[EL] Dick Morris's foreign money claims
Mark Schmitt
schmitt.mark at gmail.com
Mon Oct 15 12:30:27 PDT 2012
It should be noted that this is the same Dick Morris who is currently
plugging a book with the unironic title, /Here Come the Black
Helicopters/, in which he reveals Obama's secret plan to create a
one-world government in which we will pay all our taxes to the UN.
Mark Schmitt
Senior Fellow, The Roosevelt Institute <http://www.newdeal20.org>
202/246-2350
gchat or Skype: schmitt.mark
@mschmitt9 <https://twitter.com/#%21/mschmitt9>
On 10/15/2012 3:09 PM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
> Before you go back to work, please send me the article where these
> allegations of 2012 have been closely and competently reviewed and
> found lacking. I began my post saying I haven't seen it.
>
> I'd like to read more about it -- that's been my point all along,
>
> Thanks, Joe,
>
> Steve
>
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Joseph Birkenstock
> <jbirkenstock at capdale.com <mailto:jbirkenstock at capdale.com>> wrote:
>
> I'm writing from the certainty that these allegations have been
> closely and competently reviewed and found lacking. As for the
> rest ... well, I'm going back to work.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 15, 2012, at 3:01 PM, "Steve Hoersting"
> <hoersting at gmail.com <mailto:hoersting at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> You're talking 2008. This is 2012, and you're basing your entire
>> argument on reporting thresholds from an FEC formula.
>>
>> Look at all you are ignoring to wrap yourself in the certainty
>> there's nothing to see here.
>>
>> Yours is a ripeness argument: You will welcome press accounts of
>> this matter after the FEC has run its models and not before. Nice
>> political tactic to deflect attention, "du jour," as I think you
>> put it.
>>
>> You write as if you've never heard of Hsi Lai or the Thompson
>> hearings. In fact, I remember reactions much like yours before
>> those matters fully saw the light of day.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Birkenstock
>> <jbirkenstock at capdale.com <mailto:jbirkenstock at capdale.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Steve -- helpfully, the FEC posts its materiality
>> thresholds from 2009-10 here:
>> http://www.fec.gov/pdf/Audit_Procedures.pdf.
>>
>> Not so helpfully, at page 5 those procedures confirm that a
>> matter will be addressed with respect to prohibited
>> contributions if:
>>
>> . the dollar value of the apparent prohibited contributions
>> is greater than [REDACTED] of the total reported amount of
>> contributions from individuals (as reported on Line
>> 11(a)(iii) of the Detailed Summary Page of FEC Form 3)
>>
>> AND
>>
>> . the dollar value of the apparent prohibited contributions
>> exceeds [REDACTED].
>>
>> So while I presume neither one of us knows the actual figures
>> behind those redactions (I sure don't, but I'd love to), it
>> does appear that (1) at least as of two years ago, the
>> relevant materiality threshold involved both a proportional
>> test and an absolute dollar test; and that (2) those foreign
>> contribution issues, if any, that were identified in the
>> audit of the 2008 Obama campaign fell below either or both of
>> those tests.
>>
>> OTOH, the same document also explains that:
>>
>> Any matter, *whether or not it meets the materiality
>> threshold for inclusion in the interim*
>>
>> *audit report or referral to the Office of General Counsel*,
>> can still be referred to OGC if the
>>
>> auditor suspects there is a Knowing and Willful Violation of
>> the Act (2 U.S.c. 437g (a)(5)
>>
>> and (d)).
>>
>> (Emphasis added.) So if there had been a reasonable
>> suspicion that the Obama campaign was knowingly participating
>> in a scheme to raise foreign money through unitemized credit
>> card contributions, Audit could have -- and in my experience,
>> undoubtedly would have -- referred that issue for further
>> enforcement attention regardless of the proportion or
>> absolute amount of money involved.
>>
>> So especially on that basis, I just don't see the double
>> standard -- but I do recognize that "failure to condemn
>> [manufactured outrage du jour]" is a time-honored and
>> perfectly valid political tactic and I wish you well with it.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> *From:*Steve Hoersting [mailto:hoersting at gmail.com
>> <mailto:hoersting at gmail.com>]
>> *Sent:* Monday, October 15, 2012 12:30 PM
>> *To:* Joseph Birkenstock
>> *Cc:* law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
>> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Dick Morris's foreign money claims
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> I really don't know much about how to beef up audits or about
>> the findings in 2008. But among the few things I know are these:
>>
>> There is such a thing as a materiality threshold in pursuing
>> repayment or denoting problems in a Presidential campaign
>> audit. What amount constitutes a "material" violation on
>> $.75B in overall activity? $2M? $3M? More?
>>
>> There is much to be pursued by journalists and reformers in
>> the allegations as they stand now: the reported profile of
>> the owner of the website, the site's reported target
>> audience, that the site redirects to the donate page of an
>> authorized committee.
>>
>> That these questions aren't being pursued by journalists or
>> reformers vigorously, let alone at all -- how to put it? --
>> "meets the materiality threshold" for double standards?
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Joseph Birkenstock
>> <jbirkenstock at capdale.com <mailto:jbirkenstock at capdale.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Steve - serious question: if foreign credit card
>> contributions to the Obama campaign really are a serious
>> problem, why weren't any violations identifed in the FEC's
>> audit of the 2008 campaign? (Rick links below to his blog
>> post on the subject from April of this year, and - as I'm
>> sure you already know - the report itself is available here:
>> http://www.fec.gov/audits/2008/Obama_for_America/FinalAuditReportoftheCommission1206263.pdf.)
>>
>> We know the auditors saw much more detailed information about
>> Obama's unitemized contributions than is available to the
>> public via FEC reports - so are you suggesting that there's
>> more to these allegations now than there was the last time we
>> saw this movie? (And if so, what is it?)
>>
>> Or are you suggesting that the FEC's audit process needs to
>> be beefed up? (And if so, how?)
>>
>> ________________________________
>> Joseph M. Birkenstock, Esq.
>> Caplin & Drysdale, Chtd.
>> One Thomas Circle, NW
>> Washington, DC 20005
>> (202) 862-7836 <tel:%28202%29%20862-7836>
>> www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock
>> <http://www.capdale.com/jbirkenstock>
>> *also admitted to practice in CA
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
>> <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> on
>> behalf of Steve Hoersting
>> Sent: Mon 10/15/2012 10:46 AM
>>
>> To: law-election at uci.edu <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>
>> Subject: [EL] Dick Morris's foreign money claims
>>
>> Rick,
>>
>>
>> 1. Are you calling for enhanced disclosure of contributions
>> to authorized committees? -- because that is the allegation
>> here. My memory is you're for enhanced disclosure of social
>> welfare organizations and for removing the regulation at
>> issue in Van Hollen v. FEC.
>>
>> 2. Things are evolving quickly. Is the GAI report evolving as
>> quickly? Are you or others at, say, Politico, interested at
>> all in the fact that the website Obama.com <http://Obama.com>
>> -- purportedly owned by a third-party and distributed
>> throughout the world -- goes straight to the DONATE page at
>> Obama Victory?
>>
>> 3. So, there is no "journalist[ic]" interest in
>> "sensationalism," eh? Sticking to campaign finance and not
>> Lindsay Lohan, I saw Palin's campaign-wardrobe budget lead
>> the news for a full weekend one year. I saw sensationalism
>> drive the news cycle for three days in October 2010: "The
>> Chamber is using foreign money."
>>
>> I think someone needs to yawn, grab another mug of coffee and
>> get about the business of exposing Morris and Breitbart for
>> the hacks they really are. Easy enough to do, I'm sure...
>>
>> ...and so much more in keeping with the mission of the reform
>> organizations and the bent of the nation's editorial boards.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Rick Hasen
>> <rhasen at law.uci.edu <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Steve,
>> Three things.
>> 1. I hope you will join me in supporting enhanced
>> disclosure laws to ensure that foreign money is not secretly
>> flowing into our elections.
>>
>> 2. I believe the reason you don't see a lot of discussion of
>> this on the editorial pages is that there's really nothing
>> new in the GAI report. Here's what I wrote about it in a
>> recent Slate column
>> <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/10/will_republicans_accept_if_barack_obama_defeats_mitt_romney_.html>
>> :
>>
>>
>> This week features what conservative
>> <http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/dubious-donations-peter-schweizer-speaks.php>
>> blogs are touting
>> <http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/08/obama-bundler-tied-to-chinese-government/>
>> as an "explosive" new report
>> <http://campaignfundingrisks.com/wp-content/themes/cfr/images/AmericaTheVulnerable.pdf>
>> suggesting that the Obama campaign is illegally accepting
>> massive foreign contributions via credit card. The so-called
>> proof comes from a number of foreign visits to the Obama
>> campaign website, the lack of any federal requirement to
>> publicly disclose contributions from individuals who give
>> less than $200 overall, and the Obama campaign's supposed
>> failure to use credit card verification tools to make sure
>> the contributions are coming from inside the United States.
>>
>> Never mind that the Obama campaign has denied
>> similar reports in the past and has confirmed
>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33935> it does use the
>> verification tools; that an extensive Federal Election
>> Commission audit of the 2008 Obama campaign found no evidence
>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33193> of illegal foreign
>> contributions; that foreign visits to the website does not
>> mean that foreign contributions are being made; and that U.S.
>> citizens (including those in the military) living abroad have
>> the right to contribute to federal campaigns. The claims are
>> a way to delegitimize the Obama campaign, even as Republican
>> leaders in Congress stymie efforts to fix our broken
>> disclosure laws
>> <http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/07/campaign_finance_after_citizens_united_is_worse_than_watergate_.html>
>> and argue for less disclosure of campaign finance information.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 3. Dick Morris lacks fundamental credibility with
>> journalists and others. So his sensationalism won't bring
>> attention to an important issue. In fact, it will convince
>> journalists to ignore the issue.
>> Rick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/15/12 7:14 AM, Steve Hoersting wrote:
>>
>>
>> http://www.dickmorris.com/is-obama-running-on-foreign-money-dick-morris-tv-video-alert/
>>
>>
>> We often argue about corruption -- what makes
>> up corruption, what kinds of corruption matter, and which do not.
>>
>> Given Judge Kavanaugh's discussion in Bluman,
>> I get the feeling that this matter -- yet to be proved or
>> discredited in any news outlet I follow -- would far outrank
>> unlimited IEs by the local Right to Life, the US Chamber or
>> even the dreaded Kochs.
>>
>>
>> If we do not see meaningful discussion of
>> this issue here and in the editorial pages, will it be fair
>> to conclude, as many have surmised, that campaign-finance
>> purists are campaign-finance instrumentalists or partisans?
>>
>> Or is the relative silence just more evidence
>> that retribution, or the prospect of it, is real?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rick Hasen
>> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
>> UC Irvine School of Law
>> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
>> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
>> 949.824.3072 <tel:949.824.3072> - office
>> 949.824.0495 <tel:949.824.0495> - fax
>> rhasen at law.uci.edu <mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
>> http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
>>
>> http://electionlawblog.org <http://electionlawblog.org/>
>>
>> Now available: The Voting Wars: http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>
>>
>> <- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> - - ->
>> To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS,
>> we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise,
>> any tax advice contained in this communication (including any
>> attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and
>> cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related
>> penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting,
>> marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related
>> matter addressed herein.
>>
>> This message is for the use of the intended recipient only.
>> It is
>> from a law firm and may contain information that is
>> privileged and
>> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient any
>> disclosure,
>> copying, future distribution, or use of this communication is
>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in
>> error, please
>> advise us by return e-mail, or if you have received this
>> communication
>> by fax advise us by telephone and delete/destroy the document.
>> <-->
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>
>>
>> <- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> - - -> To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the
>> IRS, we inform you that, unless specifically indicated
>> otherwise, any tax advice contained in this communication
>> (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be
>> used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding
>> tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or
>> (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party
>> any tax-related matter addressed herein. This message is for
>> the use of the intended recipient only. It is from a law firm
>> and may contain information that is privileged and
>> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient any
>> disclosure, copying, future distribution, or use of this
>> communication is prohibited. If you have received this
>> communication in error, please advise us by return e-mail, or
>> if you have received this communication by fax advise us by
>> telephone and delete/destroy the document. <-->
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen M. Hoersting
>>
>
> <- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> -> To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we
> inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax
> advice contained in this communication (including any attachments)
> was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for
> the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the
> Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
> recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed
> herein. This message is for the use of the intended recipient
> only. It is from a law firm and may contain information that is
> privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient
> any disclosure, copying, future distribution, or use of this
> communication is prohibited. If you have received this
> communication in error, please advise us by return e-mail, or if
> you have received this communication by fax advise us by telephone
> and delete/destroy the document. <-->
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stephen M. Hoersting
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121015/666d84e4/attachment.html>
View list directory