Thread: what's up with Palin's clothes?

Hm... the RNC, caught in a blatant violation of the McCain-Feingold Act?

Oh, the delicious irony....

Look here:

SEC. 313. USE OF CONTRIBUTED AMOUNTS FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.
(a) PERMITTED USES-

...
(b) PROHIBITED USE-



(1) IN GENERAL- A contribution or donation described in subsection (a) shall not be converted by any person to personal use.

(2) CONVERSION- For the purposes of paragraph (1), a contribution or donation shall be considered to be converted to personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate's election campaign or individual's duties as a holder of Federal office, including--

(A) a home mortgage, rent, or utility payment;
(B) a clothing purchase;
(C) a noncampaign-related automobile expense;
(D) a country club membership;
(E) a vacation or other noncampaign-related trip;
(F) a household food item;
(G) a tuition payment;
(H) admission to a sporting event, concert, theater, or other form of entertainment not associated with an election campaign; and
(I) dues, fees, and other payments to a health club or recreational facility.'



Sec. 323
`(a) NATIONAL COMMITTEES-

`(1) IN GENERAL- A national committee of a political party (including a national congressional campaign committee of a political party) may not solicit, receive, or direct to another person a contribution, donation, or transfer of funds or any other thing of value, or spend any funds, that are not subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements of this Act.
`(2) APPLICABILITY- The prohibition established by paragraph (1) applies to any such national committee, any officer or agent acting on behalf of such a national committee, and any entity that is directly or indirectly established, financed, maintained, or controlled by such a national committee.

Organizations like the RNC are prohibited from converting campaign contributions for personal use, including (explicitly) with respect to "clothing purchases".


GovTrack: H.R. 2356 [107th]: Text of Legislation, Enrolled Bill

Victoria Secret?????

What's the "personal use?"

Originally Posted by kmiller1610

What's the "personal use?"

Gotta love these guys...

Okay, let's do it slow. Follow me now, one step at a time:

(2) CONVERSION- For the purposes of paragraph (1), a contribution or donation shall be considered to be converted to personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate's election campaign or individual's duties as a holder of Federal office, including--

- and then -

(B) a clothing purchase;

Simple enough, right?

Bankers, can not deduct the suits they wear to work, as "business expenses".

Politicians, can not deduct the suits they wear to work, as "business expenses".

NOR CAN THEY WEASEL AROUND THAT BY HAVING THOSE CLOTHES GIVEN TO THEM BY A THIRD PARTY.

Follow me now?

Originally Posted by nonsqtr

Gotta love these guys...

Okay, let's do it slow. Follow me now, one step at a time:



- and then -



Simple enough, right?

Bankers, can not deduct the suits they wear to work, as "business expenses".

Politicians, can not deduct the suits they wear to work, as "business expenses".

NOR CAN THEY WEASEL AROUND THAT BY HAVING THOSE CLOTHES GIVEN TO THEM BY A THIRD PARTY.

Follow me now?

Yes. Very good. You should have insect training classes for Bourne and Bluesman. Clearly, the RNC blew this one. And thank you for the step by step. I'm very into the Palin resurgence and enjoying seeing the insects scurry under the furniture when the lights come on. So I admit that I skimmed your piece. By the way, I did not say you were wrong, just asked a question. I honestly like having things explained rationally. The chirping hurts my ears.

Originally Posted by kmiller1610

Yes. Very good. You should have insect training classes for Bourne and Bluesman. Clearly, the RNC blew this one. And thank you for the step by step. I'm very into the Palin resurgence and enjoying seeing the insects scurry under the furniture when the lights come on. So I admit that I skimmed your piece.

I see you have an insect phobia.
I wonder if us intellects here need to change our avatars.

Originally Posted by Inkslinger

I see you have an insect phobia.
I wonder if us intellects here need to change our avatars.

The image appealed to me after I spent all that time reading the Alaska ethics statute and tried to get the posters who kept repeating their talking points to respond on the basis of the actual statute the legislative investigators said was their starting point. Turn the lights on. They all run under the furniture. Or find another drop of sugar in the dark to feed on.

Oh I see. It's Whats up "With" Palins clothes. I thought it said whats up Palins clothes...Completely different thread.

Uh oh.....

SEC. 315. INCREASE IN PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR VIOLATIONS OF CONDUIT CONTRIBUTION BAN.
(a) INCREASE IN CIVIL MONEY PENALTY FOR KNOWING AND WILLFUL VIOLATIONS- Section 309(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (5)(B), by inserting before the period at the end the following: `(or, in the case of a violation of section 320, which is not less than 300 percent of the amount involved in the violation and is not more than the greater of $50,000 or 1,000 percent of the amount involved in the violation)'; and
(2) in paragraph (6)(C), by inserting before the period at the end the following: `(or, in the case of a violation of section 320, which is not less than 300 percent of the amount involved in the violation and is not more than the greater of $50,000 or 1,000 percent of the amount involved in the violation)'.
(b) INCREASE IN CRIMINAL PENALTY- Section 309(d)(1) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 437g(d)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
`(D) Any person who knowingly and willfully commits a violation of section 320 involving an amount aggregating more than $10,000 during a calendar year shall be--
`(i) imprisoned for not more than 2 years if the amount is less than $25,000 (and subject to imprisonment under subparagraph (A) if the amount is $25,000 or more);
`(ii) fined not less than 300 percent of the amount involved in the violation and not more than the greater of--
`(I) $50,000; or
`(II) 1,000 percent of the amount involved in the violation; or
`(iii) both imprisoned under clause (i) and fined under clause (ii).'.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to violations occurring on or after the effective date of this Act.

Looks like, this is a FELONY, punishable by 2 years and a fine of.... let's see... about 2 million dollars?

Originally Posted by nonsqtr

Looks like, this is a FELONY, punishable by 2 years and a fine of.... let's see... about 2 million dollars?

So according to your understanding, who would be guilty? Also, have you read the whole document you are quoting from? If this gets serious, I would like to read the whole thing. For example, the "independent expenditure" section says "by a person" so I'm not sure that would apply to the party. You have to be careful dancing around a document that long as there are usually checks and balances built in.