Did the DNC Get an Illegal Campaign Loan from Bank of America? (PJM Exclusive)
Shortly after Labor Day, as polls continued to sink, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) realized it needed a cash infusion for the upcoming midterm elections. Its chairman, former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, turned to the Bank of America to secure a $15 million revolving credit line. Then, in the middle of this month, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) got another loan from BofA for an additional $17 million.
What was their collateral? It turns out, not much.
The DNC claims their collateral was an intangible piece of property — its donor mailing list. The DCCC only cites unnamed “assets.” Neither party organization possesses real estate even close to cover the $32 million. The DNC’s headquarters is owned by another entity. Even it was put up as collateral, its market value was last estimated at only $13.7 million.
Were the Bank of America deals legitimate, arms-length transactions, or were they cozy sweetheart deals in which nothing was really put up to secure a $32 million loan?
And if it was the latter, could it be considered an illegal campaign contribution from the largest bank holding company in America?
There also is troubling evidence that two days before closing on the loan transaction, the DNC changed its own privacy provisions to allow the selling or sharing of private donor data.
BofA has been a longtime friend of Democrats. In the 2008 election cycle, BofA gave its largest single campaign contribution to then-Senator Barack Obama. According to Bloomberg News, BofA’s new CEO, Brian Moynihan, is considered Obama’s top political ally on Wall Street.
On the eve of the midterm elections, the appearance of preferential loans from cozy Wall Street bankers could play badly with the electorate. What message does a largely unsecured $32 million credit line for the Democratic Party send to thousands of cash-starved small businesses across the nation who can’t secure any credit even with tangible assets?
The findings are part of an exclusive PJ Media investigation.
The DNC loan agreement as posted online by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and signed by former Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D) on September 16, 2010, says the loan collateral included: “All electronic mail (‘E-mail’) addresses and other contact lists, records and other Information (electronic or otherwise) relating to contributors, supporters and subscribers owned by any of the Borrowers.” The borrowers in this case were the DNC and the DNC Services Corporation.
The loan agreement further stipulates that if the Democrats defaulted, Bank of America would be entitled to “proceeds from any fundraising activity, refunds, reimbursements, or proceeds from the rental or sale of mailing, contact or subscription lists or Information (electronic or otherwise).”
One key to understanding the problems behind the $15 million loan is determining what the donor list is actually worth. The DNC filings with the FEC do not attach any independent appraisal documents or list broker evaluations to establish the list’s fair market value.
Senator John McCain once tried to use his presidential donor list as collateral for a loan. He valued his Republican donor list as worth $3 million. The bank rejected the loan.
Trying to fix a value on an intangible mailing list is very difficult.
“Donor lists do have value, but very fleeting value,” Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, told PJ Media. “Lists do deteriorate and $15 million is an awful lot of money. So if the bank ends up with the list because the party is broke, where are they going to get their money?”
A senior executive who is part of a national U.S. bank told PJ Media that a data list would be a weak basis for a $15 million loan. He gave his comments on the grounds that he would not be publicly identified. He said he was “somewhat skeptical of a donor list as adequate collateral for a $15 million credit line.”
But if the value is not $15 million, it could be considered a substantial campaign contribution to the Democratic National Committee. And that could be illegal.
Troubling revelations, to be sure. The preference that Bank of America seems to be showing Democrats — up to and including providing (potentially) illegal campaign financing — is deeply disturbing.
Coupled with the goings-on in Harris County, Texas (where, as Pajamas Media has extensively reported, the DoJ is — quite remarkably — investigating True the Vote for attempting to preserve integrity in the voting process), evidence is mounting that Democrats are escalating their questionable electioneering practices.
From voter-registration drives that result in highly suspect new enrollees, to the resistance of voter identification requirements, to shady solicitation methods, to electronic voting machine irregularities — overwhelmingly (so far) tilted to one party’s benefit — nothing, to them, seems beyond the pale.
Democrat politicos desperate to attain / maintain power have long employed questionable methods. But this year, one likely to disfavor them, seems to be making them especially nervous. Their heightened sense of desperation is, I believe, prompting them to turn to dirty tactics. Dirtier even, than the ones they normally employ.
http://bereapundit.com/2010/10/27/dems-down-and-dirty/
As a small business owner who has watched as our company and others in the industry struggle to hang on, laying off employees and scrapping to find capital to operate our once successful businesses- this is extremely disheartening and concerning. In the past year our major assets, all with tangible values, are no longer accepted as collateral. This coupled with the fact the banks are pushing everyone to go through the Small Business Administration process, which on average is 90 days to process or find you are not approved we are at wits end and sadly seeing many in our industry close their doors. How do we stop this corruption and save our nation?
Well it appears that the reason many can’t get the loans is that they are not properly dressed. When seeking a loan it appears one must walk in wearing “Hope and Change” t-shirts, hats, pins, etc.
But seriously, this is what bail-outs get you, cronyism gone wild. The progs want fewer, larger corporations as they are easier to control. Can’t have any independent thinkers or actions, the progs may end up having to rub elbows with the unwashed who managed to claw their own way to the top.
If I were a contributor to a political party – ANY political party! – who had given my information to the party on the presumption that it would be kept private, I would be EXTREMELY unhappy to find that my information had been given to a bank as collateral on a loan WITHOUT my express consent.
I had assumed that privacy provisions for an organization could not be changed without the consent of those affected by those provisions. Apparently, that is not the case. It seems that the Democratic Party leadership decided to use its mailing list to raise money WITHOUT getting the consent of the contributors to that party.
I’m switching banks!
I wonder how thoroughly the DNC followed up on their new privacy policy..
If they did not send out a formal set of terms and agreements including the revelation of donor information then this could lead to lawsuits against the DNC.
For example, what if Bank of America starts sending “special offers” to people only on this donor list? I imagine any lawyer could have a field day thinking up all of the possibilities for Democrat donors in this situation.
I’ll leave all of those imaginings to the lawyer crowd because I don’t understand the laws very well. But do imagine what kind of firestorm would occur if suddenly large donations being made to the DNC could be traced back to personal loans from Bank of America requested by Democrat donors.
Zamir
Glad I already switched banks.
And I was sure to tell them why.
‘B-b-but, we already paid the money back.’ That excuse dinna cut it. Told em I wouldn’t bank with someone in bed with the gub’mint. And this is one of the many reasons why.
I have this happy thought. What if the DNC runs itself deeply into the Red (pun intended) trying to elect their candidates, and winds up bankrupt at the end of the election season. The Forclosure of their mailing list and the selling of it to the various pharmacy and “enhancement” spammers would be schadenfreude of the nicest type.
Bankrupt would be nice, but they will just get bailed out also.
We have come to a truly disgusting condition in this country when the most secure and lucrative financial investment you can make is to give a campaign contribution to a politician.
Remember this?
How did that go again?
“…when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you- when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice- you may know that your society is doomed.”
Take a look around, people. Vote fraud goes unremarked by law enforcement, and those who pursue justice ar themselves pursued by a demonstrably corrupt law enforcement apparatus. Deals such as the one mentioned in this article are struck with no hope of redress.
So where does that leave us with respect to the rule of law? How bad does it have to get before we pursue the only remedy left to us?
Interesting.
Is this how B of A will respond to stockholder requests
for full disclosure of their mortgage balance sheet ?
What value is there in a copy of the DNC contributor list. B of A can foreclose in the event of a default, but that would not stop the DNC from using it in the future. The collateral has zero value. The loan is the “pay” in the next go around of pay to play. It is illegal and immoral to the core.
Changing one’s privacy policy after the fact is a violation of the FTC’s guidelines on privacy.
Of the 12 TARP and
Freddie/Fannie recipients who got $10 billion or more, 9 are listed on
opensecrets.org. Their contributions average 67% Democrat. Total D contribution:
$11,525,340. All 9 have the same top recipient: Barrack Obama. Total Obama
contribution: $3,671,593.
2008
Name TARP (billions) D%
$Dem $Obama
Fannie Mae $85 59%
$215,724 $41,900
AIG $70 75%
$531,977 $143,003
Freddie Mac $63 63%
$618,491 $115,313
General Motors $51 56%
$378,665 $55,217
Bank of America $45 61%
$1,457,466 $388,742
Citigroup $45 68%
$2,277,883 $731,347
JPMorgan Chase $25 66%
$1,970,403 $688,695
Goldman Sachs $10 76%
$2,510,094 $1,005,395
Morgan Stanley $10 67%
$1,564,637 $501,981
Total $404 67%
$11,525,340 $3,671,593
Clearly, romney had collateral. That is a crap excuse. The whole point is that the dnc did NOT, clearly, have it. Bank of amerikkka’s response is no response at all.
Big banks like any big business form an oligopoly. They are totally unresponsive to the individual and do what they please. The only answer is to break them apart so they have to be competitive. Competition is the great equalizer.
The other end of the stick is that big business has become one of the major influences on government. You see what the banks are doing to cull favor with the government. This is also true in the energy industries, defense industry, pharmaceuticals and others which I can’t think of right now. This business/government connection has been going on for a long time and both political parties are guilty of using them/being used by them. We face a world that competes with us in unfair terms where there is connections between governments and their country’s businesses. A
few examples where this is practiced are China, Russia, European Union, and Japan. I don’t know what the answer is.
When the province of Quebec held its last referendum roughly 15 years ago, and the pro-separatist side blamed ethnics and money for defeating them, little did I think that money would be used to prop up the Democratic Party.
Where did the money come from for they to advertise so heavily?
I always wondered why BoA had exclusive access to military installations during the 60′s and 70′s.
Anytime government and [big] business come together I can guarantee two things will happen:
1) Our tax dollars will somehow go to the major players in the business – through direct purchases or forcing someone to purchase something or subsidies or tax rebates/breaks, and
2) Whatever product or service we purchase from the business will become more expensive than what it was before or will be more expensive that what the new product/service replaced.
Ethanol, green energy products, sugar, other favored agriculture products, the list could go on. Let us hope that the landslide next week truly happens and the replacements stay true to what they are saying. If not or the landslide doesn’t happen then God help us.
The root cause
“Following such conclusions, the demoniac, who are lost to themselves and who have no intelligence, engage in unbeneficial, horrible works meant to destroy the world.Taking shelter of insatiable lust and absorbed in the conceit of pride and false prestige, the demoniac, thus illusioned, are always sworn to unclean work, attracted by the impermanent.
“They believe that to gratify the senses is the prime necessity of human civilization. Thus until the end of life their anxiety is immeasurable. Bound by a network of hundreds of thousands of desires and absorbed in lust and anger, they secure money by illegal means for sense gratification.
The demoniac person thinks: “So much wealth do I have today, and I will gain more according to my schemes. So much is mine now, and it will increase in the future, more and more. He is my enemy, and I have killed him, and my other enemies will also be killed. I am the lord of everything. I am the enjoyer. I am perfect, powerful and happy. I am the richest man, surrounded by aristocratic relatives. There is none so powerful and happy as I am. I shall perform sacrifices, I shall give some charity, and thus I shall rejoice.” In this way, such persons are deluded by ignorance.”