Shadow group provides Sanders super PAC support he scorns

[ehrnst]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Bernie Sanders says he doesn’t want a super PAC. Instead, he has Our Revolution, a nonprofit political organization he founded that functions much the same as one.

Like a super PAC, which is shorthand for super political action committee, Our Revolution can raise unlimited sums from wealthy patrons that dwarf the limits faced by candidates and conventional PACs. Unlike a super PAC, however, the group doesn’t have to disclose its donors — a stream of revenue commonly referred to as “dark money.”

Now, with less than one month to go before the Iowa caucuses, Our Revolution appears to be skirting campaign finance law, which forbids groups founded by federal candidates and officeholders from using large donations to finance federal election activity, including Sanders’ 2020 bid.

................................

It won’t have to publicly reveal its 2019 fundraising until after this year’s presidential election. And money it raises between now and then won’t have to be disclosed until the following year.

https://apnews.com/345bbd1af529cfb1e41305fa3ab1e604

[comradebillyboy]

1. Bernie has his very own dark money PAC. How nice for him.

[nycbos]

2. I am shocked SHOCKED to find gambling going on here.

Last edited Thu Jan 30, 2020, 10:32 AM - Edit history (1)

[ehrnst]

8. ....

[NYMinute]

34. bwaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Cha]

64. Ikr!

[The Valley Below]

3. How does Our Revolution escape enforcement actions when they are manifestly in violation

of the laws that govern 501c4 organizations?

I'm baffled.

[ehrnst]

5. Or the scorn of a candidate who has made "financial transparency" their own

personal political brand...

[George II]

9. I've been asking about that for a long time:

https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/social-welfare-organizations

To be tax-exempt as a social welfare organization described in Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 501(c)(4), an organization must not be organized for profit and must be operated exclusively to promote social welfare.

The promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office.

[The Valley Below]

10. I don't understand how what appears to be a direct violation of Federal tax regulations

and campaign finance regulations is allowed to stand.

I really don't get it.

[ehrnst]

12. I'm sure that an explanation of how it's not "technically illegal" and therefore

completely morally upstanding and progressive it must be if certain particular candidates do it.

Not so much for others, however, and they will certainly be loudly criticized for even thinking of doing any such thing because it's just BAD.

As we speak:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=322992

[The Valley Below]

13. I'd like an explanation of how it isn't grossly illegal.

A plain reading of the regulations make the activities of Our Revolution seem in direct contravention of the law.

If there is a "technicality," I'd like it explained, because I'm not seeing it.

[ehrnst]

14. The article says "skirts" the law...

And if it's Senator Sanders, then it's going to be given a pass by his supporters, because many believe that he is the very measure by which ethics and progressive ideas are judged.

If any other candidate was to 'skirt' campaign finance law in such a manner then it would be DISQUALIFYING because that candidate by the very act of disagreeing with Senator Sanders in any way on any issue, let alone opposing Senator Sanders in an election rather than dropping out and endorsing him, have distanced themselves from the ethical and progressive ideal.

And are therefore suspect.

From the article:

But while Warren has come under fire for courting wealthy financiers in her past Senate campaigns, Sanders and Our Revolution have largely avoided scrutiny during the primary, even as he has accelerated his criticism of others, among them Biden, for relying on super PACs founded by their allies.

Double standards.

[The Valley Below]

15. I'd like more clarity on that point. I don't see how they "skirt" the law at all.

Our Revolution is engaged in activities that seem to be prohibited by the law in very bold terms.

What's the rationale that excuses this?

[ehrnst]

24. I would as well...

[Recursion]

30. I mean, in practice, the rationale is that there's no enforcement during an election

The enforcement process comes after the election, at which point Our Revolution will probably be required to pay a fine.

[Gothmog]

32. The FEC lacks a quorum and cannot take enforcement actions

sanders is protected by and benefitting from trump gutting the FEC by refusing to appoint replacements for departing members

[ehrnst]

45. Bernie benefitted from Trump gutting the FEC...

But if any other candidate was to do so in this way...

[Gothmog]

46. Yes, sanders is benefiting from the gutting of the FEC

Our Revolution is a super pac and is not complying with the law

[KitSileya]

44. If that had been Trump accusing his opponents of this while doing it himself,

the shouts of projection would be deafening and the scorn practically palpable, but when Senator Sanders does it? Crickets. His supporters will be just as hypocritical as he is if they remain silent on this.

[R B Garr]

4. "the group doesn't have to disclose its donors ---

a stream of revenue commonly referred to as “‘dark money’”.

So anonymous dark money is okay if they support Sanders. What hypocrisy.

[ehrnst]

6. The defintion of "shadowy."

[R B Garr]

47. Indeed.

And this from the “rigged” system whiners. Hmmm.

[TidalWave46]

7. Here is a link to a PAC that is clearly supporting Sanders.

Southpaw MI PAC

Here is Sanders using the head of that PAC for one of his commercials as they were revamping the website to show their PAC love to Sanders. Sanders has also stood on stage with the head of this PAC and accepted his personal endorsement.

Anyone who claims that Sanders doesn't WELCOME PAC support is full of shit.

Sanders is on stage being endorsed by the head of a PAC while the PAC is changing their website graphics to show said support. This isn't six ways to...... It's a direct line.

Do we have other candidates regularly meeting the head of a PAC working in their benefit or is Sanders the only one?

That doesn't even touch on all of the dark money support from outlets like CommonDreams and outright support from anti-Democratic Party groups like Jacobin.

[ehrnst]

11. Indeed. (nt)

[TexasTowelie]

16. K&R! nt

[sheshe2]

17. K&R

[betsuni]

18. K&R

[Scurrilous]

19. Some revolution...

[Cha]

20. Why the fuck does BS get to do this and

call out everyone else for doing the same?

[R B Garr]

40. Exactly, Cha! The hypocrisy reeks.

Enough of this.

[Cha]

42. It's all over twitter, too!

[Gothmog]

21. I am glad that Our Revolution is being looked at

Link to tweet

Bernie Sanders says he doesn’t want a super PAC. Instead, he has Our Revolution, a nonprofit political organization he founded that functions much the same as one.

Like a super PAC, which is shorthand for super political action committee, Our Revolution can raise unlimited sums from wealthy patrons that dwarf the limits faced by candidates and conventional PACs. Unlike a super PAC, however, the group doesn’t have to disclose its donors — a stream of revenue commonly referred to as “dark money.”

Now, with less than one month to go before the Iowa caucuses, Our Revolution appears to be skirting campaign finance law, which forbids groups founded by federal candidates and officeholders from using large donations to finance federal election activity, including Sanders’ 2020 bid. ….

Our Revolution has taken in nearly $1 million from donors who gave more than the limits and whose identities it hasn’t fully disclosed, according to tax filings for 2016, 2017 and 2018. Much of it came from those who contributed six-figure sums.

It won’t have to publicly reveal its 2019 fundraising until after this year’s presidential election. And money it raises between now and then won’t have to be disclosed until the following year.

“Any entity established by a federal officeholder can only raise and spend money under federal contribution limits for any activities in connection with a federal election,” said Paul S. Ryan, a campaign finance expert and attorney with the good-government group Common Cause. “Our Revolution was undoubtedly established by Sen. Sanders, is subject to these laws — and is seemingly in violation of them.”

[The Valley Below]

22. You are a lawyer, politically savvy, and an obviously intelligent person, so WTF?

How are what look like manifestly illegal practices able to persist this long without enforcement actions being taken?

I do not understand it. Do you?

[Gothmog]

25. The FEC lacks a quorum and so can NOT take any actions

[The Valley Below]

27. Interesting. Thank you!

[Gothmog]

29. The lack of a quorum for the FEC is something that really pisses me off

It is a way for the GOP to get by with violations without any consequences

[getagrip_already]

54. stone, meet glass house... n/t

[ehrnst]

60. Indeed. (nt)

[NYMinute]

31. JD and OR should be looked at by the FBI

with a special attention to RICO.

[MrsCoffee]

35. +1

[mcar]

23. Potato, po-tah-to

[Me.]

26. Practically Every 5 Minutes

WE learn something new which doesn't look good on him...in the last few minutes, I have learned ...that he hired a disruptor to Biden's town hall, BS is the solution to everything and that Sirota supposedly lurks/posts here. BS is beginning to act like someone's older brother.

[NYMinute]

37. +++++

[NYMinute]

28. Such hypocrisy and gaslighting from that campaign

They accuse others of doing what they themselves are culpable for.

[brer cat]

33. K&R

[Gothmog]

36. Who gave sanders/Our Revolution $218,000?

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

38. That's a prime example of a 'shadowy' and rather high $$ donor.

[Gothmog]

48. I want to know who gave this money to sanders

[ehrnst]

49. So do I. That would what is known as "transparency."

[Cha]

50. "Transparency"? Good luck.

[ehrnst]

59. Liars know the difference between truth and lies

Bullshitters don't care.

Nixon was a liar.

Trump and other bullshitters simply believe that what benefits them is "truth" and what isn't good for them is "lies."

[getagrip_already]

56. ты никогда не узнаешь n/t

[ehrnst]

58. Разве это не правда?

[oasis]

39. Very sly.

[ehrnst]

43. Indeed.

[Cha]

41. KR!

[JustAnotherGen]

51. Wait -

This is what is important in the piece.

Our Revolution has taken in nearly $1 million from donors who gave more than the limits and whose identities it hasn’t fully disclosed, according to tax filings for 2016, 2017 and 2018. Much of it came from those who contributed six-figure sums.

If Our Revolution is being used as a funding source for the campaign - then his campaign needs to cut it off/out immediately.

My understanding is that the Revolution group was using the money to fund lower tier candidates and activism - not a Federal Election.

[getagrip_already]

52. sounds familiar...

Who else is doing unsavory things they don't want exposed until after the elections?

[The Valley Below]

53. Hopefully it will come up at the debate.

[ehrnst]

55. Well, that would be "getting ugly" wouldn't it?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=420603

[betsuni]

57. Kick

[Cha]

61. KICK!

[Gothmog]

62. Progressive Group Announces Digital Ad Campaign Against Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden

Dark money pacs are evidently okay if they attack Biden or mayor Pete

Link to tweet

A campaign spending group affiliated with Justice Democrats, an influential left-wing outfit, plans to spend more than half a million dollars on digital advertisements educating the public about elements of former Vice President Joe Biden’s and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s records that progressives consider disqualifying.

The ads will target Democrats in Iowa and South Carolina, appearing on social media and other internet platforms until voters head to the polls in each state....

Organize for Justice is trying to push back not just against the Biden and Buttigieg campaigns’ efforts to discredit progressive ideas like Medicare for All, but also against the spending of outside groups with similar agendas.

Unite the Country, the super PAC supporting Joe Biden, has spent $2.3 million on televisions ads promoting Biden.
A number of groups have also aired television and digital ads specifically trying to warn people against Medicare for All and more modest expansions of public health insurance. As HuffPost reported in December, the Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, a health care industry front group, and One Nation, a super PAC tied to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, have spent millions of dollars on ads blasting Medicare for All without any comparable progressive counteroffensive.

The Partnership in particular has invested in social media ads, spending $300,000 in Twitter and Facebook ads targeting voters in swing states, according to a November report in Politico.

“As billionaires, SuperPACs, and corporate-backed front groups spend millions to misinform voters about progressive policies and candidates, the progressive movement has to fight back,” Rojas said.

[Gothmog]

63. sanders love dark money

Link to tweet