U.S. probe of tea party donations' origin is sought

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
WASHINGTON - Two election watchdog organizations on Thursday urged the Justice Department and Federal Election Commission to investigate more than $12 million in campaign contributions that were mysteriously funneled through two little-known companies in Tennessee to a prominent tea party group. The origin of the money, the largest anonymous political donations in a campaign year filled with them, remains a secret.

The watchdog groups said that routing the $12 million through the Tennessee companies appeared to violate a U.S. law prohibiting the practice of laundering campaign contributions in the name of another person. They also said the lawyer in Tennessee who registered the companies, William S. Rose Jr. of Knoxville, may have violated three other laws by failing to organize each company as a political committee, register them as political committees, and file financial statements for them with the government.
Rose did not return a telephone message, text message, and e-mail from the Associated Press and could not otherwise be reached immediately for comment. He previously told AP that his business was a "family secret" and he was not obligated to disclose the origin of the $12 million routed through Specialty Investments Group Inc. and Kingston Pike Development Corp. Business records indicate that Rose registered Kingston Pike one day after he created Specialty Group, in the final weeks before Election Day.

The watchdog organizations, the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21, said a criminal investigation by the Justice Department was necessary "because the integrity of U.S. elections depends on the effective enforcement of the nation's campaign finance laws." They noted that, although the FEC traditionally enforces campaign finance laws and imposes civil fines for violations, the Justice Department can conduct criminal investigations of "knowing and willful" violations under the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/n...of_tea_party_donations__origin_is_sought.html

It would be nice to see someone go to jail for this. It's not enough that they have unlimited corporate and private spending through the outrageous Super PAC structure, they have to secretly funnel money too?
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
14
81
Hell if they haven't thrown anyone in jail over the Wall Street Clusterf*ck, I doubt if this would be any different.

TBTF=TBTJ
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
if this story was flipped, the left here would scream 'Righties try to ban/lock up the democrat party'

this story reads more like the left wants to use its power in the white house to investage groups it doesn't agree with.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
if this story was flipped, the left here would scream 'Righties try to ban/lock up the democrat party'

this story reads more like the left wants to use its power in the white house to investage groups it doesn't agree with.

crybaby.jpg
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,502
1
81
You understand of course that the Tea Party is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party since Clinton, right?

If the Tea Party keep on their current path the Democrats will gain control of the House of Representatives in 2014 and keep the White House in 2016. The US has paid the price of the Tea Party's williness\desire to shut down the Federal government but I am going to send them $20 anyway.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
If the Tea Party keep on their current path the Democrats will gain control of the House of Representatives in 2014 and keep the White House in 2016. The US has paid the price of the Tea Party's williness\desire to shut down the Federal government but I am going to send them $20 anyway.

The problem is that a lot of them will be "blue dog" democrats like in 2008. Fuck that. I'd rather have sane, reasonable republicans than fake democrats.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Not surprised that the guy who treats an onion-style article seriously would treat a serious article with contempt.

The same old beaten to death one-liner form someone who thinks racists vote Republican because employers in New York City don't hire blacks. You can't make up this kind of stupid and you have flaunted it in your sig for quite a while. Good job.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
The article lacks very important details: What "Teaparty group"?

If the money went to a candidate's official campaign that's one thing.

But if it's a PAC I don't understand what the problem is. I thought donations to PAC's were unlimited. I also thought the recent SCOTUS case ruled corp's can donate etc.

What's the problem?

Fern
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The problem is that a lot of them will be "blue dog" democrats like in 2008. Fuck that. I'd rather have sane, reasonable republicans than fake democrats.

People in Hell would rather have ice water, but that doesn't mean they'll get it.

Sane reasonable Republicans? A truly endangered species. Might as well wish for Bigfoot to be President.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The article lacks very important details: What "Teaparty group"?

If the money went to a candidate's official campaign that's one thing.

But if it's a PAC I don't understand what the problem is. I thought donations to PAC's were unlimited. I also thought the recent SCOTUS case ruled corp's can donate etc.

What's the problem?

Fern

As the article points out, there are transparency requirements. Money can't just appear out of thin air. Obviously, there are ways to skirt the rules, so we'll see if the veil of anonymity was properly applied.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
We should use Obamas standard. The government won't permit an investigation because you didn't prove that wrong was done and the only way there can be acceptable proof is if the investigation is done first :p

Nice catch 22
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
We should use Obamas standard. The government won't permit an investigation because you didn't prove that wrong was done and the only way there can be acceptable proof is if the investigation is done first :p

Nice catch 22

So, uhh, protecting Tea Party funding sources from disclosure is now an issue of National Security?

Who knew?

Must be Obama's fault! Everything!
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
So, uhh, protecting Tea Party funding sources from disclosure is now an issue of National Security?

Who knew?

Must be Obama's fault! Everything!

No, but neither is trying to determine if an illegal practice is occurring, unless one is a neocon. Nixon would so love todays government and political hacks. BTW, performing a significant illegal act is not a Constitutionally authorized prerogative for obstruction.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
No, but neither is trying to determine if an illegal practice is occurring, unless one is a neocon. Nixon would so love todays government and political hacks. BTW, performing a significant illegal act is not a Constitutionally authorized prerogative for obstruction.

Heh. So it's not a national security issue at all, meaning that you hacked that stuff into this thread, right?

Of course you did.