But isn’t a PAC totally unaffiliated with the candidate? These guys should certainly be investigated and prosecuted for what was illegal, but Trump has no direct connection with them. Also, there was no actual money changing hands, and whatever claims they promised could totally be bullshit. In fact, it seems like a perfect con: You give me $2M, but we cant tell anyone you are giving it to me, I’ll promise you it will go to making adds for Trump and it’ll buy you influence, and then I pocket the whole thing and buy me a new boat.
Revenge is not implied by its definition… it’s just a private citizen taking the law into their own hands. The problem is that private citizens have conflicting ideas of what is just and some of their ideas are downright crazy. I don’t generally want to applaud a private, non-judicial entity using deceit and entrapment against people I don’t like (Trump) because it creates a generally toxic atmosphere of mistrust that suddenly has a precedent for use against my own interests.
1 Like
The article states that the PAC has the approval of his son/surrogate Eric Trump, so regardless of whether it’s supposed to be or not, it is not unaffiliated with his campaign.
2 Likes
Doesn’t have to be. Just can’t “coordinate” with them.
3 Likes
But they approached both parties. Not like the conservative groups that only seek to ensnare liberals.
1 Like
Ok, but these journalists didn’t take law into their hands… they just exercised journalistic scrutiny, right?
I rather like that they did the very same thing to the two parties that are running.
Precisely what to make of their results is open to interpretation. Maybe it was just some rogue entity in the Trump camp. Though that ambiguity just makes me want there to be more documentation of how this went down.
I don’t see this as parallel to entrapment of Joe Citizen into marijuana crimes. These are people aspiring to the most powerful position on Earth, and they can and should be held to a MUCH higher degree of scrutiny than the common person.
7 Likes
Or creating them.
1 Like
-
If someone says, “Hi GOP fundraisers, I’m a journalist, would you, hypothetically, take money from the Chinese and hide it from the auditors?” they’re going to say, “Of course not!”
-
If someone says, “Y’know, I think the GOP’s fundraising should be examined. I think they’re taking money from foreigners.” the response will be, “Where’s your proof?”
-
So instead the journalists created a scenario where the fundraisers believed they weren’t talking to the press and behaved accordingly. Turns out said behaviour is deplorable.
Woodward and Bernstein got their first tip because Woodward was in the courtroom for the “plumbers’” first appearance and got inconsistent answers to his questions. He also noticed people were there who wouldn’t be (big-wig lawyers for petty thieves). Later they found financial discrepancies and enough lower-level, honest Republicans who weren’t comfortable with the ethics of what was going on that they were willing to talk to journalists.
That took several months. They almost didn’t succeed – remember, the end of the film “All the President’s Men” has them standing on their editor’s front lawn in the middle of the night, all their sources blown, having to start all over again. The eventual outcome is only displayed on telex messages right before the end credits.
Journalists right now don’t have months – they’re investigating a candidate, not an incumbent – and they don’t live in the 1970s world of literal paper trails. It was almost impossible then – it’s much harder now.
3 Likes
I missed that, but it still worries me, even if it is evenly being applied to both candidates’ campaigns
Why? More writers should be activists.
This isn’t James O’keefe.
So, just like HRC’s #PayToPlay? Oh wait, that was in an official capacity as Secretary of State…
That’s not a reason.
5 Likes
“The summit took place two whole years after Clinton stepped down as Secretary of State, she did not attend, gave no speech, and received no money”
Of course they meant that one!
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
