PDA

View Full Version : Obama Accepting Money from Lobbyist Despite Ban!!



Sev
02-08-2012, 05:48 PM
The lies and deceit just keep piling up.

http://freebeacon.com/spirit-lobbyist-bundled-for-obama-records-show/

UPDATE II: After a WFB exclusive, Ron Klein tells NBC’s Michael Isikoff that he plans to immediately de-register as a lobbyist for Spirit Airlines Inc., saying he never meant to register in the first place.

“I’m not a lobbyist,” Klein said, claiming his registration was the result of a “clerical error” by an employee of Holland & Knight LLP, the lobbying law firm where he works.

Klein’s assertion seems to contradict comments made by an Obama campaign official earlier in the day, which indicated that Klein was, in fact, a registered lobbyist.

“The minute [Klein] became a lobbyist, he stopped raising money for the campaign,” the official told Politico. “He’s no longer associated with the campaign.”

Klein said he plans to continue bundling donations for Obama’s reelection campaign. He has already raised at least $200,000 to date.

Holland & Knight spokeswoman Linda Butler told the Washington Free Beacon the firm is “not commenting on this story.”

UPDATE: An Obama campaign official tells Politico that Ron Klein is “no longer associated with the campaign” and never raised any money after registering as a lobbyist. The campaign does not intend to return the cash.

Former Rep. Ron Klein (D-Fla.) is an active campaign bundler for President Obama, having raised between $200,000 and $500,000, according to campaign records.

He is also a registered federal lobbyist.

<span style="color: #CC0000"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>The revelation poses a challenge for President Obama, who has banned registered lobbyists from personally contributing or bundling donations to his campaign. The president even touted these self-imposed restrictions in a Dec. 28, 2011, fundraising e-mail, writing: “We don’t take a dime from D.C. lobbyists or special-interest PACs—never have and never will.”</span></span>

That email was sent days before Klein filed his paper work to become a “D.C. lobbyist.”

Klein, a two-term congressman, registered to become a lobbyist for Spirit Airlines, Inc., on Jan. 2, 2012, according to the Senate Office of Public Records—exactly one year after leaving office in 2011 after losing to Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) in the 2010 midterms. Federal law requires at least a one-year waiting period between leaving office and registering as a lobbyist.

When Klein joined the lobbying law firm Holland & Knight LLP as an adviser on regulatory issues, he told Politico he had not ruled out lobbying in the future. As a former corporate lawyer, he was a natural fit for the job.

The news comes on the heels of the administration’s newfound embrace of Super PACs, third-party groups capable of raising large amounts of money from wealthy corporations and individuals, but which do not have to disclose their donors. Obama had previously expressed disdain for such groups, calling them “a threat to our democracy.”

The president’s reversal on Super PACs has led some to question the president’s commitment to political reform. After all, reducing the influence of powerful special interests in Washington was a central element of Obama’s campaign platform in 2008.

<span style="color: #CC0000"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over,” he said on Nov. 10, 2007 in Des Moines, Iowa. “They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.”</span>

Obama also promised voters “lobbyists won’t find a job in my White House,” a claim the non-partisan watchdog website Politifact.com has rated a “promise broken.”
</span>
As Politifact notes, although the president signed an executive order codifying this pledge on his first full day in office, the administration has made use of a loophole in the order that permits “waivers” for former lobbyists to serve. In some cases, the administration has hired former lobbyists without a waiver and without disclosing details to the public.

The Washington Examiner reported in 2010 that there were more than 40 ex-lobbyists working in the Obama administration, including a number of senior White House officials. The Washington Post counted more than a dozen registered lobbyists on the Obama-Biden Transition Team, including the transition director John Podesta, founder and former president of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress

eg8r
02-08-2012, 05:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over,” he said on Nov. 10, 2007 in Des Moines, Iowa. “They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.”
</div></div>LOL, Wall St owned him and he made them richer than they ever have been. I can't think of many times when he has been honest.

eg8r

Sev
02-09-2012, 07:30 AM
It makes my head hurt.

LWW
02-11-2012, 06:49 AM
What you two have to realize is that the moonbat crazy left only sees this as bad when someone else does it.

Soflasnapper
02-11-2012, 07:43 PM
Weak tea indeed.

You are attempting to turn this case into a prediction/promise about the future, that anybody who now is not a lobbyist who is raising money within the promised restrictions, will NEVER IN THE FUTURE become a lobbyist. Bizarre and strained.

To put it into a timeline, there is absolutely no issue with monies Klein raised before 1/2/12, as to the prior promise from the administration. If it's true that now that he has registered to be a lobbyist, they don't take his money, that is again meeting the promise.

The other cases, I'll admit are murkier, but the Klein matter simply isn't accurately attacked as per the article writer's take here.

Qtec
02-12-2012, 06:22 AM
Right now, Romney is the guy who gets most of his money from special interests.

Q

LWW
02-12-2012, 08:59 AM
Yet what the current regime promised.

LWW
02-12-2012, 09:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Right now, Romney is the guy who gets most of his money from special interests.

Q </div></div>

Documented by?

LWW
02-12-2012, 09:06 AM
Let's review:

Obama has received $67,663,667 frpm large donors.

Romney ... $51,119,391.

OH DEAR! (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?id=N00009638)

OH MY! (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?id=N00000286)

Soflasnapper
02-12-2012, 11:41 AM
What you say is true, and what Q said remains true.

Romney gets about 91% of his money from large donors, whereas Obama gets just above half his money from them at 54%.

So, yes, Romney is the guy who gets most of his money from the special interests as was said. Obama gets more from small individual donors than all of Romney's cash raised so far.

LWW
02-13-2012, 03:24 AM
What Snoop said is not true ... what I said was ... which proves again that you can't recognize truth when it's presented to you.

Qtec
02-13-2012, 07:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wall Street bets big on Romney

WASHINGTON (CNNMoney) -- Wall Street has thrown its weight behind alum Mitt Romney for president, according to new campaign data for 2011.

But the industry hasn't totally abandoned President Obama, who in 2008 raised more money from the financial industry than any other candidate in history, according to two watchdog groups.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>No other candidate came close to the $12 million Romney's campaign raised directly in 2011 from individuals who work at financial firms and banks,</span> which also includes cash from insurance and real estate companies, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. </div></div>

Q /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif..no link...look it up.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2012/02/01/news/economy/wall_street_romney/chart-candidates-income-2.top.gif



Bazinga.........

eg8r
02-13-2012, 09:48 AM
Do you know how stupid that statement is considering Obama just approved his campaign to start supporting superPACs? LOL, you really are the CCB village idiot.

eg8r

eg8r
02-13-2012, 09:49 AM
Wake up!!!!!!!!! Obama just approved his campaign to support pro-Obama super PACs. Hello, don't you think his special interest coffers are about to get a huge boost. Wall St doesn't need to jump in right now. There is no need for Wall St money at this time.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
02-13-2012, 12:08 PM
That approval is for ONE such SuperPac, not multiple ones.

And Wall Street generally always greases both sides, but favors the side more likely to do what they want.

Considering that the GOP position is to repeal Sarbanes/Oxley, Dodd/Frank, and that is not Obama's position, who signed at least one of them himself, Wall Street money will tend to favor Romney in this cycle, IMO.

Soflasnapper
02-13-2012, 12:11 PM
Yes, you would be correct, if getting 54% from large individual donors means you get 'most' of your donations from them, but getting 93% of donations from them doesn't mean that.

But that's a hard argument to make. Clearly, to me at least, if you are relying at a 93% rate on that type of donor, you are the one 'most reliant' on such large donors.

eg8r
02-13-2012, 12:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That approval is for ONE such SuperPac, not multiple ones.
</div></div>Yeah, well a couple weeks ago the approval was for ZERO super PACs. So how strong is that defense?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And Wall Street generally always greases both sides, but favors the side more likely to do what they want.
</div></div>Your attempt to water this down was futile back when it was reported and still just as weak. Wall St has never "greased" a side as much as it did Obama's backside in the last election. It wasn't even close to even but then again, your memory never seems as strong when related to "sly misdirections" from Obama.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Considering that the GOP position is to repeal Sarbanes/Oxley, Dodd/Frank, and that is not Obama's position, who signed at least one of them himself, Wall Street money will tend to favor Romney in this cycle, IMO. </div></div>Considering you cannot even get what happened with Obama correct I don't think I will place too much trust in this guess at all. However, if it means getting Obama out of office then I will gladly admit Romney was bought by Wall St and then I will smile a huge smile in knowing Obama can no longer ruin this country the way he has been. It will be bitter sweet though because I don't see Romney being too much better, but even a little bit will help these days.

eg8r