Salon: "O’Donnell unlikely to face consequences, even if she did violate the law"...USA! USA! USA!

[Amerigo Vespucci]

(edited for copyright purposes-proud patriot Moderator Democratic Underground)

Thursday, Sep 23, 2010 16:15 ET
So, did Christine O'Donnell break the law?
And if she has spent campaign money illegally, will she pay any price for it?

By Mark Benjamin



Christine O’Donnell has been accused twice recently of violating campaign finance laws. The Tea Party-backed GOP Senate candidate in Delaware has dismissed the allegations, characterizing the complaints as unwarranted, politically motivated smears.

A review of her campaign finance records filed with the Federal Elections Commission, interviews with attorneys familiar with campaign finance law, and a review of her own public statements suggests O’Donnell has almost certainly flouted the law. The attorneys agree, but say she is likely to face little penalty from the FEC.

Earlier this month, the Delaware Republican Party filed a complaint with the FEC alleging that O’Donnell accepted illegal contributions from the Tea Party Express. On Monday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed complaints with the FEC and the U.S. attorney in Delaware alleging that O’Donnell had violated the law by using campaign contributions for personal use, paying for gas, bowling, even the rent on her house.

"I am confident that we have been ethical," O’Donnell said this week to a scrum of reporters who had cornered her at a forum held by the First State Patriots. "I personally have not misused the campaign funds." When a CNN reporter pressed her specifically about using campaign money to pay the rent on her house, however, O’Donnell would not answer. In fact, she ran away.

(snip)

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/23/christine_o_donnell_law/index.html

[stray cat]

1. Darfur! Darfur! Darfur!

[spanone]

2. she's a poor, persecuted teagagging martyr...

[PoliticAverse]

3. Here's the loophole.

"A second payment on July 13, 2010, for $3,000 describes Carole O’Donnell as performing "financial consulting services." Attorneys say those payments are legal if Carole O’Donnell did real work for the money."

"Consulting" can be most anything and this highlights one of the loopholes in the law.

[RB TexLa]

5. That's not really a loophole. If someone pays a friend or family member

for "work" it's up to the people who contributed the money to decide if they care. There are always people who are going to get large payouts for questionable work on a campaign. If contributers don't like it they can stop writing checks or ask for their money back. That part of it is really nothing.

[PoliticAverse]

6. When is a loophole not a loophole?

The reason it's a loophole is because "consulting" is ill-defined and paying family for services can enable one to
get around the legal restrictions on what campaign funds may be spent on.

[RB TexLa]

8. How well consulting is defined means nothing. I can pay my brother $2000 a week to work on my

campaign as the janitor. The quality of his work or if he even does any work is up to my enforcement as the employer. If people who provide the money to my campaign don't like me paying him his two grand a week they can say so. If enough of them say so and stop giving the campaign money I will consider no longer paying him. It's very, very doubtful your supporters are going to care. Remember these are your supporters who have given you money. Their concern is not what you do with the money, it's that you win and when they come to speak with you about something you remember that they gave you money.

[PoliticAverse]

9. it's about legality

It relates to the original article and the use of "consultants" and campaign finance law. You couldn't use campaign funds to pay your brother's grocery bill, but if you said he was a "janitorial consultant" and gave him money and he used the money to pay his grocery bill (he'd have to declare it as income) it might provide a way around the law, depending on what constituted "real" janitorial consulting "work".

[RB TexLa]

10. But being able to pay people for work done for a campaign is not a loophole

it's a necessity for a campaign. You just apparently don't like people giving money to someone for work they didn't do. If a campaign you contribute to does this (and they all do) then stop giving them money. But there isn't anything illegal about no show or no work jobs within political campaigns. Those who have delicate ethics might blush or gasp but it's how the world works.

[izquierdista]

4. Only if she didn't help white farmers.....

....would she have to pull over to the side of the road and text her withdrawal from the campaign.

[HughBeaumont]

7. IOKIYAR!! IOKIYAR!!

As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be!

[Historic NY]

11. We're in the wrong line of work...become a Repuke grifter.