[EL] Adelson

[Jeff Hauser]

Daniel, are you being serious? Fine, consider substituting the Koch
Brothers, who have had to settle a variety of past investigations and may
have one (or more) ongoing now as well:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/bloomberg-investigation-alleges-koch-subsidiaries-paid-bribes-sold-190408559.html

And Adelson went big without Newt in the race in 2008 and may well hit
$100M in 2012 post-Newt.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Lowenstein, Daniel <
lowenstein at law.ucla.edu> wrote:

>       What does it suggest when a group of election law specialists spend
> a day debating abuses that might possibly arise from large contributions to
> a presidential candidate by an individual who might be the subject of a
> federal investigation, without noting that the candidate in question will
> not be elected president and never had more than the most remote prospect
> of being elected president?
>
>         My answer is, it suggests a discipline preoccupied with
> abstractions and too often out of touch with political reality.
>
>             Best,
>
>             Daniel H. Lowenstein
>             Director, Center for the Liberal Arts and Free Institutions
> (CLAFI)
>             UCLA Law School
>             405 Hilgard
>             Los Angeles, California 90095-1476
>             310-825-5148
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120412/0574ff21/attachment.html>