01-19-2019 04:27:50 PM -0800
01-19-2019 11:09:10 AM -0800
01-18-2019 07:06:15 AM -0800
01-17-2019 03:39:53 PM -0800
01-17-2019 12:48:37 PM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Stretch, grab a late afternoon cup of caffeine and get caught up on the most important news of the day with our Coffee Break newsletter. These are the stories that will fill you in on the world that's spinning outside of your office window - at the moment that you get a chance to take a breath.
Sign up now to save time and stay informed!

Why Allegations of Campaign Finance Violations Won’t Bring Down Trump

I think we can all agree that the whole Trump-Russia collusion thing has gone down the toilet because Democrats are not talking about it anymore. Instead, they are pinning their hopes on weak allegations of “illegal” campaign finance violations over hush money payments made to two women alleging affairs. To hear Trump’s enemies talk about it, they think they’ve finally found the issue that will take Trump down.

Like the Trump-Russia nonsense before it, this campaign finance violation approach to bringing down Trump will fail. Why? One only has to look to Trump’s predecessor, who committed far worse campaign violations, for the answer.

In 2008, Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, riding high on grassroots donations, failed to incorporate basic verification and security protocols to prevent fraudulent or perhaps international donations to the campaign.

The Washington Post reported on October 29, 2008:

Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

Now, why would the Obama campaign have such faulty security for donations? Remember, in 2008, Obama was raising record amounts of money, and he flip-flopped on his promise to accept public funding in the general election. Donations were the life-blood of his campaign, enabling him to outraise and outspend John McCain in the crucial final months of the campaign. Why were they using shoddy security that would “make it impossible to tell whether foreign nationals, donors who have exceeded the limits, government contractors or others who are barred from giving to a federal campaign are making contributions”? Does anyone really believe no one on the Obama team knew that from the beginning?

Would you believe that the Obama campaign was up to the same shenanigans in 2012? Former PJ Media editor Bryan Preston reported that of all the presidential campaigns that year, the Obama campaign, once again, was the only one not using basic security measures to prevent fraudulent or untraceable donations. That's right, despite the Washington Post report in 2008, and despite the ongoing audit of their 2008 campaign, they didn't clean up their act in 2012. Why would they do that? Because they knew that the worst that could happen was that they would have to pay a fine—after the election was over. Which is exactly what happened. In April 2012, the Obama campaign was fined $375,000 for campaign finance violations over their shady 2008 donations and other reporting issues. It was a huge fine that Obama supporters and the media said wasn't a big deal.