Trump 47

I am not the one advocating for a change in the law. You are. Wasn’t sure if you were advocating for a limit on just an individual or also a group.

But I appreciate you are consistent that you want to limit the amount for any PAC. I think tat would be near impossible to monitor…but that’s a whole different discussion.

I thought I made it pretty clear that the money going to the politicians is the issue. Whether from a group or an individual is a detail without a difference.

Given that we have created tax-free PACs this could be monitored using tax law as @Stillwaterman mentioned.

A US citizen is threatened with thousands of dollars in fines for the simple act of living overseas and having a local bank account with more than $10000, unless they report yearly to the Treasury and the IRS exactly what they have. They can do the same for a US citizen influencing elections.
 
Leavitt: "ABC is gonna have to answer for what their so-called journalist put out on twitter ... we have reached out to ABC. They have said they will be taking action, so we will see what they do ... hopefully this journalist will either be suspended or terminated."

 
Vance calls the LA protests an “invasion.” Four minutes later, Miller calls it an “insurrection.” 29 minutes later, Hegseth threatens to send the Marines onto the street of an American city.

It’s like clockwork. They’ve been chomping at the bit for months, waiting for a pretext to declare martial law under the pretext of an insurrection/invasion.

This is the plan. They’re now executing it.

 
Vance calls the LA protests an “invasion.” Four minutes later, Miller calls it an “insurrection.” 29 minutes later, Hegseth threatens to send the Marines onto the street of an American city.

It’s like clockwork. They’ve been chomping at the bit for months, waiting for a pretext to declare martial law under the pretext of an insurrection/invasion.

This is the plan. They’re now executing it.

I don’t disagree that some in the admin wanted such a scenario to play out.

I think this is more of a change the narrative. The WH lost control this week of the news cycle. They desperately need that back to control the cult.

It’s all just so stupid. Not one thing has happened to make this country better. They are just shuffling the deck chairs on the USS Titanic.
 
JON KARL: Could we really see active duty Marines on the streets of LA?

MIKE JOHNSON: One of our core principles is maintaining peace through strength. We do that on foreign affairs and domestic affairs as well. I don't think that's heavy handed.

 
Karoline wants Terry Moran punished for sharing an opinion.

Meanwhile, the President of the United States is online—
😡 Lying about peaceful protests
😡 Threatening civilians with military force
😡 Banning masks at protests
😡 Mocking elected officials like it’s a playground fight

One is a journalist exercising his First Amendment rights.
The other controls state power.

And somehow, only one is being called a threat.

 
Trump calling in the National Guard to Los Angeles is the first time in 60 years that a president has activated a state’s National Guard force without a request from that state’s governor.

In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators. In 2025, Trump is sending troops to LA to provoke a crisis and provide political cover for his failures.

 
I thought I made it pretty clear that the money going to the politicians is the issue. Whether from a group or an individual is a detail without a difference.

Given that we have created tax-free PACs this could be monitored using tax law as @Stillwaterman mentioned.

A US citizen is threatened with thousands of dollars in fines for the simple act of living overseas and having a local bank account with more than $10000, unless they report yearly to the Treasury and the IRS exactly what they have. They can do the same for a US citizen influencing elections.
I was getting at the “going to politicians is the issue” portion. This is where I thought you were going on Friday during your initial reply asking if “total amount is the only data point that matters”. As you know Musk monies that supported Trump were not direct donations to the Trump campaign, but it was a Super PAC Musk established called “America PAC”.

Musk took advantage of a FEC ruling change that occurred during the Biden Administration. A “Vote Blue” PAC requested an opinion from the FEC. They wanted to utilize their funds to more directly assist campaigns of Democrats. Specifically they asked to use their PAC funds for paid canvassing and creation of materials. The FEC also concluded the creation and distribution of the materials were not campaign expenses.

Musk was able to use that ruling for the Democrats, under the Biden Administration, to help with voter outreach and turnout —- which was previously handled by the campaign.

But the interesting portion to me….is what was talked about last week on this forum….forming a 3rd party. Musk is now proposing a new centrist political party, The America Party. His funding could well have a positive impact for additional options for voters.

—- As it how it relates to our difference of opinion. I think the way the law/regulations were initially interpreted was fine. Certainly the FEC ruling allows for monies to fund activities typically owned by campaigns. However, I still have a firm belief that individuals should be able to independently spend whatever they personally want to support a policy, position, or person.
 
Back
Top