Lowest of the low: Repubs are stealing Dem campaign donations.

[riqster]

http://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2014/02/04/lowest-of-the-low-repubs-are-stealing-dem-campaign-donations/

" And they are doing it a LOT. In the game of ethical Limbo that is American politics, the GOPee has gone as low as anyone can go.vThe scam works like this:

The National Republican Congressional Committee has launched a series of websites that look like they support a Democratic candidate for Congress, but instead direct contributions to the Republican Party instead.
The Tampa Bay Times interviews one donor who thought he was giving to Alex Sink’s (D) congressional campaign. It even used the same blue and green color scheme as the candidate’s official website.

Said the donor: “It looked legitimate and had a smiling face of Sink and all the trappings of a legitimate site.”

However, it was actually a website for the candidate’s “Republican” opponent, set up to con Dems into unknowingly giving money to Repubs. Stealing. Dirty tricks have now become filthy tricks.

And it turns out that this started in December. The Elephant Asses are using the current gridlock at the Federal Election Commission to their advantage, since it will take months or perhaps years before any action might be taken. So they are lying, deceiving, and stealing the while. And it’s not just a few bad apples: the national party is running the scam.

Tell us again, why you would ever support such a party. Because if you do, you support criminals. If you vote Red, you are telling all of us that you are pro-robbery. And frankly, I wouldn’t trust such a scumbucket around my daughters, my wallet, or even my piggy bank.

Repubs: thieves, plain and simple. Since no one will throw these crooks in jail, let’s at least vote them out of office."

A shitload of source material at the link.

[SamKnause]

1. GOP

The Tea Party and the Republicans are criminal cartels.

If the Democratic, Progressive, Independent, and Green Party do not attempt to stop their criminal activity, NOTHING will change.

The Tea Party and the Republicans CAN NOT win an HONEST election.

[riqster]

2. We have to GOTV. And be smart.

Each race needs someone who can trounce the Teapublican candidate.

[Xyzse]

3. Amazing how some of the comments are...

"Yes this is low, but Democrats have been doing this for years".

Of course, without any sort of back up. Meh, trolls.

No surprise there.

[riqster]

4. Yeah, the "both sides do it" meme prevails.

Even when they don't.

[Xyzse]

5. Exactly!

All I can say is prove it.

[Coyotl]

6. Arrest and jail their candidates for theft and any federal crimes involving interstate transfers

Theft via the internet should be easy to prosecute given the evidence trail.

[riqster]

7. The problem is, these cases get referred to the FEC.

Which rarely acts in a timely or decisive manner.

So nothing is being done.

[Coyotl]

8. File a complaint with the local police or DA.

[Gothmog]

9. RNCC is giving back contributions to any one who complains

We need to get the news out that if you gave money to the RNCC due to this false ad, you can get your money back http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/03/republican-website-donations_n_4719196.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

The National Republican Congressional Committee is doubling down on its use of websites that appear to be in support of Democratic House candidates but actually direct money to the Republican campaign effort. However, the NRCC said it would give refunds to donors who were confused or misled and contributed to the organization inadvertently.

The lawyer in me believes that the RNCC is afraid being sued and so gave in quickly. We need to sue these idiots and get the word out on this deceptive practice.

[riqster]

10. Yep. If you realize they robbed you, and threaten them repeatedly,

They will eventually give you back the money they stole from you.

And if you do not proactively pursue the case, they will smirkingly keep their ill-gotten gains.

A load of momsers, not the mensches they pretend to be.

[Lunacee_2013]

11. I know it's outrageous

but are you really surprised? GOPers are crooks and they don't just steal campaign donations, they steal entire elections. Voter i.d. laws, not giving blue states enough voting machines, therefore making lines long, voting machines that change votes, 92% of the time the flip went from Kerry to Bush (the guy who owns the company that makes the machines gave money to Bush's reelection campaign), purging voter rolls, random tea party "citizens' groups" trolling polling places and challenging people's right to vote if they looked democratic (ya know, black) and on and on...

The GOP leadership is full of bastards, bullies, crooks, lairs, sexists, racists, homophobes, religious nut jobs who think the planet is only 6,000 years old and that women's bodies belong to the state, 1%er types, the rich and the wanna-be rich, who are completely detached from the common people, and psychopathic idiots who deny climate change and sell-out our mother earth because their corporate masters, who are the real "uncle sugar" because they give the elected leaders that sweet, sweet cash, don't want regulation, and then there are the idiotic governors who will not take the money, which is our tax dollars we paid to the government, from the federal government to provide healthcare to the poor.

These fuckers need to go.

[riqster]

14. Surprised? Not a bit. Hugely pissed off? Oh hellz yeah.

[Tanuki]

12. I'm no lawyer, but this appears to be a clear case of

intent to defraud. I think one could collect triple damages and press criminal charges.

[riqster]

15. I an hoping that some of the injured parties go after the Reeps in just that way.

[Fumesucker]

13. The Democrats will be sending a strongly worded letter about this

Eventually I'm sure.

[riqster]

16. Oh, my stars and garters, yes.

Why mercy me, they will certainly tender a very politely worded exposition of mild perturbation. Any month now. Lawsy be, yes, they doubtless will.

[Gothmog]

17. Juanita Jean is calling out the GOP for this deceptive tactic

http://www.juanitajean.com/2014/02/04/like-deception-is-anything-new-to-the-gop/

Okay, so the Republican Party is trying to fool people into donating to them when the people think they’re donating to Democrats.

Well, alert the damn media. It ain’t like trying to fool people is virgin territory for them. This ain’t no damn pilgrim experience for Republicans.

Republicans are defending a series of websites they established that appear to support Democratic candidates for Congress, but instead direct contributions to the GOP.

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) said its websites were not confusing, and accused Democrats of crying foul because their candidates were struggling.

They refused refunds until a donor went to the media about it and now they are all like …. oh, not us, we will be delighted to refund money.

However, headlines like this —


— can hardly be classified as “news.” It’s what they do in the normal course of business.

[riqster]

18. I think they count on the banality of evil.

Or perhaps outrage fatigue. So we have to spread the word. Glad Juanita Jean is on it!

[Gothmog]

19. These websites are illegal

I found this analysis on why these websites are illegal on Prof. Hasen's electionlaw blog. I think that it is clear that these websites are illegal and the DNC needs to sue the RNCC http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/do-misleading-campaign-websites-violate-federal-law

By 1992, the FEC came to share Justice Ginsburg’s view and amended its regulations at 11 C.F.R. § 102.14(a) to extend the candidate name prohibition to include not only the official name of the committee, but also “any name under which a committee conducts activities, such as solicitations or other communications, including a special project name or other designation.” The FEC explained that it had “become more concerned about the potential for confusion or abuse when an unauthorized committee uses a candidate’s name in the title of a special fundraising project. A person who receives such a communication may not understand that it is made on behalf the committee rather than the candidate whose name appears in the project’s title.” The Commission further explained that “the potential for confusion is equally great in all types of committee communications,” not merely the official titles.

Of course, notwithstanding the ban on the use of candidate names in the titles of committee communications, committees remain free to “discuss any number of candidates, by name, in the body of the communication.” Additionally, following a 1994 amendment to the FEC’s regulation, noncandidate committees may also use the name of a candidate “in the title of a special project name or other communication”—but only “if the title clearly and unambiguously shows opposition to the named candidate.” Thus, the law is clear: a noncandidate committee may not use the name of a candidate in the committee’s title or in the title of a special project, such as a website, unless the committee opposes that candidate and the title of the website or other communication makes that opposition very clear.

The FEC made clear in a 1995 advisory opinion that the operation of a website constitutes a “special project” for purposes of the candidate name prohibition. Thus, because the NRCC is a noncandidate committee; the new websites are special projects under the law; and the URLs and titles include the names of candidates; the websites clearly fall within the federal law candidate name restrictions, and may only use the name of a candidate in their titles “if the title clearly and unambiguously shows opposition to the named candidate.” But far from doing so, the URLs and titles of these websites contain textbook language indicating support for these candidates—e.g., SinemaForCongress.com. Indeed, the phrases of support used in the website URLs and titles are nearly the same as the examples of express advocacy or support the Supreme Court used in Buckley v. Valeo, such as “Smith for Congress.”

Finally, it is not sufficient, as some have asserted, that a reader who scrutinizes these websites more closely will ultimately recognize that they oppose, rather than support, the candidate named in the title. The FEC regulations make it clear that “the title” must unambiguously indicate such opposition. The regulations thus put the burden on political committees to refrain from creating misleading websites – not on the voting public to sort through intentionally confusing language.

Consequently, these misleading websites violate federal law. The NRCC should take down these websites and the FEC should initiate an enforcement action against the NRCC’s flagrant violations of federal campaign finance law.

If the law cited in this article is correct, the DNC could wait and sue to force these committees to turn over all funds. In any event, the RNCC is going to be facing some litigation for this tactic.

[riqster]

20. Fascinating, thanks!