Response to solicitation of funds

Mr. Trump,

Please remove me from any and all lists associated with your campaign.

I will not contribute to your campaign, nor to any group associated with you: Including the political party formerly known as the GOP.

If you need money, please ask those “small donors” to whom you are already beholden. Sheldon Adelson, for example.

As you Tweeted last October:
“Sheldon Adelson is looking to give big dollars to Rubio because he feels he can mold him into his perfect little puppet. I agree!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 13, 2015″

Or, beg the hated RNC.

I’d also appreciate a review of contributions in kind from media like Fox News. Maybe you can release your estimate along with your tax returns.

I am disinterested in bankrolling your threatened anti-Chicago Cubs ads and your “Little Miss Stompy Foot” feud with the Club for Growth. I will have nothing to do with a “finance expert” who so misinterprets the word fungible that he will fund Planned Parenthood, in any way, with taxpayer dollars. As if this accounting gimmick can force separation of dollar one from dollar 500,000.

I’m not attracted to a candidate whose frugality argument is that he can spend my money better than the Democrats have, better than Republicans would, and CERTAINLY better than I could.

As to Crooked Hillary’s “rigged system of crony handouts,” you’ve bragged about having been a recipient of said handouts, and are deeply complicit in that very system.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter,
Duane Hershberger

P.S., You misspelled “Yuuge.”

On May 31, 2016, at 2:07 PM, Team TRUMP wrote:

Make American Great Again

Our country doesn’t win anymore, Duane.

We are losing hundreds of billions of dollars a year to China. Mexico is beating us at the border and on trade.

It feels like every day in the news another company is leaving our great nation. We are losing millions of jobs, and it is time for this to STOP.

This will all change when Donald Trump is elected President. We will start winning again.

We are going to start winning so much that you are going to get used to winning!

Donald Trump went the entire primary without asking a single person for a penny, because he was not beholden to anyone but YOU – the American people.

But here’s the problem: Crooked Hillary and her cronies are raising $2 billion to try to stop us.

That’s why we are asking you to contribute $35 and become a Founding Member of our campaign:

Crooked Hillary is scared to death of us. Our movement threatens her rigged system of crony handouts and bad deals that have cost the American people millions!

She’s pulling in as many special interests and media elites as she can.

But Donald Trump doesn’t want ANY of them.

You’re the only person we would ever want on our team. Our campaign is a movement of the American people – NO ONE else.

Please contribute $35 right now to activate your Founding Membership with our campaign.

While our Party is ready to unite, Democrats are fighting tooth and nail over a socialist and a serial liar under investigation by the FBI.

We have a HUGE opportunity to win!

We don’t want to just defeat Crooked Hillary, we want to CRUSH the Democrats at every level.

We want to win in a massive landslide. We want our victory to be so great that Crooked Hillary and Obama regret the day they ever turned their backs on the American people.

Together, we will win this election and Make America Great Again!

Please join us today using this special link: [deleted]

Thank you and God bless you,

Team Trump

"Will No One Rid Me of This Meddlesome Priest?" -Henry II, 1170

This Kimberly Strassel piece documents the most recent behavioral conditioning of the IRS: To regard the words “tea party” as Winston Smith regarded rats. Read it, and see why things haven’t much changed since 1170, or 1949; when Smith was the protagonist in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Nobody had to give any direct order to even barely conscious union members astute employees of the IRS (EPA, OSHA, et. al.) whose self-interest is so exquisitely aligned with that of Big Government politicians.

Read the Strassel piece, but I must note this particularly risible quote from the man heading the most opaque administration since FDR; and who employed Richard Windsor Lisa Jackson, still employs Eric Holder and just promoted Susan Rice: “The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.” -Barack Obama, 2010
(How can I fit a reference to Lois Lerner in here? Oh.)

The Democrat harping on mysterious “foreign contributers” is hard to take from a guy who accepted credit card donations from anywhere; not bothering to employ simple, and standard, ways to prevent such illegal donations.

On the NSA surveillance of every phone number ever dialed, and where and for what every credit card is used: No doubt this is a result of the Patriot Act – i.e., Big Government under George Bush. Seriously, it’s what Big Government does. George and Barack are just following the lead of Woodrow and Franklin. And Henry, of course, but we did break with That Sort of overreach circa 1776.

George Orwell labeled one manifestation of this tendency “Thought Police.” Many other things were illegal in Orwell’s Oceania, you’d be surprised by the similarities.

While what the Obama Administration has done with the NSA appears ‘legal’ to me, the president is certainly open to the charge of hypocrisy. George McGovern didn’t whine so much about Constitutional violations as did Senator Obama.

Obama’s hypocrisy, however, isn’t the point. The point is that Big Government will unfailingly use whatever powers it has to increase the power it has – whoever is in charge. None of these scandals are failures of our current system, they are the system. None of it is overreach, it’s how serfs are treated.

This is the simple point the tea party has been politely making. It’s why they were targeted.


Probably, but it would not be surprising if true.

RED ALERT: Did anti-Obama campaign contributions dictate which Chrysler dealers were shuttered?

A cursory review … showed that many of the Chrysler dealers on the closing list were heavy Republican donors.

To quickly review the situation, I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates. While this isn’t an exhaustive review, it does have some ominous implications if it can be verified.

More here.

None may be discontributionized

In line with their own campaign staff illegal registrations and a coziness with ACORN and its decade spanning voter registration frauds under the rubric of ensuring no voter is disenfranchised, the official position of Barack Obama’s campaign appears to be that illegal campaign contributions are all in the eye of the beholder. For example, they may well argue, a person named Jgtj Jfggjjfgj probably views it that way.

Obama’s website has* all credit card verification procedures turned off for campaign contributions. The default is “On,” you have to turn it off deliberately. When you do, many wonderful things happen. You can accept contributions from Della Ware, John Galt, and Jgtj Jfggjjfgj. These fictitious people, though actual donors, may submit any address whatsoever, including foreign countries or Second Life.

Obama’s people claim they vet the legality of their donors after the contributions are made. The effectiveness of this technique is demonstrated by a pair of donors noted at the New York Times: “Derty West” and “Derty Poiiuy.” They both live at “rewq, ME” and are both employed by “Qwertyyy.” They even do the same job – “Qwerttyyu.”

This is a fine example of the ethical acuity of Chicago machine politics, because it shows how to facilitate anonymous, falsely sourced or foreign contributions while simultaneously evading contribution limits. All of that is illegal, of course. It’s why an honest person would not disable credit card verification. An honest person would not want to encourage illegal campaign contributions. An honest, prudent person would not turn off an effective verification system and assume the costs of vetting contributions themselves unless they were convinced they could do a superior job. As we’ve seen, this ideal is unrealized. Obama had good intentions, though: No one should be discontributionized.

The McCain campaign does not knowingly encourage such donations. They did not turn off the credit card verification system.

Commenter stevieray at sums it up:

“…Obama’s system doesn’t care what name is used, only that the credit card number is valid.

Obama’s system doesn’t care what address is used, only that the credit card number is valid.

Obama’s system doesn’t care if the security number is valid, it doesn’t even ask for it.

Federal law limits the amount anyone can give to the campaign, and requires the campaign to keep track of the donors and report the info to the feds.

Obama cannot report his donors accurately, because he can’t prove who gave ANY of the money to his campaign.

Every report he sent to the FEC is a fraud.

He can’t prove ANYBODY is below the limit, because he doesn’t know. His system made sure of that.”

A good summary of how this was discovered and has been documented may be found here.

Oh well, just another failure you can chalk up to the good intentions and false promise of McCain-Feingold. Strictly enforced donor disclosure requirements would have prevented it.

*Or had, there are reports credit card verification has been reinstated after this fraud-hole was discovered – proving they knew what they had done.

How John McCain can get my vote

Here’s the speech that would do it.

My friends, I am here today to announce what will be certainly be described in the media as flip-flops so stunning as to send a tingle up both Chris Matthews’ legs – and his notochord, since “spine” would be an overstatement.

I have examined the results of my efforts to remove the appearance of corruption from politics, and I find them to have been an abject failure. I see now that McCain-Feingold campaign finance regulation is an intolerable violation of the First Amendment. Worse, like other well intended leftist policies, its effect has been exactly opposite to the intent.

After my defeat in the 2000 North Carolina primary, I wanted to “clean up” politics by suppressing lying in advertising; as if protecting people who believe everything they hear was the job of government, rather than simply being impossible. Instead, I enabled a labyrinthine industry of 527(c) and 501(c) issue-based lobbying groups not subject to any easily accessible scrutiny.

For example, George Soros continues to pump vast sums of money into issue advertising, including such despicable ads as the attack on General Petreaus in the New York Times.

My friends, is this sort of attempt to affect public policy NOT lobbying? Was its genesis NOT secretive? Does it not appear corrupt?

I’ll bet you didn’t know Soros put a lot of money into 527s and 501s that lobbied for campaign finance restrictions. The Reform Institute, which I founded in 2001 as an unofficial arm of my campaign for president, was one beneficiary. I know now that I should have put the Constitution before my desire to be elected President. More information on this disguised lobbying initiative/campaign staffing ploy can be found here, here, here, here, here and here.

You have probably asked yourself why someone like George Soros, who freely spends his vast fortune on political messages, should be vitally concerned about restricting others from spending a pittance. I know now that I should have asked that. I didn’t. I’m sorry, and I’m ashamed. When I’m ashamed, as in the Keating affair; or pissed off, as in North Carolina, I make very serious commitments to correct things. If I can logically connect ashamed with pissed off, look out. McCain-Feingold was an attempt to assuage my guilt and ire in these cases respectively. That’s why it’s taken me so long to recognize what a mistake it was.

I am proposing that all restrictions on campaign finance be removed in favor of an absolute, complete, detailed and immediate disclosure of funding sources. Let the ads run. Let us know exactly who is paying for them. No cover in “foundations” or other bundling organizations.

For example, if T. Boone Pickens finances Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads, it should be known immediately. If he runs ads where he promotes a project he says will be “financed by private funds,” it should be revealed that he is in fact lobbying for billions in government funding that will result in what can truly be described as windfall profits for a Pickens-owned energy company in which the Speaker of the House has herself invested hundreds of thousands of dollars.

If he wants to build windmills with private money, supposedly like Nancy Pelosi’s, why is he running ads costing millions instead of simply building windmills and proving his thesis? Pickens is mounting a major advertising campaign because he’s lobbying for government assistance to build infrastructure in support of windpower, while simultaneously promoting the use of Pickens-supplied natural gas for automotive uses. One consequence of this would be to raise the price of heating your home. He doesn’t mention that.

If he wants to extract more natural gas, why did he ever say “[W]e can’t drill our way out of this.”? If we pay for the infrastructure Pickens wants, we should get at least as many shares of CLNE as did the Speaker of the House.

Frankly, such transparency is coming to pass anyway, as more and more investigative work is undertaken by a handful of so-called bloggers. Access to such information might as well be made easy for the average disinterested, Google-challenged American, and it might as well have some teeth making sure we find out when Jack Abramoff or Norman Hsu, or Ted Stevens or Nancy Pelosi are up to no good.

As to public campaign financing, my opponent has demonstrated that there is no practical limit to the campaign funding that may be achieved by an attractive and energizing candidate. Celebrity aside, however, the willingness to participate in public financing of Presidential campaigns (on which Senator Obama has anyway flip-flopped) is no measure of worth. Public campaign finance is a bad idea whose time has obviously passed. Without public financing, all candidates would have to appeal for support rather than taxing supporters and opponents alike. I say this knowing that, for me, it would have been disastrous in this election cycle. I probably would have reversed my position on campaign finance even earlier.

While we’re at it, recent events in Georgia have convinced me on grounds of both environmental protection and national security that it is not an option for the United States to arbitrarily prevent drilling in ANY location where private industry might recover fossil fuel of any kind. It’s not that we should allow drilling in ANWR, it’s mandatory that we drill there. The Russian invasion of Georgia has caused more damage to the environment, and to innocent people, than oil extraction has in the last 50 years while they simultaneously threaten to take complete control of vast amounts of oil. Meanwhile the Chinese are drilling just off Cuba.

In exchange for opening all of the United States for oil drilling and an expedited regulatory approval process; all subsidies to oil companies will cease. Some may call this a tax increase. I call it a reduction in corporate welfare. We’ll get out of your way. You get out of our pockets. As a bonus, you’ll save a lot on lobbyists’ salaries.

If Big Ethanol wants to take note of that, I have no objection. I’m calling for an immediate elimination of tariffs on Brazilian ethanol and cessation of all subsidies to domestic ethanol production. To eliminate the actual corruption represented by ethanol industry lobbyists, ethanol production will no longer receive any subsidies; through protectionist tariffs or in the form of tax breaks. There will be nothing to lobby for.

In closing, I am fully aware that several other positions I have taken, notably on global warming and the treatment of illegal immigrants, will still not sit well with many voters. Well, them’s the breaks. What I can tell you is that, unlike my opponent, I will never subordinate the interests of the United States to either of these things. In terms of implementation of actual legislation in those areas, you can read into that what you will. Take comfort in the fact that the phrases “global warming” and “climate change” appear nowhere in the GOP platform.

My judgment is not always perfect, as I have just now acknowledged. But, as far as change goes, I can do it when I see good reason for it.

I have changed my positions because they proved not to be in the interests of the United States. I will not change positions in the interest of making other countries like us more. That vastly distinguishes me from my opponent. So, I hope you will vote for John McCain in November, because the alternative is obviously the greater of two evils.

That’s straight talk. Thank you, and God preserve America.

Can you say "Petard?"

Barack Obama may have just killed campaign finance reform as we know it by refusing to participate in government financed government. He won’t be taking any money paid in taxes to run his campaign. Good for him. It looks great on John McCain.

John’s guys say it’s fine, too.

“We think $85 million in public funding for the general election is plenty,” McCain’s general counsel, Trevor Potter, said.

Suuure you do. Obama is likely to have $400 million. This “$85 million is plenty” stuff is just whistling past the graveyard where your own freshly chiseled headstone is standing behind an open grave.

For Obama to blame McCain for Obama’s own flip on this is clearly disingenuous, but it just tickles me to see McCain’s own petard exploding beneath him. It’s his own ICD (Improvised Censorship Device) that got him. And he’s not even getting any credit for the morality play he thinks he’s playing lead in: It’s all McCain’s fault that Obama can’t take public funds, you see, and ACORN and George Soros and MoveOn don’t count:

McCain is “not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations,” Obama said.

McCain has decried the spending and attack ads by such groups and has promised to speak out against those campaigning on behalf of Republicans.

Ah yes, speaking out against those campaigning on behalf of Republicans is what you do very well, John. I hear you, so don’t be concerned I’ll make the mistake.

“Anyone who believes they could assist my campaign by exploiting a loophole in campaign-finance laws is doing me and our country a disservice,” McCain said in November.

Au contraire, John, they’re doing us all a favor by sticking your own pet cause where it belongs. You’re the guy who already tried to stop anti-Obama ads in North Carolina. See what it’s gotten you? Alienated Republicans. And while you continue to “reach out,” you’re gonna be outspent 5 to 1 by a loophole exploiter. You go, John. And take Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Arlen Specter, Lindsey Graham, Michael Bloomberg, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Lincoln Chafee, Christopher Shays and Vernon Ehlers with you.

Not that Obama thinks Campaign Finance Reform is a bad idea (and why would he, since it’s his opponent who’s stuck in it). It’s good for other people, however.

Obama acknowledged, however, that other candidates are not likely to be able to be as successful attracting small donors as he has been, so he still supports campaign finance reform.

Tell it to George Soros, Barack, and then run attack ads against McCain in all 50 States. He’ll soon be pining for the civility of the 2000 North Carolina primary.

Obama’s campaign today released its first general-election television advertisement and said it will be broadcast in some traditionally Republican states, such as Alaska, North Dakota and Montana, as well as battlegrounds such as Florida.

The only thing tempering my enthusiam here is that after Obama is annointed elected, he’ll have a whole new set of ideas about how to gut the First Amendment. Then I’ll be pining for the days of the current FECless regulations.