This Lying RNC Idiot POS Is Responsible For Citizen's United... And He's Not Sorry

[Billy000]

Are you ******* kidding me? The Koch Brothers gave almost a billion to the 2016 GOP campaign. That's all of the funding of the 2012 funding for the GOP in TOTAL. That's what Citizens United brought us. Money trumping the will of the people. I mean thank god they were idiots and gave it to the wrong campaigns but we might not be so lucky next time.

PLEASE show us your reliable, along with the link to your allegation that the KOCH BROTHERS GAVE ALMOST A BILLION DOLLARS to the 2016 campaign.

Thus far, I don't believe they have not contributed a dime for 2016.

If you meant 2012, as I said above, please show us your source.

Koch Brothers' network will drop almost $1 billion on 2016 election

How do you people miss this stuff?

You are amusing, I'll give you that!

The article is from JANUARY 2015, NOT 2016 but OVER a year old. To date, you cannot show where they have GIVEN A DIME.

YOUR POST stated that they had spent ONE BILLION DOLLARS on the campaign. The Koch brothers were on TV this week saying they had not decided who they were going to support.

But...as I said, cute try and you are amusing.

lol this was clearly meant for the 2016 cycle. You do know the campaigns started in 2015 right? It would take months for them to launch their campaigns. They would need funding by early 2015. Scott Walker is who they were supporting. I mean what possible reason would there be to donate all of that money lol. The announcement they made today was obviously talking about the candidates still left in the race. No my friend, it is you who is adorable.

And I bet the $5,400 those two brothers could donate to Walker went a looooooooooooooog way.

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

 

[OKTexas]

PLEASE show us your reliable, along with the link to your allegation that the KOCH BROTHERS GAVE ALMOST A BILLION DOLLARS to the 2016 campaign.

Thus far, I don't believe they have not contributed a dime for 2016.

If you meant 2012, as I said above, please show us your source.

Koch Brothers' network will drop almost $1 billion on 2016 election

How do you people miss this stuff?

You are amusing, I'll give you that!

The article is from JANUARY 2015, NOT 2016 but OVER a year old. To date, you cannot show where they have GIVEN A DIME.

YOUR POST stated that they had spent ONE BILLION DOLLARS on the campaign. The Koch brothers were on TV this week saying they had not decided who they were going to support.

But...as I said, cute try and you are amusing.

lol this was clearly meant for the 2016 cycle. You do know the campaigns started in 2015 right? It would take months for them to launch their campaigns. They would need funding by early 2015. Scott Walker is who they were supporting. I mean what possible reason would there be to donate all of that money lol. The announcement they made today was obviously talking about the candidates still left in the race. No my friend, it is you who is adorable.

And I bet the $5,400 those two brothers could donate to Walker went a looooooooooooooog way.

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

 

[Billy000]

Koch Brothers' network will drop almost $1 billion on 2016 election

How do you people miss this stuff?

You are amusing, I'll give you that!

The article is from JANUARY 2015, NOT 2016 but OVER a year old. To date, you cannot show where they have GIVEN A DIME.

YOUR POST stated that they had spent ONE BILLION DOLLARS on the campaign. The Koch brothers were on TV this week saying they had not decided who they were going to support.

But...as I said, cute try and you are amusing.

lol this was clearly meant for the 2016 cycle. You do know the campaigns started in 2015 right? It would take months for them to launch their campaigns. They would need funding by early 2015. Scott Walker is who they were supporting. I mean what possible reason would there be to donate all of that money lol. The announcement they made today was obviously talking about the candidates still left in the race. No my friend, it is you who is adorable.

And I bet the $5,400 those two brothers could donate to Walker went a looooooooooooooog way.

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

Oh you mean from a network they own that only serves their personal interests?

 

[OKTexas]

You are amusing, I'll give you that!

The article is from JANUARY 2015, NOT 2016 but OVER a year old. To date, you cannot show where they have GIVEN A DIME.

YOUR POST stated that they had spent ONE BILLION DOLLARS on the campaign. The Koch brothers were on TV this week saying they had not decided who they were going to support.

But...as I said, cute try and you are amusing.

lol this was clearly meant for the 2016 cycle. You do know the campaigns started in 2015 right? It would take months for them to launch their campaigns. They would need funding by early 2015. Scott Walker is who they were supporting. I mean what possible reason would there be to donate all of that money lol. The announcement they made today was obviously talking about the candidates still left in the race. No my friend, it is you who is adorable.

And I bet the $5,400 those two brothers could donate to Walker went a looooooooooooooog way.

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

Oh you mean from a network they own that only serves their personal interests?

Your own link said it consisted of more than 450 donors, and those were the ones at just that one meeting. Evidently those others felt their interest were being served as well. Ain't America great, where you and your pals can consolidate your resources and get your opinion out?

 

[Billy000]

lol this was clearly meant for the 2016 cycle. You do know the campaigns started in 2015 right? It would take months for them to launch their campaigns. They would need funding by early 2015. Scott Walker is who they were supporting. I mean what possible reason would there be to donate all of that money lol. The announcement they made today was obviously talking about the candidates still left in the race. No my friend, it is you who is adorable.

And I bet the $5,400 those two brothers could donate to Walker went a looooooooooooooog way.

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

Oh you mean from a network they own that only serves their personal interests?

Your own link said it consisted of more than 450 donors, and those were the ones at just that one meeting. Evidently those others felt their interest were being served as well. Ain't America great, where you and your pals can consolidate your resources and get your opinion out?

You do realize of course that if the Koch Brothers wanted to donate a billion from their personal accounts they legally could right? Instead they were so greedy they relied on 450 donors that only served their personal interest. Money now trumps speech. A person making 50K a year is all but a whisper in comparison to billionaires like the Cock Brothers.

 

[bripat9643]

Hint to the weak minded, electioneering is speech.

I imagine you would be OK with having blaring amplified speeches at the doorsteps of polling locations. After all it's only free speech right?

That is under the domain of state election laws, not the First Amendment.

According to some here any regulatory provisions are a violation of free speech. The FEC was designed by congress to attempt to insure fair elections. Their rules apply to all parties and candidates. The commission has 3 dems and 3 republicans on it.

The Constitution says the states make the rules for conducting elections. Controlling what goes on in a polling place fits the description. You could make a credible argument that disallowing campaigning is a violation of the First Amendment, but the infringement is too small to get excited about. Telling people they can't make a movie or publish a book, on the other hand, is a serious violation that could affect the outcome of the election.

I believe that the movie was already made. The supposed violation was the time proximity to an election. I can't remember if it was a primary or what. Citizen's wanted to flood pay for view for free as well as hit the broadcast venues too close to the election. The rule FEC rule was 30 days. I guess the rule is so a candidate has time to prepare a response to whatever is thrown at them. The movie called "Hillary" was filled with obvious untruths but that is not why the smear campaign was rejected. I cannot verify the content. I read the Supreme court decision. Man that thing went on and on and on.... They referred to the original lawsuit and denial as "Austin".

What's your point?

 

[HUGGY]

I imagine you would be OK with having blaring amplified speeches at the doorsteps of polling locations. After all it's only free speech right?

That is under the domain of state election laws, not the First Amendment.

According to some here any regulatory provisions are a violation of free speech. The FEC was designed by congress to attempt to insure fair elections. Their rules apply to all parties and candidates. The commission has 3 dems and 3 republicans on it.

The Constitution says the states make the rules for conducting elections. Controlling what goes on in a polling place fits the description. You could make a credible argument that disallowing campaigning is a violation of the First Amendment, but the infringement is too small to get excited about. Telling people they can't make a movie or publish a book, on the other hand, is a serious violation that could affect the outcome of the election.

I believe that the movie was already made. The supposed violation was the time proximity to an election. I can't remember if it was a primary or what. Citizen's wanted to flood pay for view for free as well as hit the broadcast venues too close to the election. The rule FEC rule was 30 days. I guess the rule is so a candidate has time to prepare a response to whatever is thrown at them. The movie called "Hillary" was filled with obvious untruths but that is not why the smear campaign was rejected. I cannot verify the content. I read the Supreme court decision. Man that thing went on and on and on.... They referred to the original lawsuit and denial as "Austin".

What's your point?

For you there is none. For your puppet masters it is a warning that their manipulation of the American voting process will be short lived.

 

[OKTexas]

And I bet the $5,400 those two brothers could donate to Walker went a looooooooooooooog way.

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

Oh you mean from a network they own that only serves their personal interests?

Your own link said it consisted of more than 450 donors, and those were the ones at just that one meeting. Evidently those others felt their interest were being served as well. Ain't America great, where you and your pals can consolidate your resources and get your opinion out?

You do realize of course that if the Koch Brothers wanted to donate a billion from their personal accounts they legally could right? Instead they were so greedy they relied on 450 donors that only served their personal interest. Money now trumps speech. A person making 50K a year is all but a whisper in comparison to billionaires like the Cock Brothers.

Yep, keep moving those goal posts like a good little regressive. The point was you claim that the Kochs were spending a billion dollars and it's a totally fabricated LIE, disproved by your own links. So take your little crocodile tears and try to sell them on Ebay, maybe someone there might think they're worth something.

 

[Markle]

Why don't you just tell me it should be OK to yell "FIRE" in a theater. The Hillary movie attempted to break FEC law and a court threw them out. THEN they attempted to make it a free speech case which they did because Roberts made it so. It was NEVER a free speech issue. It was an electioneering violation.

Also wrong.

Citizens United did in fact concern free speech:

“The remedies enacted by law, however, must comply with the First Amendment; and, it is our law and our tradition that more speech, not less, is the governing rule. An outright ban on corporate political speech during the critical preelection period is not a permissible remedy. Here Congress has created categorical bans on speech that are asymmetrical to preventing quid pro quo corruption.
[…]
[T]he remedy is not to restrict speech but to consider and explore other regulatory mechanisms. The regulatory mechanism here, based on speech, contravenes the First Amendment.”

CITIZENS UNITED v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMM’N

The Court admonishes citizens to “explore other regulatory mechanisms” that do not violate the First Amendment; the Court acknowledges that campaign finance reform is warranted, but that violating free speech is not a Constitutional ‘remedy.’

You are so full of shit. The reg that Citizen's United was trying to get around was electioneering within the thirty day limit. The FEC said no and the judge agreed.

Hint to the weak minded, electioneering is speech.

Is this a violation of your idea of free speech?

Voter intimidation is not free speech, it's a violation of law, one that the Bush administration had won a default judgment against and the maobama admin promptly threw it out.

Very, very good, I am duly impressed!

 

[Billy000]

Yeah if they went that direct route. Instead they took the loophole route and donated almost 1B to a super pac that promoted the GOP agenda. That's republicans for you. You know what George Soros donated to the democrats? A measly 7 million. That's what separates the GOP from the Dems.

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

Oh you mean from a network they own that only serves their personal interests?

Your own link said it consisted of more than 450 donors, and those were the ones at just that one meeting. Evidently those others felt their interest were being served as well. Ain't America great, where you and your pals can consolidate your resources and get your opinion out?

You do realize of course that if the Koch Brothers wanted to donate a billion from their personal accounts they legally could right? Instead they were so greedy they relied on 450 donors that only served their personal interest. Money now trumps speech. A person making 50K a year is all but a whisper in comparison to billionaires like the Cock Brothers.

Yep, keep moving those goal posts like a good little regressive. The point was you claim that the Kochs were spending a billion dollars and it's a totally fabricated LIE, disproved by your own links. So take your little crocodile tears and try to sell them on Ebay, maybe someone there might think they're worth something.

Christ, dude you try way too hard. A network belonging to the Cock Brothers is their money and their own interests.

 

[pwjohn]

The American people are ultimately responsible for who gets elected – not corporate money, not PACS, not Citizens United.

And the American people have only themselves to blame for the bad government they get.

Do you really think the average American voter knows and would approve of his congressman or senator spending 30 hours a week on the phone begging for contributions?

Really? They are told they must come up with 18,000 dollars a week in donations by the DNC and RNC. And you have nothing to say but that you blame the American voter? Really?

Lets see it. The proof.

 

[pwjohn]

Apologize? Hollywood lefties promoted a foreign based movie called "the Assassination of George Bush" while George Bush was still in office and they never apologized for it. The lame movie "W" came out during the Bush administration. A short trip along the HBO highway will find Nixon junk that is still shown. The funny thing is that the Clinton administration was ripe for a movie with it's sex, drugs and rock and roll and a couple of unexplained deaths and federal atrocities thrown in but Hollywood wasn't interested.

Maybe if repubs got the hell out of our bedrooms and, ditched that very ugly authoritarian side, hollywood wouldn't be so hard on them.

 

[Searcher44]

The American people are ultimately responsible for who gets elected – not corporate money, not PACS, not Citizens United.

And the American people have only themselves to blame for the bad government they get.

I'd like to agree with that, its a good solid intellectual reaction. However...there's just too much evidence that Madison Ave type brainwashing has scientifically proven positive effect. Its why people are willing to pay 150 bucks for a plain white tee designed by (fill in the blank). Incessant bombardment by the media convinced citizens to trade privacy for security (as in the out of context Franklin quote). We have to confront reality, and purchasing voter consent to be governed by the military-industrial complex is a deeply ingrained notion that deals like Citizens United make easier (and cheaper in the long run) to perpetuate.

 

[HUGGY]

The American people are ultimately responsible for who gets elected – not corporate money, not PACS, not Citizens United.

And the American people have only themselves to blame for the bad government they get.

Do you really think the average American voter knows and would approve of his congressman or senator spending 30 hours a week on the phone begging for contributions?

Really? They are told they must come up with 18,000 dollars a week in donations by the DNC and RNC. And you have nothing to say but that you blame the American voter? Really?

Lets see it. The proof.

I have already provided the links and the info in the OP. This thread isn't that long. Your laziness isn't my problem.

 

[pwjohn]

The American people are ultimately responsible for who gets elected – not corporate money, not PACS, not Citizens United.

And the American people have only themselves to blame for the bad government they get.

Do you really think the average American voter knows and would approve of his congressman or senator spending 30 hours a week on the phone begging for contributions?

Really? They are told they must come up with 18,000 dollars a week in donations by the DNC and RNC. And you have nothing to say but that you blame the American voter? Really?

Lets see it. The proof.

I have already provided the links and the info in the OP. This thread isn't that long. Your laziness isn't my problem.

I don't have to take that crap

 

[HUGGY]

The American people are ultimately responsible for who gets elected – not corporate money, not PACS, not Citizens United.

And the American people have only themselves to blame for the bad government they get.

Do you really think the average American voter knows and would approve of his congressman or senator spending 30 hours a week on the phone begging for contributions?

Really? They are told they must come up with 18,000 dollars a week in donations by the DNC and RNC. And you have nothing to say but that you blame the American voter? Really?

Lets see it. The proof.

I have already provided the links and the info in the OP. This thread isn't that long. Your laziness isn't my problem.

I don't have to take that crap

You do not have to do anything and you do that very well. Your lack of curiosity and laziness reminds me of a recent president.

 

[OKTexas]

I guess you still don't understand that the PACs they support raised almost a billion, from many donors, it didn't all come from the Koch's. I know, I know, details and facts, who needs them, right?

Oh you mean from a network they own that only serves their personal interests?

Your own link said it consisted of more than 450 donors, and those were the ones at just that one meeting. Evidently those others felt their interest were being served as well. Ain't America great, where you and your pals can consolidate your resources and get your opinion out?

You do realize of course that if the Koch Brothers wanted to donate a billion from their personal accounts they legally could right? Instead they were so greedy they relied on 450 donors that only served their personal interest. Money now trumps speech. A person making 50K a year is all but a whisper in comparison to billionaires like the Cock Brothers.

Yep, keep moving those goal posts like a good little regressive. The point was you claim that the Kochs were spending a billion dollars and it's a totally fabricated LIE, disproved by your own links. So take your little crocodile tears and try to sell them on Ebay, maybe someone there might think they're worth something.

Christ, dude you try way too hard. A network belonging to the Cock Brothers is their money and their own interests.

And they're different from unions, HOW?

 

[g5000]

All this BS, just point out what finance law was changed. Be specific.

Unlimited donations to a political cause was changed you assclown.

Nnnnope. Try again.

 

[g5000]

Mcain-Feingold led to a tsunami of 527 organizations. Every time Congress tries to write an incumbent preservation law, masked as "campaign finance reform", smart people manage to find the loopholes in those laws. And when Congress tries to tighten their hold, it often violates the Constitution in the process, as they did by attempting to outlaw electioneering programs 90 days before an election.

The retards have not noticed the real causes of the growth of money in politics. Nor have they noticed that despite half a century of both legislative and judicial "reforms", the re-election rate of incumbents has remained completely unchanged!

So why is the amount of cash in politics ever climbing? Because the amount of power we centralize has been ever climbing.

After all, there would be no point in trying to capture a federal body if that federal body had little or no power.

So remember that, retards, every time you demand the federal government be expanded.

You dumb ***** just handed control of your very healthcare over to the government, and so don't ******* whine when you see the money flowing to capture the reins.

Idiots.

 

[Billy000]

All this BS, just point out what finance law was changed. Be specific.

Unlimited donations to a political cause was changed you assclown.

Nnnnope. Try again.

Oh really? Quote the ruling that says unlimited donations cannot be given to a Super PAC.