Monday, October 23, 2006

C.R.E.E.L.

From the Daily Cup of Joe on the Ned Lamont official website:
After President Richard Nixon abused campaign finance law through his Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP), laws were passed to force candidates to disclose how they spend campaign funds.

But over the weekend, it became clear Senator Joe Lieberman may be ignoring those laws, as the Senator’s FEC reports uncovered $387,000 “petty cash” slush fund that could be called the "Committee to Reelect Lieberman" (CREEL).

During the 14 days around the August 8th primary, Lieberman’s campaign spent over $387,000 on un-itemized, un-identified, and un-disclosed disbursements. By contrast, Ned Lamont’s campaign spent just $500 on petty cash in the entire reporting period. This slush fund requires answers to questions like: what was this spent on? Who was it spent on? And why weren’t the expenses itemized, as the FEC requires?

Today, the Lamont campaign will be filing a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission, demanding an investigation into possible wrongdoing.
Read the rest of the article here.

I wonder how much of that money went to Lobbyist Richard Goodstein (see Dickie in action here). Judging from how he behaved, it must have been a LOT!

(photo courtesy CT Blogger at ConnecticutBLOG)

4 comments:

selise said...

ctbob,

over at fdl urban pirate raises, imo, an excellent question. i hadn't seen it widely discussed (or debunked), so that i should bring it to your attention:

"I haven’t seen this talked about much yet. but from what I understand, if Joe was paying out of state “volunteers” to collect signatures, thats in violation, and those signatures are invalid.

There was speculation to that effect pre-primary, but no concrete proof. Maybe the reason the expenditure on non-itemized is to obscure that as well.

Anybody see any research/commentary on this?
"

here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/y7ru4r

if there's any truth to this hypothesis, couldn't this be more explosive than any yet suggested hypothesis? if the signatures are invalid....

you see where this could lead? maybe it's completely off base and unfair... but now i REALLY want to see that journal/logbook...

erik said...

What are the tax implications of paying these "street volunteers" for their services and not paying the taxes on these wages?

mui said...

Today, the Lamont campaign will be filing a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission, demanding an investigation into possible wrongdoing.
Yeah Baby! Yeah! Go Ned!

Sharoney said...

So Holy Joe is no better than Dick Nixon.

I'm not surprised at all. With both of them, it's all about getting and keeping power.