Gloves off: Now, Obama calls for prosecuting GOP donor; Update: AIP responds
Scroll down for updates…
I noted this morning that the Obama campaign’s Chicago-style thug effort to shut down the independent ad on Bill Ayers is part of the larger effort to intimidate conservative donors and curtail the free speech of The One’s critics.
It’s getting uglier, people.
Obama’s lawyer has sent a second letter to the Justice Department calling for the head of Dallas billionare Harold Simmons, who funded the Ayers ad that the Obama campaign doesn’t want the public to see.
Feel the chill:
Obama general counsel Bob Bauer today sent a second, sharper letter to the Justice Department, directly attacking the Dallas billionaire funding a harsh attack ad, Harold Simmons.
“We reiterate our request that the Department of Justice fulfill its commitment to take prompt action to investigate and to prosecute the American issues Project, and we further request that the Department of Justice investigate and prosecute Howard (sic) Simmons for a knowing and willful violation of the individual aggregate contribution limits,” he wrote.
He called the group’s activities “patently illegal.”
Bauer made the case that Simmons’ group [is not] fulfilling its [...] nonprofit charter because it hasn’t spent any money on anything other than attacking Obama. Simmons’ spokesman, Christian Pinkston, told me yesterday that plans to, and dismissed the complaints as an effort to lawyer away charges the campaign can’t rebut.
I posted AIP’s rebuttal here yesterday. And as I’ve noted today and will note again: Obama has some nerve whining about campaign finance integrity after getting caught hiding $800,000 in ACORN payments.
What’s going on? Simple: The Left has its George Soros sugar daddy and can’t stand that conservatives have their own committed benefactors. They’ve got a massive non-profit infrastructure funded with taxpayers and operating flagrantly in an illegal, partisan manner (hello, ACORN Watch!). They want the playing field all to themselves. And they are fighting for that turf by any means necessary.
Can they do it?
No, they can’t. Not if you don’t let them.
***
AIP responds again:
American Issues Project Calls Obama Campaign Efforts to Prosecute Political Opponents “Bullying” and “Censorship”
AIP Responds to Second DOJ Letter from
Obama Campaign Demanding Donor Prosecution
Washington, DC – August 26, 2008 – The Barack Obama campaign has now sent a second letter to the Department of Justice calling for the prosecution of one of American Issues Project’s donors for his role in funding a political advertisement in full compliance with all election laws.
“Having failed in its attempts to get our legal, factual and fully-supported ad off the air, Barack Obama’s campaign now wants to put our donors in prison for exercising their right to free speech,” said Ed Martin, American Issues Project’s president. “These over-the-top bullying tactics are reminiscent of the kind of censorship one would see in a Stalinist dictatorship, with the only difference being that those guys generally had to wait until they were in power to throw people who disagreed with them into jail.”
In addition to two letters sent to the Department of Justice asking the government to investigate American Issues Project, its officers, board of directors, and donors, the Obama campaign has been contacting stations running American Issues Project’s ad in an unsuccessful attempt to compel them to pull the spot. With no success on either front, the campaign has also begun running its own ad in response. Notably, this ad fails to dispute a single fact in the American Issues Project’s initial ad.
American Issues Project is a 501(c)4 organization, similar in structure to NARAL and the League of Conservation Voters, two liberal organizations that have claimed status as “qualified nonprofit corporations” for two decades. In accordance with federal law, American Issues Project only solicits and accepts contributions from individuals and not from any business corporation. The FEC also sets out specific regulations for the activities of a qualified nonprofit corporation, which American Issues Project follows.
The American Issues Project’s ad began airing Thursday, August 21, and will continue through the Democratic Convention. An electronic version of the ad and full documentation of all statements made are available at American Issues Project’s website: www.americanissuesproject.org.
About American Issues Project
American Issues Project is a 501(c)4 organization representing a coalition of conservative activists committed to raising important issues that deserve deeper examination given their impact on policy and politics. In accordance with federal law, American Issues Project only solicits and accepts contributions from individuals and not from any business corporation. For more information, visit: www.americanissuesproject.org.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers denied emeritus status
September 23, 2010 10:06 PM by Michelle Malkin
71 Comments
Left-wing campus embraces unapologetic, murdering peacenik bomber
August 23, 2010 11:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
35 Comments
Anita Dunn: A corruptocrat flack and a Mao cheerleader
October 15, 2009 07:53 PM by Michelle Malkin
104 Comments
Why parents don’t trust the Educator-in-Chief and his comrades
September 4, 2009 10:00 AM by Michelle Malkin
90 Comments
Whitewashing the Obama education speech guides
September 2, 2009 08:40 PM by Michelle Malkin
34 Comments
Cash for Chicago Cronies: Federal Census grant $ for radical Woods Fund
September 2, 2009 03:56 PM by Michelle Malkin
18 CommentsFlashback: Bill Ayers declares education “the motor-force of revolution”
September 2, 2009 10:36 AM by Michelle Malkin
41 Comments
Ayers and Churchill: We’re victims and heroes
March 6, 2009 09:56 AM by Michelle Malkin
62 Comments
Categories: Bill Ayers
Pundit & Pundette
» Obama's war on conscience, cont'dRedstate
» Media MattersHot Air
» National Review to Newt: Get outAmSpecBlog
» Explosion Near Israeli Embassy in India
Many voters gave Bill a pass on his extrmarital activities – that being a personal thing some people could relate to and ignore or forgive, given Bill’s good ol’ boy down to earth kinda guy image.
A cozy relation with an unrepentant anti-aamerican terrorist is something only a few moonbats could ignore or forgive and not anything anyone could relate to given the Obamessiah’s whiney and elitist image. A good ol’ boy charmer he ain’t. More like a snake charmer he is
Chappy old bud. Name three things in the add that are false.Ok I’ll give you a break. Name two things in the add that are false. If not then shut up till you know your facts . Quit trying to be a igm wannabe.
George Soros funded ads that , if not beyond lies, were subversive. Soros wishes our country to be Socialistic if not Marxist. Anything Soros touches is poisonous to democracy and individualism
Actually, I probably agree with you, but that is not the law. Blame McCain.
Not true, and I would ask you where I have said as such.
Maybe it should be protected speech. But until McCain Feingold is repealed, or the Supremes declare it unconsitutional, it is not. But of course, you wouldnt want the Supreme Court to do that because that would be legislating from the bench, right?
If you have a colorable legal claim against me, feel free. But remember, one can be found in contempt of court for bringing a frivolous suit. Also, you might want to rethink the notion you can drive me into bankruptcy since I can probably defend myself without paying for another attorney more effectively than you can go after me without one.
Feel free to send them my screenname. I am sure they can track me down from there. I feel pretty certain, however, that they probably don’t have the resources to track or care about every single person in the US who objects to warrantless wiretapping, or as you say it “supporting terrorists.” There happen to be a lot of us.
BlameAmericaLast said:
I still think the other shoe is going to drop, and it ain’t the Ayers issue.
I just have this gut feeling there’s more to come.
Timing is everything, and now is not the time. I predict a Halloween surprise.
I agree. This is what Bill Clinton was quoted as saying earlier today.
“For those of us interested in politics, it was an endlessly fascinating process already, and it’s still got some twists and turns between now and November,” Clinton said.
Who was it who said that anybody who acted as their own attorney had a fool for a client? Probably some lawyer. Besides, I thought you said the other day that you didn’t have any courtroom experience.
BruceB, my very bestest friend, I did not say ANYTHING about the veracity of the claims in the ad. Every single word could be true and it could still violate campaign laws, which is what Obama’s camp is claiming.
So maybe you should “shut up” until you learn to read what I am actually saying rather than what you think I am saying.
Not much, but enough to get by.
Even though they won’t air it, Fox News is sure talking about it alot.
Will they air it after the DNC convention?
John Ansell (post #84) and I have been trying to get people to examine the Chicago Connection of Obama for months now. A chicago democrat is corrupt. Don’t care who it is, they don’t get to be political in chicago if the Machine is not behind them.
Chicago and all (that would include barakadoodledoo) of its players are dirty.
We have yet another govenor ready to be indicted and hopefully sent to prison for corruption. (If for nothing else he should be locked up for what he has done to Southern Illinois with his chicago politics.)
What Hopenchange’s little minions are demonstrating here is their cartoon-world understanding of how John “war hero” Kerry got blitzed by the Swifties — and what to do about it.
The lesson donkeys drew from Kerry’s experience was that to avoid being “Swiftboated” a hard-hitting response is key. The substance of the response isn’t so important as its forcefulness.
In this respect, Hopenchange’s strategy when it comes to coping with unwelcome free speech is strongly reminiscent of how the French responded to the problem posed by English longbowmen:
At Crecy in 1346, French knights on horseback charged the longbowmen and were cut down en masse by a rain of arrows. Unwilling to accept that English peasants could’ve beaten French nobility, when they fought the English again at Agincourt in 1415 the French knights attacked dismounted — because that’s how the English knights fought at Crecy. You could just about hear them saying to themselves, “Yeah, that’s the ticket…”
And the longbowmen cut them to ribbons again.
Kerry got beat by the Swifties because he had no effective factual reply to them. But the donkeys decided that Kerry’s lack of a reply itself was what did him in. So this time — even though they still have no effective rebuttal when it comes to Hopenchange’s cavorting with Ayers — they think that the solution is to make an angry, threatening reply.
And they’ll get the same results, figuratively speaking, that the French got at Agincourt.
Both McCain and Obama are dirty.
BHO-Chavez strikes again.
How is McCain dirty for returning funds solicited from an improper donor? He can’t be in touch with every donation as it happens. He can surround himself with a team that will catch such issues and correct them. Believe you me that McCain’s folks caught the impropriaty, or the MSM would have had a field day.
So, you have called for prosecution of George Soros and that the DoJ needs to back off the American Issues Project? When did this happen?
It is protected speech. Maybe you need to read McCain-Feingold again.
This is an issue ad, not a candidate ad.
Your cheap shot ar the Conservative view of the Supreme Court didn’t go unnoticed.
I have a better legal claim against you than The ObamaMessiah has against the American Issues Project.
I see you don’t understand how the US legal system works either. Why do you think certain prosecutors and defendents go judge shopping? I will also point out that it’s much cheaper to file a lawsuit than it is to defend against one. My grandmother found that out the hard way as someone who didn’t like her kept her going back to court over 15 years in wave after wave of frivolous lawsuits – and not once did the other woman ever have to pay so much as a dime or serve a minute of comtempt.
But yet you feel that they do have the resources to go after everyone and anyone who speaks the truth about the ObamaMessiah.
There happen to be a lot of us.
Swmbo, I want to find out if Dick Durbin ever had ties to Ayers. I want to see Steve Sauerberg beat him. The Rezko thing has always made me wonder about one GOP Power Broker. It really has me questioning things.
Wasn’t this ad found to be a violation of election law?
The Obama camp should have ignored this ad. I was convinced to vote against Kerry in 2004 because the only defense I heard against the Swift Boat book was that they were all liars. I even tried to contact the Kerry camp to ask how many days Kerry spent either in a hospital or on limited active duty because of his wounds – all I got was a bunch of nonsense about how that wasn’t the issue.
President Obama Mugabe welcomes you to participate in the United States of Zimbabwe election process.
Post this on every pro-Obama site you can find. Republicans already know the deal with Obama, it’s his followers that need to see the light.
Yup. And McCain and Feingold have taken some heat around here for it. I’m not speaking in favor of libel obviously.
Obama and his thugs are nothing but whiny-ass punks and people had better not give in to the jackasses. If the want war, let them start it and we’ll all participate.
So it’s ok if George Soros and his merry band of pranksters does this, but when someone comes out with an ad that is hard-hitting AND true, it isn’t Kosher?
Idiots.
The hallmark of a thug: Go for the throat first, ask questions … Nah. There’s nothing to ask.
Obama has surrounded himself with brownshirts.
talkin_bout #116
ummm…no.
Why would be telling the truth about the ObamaMessiah be a violation of any law anyway?
Isn’t it ironic that John Edwards has been barred from appearing at the Democratic Convention for having an affair and lying about it and Bill Clinton has been given a primetime speaking spot even though he had an affair and lied about it.
Gag Edwards, tell Bill what to say, and sic the dogs on anybody else that may hurt Obmas chances. At all cost! Whats left is right.
I have “called for” nothing with respect to either group.
Please. That is not an “issue” ad. Admittedly both sides try to stretch the limit of what is an issue ad (i.e., Tell your congressman that you support/oppose x when that congressperson either opposes or supports x) but this is blatantly partisan, even if its the truth. To say that this ad is not advocating against Obamais absurd.
I look forward to the summons, then.
No, just the ones that break campaign finance laws in the process.
You mean like Chinese Laundrymen bundling clothes and money?
You should read your own posts with regards to the American Issues Project advertisement.
I just love it when you spout the ObamaMessiah party line. Have you ever even tried to think for yourself?
I look forward to you thinking for yourself.
No campaign finance law was broken here – but then you already knew that.
Why is Heir O’berfuhrer so upset? What is he afraid of?
Indulge me, please, and show where I said what you say I said.
Awesome retort, really first class. It is advocating against Obama. You can think what you want about the veracity or substance of the ad or the wisdom of allowing it to air, but try to maintain a shred of intellectual integrity and call it what it is.
Here’s a quote that He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Middle-Named might want to chew on:
“Injustice is relatively easy to bear. What stings is justice.”–H.L. Menken
The truth hurts.
Anyway, this has been fun. Off to watch Hillary try to wrench the nomination away one last desperate time.
chapoutier challenges my intellectual intregity while demonstrating none of his own. Heck, he doesn’t even bother to read what is in his own posts.
reality check for chapoutier = fail
The Obama campaign is the exact opposite of everything he preaches. Exclusionary, strong-arming bullies. And they will do anything to make sure they get their chance to stick it to whitey good.
I actually did go back and reread my posts. Meanwhile, still waiting for you to show me where I said what i didn’t say.
chapoutier, it’s nice to know that you can claim that you didn’t say what you actually said.
You failed another reality check.
I wish I was surprised.
I just wish you would provide a simple citation. Shouldn’t be that hard, right?
I wish you weren’t a troll.
I guess that is too hard for you, huh?
btw, I did cite your own posts.
Ahhhh….the “Troll Defense.” Shrewd move.
You can end this inane back and forth by simply citing my post. Do you know how to use the search function on your browser? Press “control F” and type “chapoutier” and it will take you easily to all of my posts.
Its okay. You assumed I said something I dind’t because your biases led you to jump to a conclusion. But stop digging. You are embarrassing yourself with every post that you don’t just simply quote me.
Where? And if so please forgive me being just so darn slow, but would you mind just reposting my quote here?
Where is there an untruth that is not actually stated, as lgm does all the time. I can’t find any double meaning to any word on the post. Where’s the concealed deeper meaning?
I do see where lgm “expresses partly in speech and partly in the mind;” but where is Michelle Malkin doing it? Where’s the mental reservations here?
Just curious.
And chapoutier does his best to prove me right. Thank you.
First, I’m not using the “Troll Defense”. What I am doing is accurately describing your presence here on MichelleMalkin.com.
Second, the only thing insane about this “back and forth” is your inability to read what you have actually posted. Apparently you don’t have the ability to “scroll up”.
Then again, your response fits the definition of the modern liberal. Only what you say now matters, anything you said before is old history and doesn’t have any bearing on the now.
I’m not the one being embarassed. I’m not the one who is the troll.
Come on, JHSII. Show me up something good. Cite my post right here and right now. Not for my benefit, but for all those souls that don’t want to wade through 144 other posts to find it for themselves.
I already told you how to use the search function, but do you also need a tutorial on cutting and pasting and using the Quote buttons? I’ll walk you through it if need be.
I have cited your posts right here in this thread, chapoutier.
Care to try to prove me wrong?
I am asking you to post, or repost if you think you have already, my post where I have “called for” anything one way or the other with respect to either Soros or AIP. It should be easy.
Put up or shut up.
Sorry chapoutier, I’m not the one who got caught in the standard liberal double standard and is now trying to worm my way out of it.
Good show though. You’re almost amusing.
Put up or shut up.
I’m not the one who has to defend my double standard, chapoutier.
Sigh…put up or shut up.
Does anyone else want to come to this idiot’s defense?
Down goes JHSII. Down goes JHSII. Stay out of the deep end brah.
Why should anyone come to your defense, chapoutier?
Come on dakine…help him out. he clearly needs it. I feel like the little league team that has to let one of its kids play for the other side because they only showed up with 8.
Except maybe Dakine.
Put up or shut up, JHSII.
And here goes chapoutier with an ad hominum attack.
He still can’t defend his double standard.
JHSII, Put up or shut up.
Why don’t you stop being a troll, chapoutier?
I would ask you again to put up or shut up.
Why don’t you stop being a troll, chapoutier?
I guess that is the sound of you shutting up.
I’m not the one that has to defend a double standard, chapoutier.
Again, will someone else here please come help this guy. He’s flailing pretty badly.
atheling? Goldwater? Anyone? Can someone please step in and show this guy how easy it is to quote my previous posts and hold it against me?
More projection from chapoutier. He can’t defend his double standard, so he claims that I’m the one “flailing pretty badly”.
No surprise ehre.
Still waiting for you to show the double standard, sport. Should be easy. Remember the lessons we’ve learned about control f and the quote buttons.
I’m still waiting for you to read your own posts, chapoutier. I would ask if you remembered about the “scroll up” function, but you don’t appear to be able to understand easy instructions.
Heck, chapoutier, I’m still waiting for you to stop trolling. Well, actually I’m not waiting. I doubt it will ever happen. Suns will burn out first.
Like I said, don’t quote me for me. Quote me for everyone else that doesn’t want to pore through every inane psycho liberal post I have made here. Do it for them. Show me up and prove yourself the hero of the board.
More evasion from chapoutier. Yawn.
btw, you never said to quote you “for everyone else that doesn’t want to pore through every inane psycho liberal post I have made here.” You see, I don’t need to do that for them – they already know. And if not, all they have to do is ask. And no, I don’t include the other trolls in that.
Be the hero. Be the hero.
Sorry, but I don’t have the authority to ban you.
Actually, that was funny. But you still have not put up anything.
Be the hero.
I’m not the one who has to put up anything – I’m not the one with the double standard.
JHSII:
Chapoutier played the same old game in the abortion thread. Says things, then later says he he didn’t. Had to show him, and OOOOPS!!!! I did? Whaddya know!
He’s pulling the same crap here.
And Capt. Dogcatcher showed up to lick his hand!
Oh…you mean the one you refuse to provide any evidence of? That one? I know you may be new to this whole “thinking” and “reason” thing, but a bit of advice: It is usually incumbent on the one making the accusation to prove it. For example, I could say that you have carnal knowledge of small woodland creatures. I could even claim until I am blue in the face that you posted something to that effect somewhere here. Most would want me to provide some evidence of such, but not you. You will not be bothered with such trivialities as “proof.”
So I will just go with that new meme. JHSII just loves (wink wink nudge nudge) furry rabbits. It is incumbent on you now to prove me wrong.
atheling. I offer you the same deal. please provide some citations to back up what he claims I said.
And as for the example you offer, I admit I wrongly read your argument, for which I apologized, but I did not go back on anything I said.
I say again…all of this can be cleared up with a few simple quotes.
It has now been 47 posts since I asked JHSII to back up his claim. Why hasn’t he? Can he really be trusted with our children’s future?
chapoutier, you remind me of John Kerry in the 2004 elections.
The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth came out, and Kerry didn’t even try to refute the charges against him – he just went on the attack against the Veterans. This is what you do. The end result will be the same here too.
49 posts.
atheling #175
Hmmm…I didn’t notice – I usually avoid abortion threads. I’ve seen this behavior from trolls before though, which is how and why I know what game chapoutier has been and is playing. As I said way back in post #144:
It still fits perfectly for chapoutier.
Not so. You claimed to have refuted my argument, and when I showed that you had not, you admitted that you misread my argument.
However, you continue to play the same game by dismissing my point by bringing up another red herring.
Your game is to exhaust the opponent by demanding that they do all the work.
That’s dishonest and dishonorable.
#182 is addressed to chapoutier.
50 posts. Just end it so we can all go to bed. Quote me. Please.
Well, at least here, JHSII is the one claiming I said something. It is not unreasonable to ask him to show where I said that is it, atheling?
I guess now chapoutier is now going to try and impress us with his ability to count. Of course, I’m not the one with the double standard, nor did I make any kind of claim. I simply pointed out the double standard.
I guess you could say it’s been 50 posts now from me that has chapoutier being unbale to defend his double standard.
52 posts.
Just. Cite. My. Post.
atheling #182
Which does in fact describe chapoutier. No surprise here.
53 and still no cite.
Now 53 posts of mine since I have asked chapoutier to defend his double standard. Actually it’s probably been more, since I remember distinctly asking in another topic.
atheling, help him out. If you don’t mind please cite to the post or posts where I said what he is claiming.
Yeah. I am agreeing with that. I apologize again for misreading your original post. It made my “refutation” of it obviously flawed.
chapoutier:
It’s not any one post. It’s the way you twist and evade. #48, you were asked a valid question to clarify if you were at least trying to be impartial, and you did not answer it.
It would be exhausting to point it all out, but many people here have noticed your pattern of dishonesty.
It’s cumulative.
Well, at least now I have something substantive to work with. Recall the original claim I was supposed to have made was that I was “calling for” some particular action, I guess action by the DOJ to either leave one or the other group alone or to prosecute one or the other group, with respect to either Soros or AIP.
In the post you cite I was asked in that if the claim Obama was making was weak. First, what does that question have to do with statement JHS claims I made? Second I answered that question here:
Still nothing to show I “called for” action, is there? Cumulative or not.
ahhh…back to the original issue
There is no case here, and the Obama people know it. The effort is to intidimate and silence. All you have to do is look at the success that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have had. Businesses will cave knowing that if they don’t, they will be out of business.
Also, if the advertisement was in such flagrant violation of the law, why didn’t the Obama crowd go to the FEC and let them send it to the DoJ? Isn’t that the usual route that these things take?
Of course, if it did go that route, then it probably wouldn’t be settled until after the election is over. The democrats made sure of that so they could stop any Republican challenge to democrat election fraud. Now it may come back to bite them!
Which I am happy to return to since you have failed to make your point on the tangential issue we have been bickering about for 64 posts now.
I didn’t make any claims, chapoutier. I simply saw your double standard and said as such. Then you did a John Kerry.
Nothing has changed since that point.
The only tangent has been yours, chapoutier. It’s only been there because you haven’t wanted to discuss the issue.
You know, you could have discussed the issue at any time.
See…that is how you actually use the quote function to prove someone is lying.
No lies from me, chapoutier. Did you even bother to read what I posted before calling it a lie?
If you read what I actually posted, the you would have noticed that I asked several questions. Those questions were based on your double standard.