Let me give a example.
Let us say people donate money to me to build a house for a charity case.
I get $100000 for this. I send 50000 to my personal checking account.
This is clearly unethical.
Ok, instead i sent $50000 to Deth’s Contracting Services, owned by me. I spend the other $50K on the house also.
The house gets built.
Now, that could be unethical, maybe Bob’s Contracting Services, owned by Bob, might have done the work for just $40000.
Or it might be kosher.
However, we dont know.
Lol. Sent them some money, did you?
What do you say about Steve’s self-serving rant when he resigned? ‘My child molester made me do it’? WTF?
https://twitter.com/SteveSchmidtSES/status/1360378946588708866?s=19
Personally, I’m going to miss Rick’s The New Abnormal podcast he did with Molly Jong-Fast. It may not be off the table, but they did miss the last episode date, so we will see.
Nope. Some $ to Biden is all, and a small amount to Amy vs Mitch.
And yes, the org has had a bad falling out. That’s sad.
It is entirely expected. These people were Republicans first. This means that grifting is in their very morals and makeup.
No surprises here at all.
Those blinders you have on must be lined with lead. There is NO difference between Trump directing his super-PAC money toward companies he and his confidants own and the Lincoln Project doing the same thing. In both instances the super-PAC is getting something for its money – whether it’s tv production work on a commercial or a venue for holding a soiree. The only difference is whether the check is being cut to the Trump Organization or Summit Strategic Communications (owned and operated by LP Treasurer Reed Galen).
What makes all of this unethical is that those who run the PAC have every incentive to pay inflated rates, ignore other vendors of these services, and set low standards of accountability for the supplier. And both PACs hide behind gimmicks to avoid public reporting of how dollars are ultimately expended. The donors who fund these PAC deserve, at the very least, a full accounting of how their donations are being used to achieve the goals of electing/defeating Trump.
Then someone should have written a law to make PAC’s accountable and thus make this behavior unlawful.
Do you really think the people who donated to these PAC’s were so naïve? They didn’t care as long as they thought it helped there cause and that this was the accepted way to go about cheating to win.
The issue here is that the people who dont like or trust the LP are stating things as absolutes.
“They sent money to companies they control, that is proof they were personally lining their own pockets!”
vs
“Hmm, sending money to companies you control? That’s a bit of a red flag, innit?”
I don’t ‘dislike’ the Lincoln Project, my God, where would you even get the idea? But when corporate executives start shipping buttloads of cash to off-book entities controlled by those same executives, it just smells a lot like Enron. And the LP imploded even faster than ENR, so ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Just listened to the latest episode of The New Abnormal, the Rick Wilson/Molly Jong-Fast (MJF) podcast mentioned above and:
I’m with the doctor on this. You guys are so ready to believe anything bad about conservatives that it takes little proof to convince you. Maybe all the allegations in this thread are true and maybe the allegations against Hunter Biden are true. I hold all of them as dubious without solid proof.
Good thing they give us far more than a little proof.
The main plank of the Republican platform these days (such as it is) has been “Scam money off the rubes before the next guy does it”. The term “Principled Republican” is an oxymoron. If there are any Republicans who would NOT engage in grift and schemes to rip off the public, they are long gone, or are currently being attacked for “not being pure enough”
In short, little evidence of corruption is needed, because this is what Republicans are
Because of this, you would actually need some extraordinary evidence if you were to present to me an honest Republican. It is so unusual a sight, that you’d have to work hard to prove it.
It’s like if I pointed out a man in the street who had been recently released from his 7th prison stint for robbery, fraud and car theft. And I said to you “there is a dishonest man”. I would not have to provide you with extraordinary evidence beyond his past history.
I have nothing personally against the Lincoln Project or its founders (well, I guess Weaver’s shown himself to be a slimeball). I agree with the goals of the organization. And I think that any Republicans who are willing to break with Trump are to be lauded.
But I do think that several people in this thread are minimizing and excusing behavior here that they wouldn’t in any other situation. It’s certainly odd to see some presumably liberal posters rushing to the defense of a Super-PAC, an entity created to skirt traditional campaign donation regulations. I raised the comparison with Trump’s use of Super-PACs he controls to direct funding toward his properties and companies, and the only response is that’s, “different.”
This is largely poppycock. Before the entrance of Trump the Republicans were hardly different from Democrats. I live in Boston where it wasn’t too long ago that three consecutive state Speakers were convicted of some sort of fraud.
Trump, of course, changes things and any corruption in his orbit is possible, even likely. It is going to take the GOP a long time to erase the stink of Trump. Reagan was able to bring them back after Nixon but there was much less popular support for Nixon.
The LP, though, is not Trumpist and I want to see some proof they were doing anything unwarranted.
They were doing the same self-dealing bullshit that Trump pulled whenever he charged the secret service top dollar to stay in one of his properties while “protecting him”
They were soliciting donations, and then funnelling the donations to their own companies.
Same as it ever was; Republicans fleecing the rubes.
They gave absolutely no proof whatsoever.
Yes, it is a red flag that the money was funneled into orgs they control. But the ads got made, they got broadcast.
There is no proof that any of the founders lined their own pockets, outside of their pay as CEO, President, etc.
Except for their own cited statements.
which statements?
You dont mean the “LP is creating ‘generational wealth’”? Puleeze, we have debunked that. It is hearsay and uncited.
Now if you have a cite where they say they said that, trot it out.
Of course, I am sure their pay wasnt tiny.
Take the money taken in and divide it by the number of ads. Compare that to other political ads. I think they gave their donors a deal, especially in quality of the ads.