The media seems to be once again showing their bias against President Trump. They pounced in Friday’s news cycle on the just-filed Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act lawsuit against the Trump campaign, WikiLeaks, and Russia. But there was almost nothing in the news of last week’s federal court filing that exposes an $84 million money-laundering conspiracy the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign executed during the 2016 presidential election in violation of federal campaign-finance law.
The latter lawsuit summarizes the DNC-Clinton conspiracy and provides detailed evidence from Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings confirming the complaint’s allegations that Democrats undertook an extensive scheme to violate federal campaign limits.
Dan Backer, a campaign-finance lawyer and attorney-of-record in the lawsuit, discovered there was “extensive evidence in the Democrats’ own FEC reports, when coupled with their own public statements that demonstrated massive straw man contributions papered through the state parties, to the DNC, and then directly to Clinton’s campaign—in clear violation of federal campaign-finance law.”
Backer filed an 86-page complaint with the FEC against Clinton, her campaign and its treasurer, the DNC and its treasurer, and the participating state Democratic committees. The complaint detailed the misconduct and provided concrete evidence supporting the allegations.
In a nutshell, the evidence suggests that Clinton, the DNC, and participating state Democratic committees established the Hillary Victory Fund (HVF) as a joint fundraising committee to accept contributions from large donors, some exceeding $400,000.
FEC records show several large contributions reported as received by the HVF and the same amount on the same day (or occasionally the following day) recorded as received by the DNC from a state Democratic committee, but without the state Democratic committee ever reporting the contribution.
For more than a year, FEC records show some 30 separate occasions when the HVF transferred contributions totaling more than $10 million to the DNC without any corresponding record of the receipt or disbursement from the state parties. They illegally jumped right over the state Democratic parties.
According to Politico, “[w]hile state party officials were made aware that Clinton’s campaign would control the movement of the funds between participating committees, one operative who has relationships with multiple state parties said that some of their officials have complained that they weren’t notified of the transfers into and out of their accounts until after the fact.”
It seems that the Clinton campaign was in total control of the transfer of funds and used the party as a “fundraising clearinghouse.”
Former DNC chairwoman Donna Brazile acknowledged that “[a]s Hillary’s campaign gained momentum, she resolved the party’s debt and put it on a starvation diet. It had become dependent on her campaign for survival, for which she expected to wield control of its operations.”
The Supreme Court made evident in the 2014 case, McCutcheon v. FEC, that this exact scenario would violate the law.
Even with this wave of evidence concerning campaign-finance criminality—more than $84 million—the media instead chose on Friday to chase the story of Trump’s $130,000 payment through Cohen to Stormy Daniels.
Credit: The Federalist,redbluedivide.com