Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   Accused of misusing campaign funds, congressman then uses more campaign funds to fight the charges   (forbes.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Federal Election Campaign Act, Money, campaign money, United States Congress, campaign funds, legal fees, Preselection, United States House of Representatives  
•       •       •

1446 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Jun 2021 at 6:13 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



37 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-06-15 9:23:14 AM  
He may have illegally used campaign funds but I think using campaign funds for a defence is allowed.  Isn't it?
 
2021-06-15 1:15:32 PM  

mrshowrules: He may have illegally used campaign funds but I think using campaign funds for a defence is allowed.  Isn't it?


FTFA:

U.S. congressman under investigation for allegedly using campaign money to pay for personal expenses dipped into those same funds to cover his legal fees. Doing so, however, does not appear to violate federal election law.

Seems you're right.
 
2021-06-15 4:02:13 PM  
frinkiac.comView Full Size
 
2021-06-15 6:21:53 PM  
How does that not violate election law??
 
2021-06-15 6:25:59 PM  
Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

specials-images.forbesimg.comView Full Size
 
2021-06-15 6:28:29 PM  

austerity101: How does that not violate election law??


If only there were something you could read that might explain it.
 
2021-06-15 6:29:33 PM  
That liberal rag Forbes once again exposes its bias against dependable GOP men.
 
2021-06-15 6:30:04 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]


He actually looks like he is leaving his frat house after a night celebrating beating the rape charges.
 
2021-06-15 6:31:33 PM  

BMulligan: austerity101: How does that not violate election law??

If only there were something you could read that might explain it.


First off, GFY.

Second off, my question was obviously rhetorical. I'm trying to figure out why this would even be allowed. It seems extremely irresponsible for it to be allowed. But that's me.
 
2021-06-15 6:32:36 PM  

Cafe Threads: mrshowrules: He may have illegally used campaign funds but I think using campaign funds for a defence is allowed.  Isn't it?

FTFA:

U.S. congressman under investigation for allegedly using campaign money to pay for personal expenses dipped into those same funds to cover his legal fees. Doing so, however, does not appear to violate federal election law.

Seems you're right.


But, it seems to me if he continues to solicit campaign contributions, intending to spend the money on defense lawyers, he's committing fraud.  I mean, the donors think they're buying access and political favors, but really they're paying for a lawyer's mistress.  That's fraud.
 
2021-06-15 6:34:38 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-06-15 6:35:29 PM  
Oh look another douche bag, that looks like a douche bag.
 
2021-06-15 6:40:41 PM  
Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?
 
2021-06-15 6:40:50 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-06-15 6:41:01 PM  

Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?


15.
 
2021-06-15 6:41:52 PM  

Aquapope: Cafe Threads: mrshowrules: He may have illegally used campaign funds but I think using campaign funds for a defence is allowed.  Isn't it?

FTFA:

U.S. congressman under investigation for allegedly using campaign money to pay for personal expenses dipped into those same funds to cover his legal fees. Doing so, however, does not appear to violate federal election law.

Seems you're right.

But, it seems to me if he continues to solicit campaign contributions, intending to spend the money on defense lawyers, he's committing fraud.  I mean, the donors think they're buying access and political favors, but really they're paying for a lawyer's mistress.  That's fraud.


You think the candidate won't remember who contributed to their defense fund?
 
2021-06-15 6:43:51 PM  

Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.


Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.
 
2021-06-15 6:48:58 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]


The gold buttons kill it. That's the kind of jacket that you pair with white trousers and hat when you want to be a sailor for Halloween.
 
2021-06-15 6:49:35 PM  
What monetary help could his brother possibly need to re-enlist in the Navy?? That's weird.
 
2021-06-15 7:06:15 PM  

casual disregard: Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.

Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.


False
 
2021-06-15 7:09:14 PM  

Aquapope: Cafe Threads: mrshowrules: He may have illegally used campaign funds but I think using campaign funds for a defence is allowed.  Isn't it?

FTFA:

U.S. congressman under investigation for allegedly using campaign money to pay for personal expenses dipped into those same funds to cover his legal fees. Doing so, however, does not appear to violate federal election law.

Seems you're right.

But, it seems to me if he continues to solicit campaign contributions, intending to spend the money on defense lawyers, he's committing fraud.  I mean, the donors think they're buying access and political favors, but really they're paying for a lawyer's mistress.  That's fraud.


Well the people in charge think otherwise. I'd be open to owing back that money if you lost your case.
 
2021-06-15 7:14:05 PM  

qorkfiend: casual disregard: Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.

Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.

False


I love to learn when I'm wrong. I live for it.

What did I do wrong this time?
 
2021-06-15 7:14:42 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?



images.yuku.comView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size


Wow looks like Gutter from PCU cleaned himself up.
 
2021-06-15 7:31:31 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]


Looks like Carl Wilson from the Beach Boys.
 
2021-06-15 7:33:23 PM  

ThePea: What monetary help could his brother possibly need to re-enlist in the Navy?? That's weird.


He bribed them so they would let his brother reenlist.  Brother must be an even bigger dinglefutz than this dinglefutz.
 
2021-06-15 7:38:37 PM  

Tor_Eckman: ThePea: What monetary help could his brother possibly need to re-enlist in the Navy?? That's weird.

He bribed them so they would let his brother reenlist.  Brother must be an even bigger dinglefutz than this dinglefutz.


But who are you gonna bribe? All he had to do was look twice at a recruiter & they would've signed him right there in the Rally's parking lot. No one's bribing their way into an enlisted Navy slot.
 
2021-06-15 7:52:16 PM  

austerity101: BMulligan: austerity101: How does that not violate election law??

If only there were something you could read that might explain it.

First off, GFY.

Second off, my question was obviously rhetorical. I'm trying to figure out why this would even be allowed. It seems extremely irresponsible for it to be allowed. But that's me.


It's allowed because there's no law against it.  Probably because the people who write laws want to allow spending campaign dollars to defend themselves if needed.

The rules aren't made by someone who decides what should be reality, the rules are made by people who are supposed to represent the folks at home.  There's a reason for the phrase "there ought to be a law", and that's because no one has thought of the law, or no one has been able to pass it.  You take a circumstance, you react to it legally, and when that fails you react legislatively.  And that can't be in retrospect.

Rhetorical questions, by the way, always have an answer.
 
2021-06-15 7:55:55 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-06-15 8:05:20 PM  

casual disregard: qorkfiend: casual disregard: Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.

Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.

False

I love to learn when I'm wrong. I live for it.

What did I do wrong this time?


Article I, Section 2: "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."

Article I, Section 3: "No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."
 
2021-06-15 8:17:43 PM  

qorkfiend: casual disregard: qorkfiend: casual disregard: Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.

Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.

False

I love to learn when I'm wrong. I live for it.

What did I do wrong this time?

Article I, Section 2: "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."

Article I, Section 3: "No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."


Those are not really "qualifications" though. Not like, say, having a degree, or a certain amount of experience, or certification...
 
2021-06-15 8:18:18 PM  

winedrinkingman: Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]

He actually looks like he is leaving his frat house after a night celebrating beating the rape charges.


I thought that very thing.

Knew a bunch of guys like him. Talk smack when they are with their bros, but catch them by themselves, and they are polite as can be.

Someone should catch this wanker when he is alone.
 
2021-06-15 8:18:40 PM  

qorkfiend: casual disregard: qorkfiend: casual disregard: Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.

Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.

False

I love to learn when I'm wrong. I live for it.

What did I do wrong this time?

Article I, Section 2: "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."

Article I, Section 3: "No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."


I'm old enough to be both a Congressman and a Senator?

Both of those jobs sound terrible.
 
2021-06-15 8:37:47 PM  

Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]


Same place we got Gov. Tater -- GOP Godfather Haley Barbour pulls them out of his back pocket.
 
2021-06-15 8:50:40 PM  

Gin Buddy: qorkfiend: casual disregard: qorkfiend: casual disregard: Ragin' Asian: Ragin' Asian: Did they lower the qualification to be a member of Congress to 25?

15.

Theoretically there is no qualification for Congress.

That's kind of part of the problem.

False

I love to learn when I'm wrong. I live for it.

What did I do wrong this time?

Article I, Section 2: "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."

Article I, Section 3: "No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."

Those are not really "qualifications" though. Not like, say, having a degree, or a certain amount of experience, or certification...


They are literally qualifications.
 
2021-06-15 8:59:23 PM  

winedrinkingman: Senseless_drivel: Where do they find these goobers from 1965?

[specials-images.forbesimg.com image 850x587]

He actually looks like he is leaving his frat house after a night celebrating beating the rape charges.


Ha, I was trying to place the look.
 
2021-06-16 12:05:10 AM  
Doesn't Trump do the same thing?
 
2021-06-16 2:05:16 AM  
Ya know the difference between a shiat hole third country and any southern state?
The people from the 3rd world country are smarter, far less ignorant and more moral people than any southern hell hole.
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.