The official end of Howard Dean: Unions are Super PAC's

[FlatBaroque]

This is truly pathetic.

[cantbeserious]

1. How Far They Fall - How Far The Democratic Party Has Fallen

eom

[mythology]

2. You neglected to say why he's wrong

Probably because he's not.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/18/politics/bernie-sanders-super-pac-nurses-union/

A super PAC tied to a union supporting Bernie Sanders has spent almost $570,000 to help his presidential run, according the Sunlight Foundation and representatives from the group, spending that contradicts some of what the Vermont senator has said in the past about campaign finance reform.

National Nurses United For Patient Protection, a independent expenditure group, or super PAC, has spent $569,000 backing Sanders. National Nurses United, the union associated with the group, endorsed Sanders in August, the first national union to do so, and has since been seen supporting him at events across the country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee

In the United States, a political action committee (PAC) is a type of organization that pools campaign contributions from members and donates those funds to campaign for or against candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation.[1][2] The legal term PAC has been created in pursuit of campaign finance reform in the United States. This term is quite specific to all activities of campaign finance in the United States. Democracies of other countries use different terms for the units of campaign spending or spending on political competition (see political finance). At the U.S. federal level, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $2,600 for the purpose of influencing a federal election, according to the Federal Election Campaign Act.[3] At the state level, an organization becomes a PAC according to the state's election laws.

Contributions from corporate or labor union treasuries are illegal, though they may sponsor a PAC and provide financial support for its administration and fundraising;
Union-affiliated PACs may only solicit contributions from members;
Independent PACs may solicit contributions from the general public and must pay their own costs from those funds.

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2010

United Mine Workers of America Power PAC

Natl Nurses United 4 Patient Protection

Communications Workers of America

So yeah, unions can have super pacs. I'm sorry if that fact gets in the way of trashing Howard Dean, but you are factually wrong.

[FlatBaroque]

8. I do worry about Bernie being beholden to Big Nursing

Seriously though. Unions share some characteristics with super pacs. In my view, the constituents they represent makes the difference in whether it is objectionable. I am glad nurses can band together and strive for a better life. More power. A David Brock hit job super pac on the other hand is a repulsive creature that should be viewed for what it is...

[Metric System]

9. A super PAC is a super PAC is a super PAC.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

42. Well now I have seen it all.

You seriously believe there's no difference between a union PAC and something like Club for Growth or American Crossroads?

[Bubzer]

60. Nice how the Metric System just equated Planned Parenthood's PAC with the likes of Big Pharma...

... the oil industry and the Koch brothers, all in one fell swoop. That takes some serious doing to be that kind of bendy and twisty. Got to hand it to the Metric System... that's some peculiar logic by any normal measurement.

[RiverLover]

45. My republican brother has said the same exact thing to me.

Unions are for PEOPLE. not PROFITS for the already filthy rich.

When did Democrats stop being the Party for People?

Oh yeah, when Clinton ushered in centrism & doubled-down on trickle down.

And you want a REPEAT!?!

A nurse union is the same as a SuperPac my ass. Is this a republican site now?

[raindaddy]

66. Not if you're a traditional Democrat..

Unions represent working folks who have joined forces to fight for decent wages and working conditions..

Wall Street could give a shit about the poor and middle class.. In fact they prey on the poor and middle class...

I guess for 3rd way neoliberals like Clinton and Dean there isn't a difference..

[geardaddy]

98. Spoken like a supporter of Citizens United. n/t

[MADem]

12. I know--isn't it amazing! All the ire and scorn--when he's RIGHT!!!!

LOL!! To hell with those pesky FEC filings that say otherwise!!!

And guess who hasn't been shy about raising money from the likes of Goldman Sachs and other "banksters" .... for many years now, attending fancy parties in Martha's Vineyard and Palm Freaking Beach???

Who knew? http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/index.html

This "vetting" thing happens when you get media attention. It's the downside of fame!!!

[virtualobserver]

32. this PAC was created before SuperPAC's existed

and is funded purely from union dues.

If that is what you would like to see eliminated, you are extremely misguided.'

Bernie was raising money on behalf of the Democratic Party, not for himself.....Hillary was taking spending cash for herself...in your heart you know that those things couldn't be more different.

[MADem]

83. A Super Pac is defined by the FEC. And no candidate "has" one.

To try to pretend that a super pac is not supporting Sanders (not that he "has" one, that one is supporting him) is just not true. A super pac IS funding him, and they're closing in on a million bucks, so far.

I'm betting that when Sanders leaves the Senate, he'll hit the speaking circuit too, after he writes a book and gets millions upon millions in advance royalties for it. His wife will probably write a book too.

The reason that Sanders isn't raking in that honoraria NOW, giving speeches and picking up a check, is because he's legally constrained from so doing, not because he's "pure Bernie."

And HRC has given a ton of her speaking fees to the Clinton Foundation, too. She has stopped giving speeches since she announced that she was running for POTUS, but -- like anyone with a lick of sense planning on running for office-- she put aside a nest egg in case she has to self-fund or fill in some gaps.

Remember last time? She had a ton of debt. Campaigns can cost money, ya know.

How nice that "Bernie was raising money for the Democratic Party." Keep foremost in your mind that he was raising it from BIG MONEY donors in the financial industry--JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, etc.--all the people that he snarks about and mocks.

Here's the bottom line. He was able to raise money from "those people" (the "banksters&quot and not be corrupted. Isn't that great!!

Now... if HE can not be corrupted, why can't he believe that others might not be corrupted, either?

See--it seems a bit hypocritical to me. He's probably got a bit of 'splainin' to do.

[virtualobserver]

87. watching Hillary supporters stretch and distort and spin....attempting to make Bernie appear corrupt

Your post is so cynical....it is impossible to even respond to.

[MADem]

95. The fact that this is your take away from the article says everything about YOU and nothing about

the facts of the discussion, here.

If that's what you "see" you really need to work on your perception. I think you're simply reacting in an aggressive fashion even when there's nothing to rail against.

NNFPP is a super pac--the FEC has said so. It is not "Bernie's" super pac because candidates cannot "have" super pacs.

The super pac can choose to support the candidate, but they cannot coordinate.

This does not just apply to "Bernie," it applies to all candidates.

Not sure why you're getting so riled--it just makes no sense, given the context.

A super pac IS supporting Sanders--the FEC has said so. So what? It's not like he doesn't know it.

[virtualobserver]

97. not aggressive....it is just that your cynicism depresses me.

we both know that you are just spinning.....common sense would never lead you to any of the conclusions that you are projecting.

[MADem]

100. I am not "just spinning" and I am not cynical either.

I am bringing facts to the table that obviously trouble you. Stop fronting like I'm making this stuff up--it's federal election law. Deal with it.

Super pacs are what super pacs are. If you want to make them go away, go to law school, work your way up to a nomination to the Supreme Court, and vote against them. I have no power to influence them, and I don't make the decision as to who labels an entity a super pac--that's up to the FEC.

The candidate doesn't control them. But they can--and do--spend money on candidates. The NNFPP super pac spends their money on Sanders.

That's not spin, and that's not cynical. It's fact.

[virtualobserver]

106. all you care about is the label....that is the cynical part

Bernie isn't opposed to PACS created by unions because they are funded by dues from individual members;

He is opposed to PACS that allow one person to donate 6 million dollars, or whatever they want.


It isn't about a label, it is about unlimited donations.

[MADem]

131. Nonsense. If he's not worried about labels, he should admit that a Union Super Pac supports

him and be done with it. Instead, he tries to make the term "super pac" a "scary" and "bad" thing, the same way he has turned Goldman Sachs and Big Financial Interests and BANKERS into "bad" words...even as HE hobnobs with them at private luxury donor bashes where people who throw tens of thousands at candidates congregate.

I mean, this is some hypocritical shit, here: http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/index.html

Bernie Sanders complained on the campaign trail Friday that dialing for dollars "affects your entire being."


What he didn't mention: The Vermont senator and presidential candidate is a prolific fundraiser himself and has regularly benefited from the Democratic Party apparatus.

In recent years, Sanders has been billed as one of the hosts for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee's retreats for the "Majority Trust" -- an elite group of top donors who give more than $30,000 per year -- at Martha's Vineyard in the summer and Palm Beach, Florida, in the winter. CNN has obtained invitations that listed Sanders as a host for at least one Majority Trust event in each year since 2011.

The retreats are typically attended by 100 or more donors who have either contributed the annual legal maximum of $33,400 to the DSCC, raised more than $100,000 for the party or both.

Talk about "Do as I say, not as I do." It's pretty sleazy to raise all this money, "launder" it through the DSCC, and then present to your adoring fans a list that shows contributions from unions, little people, and a "Senate fund" --but doesn't show that the Senate fund in question got their dough from those 'awful' banksters and Military - Industrial types.

Sanders doesn't want people to know that he is as much "part of the system" -- and has been for YEARS now--as the politicians he's railing against. It's not a good look for him. See what you find when you look behind those labels?

[virtualobserver]

135. you see everything through your cynical lens

for months we have been hearing from Hillary supporters that Bernie did NOTHING for the party.

Now you argue that he was raising money for Democrats....not for himself, but for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign committee....and that is your evidence that he is sleazy.

Bernie doesn't have to explain anything. Those that have common sense get it.

There are many sources of information on the banksters......Goldman Sachs and Big Financial Interests ARE bad words.

According to well respected books written after the crisis and documentaries like Charles H. Ferguson's Oscar-winning documentary Inside Job, they are CRIMINALS.

Their crime not only enriched them, without prosecution.....they came close to totally crashing the world economy, causing millions to lose their homes and jobs, countless suicides.
and then finally bailed out with Trillions of dollars.

The criminals then enriched Bill and Hillary Clinton, shooting money at them like it was coming out of a fire hose.

Your attempt at pushing this false equivalency that somehow Bernie raising money for the Democratic party, not for himself..... is equal to Banksters and Corporate titans who defrauded investors and have now handed millions in free cash to Hillary..

...the word absurd does not do it justice. Ridiculous is still inadequate. A new word must be invented

[angrychair]

108. Facts of the dicussion

Read and learn:
"The difference between unaffiliated and affiliated super PACs "gets to the core issue of coordination and non-coordination in the post-Citizens United era," said Robert McGuire, a research analyst with the Center for Responsive Politics.

Affiliated super PACs are often created or staffed by the candidate's political allies and act as extensions of the official campaigns. Though these independent groups are not allowed to donate directly to or coordinate with campaigns, they’ve have found ways to toe the
line...Unaffiliated super PACs are different. The two pro-Sanders super PACs --have no ties to Sanders or his campaign."
Politifact states that he does not have an affiliated SuperPAC associated with the Sanders campaign:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/30/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-only-presidential-candidates-withou/

It's not like he has 24 affiliated SuperPACs and is using loopholes in the law to coordinate directly with their SuperPAC.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/

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

[MADem]

111. Here's a fact: The FEC decides what is, and what is not, a Super PAC.

And again--NO candidate "has" a Super Pac.

Super Pacs have candidates, though.

[questionseverything]

124. hc coordinates with brock's correct the record

On Tuesday, Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton rapid-response operation, announced it was splitting off from its parent American Bridge and will work in coordination with the Clinton campaign as a stand-alone super PAC. The group’s move was first reported by the New York Times.

Campaign 2016 Email Updates
Get the biggest election stories in your inbox.
Sign up
That befuddled many campaign finance experts, who noted that super PACs, by definition, are political committees that solely do independent expenditures, which cannot be coordinated with a candidate or political party. Several said the relationship between the campaign and the super PAC would test the legal limits.

But Correct the Record believes it can avoid the coordination ban by relying on a 2006 Federal Election Commission regulation that declared that content posted online for free, such as blogs, is off limits from regulation.

////////////////////

so yes she had a super pac functioning on the borders of legality

[MADem]

129. You do know they fall under the "internet-only" rule? It's not the 'borders' of legality. It's

ENTIRELY legal. The FEC has said so. Since you didn't bother/forgot to offer a link for your citation, I went out and found it for you-it's from May of last year:

But Correct the Record believes it can avoid the coordination ban by relying on a 2006 Federal Election Commission regulation that declared that content posted online for free, such as blogs, is off limits from regulation. The “Internet exemption” said that such free postings do not constitute campaign expenditures, allowing independent groups to consult with candidates about the content they post on their sites. By adopting the measure, the FEC limited its online jurisdiction to regulating paid political ads.

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

If the Sanders campaign wanted to challenge this ruling, they most certainly could--they've had a year to do it, and they haven't. The reason is that they're doing the same thing, albeit in a more ad hoc fashion, on free social media platforms like facebook and reddit and twitter and even little old DU. There is a coordinated online effort that "gets the word out" -- it's not an accident that you can see a thought originating on reddit that suddenly is on every social media outlet and message board in two shakes of a lamb's tail.

Sanders should have done the same and fired up his own site, controlled by his OWN David Brock--not sure why he doesn't. It's probably too late now. It's in effect the same as what he's doing on Twitter and on Reddit, the only difference is, he can't CONTROL the message as well (really, at ALL) --and that is starting to become a problem. Maybe he thought a plethora of angry young men with keyboards was a better approach...? Maybe he thought it was cheaper to just use facebook and reddit and twitter etc., to spread the word? It was, for awhile--it was freewheeling, felt kind of "grassroots," dynamic, and passionate, etc.

But there's an ugly side coming to the fore of late, where honest critiques are met with personal insults. "I disagree with his stance on X" is met with characterizations about the person making the comment, and sometimes they are gender/race-based insults. If Sanders "owned" the process and formulated the rapid response, he'd have less trouble in this regard, I think.

I don't think he thought there'd be so many issues that some of (note I said SOME) his acolytes would respond to with elements of racism and misogyny up in the mix. Perhaps his staff ought to revisit the whole "BernieBro Army" tactic--but, really, it's probably too late for that. The horse has left the barn, and, to mix a metaphor, I don't think they'll be like genies and go quietly back into the lamp. They've been unleashed and some of them (again, SOME) LIKE getting on line and playing the Insult-And-PutDown game. We've seen that here on DU, too.

I know that a week or so ago, his campaign put out an appeal to "tone down the rhetoric." That lasted for about half a day, and the ugly put-downs, to include "reproductive" language, began anew.

It's a problem for him, I think. I think it'll get worse before it gets better. Responding to policy critiques with idiotic retorts like "Goldwater girl" or "Vagina voting" is very off-putting. It makes one recoil, and that distaste, like it or not, gets transmitted, unfairly, certainly, to the candidate himself. People ask themselves "Why would I want to support anyone who attracts these kinds of people as his followers?" And then they ask themselves "Why doesn't he tell these assholes that they aren't HELPING?" But he doesn't do that, they keep doing what they're doing. And it pushes people further and further away from him, to the point that some of them (again, SOME) wouldn't come back if he were the only alternative.

[questionseverything]

133. long rambling way to admit hc does have a superpac

surprised you added the points about coordination even here at du

[MADem]

134. Wow--that was a short answer to tell me you didn't read what I wrote!

She doesn't "have" a superpac.
Neither does Sanders.

If anything, "their" (word used advisedly) superpacs HAVE THEM.

Pat yourself on the back! You entirely missed the point!

FWIW, there's nothing illegal about coordination--you missed that point, too!


smh!!!

[Bubzer]

76. Ahhh, so your pro superPAC? Guess you love the oil loby and Koch Brothers then.

[MADem]

78. Why are you inventing scenarios?

If you have an issue with what is--or is not--a super pac, you need to take it up with the FEC.

And what's an "oil loby?" A greasy lobotomy? And why even throw the Koch Brothers at me--sounds like you're really angry and just trying to insult me with garbled, angry words.

You've not said a single accurate thing about me.

[Bubzer]

80. You've also not denied it, so I guess that means you do support them.

Garbled angry words? That sounded angry to you? Or even garbled? Hmm. Okay.
I suppose you have to cover for being pro oil lobby somehow?

[MADem]

101. Will it make you feel better if I tell you I'd prefer publicly financed elections?

There, there, now!! Be calm!!!

Here's what I understand, though: My dream isn't going to be realized this election cycle--maybe not the next one, either.

Should Democrats be hamstrung out of a sense of false "principle?" Hell no.

Sanders isn't. He's going to fundraisers and retreats on Martha's Vineyard and Palm Beach, raising millions, and a super pac IS supporting him.

Only on DU is pragmatism by "the other candidate" a crime, and pragmatism by one's own favorite overlooked.

smh!

BTW, Still completely confused by your "oil lobby" nonsense--you keep saying it like I'm supposed to know what you mean. Sorry, I'm still in the dark. Does Sanders hang out with oil lobbyists on top of financial sector contributors at those retreats/fundraisers, is that it? Or are you saying Howard Dean is hooked up with them? Unless and until you explain what you mean, I'm going to keep pointing out that you're not really making any sense with that throw-away phrase!

Is that code for something?

[Bubzer]

105. It was nothing so subtle...and maybe I shold have posed it a little more like a direct question...

IE: Do you support the oil Lobby or perhaps the Military industrial complex.

[Thinkingabout]

24. Oh no, super pacs working for Sanders, getting big money for

Advertising. Point is we know there is PAC money helping in Sanders campaign, no need to hide, tell the real story, all of the money spend on Sanders campaign did not come from $27 donations. Guess this makes Sanders a part of the establishment.

[virtualobserver]

35. Why are you attacking the nurses union?

The pac is funded by union dues. I thought that Democrats were pro-union.

[Thinkingabout]

39. Attacking the nurses union? That is news to me, saying Sanders is getting

The benefits of a super pac is not an attack on the nurses union. BTW, why are you attacking an union member?

[virtualobserver]

41. the super pac is a nurses union pac-

funded by dues......do you think that they should be outlawed?

[Thinkingabout]

86. Apparently Sanders thinks they should be outlawed, ask him. When he complains

about campaign finance and then he gets the benefits of super pacs then he becomes a part of the establishment. Pointing out Sanders is in the same game is not attacking unions, maybe he could be honest and say he has benefited from super pacs. Is he going to be influenced by these super pacs, I don't know.

[virtualobserver]

89. he wants donations from working union members,like the nurses, not from Hillary's Billionaires

[Thinkingabout]

93. What about the RW super pacs running ads against Hilary, they are funded by rich people.

He needs to drop complaining when he is benefitting also, makes him establishment, campaign financing by the rich.

[virtualobserver]

96. he wants them to be abolished

those RW pacs will eventually attack him as well

[Thinkingabout]

99. Then it is disingenuous for him to complain about Hillary or any other candidate eating the steak

when he is doing the same, saying Hillary is part of the establishment and indicating he is not, it is wrong and we realize what he is doing.

[angrychair]

107. No affiliated SuperPAC...not true of everyone

Read and learn:
"The difference between unaffiliated and affiliated super PACs "gets to the core issue of coordination and non-coordination in the post-Citizens United era," said Robert McGuire, a research analyst with the Center for Responsive Politics.

Affiliated super PACs are often created or staffed by the candidate's political allies and act as extensions of the official campaigns. Though these independent groups are not allowed to donate directly to or coordinate with campaigns, they’ve have found ways to toe the
line...Unaffiliated super PACs are different. The two pro-Sanders super PACs --have no ties to Sanders or his campaign."
Politifact states that he does not have an affiliated SuperPAC associated with the Sanders campaign:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/30/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-only-presidential-candidates-withou/

It's not like he has 24 affiliated SuperPACs and is using loopholes in the law to coordinate directly with their SuperPAC.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/

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

[rynestonecowboy]

120. The problem is logic won't work with these die hard HRC supporters,

They know well enough that a union PAC and a filthy corporate funded PAC are two different animals. They are getting desperate and the stretching of the truth may work on an uninformed voter but they are naive thinking DU members are fools. HRC and her surrogates have tried so many "artful smears" on Sanders and none have stuck so we will continue to see the desperation. There is an extreme problem with the wealthy influencing politics and unfortunately for our party Mrs. Clinton is a poster child for that.

[notadmblnd]

84. because nurses wield so much influence in Washington D.C.

I hear they been buying politicians left and right. Yeah, them Nurses and their Unions- there's a real group of elite that holds power and has influence over the country. Guess that makes Sanders establishment alright

[Thinkingabout]

92. Why is Sanders partaking the benefits of big money pacs and criticizing H illary for doing the same.

He says she is a part of the establishment, the same applies to Sanders.

[notadmblnd]

94. Like I said, that's really big money.

yep right up there with the bankers, big pharma and the Kochs

They are not giving him money

[OrwellwasRight]

40. He is WRONG.

Bernie did not say that no Super PACS support him. He said HE does not have a super PAC. Those are two totally different things. Or are you so grossly contemptuous of working people who join together to act collectively that you actually believe that Bernie controls how the National Nurses Union spends their own money in their own Super PAC?

Also, please be aware that not all PACs are Super PACs. A Super PAC is a particular kind of PAC.

I'm sorry if the facts are in the way of your Bernie and union bashing.

[unapatriciated]

49. He said unions ARE super pacs not that they can have them

[JDPriestly]

77. My question is whether any one of the union members is giving more than $2700 to that superpac.

If not, if the amount adds up to less than $2700 per member, then describing it as a superpac is not very accurate.

The point in the corporate superpacs and the superpacs of the wealthy is that they can exceed the $2,700 maximum donor pro person amount.

If there are only 569 members (probably are more) in the Union and each gives $1000 which is less than $2,700 and they have spent $569,000 than so far they have not spent more than $2700 per donor or member.

What's the fuss here?

How much has George Soros given Hillary?

[davidthegnome]

91. Hmm

Unions are super pacs.

Unions can have super pacs.

Two very different statements.

What a union actually is (particularly a labor union) is an organization (usually of like-minded employees and those who share their interest) of individuals joining together to provide better working conditions, compensation - and so on, for their employees. Police unions, fire fighters unions, teachers unions, nurses unions, etc. They may endorse political candidates and/or form political action committees to support them, but that, in no way defines, describes, or even indicates what unions actually are or what they do - or why.

What Howard Dean is saying is very different from what you are saying. He is not just wrong - he is severely wrong, I'm sure if you think about it, you'll understand why what he said makes people angry. As you were kind enough to define political action committees for us... here you go:

Labor Union: An organization of workers formed to promote collective bargaining with employers over wages, hours, fringe benefits, job security, and working conditions.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/labor-union

Yes, there is a pretty big difference between the two statements - and between super pacs and labor unions in general. Also, just for general clarification:

I can have a dog.

I am a dog.

See the difference?

[SusanCalvin]

3. WHAT?!

Who are you, and what have you done with Dr. Dean???

[LovingA2andMI]

44. The Real Dr. Dean....

Has Been Placed In The Basement And This Guy Has His Soul...

[Recursion]

4. Literally the first Super PAC was started by AFL-CIO

It's called Workers Voices or Workers Voice or something like that

[99th_Monkey]

10. But that is the UNION's super-pac, not a candidate's. There a big difference.

That union super-pac can support a whole array of different candidates for different offices, and
do it in various ways. So you can't say that because a union's pac runs an ad for ONE certain
candidate, that OMG That candidate 'HAS A SUPER PAC' <-- this is nonsense.

[Recursion]

11. There's no such thing as "a candidate's super PAC" (nt)

[dreamnightwind]

16. Correct The Record is a candidate's Super PAC

[Recursion]

19. Tell the FEC, then; that's illegal

(Yes, I know, CTR doesn't buy broadcasting so they argue they can "coordinate" through the press. If you think that's a violation of law you should send a complaint to the FEC.)

[dreamnightwind]

25. I didn't say it's a violation of the law now, did I?

And they don't just coordinate through the press. They exploit the internet loophole, openly. A candidate's Super PAC, which you claimed doesn't exist.

[Recursion]

30. It doesn't. It's not hers. She can't tell them what to do.

She can have a campaign staffer write an op-ed that says "it would be great if somebody would point out X", and then CTR can spread those talking points to journalists. But then again her campaign can also spread those talking points to journalists.

For that matter, since they aren't buying broadcasting I'm kind of curious what Correct the Record is actually spending their money on...

[dreamnightwind]

43. You're seem to be defending the indefensible, for some reason

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/252493-pacs-creative-rule-bending

PACs’ creative rule-bending

Correct the Record publishes opposition research and strategy on the Internet to defend Clinton and attack her opponents.

It was initially reported that Correct the Record was using an “Internet exemption” in campaign law that allowed that “free” content posted online would not be counted as coordinated campaign expenditures. But The Washington Post later reported that Correct the Record officials said they were not relying on the individual Internet exemption but instead “a related exemption in the definition of coordinated communications.”

Asked to clarify the competing versions in the Times and the Post, the communications director for Correct the Record, Adrienne Watson, told The Hill “The FEC’s Office of General Counsel has repeatedly concluded that Internet activity that does not fit the FEC definition of a ‘public communication’ may be coordinated with a campaign — including activity paid for by a super-PAC.”

[virtualobserver]

36. no, they are exploiting a loophole

[angrychair]

109. The story is out

There are unaffiliated and affiliated superPACs

Affiliated super PACs are often created or staffed by the candidate's political allies and act as extensions of the official campaigns.

A certain someone has 24 affiliated SuperPACs and is using loopholes in the law to coordinate directly with their SuperPAC.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/12/how-a-super-pac-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-hillary-clintons-campaign/

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

[LittleBlue]

127. This is the one and only time I've seen DUers defend super PACs as legit

Super PACs cannot officially be a part of a person's campaign, but they often are unofficially. The only difference is the legal requirement that they be officially separate. And they coordinate. It's common practice.

Correct the Record and Priorities USA are Hillary's main super PACs.

[MADem]

21. Candidates can't and don't have super pacs.

smh!!!

The whole idea is that the super pac has to work INDEPENDENTLY of the candidate.

The super pac can SUPPORT a candidate, like NNFPP does with Sanders, but they can't "collude" with him.

So when Sanders says "I don't have a super pac" like we're supposed to cheer for him because he's 'better' than people who do, that's kinda "BS." No one "has" a super pac.

The super pacs "have" their favored candidate in mind, they spend money on 'em...and that's how it rolls.

[w4rma]

112. Colbert created a PAC and then changed it to a Super PAC and then "gave" it to Stewart.

[MADem]

113. Yeah, that was funny as hell!!

But more to the point, I want to thank you for adding it to the thread because it really is helpful...AND funny!

Thanks again!

[merrily]

5. Dean may be conflating a union with a super PAC associated with a union.

Unions are not, and cannot be, super PACS, not legally, not factually, not operationally or in any other way.

Dean, or whoever is feeding him bs to mouth, may also be confused by a line of cases, cited in the Citizens' United opinion, in which unions were allowed to donate to political campaigns, much as other organizations donate, such as the HRC. Being cited in a Supreme Court opinion about super PACs, does not a super PAC make.

For years, unions were among the largest donors to Democrats, which made them targets for Republicans. Now, they're being smeared by centrist Democrats. Isn't that special?

This is either speaking out without knowing what he's saying or very dishonest on the part of Dean. Either way, it's shameful.

[FlatBaroque]

15. One can forgive him for getting some of it wrong

he was, after all, so flustered that Bernie would dare expose Hillary.

[merrily]

18. Dishonesty, in any of its many forms, is one of few things I have a very

hard time forgiving. Betrayal is another.

[John Poet]

31. When recently asked about Hillary getting six-figure speaking fees

from corporations, Howard Dean replied

"No she isn't."

Even Hillary doesn't deny it, but Howard does. Ok, whatever Howard.


As for centrist Democrats smearing unions.... I don't think I recognize this Democratic party any more.

[merrily]

62. Neither does Trumka.

http://www.thenation.com/article/afls-trumka-pols-selling-out-workers-ive-had-snootful-st/

[frylock]

65. Here, put these glasses on..

[cali]

6. That's just painful

[99th_Monkey]

7. OMG. We're quick-approaching a point where words mean absolutely nothing anymore. nt

[merrily]

20. I'm disappointed in you. That's not a very centrist liberal progressive thing to say.

[RiverLover]

55. LOL!

[Bread and Circus]

13. I find Dean insulting. "I didn't think she was gonna run for President".

That is such a crock of shit you fucker.

[FlatBaroque]

17. lol, that moment when you decide this should be posted on DU

so funny...when he said that my mouth fell open.

[SusanCalvin]

23. Really.

It's a wonder his nose didn't break through my tablet screen.

[frylock]

68. ikr?! who do they think they're fooling with this crap?!

[merrily]

75. Yes, Hillary's run for President was quite the shock.

Said no one honest, ever.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

14. Because he is conflating the

declining power of unions with the rising power of Wall Street. Also conflating HRC's sleazy coordinated Super PAC with union PACs independently supporting Bernie.

[FlatBaroque]

117. Yup exactly, and that is a deceptive act.

Little Howard is all grown up now and a big league lobbyist.

[gyroscope]

22. The insurance and pharma lobby

pays him the big bucks to say what they want him to say

[FlatBaroque]

28. plus being from Vermont, he has a unique ability to attack as a hometown guy

so Hillary is deploying him hard because obviously the charges against Hillary of taking all that money are doing a lot of damage. Bernie is brilliant, that one issue of the core of the entire message, and Hillary embodies the worst of the problem, that's why he decided to run for president, in my view. By the way, I'm starting to use "in my view" a lot now - got that from Bernie

[Live and Learn]

26. Maybe he should get a brain scan. It seems something has gone seriously awry. nt

[Duppers]

136. I was just going to post that all that lobbying cash

must kill brain cells.

I'm so damn disappointed in him! I didn't think he could be bought like this.

Dean has become a whore.

[Live and Learn]

137. It is frightening how easily a little money and power can change people.

I feel the same way. At least, I don't have to feel so bad about him losing, now.

[DefenseLawyer]

27. I expect Hillary's Wal-Mart board of directors to vilify unions

Sad to see it from the former head of the Democratic Party.

[FlatBaroque]

29. His going after unions was shocking and disturbing

I am certain he will not be anywhere within sniffing distance of the Sanders administration.

[mhatrw]

33. .

[FlatBaroque]

34. Thank you. I was being lazy

[Joe Shlabotnik]

88. +1

Mission accomplished Fonze.

[seaglass]

37. I think he misspoke and meant unions have super PACs which they do. He knows unions aren't

super PACs.

[MissDeeds]

38. I remember when he was a Democrat

[jalan48]

46. Some Democrats have decided to just come out as Republicans and celebrate it.

[frylock]

69. Yep, like ah well, fuck it.

Here we are!

[jalan48]

72. LOL-you got it.

[stillwaiting]

119. I am so glad they have. I'm sure this has been a surprise to many.

Now many more people realize that we have a lot of work to do.

Thank You Bernie for exposing so many. The freak outs to his success expose and reveal.

[billhicks76]

47. He Was Always Kind Of Half-Baked

Not a true populist. But many many are afraid to speak up. I think they fear the national security establishment.

[frylock]

71. He was the most viable anti-war candidate we had that cycle..

that was really the only thing he had going. I supported him.

[bluestateguy]

48. The unions supported the Citizens United decision

People here don't like to talk about that.

[RiverLover]

50. Link?

Or did you just hear that on Fox?

[RiverLover]

53. You DID hear that on Fox, b/c "AFL-CIO Calls for Overturning Citizens United Case"

http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/AFL-CIO-Calls-for-Overturning-Citizens-United-Case

Republican lies, is lying. If it looks like a duck, acts like a duck....

[mckara]

51. Dr. Dean Cashes In

"Do you even remember the first time you sold-out?" Rudy Baylor (Matt Damon) in The Rainmaker

[restorefreedom]

52. wow. what an ignominious end

to a once passionate and inspiring antiwar advocate

and now, for a musicsal interlude....

https://m.

[silvershadow]

54. Wow. He has taken leave of his senses. nt

[Feeling the Bern]

56. Politically, Dr. Dean, you are dead to me now!

[MgtPA]

57. That is so sad

I was such a Deaniac.

[tomm2thumbs]

79. ditto here

Talk about selling your soul to the highest bidder... he has done worse, he's just giving it away

[frylock]

58. Selling his soul to the Clintons. What a sad, little man.

Can't tell you how disappointed I am in this guy as a former Deaniac.

[FlatBaroque]

121. That is it. At least sell out to someone who might do something positive

but selling out to a corrupt war hawk?.....

[raindaddy]

59. Pathetic is right...Howard Dean is a complete sell out...

There should be a law that when a lobbyist appears on TV as an expert, the industry they're affiliated with should appear on the screen..
This isn't the Howard Dean that ran for President a number of years ago...

I'm sure that Bernie would be fine with releasing the transcripts of any union speeches he gave, so will Hillary do the same? This is the DEMOCRATIC party, the labor party Howard...

The poor abused Clintons, being chastised for amassing a $153 million dollar fortune giving speeches to special interests.. Legalized bribery..

[LovingA2andMI]

61. Again, the Real Dr. Dean....

Is Tied Up In A Basement Somewhere....And This Guy Has Taken Over His Soul....

[RiverLover]

64. I wish I could rec this post ^^^

REC!!

There

Thanks for sharing. A picture is worth a thousand words.

[LovingA2andMI]

141. Thanks!!

Appreciated.....

[Not Sure]

63. Overturn Citizens United - eliminate super pacs (nt)

[Zen Democrat]

67. He was toast when he became a lobbyist for Big Pharma. He cashed in.

It's like the entire political history of this country has been scripted.

[highprincipleswork]

70. Said it before, say it again, Howard Dean can currently kiss my ass!

[tomm2thumbs]

73. WHY would he bring up Vince Foster's death and Whitewater? Has he lost his mind?!

Who, and I mean this... WHO is talking about that in the Democratic Party -- except for him now????! OMG, he is either secretly working for Republicans, or he has lost his touch in a major way. Seriously.

AND the fact that he was literally shocked to learn Hillary had in fact taken hundreds of thousands from schools for speaking, until he was shown otherwise live on TV, well that speaks volumes about how that appearance tarnishes her image as a candidate for President.

I don't think the Hillary Campaign is going to keep this corporate lobbyist-employed guy around much longer as he is shedding stupidity at a record pace.

[melman]

74. Liked him back in '04

Been trying to figure out why pretty much ever since.

[FlatBaroque]

130. LOLL

I'll tell you why - because for about 40 years we have been hungry for someone to shake up this decrepit political machinery in this country. Anyone who even hints at breaking the status quo is immediately embraced, without proper vetting, e.g. Barack Obama. Thankfully Bernie ha a 30 year record that is out there.

[Duppers]

138. ^^ That's it ^^

[passiveporcupine]

81. Oh fuck

A lot of it was given back to the Clinton foundation.

Yeah! You got it. This it the the problem, right there...you stupid idiot.

What a maroon!

[AzDar]

82. Et tu, Howard? Sell-out's gotta sell, I reckon...

[Festivito]

85. The denegration of Dean has been a several month long concert.

I think the Debbie Wassermann Schultz crew are trying to keep Dean from being her people-favored replacement.

It would be a great time for sock puppets to increase their post counts as well.

[MADem]

103. You never go back.

Dean has done that job already.

He'd like a cabinet post, I should think.

[FairWinds]

90. Which other of our "heroes" sold us out ?

Richard Gephardt

and could it be true, Tom Harkin?

Like they were not wealthy enough already !!

[somebody please correct me on Harkin. I really hope I'm wrong]

[Spitfire of ATJ]

102. Took a while but I found it...

VINCE ILUZZI (R), VERMONT STATE SENATE: People understood that they could respectfully disagree, agree to disagree, but to say that they walked away saying I don't like Howard or I hate Howard Dean or he's a left-wing nut that you can't reason with. You're not going to find that in Vermont. WALLACE: Misperception number two, those who know him well say, Governor Howard Dean was no left-wing liberal.

FREYNE: We all laugh at that. Howard Dean represented the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Some even thought it was the Republican wing of the Republican Party at first.

WALLACE: In fact, his biggest critics during his 11 year tenure were not Republican, but left-wing Democrats who sometimes found him too conservative, like Democrat Francis Brooks.

<more>

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/08/lad.14.html

[Odin2005]

104. I feel disgusted for ever supporting him in 2004.

[Beacool]

110. Well, there went Dean under the bus.

The Nurses Union's super Pac supports his campaign.

Union super PAC helps Sanders and he won't tell them to stop

CNN)—Bernie Sanders declined to disavow a super PAC spending money on his behalf in an interview with CNN on Monday and contradicted a statement his campaign made about the political entities he has long spoken out against.

Sanders drew a distinction between National Nurses United For Patient Protection, a super PAC that has spent at least $569,000 backing him, and those super PACs backing other candidates during an interview with CNN's Brooke Baldwin.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/23/politics/bernie-sanders-super-pac-nurses/index.html

[catnhatnh]

122. Your Link:

What I have said over and over again is that I have not and will not raise a nickel for a super PAC," Sanders said. "I am the only Democratic candidate who does not have a super PAC. I will not have a super PAC. They are nurses and they are fighting for the health care of their people. They are doing what they think is appropriate. I do not have a super PAC."

Sanders is correct that he has not raised money for the nurses super PAC, which is affiliated with National Nurses United, the first national union that backed his campaign.

[BainsBane]

114. Some unions HAVE super pacs

That is a fact. The Nurse's Union Super Pac, for example, spends a lot of money for Bernie's campaign.

[RiverLover]

116. And they are to help & protect PEOPLE, not PROFITS of already filthy rich

Its republican of you all to say they are the same thing. Disgusting.

[quaker bill]

115. It is a cute move

"That bad man is beating up on this poor little lady". She has done it before and it has worked. The Clintons have both used the unfairness device before to great effect. In 2008 she tossed in a few tears, perhaps they are still coming.

She is the former Secretary of State, a former Senator, and a previous candidate for President. She has the establishment of the Democratic Party behind her bid this time. There is nothing "poor little lady" about her at all.

Stating truthfully that she takes large piles of Super Pac money is only an "assault on her integrity" if there is something intrinsically wrong with taking that money. No one, not even Bernie, states that it is anything less than completely legal for her to do so. So, she is taking money legally from large organizations that are fully entitled to give it to her. If she is doing it, why not just own it?

Because it is better to their minds to call Bernie out for "being unfair to the little lady", than it is to simply own the profound structural advantages she has earned. Structural advantages that are really too numerous to count. Of course, admitting to the profound structural advantages she has earned leaves the open question of how she earned them.... So it is way better to call Bernie unfair.

BTW - Politics is not a game played fairly. It never has been. There is nothing wrong with the devices Clinton is using here, they just need to be seen as devices.

A politician in Louisiana once claimed that his opponent's daughter was a "well known thesbian" and that his son was seen "matriculating in public"... It apparently worked. This game is not played fairly.

[FlatBaroque]

118. Great post quaker bill, wish I could rec it

[Duppers]

140. LoL for your last paragraph. nt

[Ferd Berfel]

123. And Howard Dean is now just another paid Corporate stooge

We can't trust him any longer.

[Romulox]

125. He is covering himself in sleaze. Hope he never gets the jobs he's angling for. nt

[LittleBlue]

126. Disingenuous shill

He's a sad, twisted establishment creature now. Haven't liked him in years.

[LittleBlue]

128. Suddenly a portion of DU defends super PACs? LMAO

Oh yeah, DU had long been critical of super PACs until Hillary got criticized for one.

This is why I'm losing interest in politics. We hammer the Rethugs for using super PACs for six years and suddenly it's okay because our nominee presumptive used one. Embarrassing.

[Betty Karlson]

132. Well, these days, his paycheck depends on saying nonsense.

He no longer has to speak on behalf of the middle class and those who live in financial distress.

[Octafish]

139. Kind of matches what he said about Universal Health Care.

Makes more sense now to him now, for some reason, to have Corporate Wealth Care.

https://theintercept.com/2016/01/14/howard-dean-lobbyist/