Many said the key to President Obama’s success in both Presidential campaigns was his technological and digital edge over his Republican adversaries. Catalist, a Democratic data firm, is one of the reasons why Democrats enjoyed the edge not just in Presidential elections, but in many campaigns for the House and Senate over the last ten years as well. Today the firm is coming under fire for breaking campaign finance law, a funny “coincidence” considering liberals’ open disdain for how the Citizens United case changed finance law in the U.S. Apparently liberals only want “dark money” when it’s theirs. Fox News reports,
A Democrat-aligned business founded by a longtime Clinton confidant is being accused of giving valuable voter lists to party committees and candidates, as part of a “scheme” that allegedly runs afoul of campaign finance law.
The charges were detailed in a new complaint filed by the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), a conservative watchdog group, on Wednesday. They implicate Catalist, LLC., a for-profit company that has provided customized voter data to hundreds of labor unions, Democratic committees and candidates — including the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns in 2008.
The complaint, filed to the Federal Election Commission, accused the group of effectively masquerading as a corporation while acting like a political action committee — in turn, skirting campaign finance laws that normally apply to PACs.
“Fundamentally, I would call [Catalist] a scheme to avoid campaign finance law,” FACT director Matthew Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney, told FoxNews.com.
The complaint accuses the group, whose investors include George Soros, of skirting laws that cover so-called “soft money” — donations from corporations, unions, and individuals used to influence elections — and coordination between independent groups like PACs and the parties and candidates they support.
The charges leveled against Catalist have the potential to rock not just the Hillary Clinton campaign, who enjoy close ties to the firm, but also the campaigns of other Democrats running for office in 2016.
So far, the complaints are just in the form of an FEC (Federal Exchange Commission) complaint. If action isn’t forced against the firm, Democrats will again enjoy an illegal data and technological edge against the GOP in 2016, as they apparently did in previous election cycles.
Imagine if a Republican firm were caught in a similar situation. Odds would be it wouldn’t take intense political pressure for accountability to take place.
Comment below: Do you think we’ll uncover more illegal activity from organizations tied to Hillary’s campaign before 2016?