cent from corporate PACs.

And people respect him for it, which is worth more than a few attack ads.

[BlueCheese]

70. I hate the system too.

But the amount you can raise for your own campaign is capped at $2700/person. The amount that a super PAC can raise is basically unlimited. Super PACs have already raised $300 million this cycle; compare that with the $40 million that Sanders has raised for his campaign and the $75 million Clinton has raised for hers.

If Sanders wins the nomination, you can bet that the Democratic Party will be counting on all the outside money it can get. Otherwise we'll be outspent 10-1.

I know it stinks, but those are the rules in the post-Citizens United world. I think Sanders' stance is commendable, but I won't blame any of our candidates for using all the resources that are available.

[Maedhros]

79. This is a cliche for very good reasons:

“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”

-Friedrich Nietsche

[2pooped2pop]

29. yep

Got what she needed now wants to stop it before she might have to face repubs funded with it. She does plan ahead. I'll give her that.

[merrily]

54. +1

[billhicks76]

59. Hillary Isnt A Republican?

She certainly acts like one. Must be our mistake, right? I dont think so.

[Nye Bevan]

84. What a strange post.

Corporate contributions to her campaign would be illegal, and Citizens United did nothing to change that.

[Dodo]

3. She's not even close to overturning Citizens United.

She needs to shut down all of her SuperPACs right now, refund all the money, reveal all the donors that donated on the SuperPAC before I can even trust her to make the right call on the justices that needs to be replaced.

[Walk away]

6. That's pretty funny Dodo!

[Dodo]

12. You wouldn't be laughing at that

when the American voters don't trust her to do the job. Clinton is still very much underwater. Check the HuffPost numbers.

[Sheepshank]

7. Bernie Supporter are constantly coming up with the totally insane ideas

recommending that Hillary hinder her own campaign....in the middle of the campaign.

WRONG.

The idiocy of telling someone to cut off their own arm in the middle of a volleyball game is just plain nuts.

Creating a level playing field, when every single candidate plays at the same financial advantage or disadvantage is the goal. Not to sink their own campaign.

[Dodo]

14. Then you know for yourself that Clinton is tied with the corporate world forever.

Using Citizens United is a perfect example of what NOT to do on a campaign.

Bernie, to his credit, is running a anti-Citizens United campaign, and proving that he still can compete.

[Sheepshank]

24. How's that working out for Bernie?

Dems should not be handing an election to the Republicans while even the distaste of CU is legal...legal...legal.

I honestly question why you want so badly to hand the election to the Republicans?

[Dodo]

34. Show me Clinton's crossover appeal.

Bernie has shown where he has the crossover appeal for the GE.

[Sheepshank]

74. How's that crossover thingy working out for Bernie

10 people isn't going to get him an endorsement, a delegate or win the election.

[oasis]

17. The old reliable "Shoot yourself in the foot strategy".

[Dodo]

35. Go ahead and vote for Clinton in the primary if you want to.

I'll vote for my candidate at the caucus, and then the Democratic nominee, whoever that may be.

[oasis]

38. I'll just go ahead and do that.

[Plucketeer]

60. And once the coronation is complete

she'll be beholden to no one but the voters! <sigh> Daisies and butterflies!

[Sheepshank]

46. I've just been reminded, she can't return money she is never in possession of

Per campaign finance laws.

[Dodo]

52. That's right, but she is allowed to coordinate with one that is Internet-only SuperPAC

That's Correct the Record. As in David Brock.

[Sheepshank]

71. A link would be nice that explains how that works within the law

And something without David Brock. He gives me whiplash from his flopping around with loving Hillary one day and demonizing her the next. Tia

[Lil Missy]

76. Well that would be a stupid thing to do. It's not her job to pander to the whims of

the far left. I'd rather see her actually get something done.

[840high]

78. ...+1

[RobertEarl]

4. Sure

I joined a group working toward an amendment 4 years ago. JOINED.

And Hillary is just now thinking about it?

Sure she is. Nawt!

[Walk away]

10. I'm sure she has been thinking about it longer than you have....

but she has a few other things to do like channeling billions of dollars to charities, running the State Department for 4 years, Speaking out for women all over the world.

Hillary has been a target of CU herself! She has raised a lot of money for the Democratic party in order to fight these battles as well.
I'm sure you have helped a lot.

[RobertEarl]

20. No success.... duh!

Sure would have been nice if she had joined already instead of just pledging to maybe one day do something.

What about you?

[Sheepshank]

19. No...iook at the dates

She has been locked in a legal fight with CU since prior to the campaign funding Supreme Court Decision.

I tried to provide more recent articles because you know the moment I prVoice older articles, that would be an issue that she has since changed her mind. Who would have thought that no matter the veracity of the articles, Bernie supporters won't read anything and keep making up,complaints.

[RobertEarl]

21. List of your words of wisdom, sheep

Bernie supporters won't read anything and keep making up,complaints.

"Bernie Supporter are constantly coming up with the totally insane ideas"

I honestly question why you want so badly to hand the election to the Republicans?

[slipslidingaway]

8. Words vs. actions n/t

[msongs]

11. a meeting described as a "meeting"? OMG what dastardlyness (is that a word) nt

[mcar]

13. K&R

For reality

[jeff47]

15. You realize the problem is not literally the group "Citizens United", right?

'Cause that's all you focus on in the first half of your post. Yes, they won the court case, but they are a tiny fraction of the spending.

Also, I disagree with this:

Lets put aside the FACT that Citizens United benefits the Republicans to a much, much greater degree than any Democrat

Nope. The Republican race is a clown car precisely because of Citizens United.

Various insane people are in that race only because a billionaire or two has given them a pile of money. We would have a sane (for a Republican) candidate for their party to coalesce around by now if it wasn't for CU.

Instead, the crazy people stay in the race, sucking up all the media attention. The "sane" ones get no coverage, and thus flounder at dismal polling numbers.

As for the rest of your post, the problem with being a weathervane is no one believes you will stay pointed in the same direction.

[George II]

27. The lawsuit that the Supreme Court ruled upon was "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission"..

....and after the decision in Citizens United's favor, it has been referred to simply as "Citizens United". Of course people who understand this issue know it's not the group itself. But when people refer to uncontrolled and unaccountable spending in political campaigns, it's referred to as "Citizens United".

You realize that when speaking about legalized abortion no one is talking about either Rowe or Wade, but they refer to "Rowe v. Wade" all the time.

[jeff47]

42. Yes....which is why I objected to the OP spending half his post only talking about CU themselves.

Reading...Try it!

[George II]

63. I did read it, and the OP barely touched on the actual organization, and then only as a point...

...of reference.

Did YOU read it?

[jeff47]

87. "Barely touched" being 2 of the 5 links, as well as the entire justification

for claiming that Clinton is "fighting" the CU decision. The group is suing her. That is nothing like fighting the CU decision.

[George II]

90. Actually it was mentioned in three of the links, but primarily as a point of reference...

....in a similar manner as my example of "Rowe v. Wade" is mentioned often, even though that case was more than 40 years ago.

As you point out, Clinton is/will be fighting that decision, not Citizens United.

But you're incorrect, that organization is not suing Hillary Clinton.

[jeff47]

91. They're suing the State Department for events during her tenure, if you want to be utterly pedantic.

But again, the only demonstration of "fighting" in the OP is those lawsuits.

The rest of the posts are statements with zero action to back them up. In fact, she's exploiting the hell out of the CU decision.

[Sheepshank]

31. Yes...there is a group

And there is also a Supreme Court decision...look at the links and maybe even wiki.

[jeff47]

44. Then why did you spend 1/2 of your post pretending it was only about the group

and not the decision?

[Sheepshank]

75. At least 2 links were about the court case...that would make it half

The other half about the law suit.....I don't understand your complaint, other than you are just trying to find something to complain about, to cover your misstatement.lol

[jeff47]

86. Your claim is she's fighting the CU decision because she is being sued by CU.

CU is not the CU decision. You're trying to conflate the two.

[JaneyVee]

22. Hillary is the ONLY candidate actively fighting Citizens United.

K and R.

[jeff47]

23. ...by exploiting every bit of that decision.

Including coordinating with Super-PACs because no court has ruled on Internet communications yet.

[JaneyVee]

26. She is literally fighting them.

[jeff47]

47. No, she's getting sued by them. She didn't sue them.

Also, she is exploiting everything she can from the decision.

[George II]

30. You understand that it's illegal for a candidate to coordinate with Super Pacs, don't you?

[jeff47]

45. You understand that Clinton and Correct The Record admitted they coordinate, don't you?

Back in May:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/

I think this is the 4th time I've pointed you to this article. Perhaps you could stop pretending coordination isn't happening.

[George II]

56. Perhaps you should actually read the article. If you did, you'd know that Correct The Record...

....isn't spending a penny on Clinton's, or any other candidate's, campaign.

You've got to go past the catchy headline.

[2pooped2pop]

32. is she?

Or is she just keeping a case open to give that illusion while benefiting from it?

[Art_from_Ark]

33. What pure, unadulterated horse manure

From Bernie's web site:

Getting Big Money Out of Politics

Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to buy the United States government. Oil companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, Wall Street bankers and other powerful special interests have poured money into our political system for years. In 2010, a bad situation turned worse. In a 5-4 decision in the Citizens United case, the Supreme Court opened the floodgates for corporations and the wealthy to spend unlimited and undisclosed money to buy our elected officials. The Supreme Court essentially declared that corporations have the same rights as natural-born human beings.

Our democracy is under fierce attack. Billionaire families are now able to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to buy the candidates of their choice. These people own most of the economy. Now they want to own our government as well. The Koch brothers, the second wealthiest family in America, plan to spend some $900 million in the coming 2016 election — more money than either of our major parties spent in the last election. That is not democracy. That is oligarchy. To restore our one person-one vote democracy, Congress must pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and move toward public funding of elections.
Key actions

Introduced the Democracy Is for People constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.
Voted for the DISCLOSE Act to shine a light on the exorbitant amounts of dark money in our politics.
Promised that any Sanders Administration Supreme Court nominee will commit to overturning the disastrous Citizens United decision.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/money-in-politics/

[George II]

37. As J. Peterman might say:

[Scootaloo]

58. Reading isn't especially difficult, George

[George II]

64. No, reading is not especially difficult, Scootaloo, but....

....I prefer spending my time reading things that are worthwhile, not just "a lot of words".

Funny you suddenly jumped in on this discussion.....shift change?

[Scootaloo]

65. That is, you don't read anything that doesn't already agree with you.

[George II]

66. Why do you say that, Scootaloo?

[George II]

92. I guess Scootaloo decided to just "scoot, aloo"!

[Starry Messenger]

28. k&r

[William769]

36. Our democracy should work for everyone, not just the wealthy and well-connected.

“We have to end the flood of secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections, corrupting our political system, and drowning out the voices of too many everyday Americans. Our democracy should be about expanding the franchise, not charging an entrance fee.”
HILLARY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2015

Hillary is calling for aggressive campaign finance reform to end the stranglehold that wealthy interests have over our political system and restore a government of, by, and for the people—not just the wealthy and well-connected. Her proposals will curb the outsized influence of big money in American politics, shine a light on secret spending, and institute real reforms to raise the voices of regular voters.

Hillary will:

Overturn Citizens United. Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who value the right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections. She’ll push for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United in order to restore the role of everyday voters in elections.

End secret, unaccountable money in politics. Hillary will push for legislation to require outside groups to publicly disclose significant political spending. And until Congress acts, she'll sign an executive order requiring federal government contractors to do the same. Hillary will also promote an SEC rule requiring publicly traded companies to disclose political spending to shareholders.

Amplify the voices of everyday Americans. Hillary will establish a small-donor matching system for presidential and congressional elections to incentivize small donors to participate in elections, and encourage candidates to spend more time engaging a representative cross-section of voters.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/campaign-finance-reform/

Put that in your fucking pious pipe & smoke it. (not you Sheepshank).

[Sheepshank]

49. Thank you so much for this post.

It so perfectly sums up where Hillary is on this matter.

[freshwest]

50. Thanks for that video! And yes, they've been after her for years. They are scared, Bill! n/t

[rbrnmw]

77. Thanks

Very good information.

[sheshe2]

80. KnR your post!!!!!

Late.............................................

[NurseJackie]

39. I'm impressed with your thorough and detailed reply. Thank you.

[Evergreen Emerald]

40. Kick

[NanceGreggs]

41. Kicked!!!!!

[Fuddnik]

48. Best joke of the evening.

[antigop]

51. yep. nt

[merrily]

53. Reality Check.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12776799

[Cha]

55. Thank you, Sheepshank! We need Hillary!

[Phlem]

69. YEP! She's a huge FUCKING original thinker!

Pathetic FAIL!

[Live and Learn]

57. Sure, that is why they donate to her. nt

[Sheepshank]

73. Prove it

And disprove anything in the op to bolster you piece of crap made up shit.

[Faryn Balyncd]

61. Good. This is win that America reeds.

[SoapBox]

62. Really? She is?

Funniest thing I've heard tonight...how many times will she "evolve" on this?

[Phlem]

68. Oh!?

OK then.

This whole OP and thread is a monumental pathetic fail.

[ismnotwasm]

72. K&R

I really love this!

[sheshe2]

81. KnR!

[bowens43]

82. which ever way the wind blows......so transparent, so pandering

[Fairgo]

83. Book marked until after the election

I am very interested in seeing how this coup unfolds.

[davidpdx]

85. Clinton will not do a think to change the status quo that benefits her so greatly

If she wins the nomination and the GE, she will start fundraising for reelection. She will (as her supporters do) claim that it isn't her fault and sit on her hands on the issue. Sure she may be able to appoint Supreme Court justices that may able to be overturn the case once a similar case comes before SCOTUS. That could be years. It certainly WON'T be before the beginning of the 2020 election (figure if it started a year early that would be around Fall 2019).

Sanders could also appoint Supreme Court justices if he were to win. However he has introduced constitutional amendments in Congress to overturn CU. There are multiple ways to overturn CU, SCOTUS is just one way. An active group of people have been working since the CU decision on a constitutional amendment (some of them DUers). I support their cause.

While I'm sure I'll hear the tired old Clinton lines that she's promised and that we should believe her, I don't buy it. The open pit of money is a dark trap and those who have benefited from it in the past won't give it up without a fight.

[Sheepshank]

88. CU benefits the Republican fund raising machine to a much greater extent

of course it benefits everyone on the left to reign in the Republican fund raising abilities and create an equal or level playing field....so there is no incentive NOT to go after CU.

[davidpdx]

89. CU benefits someone like Hillary Clinton just as much as it does the Republicans

You guys have been saying it yourselves. The only ones it doesn't benefit are those who don't want to take corporate cash. Again, I strongly do not believe that CU will be overturned before 2020.