Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, September 15, 2021

The wealthy family led by conservative megadonors Robert and Rebekah Mercer, whose money helped propel Donald Trump to victory in 2016, invested nearly $20 million last year into a GOP-friendly dark money fund that allows donors to keep secret the ultimate destination of their contributions.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Yup, taxes need to go way up on the ultra-rich, they should not have this kind of money to buy our elections.

#1 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-09-15 03:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Mmmm, that's good First Amendment Protected Speech!

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 03:29 PM | Reply

Living arguments for a more robust Estate Tax.

#3 | Posted by morris at 2021-09-15 03:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Money is not speech no matter what the corporate court says.

Dark money is destroying our democracy. The fact that it got the bloated------------- election is proof.

#4 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-09-15 03:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#4. Government can't censor books. Movies, etc particularly when it comes to political content. Read the 1st Amendment as many times as necessary for that to sink in.

#5 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 04:02 PM | Reply

" Dark money is destroying our democracy. The fact that it got the bloated------------- election is proof."

Clinton vastly outraised Trump.

#6 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 04:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Clinton vastly outraised Trump."

Dark money too?
How would we know that?

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 04:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#4. Government can't censor books. Movies, etc particularly when it comes to political content. Read the 1st Amendment as many times as necessary for that to sink in.

#5 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Money isn't books, movies ect.

Citizen's United will probably be a mortal wound to our republic.

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2021-09-15 04:14 PM | Reply

"Yup, taxes need to go way up on the ultra-rich, they should not have this kind of money to buy our elections."

How do you buy an election?

#9 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 04:14 PM | Reply

"Citizen's United will probably be a mortal wound to our republic."

How about potential leaders offering to buy votes with taxpayer dollars?

Do you view that as any sort of a problem?

#10 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 04:15 PM | Reply

#10 Those are the same problem.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 04:17 PM | Reply

They even look like ghouls.

#12 | Posted by jpw at 2021-09-15 04:19 PM | Reply

#8 CU was about an anti Hillary Clinton movie that government tried to suppress under McCain/Feingold.

#13 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 04:19 PM | Reply

How about potential leaders offering to buy votes with taxpayer dollars?
Do you view that as any sort of a problem?

#10 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Depends on what you mean by buy votes.

Literally pay for votes? Already illegal and yeah, should be.

Propose policies that voters will benefit from? Not buying votes no matter how many word games you want to play to try and make it so.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2021-09-15 04:20 PM | Reply

#13 CU was about that, but the way they addressed it opened our political spending process to dark money.

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 04:21 PM | Reply

#8 CU was about an anti Hillary Clinton movie that government tried to suppress under McCain/Feingold.

#13 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

I know what precipitated the case.

Problem is the ruling gave the farm away to corporations and wealthy donors.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2021-09-15 04:22 PM | Reply

"How about potential leaders offering to buy votes with taxpayer dollars?
Do you view that as any sort of a problem?"

Do you?
Why shouldn't votes be bought and sold like any other commodity?
???

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 04:23 PM | Reply

Clinton vastly outraised Trump.

#6 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 04:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

We know that Dotard got 100% of the NRA's money in the presidential race, which means that he got 100% of Russia's illegal contribution that election cycle over and above the millions of dollars worth of free Russian social media help. The NRA spent $30 million to elect Dotard, triple what they spent in 2012, and that came shortly after their leaders met with Oligarchs in Russia. It certainly looks like the NRA was washing illegal Russian political contributions, which should be criminal, but the fact that Metamucil Mussolini is still walking free after being "Individual 1" in the Cohen case means that we don't really enforce election finance law because what Michael Cohen went to prison for was at the direction and for the benefit of Individual 1.

#18 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-09-15 04:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#8 CU was about an anti Hillary Clinton movie that government tried to suppress under McCain/Feingold.

#13 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

No. It was about election spending on a movie about Hillary Clinton from a PAC. This wasn't just some movie. This was a movie made by a political action committee for the purposes of swaying the voters.

And it was actually Speechnow.org v. FEC that really ------ things up when relying on Citizens United. The Court held Super PACs could collect unlimited contributions. They have to include who they got the money from but that's an issue with dark money groups that donate to Super PACs because they can hide the donors to the dark money group.

This means that in competitive races, about 70% of spending is from outside Super PACS rather than the candidates or their PACs.

#19 | Posted by Sycophant at 2021-09-15 05:44 PM | Reply

" Dark money is destroying our democracy. The fact that it got the bloated------------- election is proof."

Clinton vastly outraised Trump.

#6 | Posted by BellRinger

So what? Trump's money came from putin and came with treasonous strings attached. You think that's ok?

#20 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 07:09 PM | Reply

How about potential leaders offering to buy votes with taxpayer dollars?

Do you view that as any sort of a problem?

#10 | Posted by madbomber

Isn't that what promising tax cuts is? Offering a payoff if you vote for them.

Do you view republicans writing new laws that allow them to ignore the voters if they lose as any sort of problem?

#21 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 07:11 PM | Reply

#19.

And?

It was still a movie. Or a lengthy political ad, if you prefer. It's protected speech under the 1st Amendment.

#22 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 07:31 PM | Reply

It was still a movie. Or a lengthy political ad, if you prefer. It's protected speech under the 1st Amendment.

#22 | Posted by BellRinger

Does the first amendment allow hostile nations to make propaganda films filled with lies and buy airtime on american airwaves?

#23 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 07:35 PM | Reply

Was the Hillary movie produced by a hostile foreign entity?

#24 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 07:58 PM | Reply

#23. If the Steele Dossier is any indication ...

#25 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 07:59 PM | Reply

Was the Hillary movie produced by a hostile foreign entity?

#24 | Posted by BellRinger a

It was a hypothetical: Does the first amendment allow hostile nations to make propaganda films filled with lies and buy airtime on american airwaves?

#26 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 08:46 PM | Reply

#26. Well the Steele Dossier fits that description to a "T", so you tell me ...

#27 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 08:48 PM | Reply

The 2nd Amendment used to be the one progressives hate the most. It's been supplanted by the 1st.

#28 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-09-15 08:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Was the Hillary movie produced by a hostile foreign entity?"

It was probably paid for in part with foreign money. Citizens United is a 501c(4) and they do not have to disclose who gives them money.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 09:34 PM | Reply

Ironically, as part of the 'Citizens United' decision, the Court warned Congress that they MUST address the issue of 'dark money' in politics since if it was left to continue unabated, that it had the potential to destroy our democracy as we know it. The reason the Court ruled as they did in 'Citizens United' was because there was nothing in the Constitution that supported them overturning it nor were there any laws on the books to do so. The 'Citizens United' decision was a call to action, BY THE COURT, but which was ignored by Congress, which was controlled at the time by members, be they Republican or Democratic, who were being 'paid off' by the very people who were depending on 'dark money' to influence Washington and the statehouses around the country.

OCU

#30 | Posted by OCUser at 2021-09-16 11:42 AM | Reply

"Ironically, as part of the 'Citizens United' decision, the Court warned Congress that they MUST address the issue of 'dark money' in politics since if it was left to continue unabated, that it had the potential to destroy our democracy as we know it."

^
In other words, the Supreme Court ruled it is the Fox's job to guard the Hen House.

Yeah. That's why it was a bad decision.

Only people who don't care (or support) the impact of the decision think Citizens United was a good outcome.

For example, most Republicans are perfectly content with the Russian state mafia investing in Republican politicians.

#31 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-16 11:52 AM | Reply

The 2nd Amendment used to be the one progressives hate the most. It's been supplanted by the 1st.

#28 | Posted by BellRinger

You keep dodging the question so I'll keep asking it: Does the first amendment allow hostile nations to make propaganda films filled with lies and buy airtime on american airwaves?

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-16 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Depends on what you mean by buy votes."

I mean, vote for me and I will take money from other people and either give it to you directly or use it to pay for things you want.

That's what I mean by buying votes.

#33 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-16 03:18 PM | Reply

Does the first amendment allow hostile nations to make propaganda films filled with lies and buy airtime on american airwaves?

Short answer, it depends.

First and foremost, the First Amendment is a restraint on government to regulate the content of speech no matter the speaker. takecareblog.com

Second, it depends on what the foreigner says. Simplistically, the foreigner can speak to issues but not campaigns or candidates. www.fec.gov

If a domestic concern can engage in propaganda regarding a given issue so too, it seems, can hostile nations.

#34 | Posted by et_al at 2021-09-16 03:31 PM | Reply

I mean, vote for me and I will take money from other people and either give it to you directly or use it to pay for things you want.

That's what I mean by buying votes.

#33 | Posted by madbomber

So basically every statement made by every politician on a campaign ever.

#35 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-16 03:34 PM | Reply

The failure of America as a country can be directly attributed to the creation of the Religious Oligarchy.
The SCOTUS Citizens United ruling hastened and solidified America's demise.

Then, Trump; Trump made sure we are now a second-rate country, more like Austria than what we used to be.

#36 | Posted by e1g1 at 2021-09-16 05:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"So basically every statement made by every politician on a campaign ever."

No.

I don't think that Gary Johnson was trying to buy votes with taxpayer dollars.

Do you?

#37 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-17 03:57 PM | Reply

"Then, Trump; Trump made sure we are now a second-rate country, more like Austria than what we used to be."

You can't lay it all on Trump.

Yeah, he's a piece of ----, but "progressives" were burning Portland night after night long before 1/6.

Blaming it squarely on Trump is dishonest. You can blame him for embracing and enabling the radical right...but what about the radical left?

#38 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-17 03:59 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort