Archive for the ‘Federal Election Commission’ category

FEC complaint accuses Clinton campaign, DNC of violating campaign finance law with dossier payments

October 26, 2017

FEC complaint accuses Clinton campaign, DNC of violating campaign finance law with dossier payments, Washington TimesDave Boyer, October 25, 2017

(But what difference does it make now! — DM)

FILE – In this Oct. 22, 2015, file photo, then-Democratic presidential candidate, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, before the House Benghazi Committee.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee violated campaign finance law by failing to disclose payments for a dossier on Donald Trump, according to a complaint filed Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission.

The complaint from the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center said the Democrats effectively hid the payments from public scrutiny, contrary to the requirements of federal law. By law, campaign and party committees must disclose the reason money is spent and its recipient.

“By filing misleading reports, the DNC and Clinton campaign undermined the vital public information role of campaign disclosures,” said Adav Noti, senior director of trial litigation and strategy at CLC and a former FEC official. “Voters need campaign disclosure laws to be enforced so they can hold candidates accountable for how they raise and spend money. The FEC must investigate this apparent violation and take appropriate action.”

Media reports on Tuesday alleged that a lawyer for the Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS to investigate Mr. Trump in April 2016. The private research firm reportedly hired Christopher Steele, a former British spy with ties to the FBI, to conduct the opposition research, and he compiled a dossier containing allegations about Mr. Trump’s connections to Russia.

The Clinton campaign and the DNC funded the effort until the end of October 2016, just days before the election.

“Questions about who paid for this dossier are the subject of intense public interest, and this is precisely the information that FEC reports are supposed to provide,” said Brendan Fischer, director of federal and FEC reform at CLC. “Payments by a campaign or party committee to an opposition research firm are legal, as long as those payments are accurately disclosed. But describing payments for opposition research as ‘legal services’ is entirely misleading and subverts the reporting requirements.”

Complaint Filed Against Clinton’s Campaign Following O’Keefe Videos

October 19, 2016

Complaint Filed Against Clinton’s Campaign Following O’Keefe Videos, Washington Free Beacon, October 19, 2016

hilclintonHillary Clinton / AP

An election integrity group has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission following the release of undercover videos from James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), an Indiana-based group that litigates to protect election integrity, submitted the complaint Tuesday to the Office of the General Counsel at the FEC claiming that Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee and other left-wing groups may have violated campaign finance laws.

“This complaint is based on information and belief that respondents have engaged in public communications, campaign activity, targeted voter registration drives, and other targeted GOTV [get out the vote] activity under 11 C.F.R. 100.26 and 11 C.F.R. 114.4 at the request, direction, and approval of the Hillary for America campaign committee and the Democratic National Committee in violation of 11 C.F.R. 109.20 and 11 C.F.R. 114.4(d)(2) and (3),” the complaint states.

“Complainant’s information and belief is based on findings from an investigation conducted by Project Veritas Action and their published reports regarding the same, as well as on news sources.”

“‘If the Commission, upon receiving a complaint … has reason to believe that a person has committed, or is about to commit, a violation of [the FECA] … [t]he Commission shall make an investigation of such alleged violation … ‘ 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(2); see also 11 C.F.R. § 111.4(a).”

PILF argues that the groups within the videos–which were caught on tape discussing possible voter fraud scenarios–have organized voter registration drives and other GOTV activities that could have potentially registered people who are not United States citizens.

“On the same information and belief, these voter registration drives and other GOTV activity were coordinated with DNC and HFA by express communication through agents of Democracy Partners and The Foval Group,” the complaint reads. “These communications resulted in coordination of voter registration activity in violation of 11 C.F.R. 114.4(c)(2) and (d)(2)-(4) by all parties involved.”

The complaint also mentions the “paid protesters” referenced by Democratic operatives within the videos who were allegedly paid to incite violence at Donald Trump rallies.

“Upon information and belief, and based upon the facts set forth above, Respondents Hillary for America, the Democratic National Committee, Democracy Partners, Americans United for Change, and their agents, named and unnamed above, have, each of them, individually and collectively, violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, and must be held accountable and liable for their unlawful actions,” the complaint concludes.

Clinton campaign treasurer Jose H. Villarreal, the Democratic National Committee, Democracy Partners, Americans United for Change, Scott Foval, and Voces de la Frontera Action are additionally listed as respondents on the complaint alongside Hillary for America.

J. Christian Adams, president of PILF, hopes the FEC will investigate the matter.

“American voter rolls are corrupted with unacceptable numbers of aliens who are illegally registered to vote,” Adams said. “Groups should not be coordinating with campaigns and political parties to exploit vulnerabilities in our election system. We hope this matter is fully investigated by the FEC and that if aliens are voting, they are prosecuted by the Justice Department. That would mark a change in DOJ policies of the last 7 years.”