Is well worth it.... Instead of just feeling the corruption but struggling to really put a finger on it. This lays it all out and explains all the connections to show how 10 individuals have given 18% of her contributions.

I'd also add that many of these same contributors are also the main contributors to her other SuperPac Priorities USA Action.

I got some heat for that but it was public info. Part of post: (these donations were all by the same person whose name I deleted for sensitive souls). It was public info but somebody has hidden the site now. I wonder if it was Clinton? It is or was public information.

She is disingenuous when she brags about her small donations . . . which she hasn't done much of lately to her credit. Maybe this post did some good. There were many, many state dept employees who had done the same thing.

Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 12/01/2015 $15
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 12/01/2015 $15
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 12/22/2015 $38
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 12/31/2015 $100
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 12/22/2015 $38
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/30/2015 $38
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/01/2015 $15
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/24/2015 $50
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/25/2015 $50
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 08/01/2015 $15
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 08/25/2015 $50
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/29/2015 $38
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/13/2015 $25
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/15/2015 $25
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 08/22/2015 $50
Doe, John U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTING RANDALLSTOWN MD 211332057 09/27/2015 $38 U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Let me explain...

If you donate over $200 total your donations have to be itemized and listed on the FEC filings they do. I am listed on those FEC filings for Sanders and I am not a paid shill donating to him.

I donate in typical amounts of $15 here or there and so my name shows up a lot on the filing. Likely an employee of the state department who would of course likely support Hillary since she was the SoS donated multiple amount here or there.

This was a way too make avg donations much lower so she could say she got avg of $50. If she did not get many $1 ones her avg would be in 10,000s range.

But I'll stand aside now.

by making a bunch of tiny donations and bringing my average contribution down.

If you collect 49 million from 1 person and then $1 from 100,000 people who do it 10 times.
The avg would come out to be 49.99995000005. So claiming it is $50 avg is the truth.

It kinda Like saying "I did not have sexual relations with that women" It could be a true statement because
Clinton wasn't asked if she had sexual relations with him, just if he had them with her. Which he did not. She gave him oral sex. He did not touch her. See you and Sanders are not "good politicians" like Clinton because you think a lie is a lie but truth is you spin it and it is the truth..

But she is telling her supporters, whether they are smart enough to figure it out or not, help me mislead the American public.

trying to slut shame her.

I voted for Sanders here in NC, and shuffled people to the polls. I am disgusted by your post because you MEAN for DU members here to TURN on many of the same people who have been funding left causes for much of the last 20 years mainly as a COUNTER to the EXTREMELY WELL-FUNDED RW machine.

The RW has been funded by 10s of billions over the years and you want to attack some of the few wealthy Democrats that have been funding the left and progressive causes CONSISTENTLY?

What have you been doing the last 20 years that you think it is OK to smear these people and point to their being Jewish, and speak of them as if they are motivated by greed or enrichment? If they were they would be aligned with the Kochs and the GOP not the Dems and women's groups and environmental groups and equality groups. They have spent decades helping the left to STOP the onslaught we have been facing (those of us who have been fighting, anyway), and Soros, in particular, has been one of the biggest targets of the RW propaganda machine - what motivates YOU to now try and lead a hate-fest against Soros, too?

So.....who are YOU, GeorgiaPeanuts, and what have you been doing the last twenty years that gives you the right to diminish the efforts and contributions of those women and men you are targeting here? DU has been around for over 15 years and many of us have been GRATEFUL for those who were willing to use a part of their fortunes to counter the GOLIATH being built by the RW in hopes of smashing us into oblivion.


I hope other Sanders supporters speak out against this pitiful post of yours.

Billionaires buying elections are wrong no matter what side is being bought. Younger people like myself are tired of sham elections where the wealthy donors use their influence to buy access to politicians and get their needs met while policies supported by the majority of Americans are ignored.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

Princeton did a study that found we are an Oligarchy. And I know that it is not just the Right Wing that is part of this Oligarchy, the Democratic Party is just as complicit. Republicans and Democrats alike go on their cocktail circuits and smooze it up, while in public life they act as though they are bitter enemies.

You seem to have a black and white view as if when the Kochs donate huge amounts of money it is bad, but if the top Democrat donors do it, it is okay.

edit: I'll also add that I didn't write this piece, so speaking as if I slut shamed Cheryl or I'm anti-Semitic is ridiculous.

I think the point the author make about the ties to Israel tie into Clinton's Warhawk foreign policy posturing especially with regards to Syria.

It is all pretense and Bernie doesn't do it. I've donated as well to Bernie and I don't do it to make it look like I'm a small donor and I'm actually a pretty big donor. So, uber rich, corporations, super pacs, or getting little guys (who knows how little) who work for you to make donations look like many small ones so you can use that to campaign? It is all a form a fraud or buying government.

Who cares. But I leave it to you two to argue. This is a distraction now.

or to even bother countering the RW machine that was built. What do you think would have happened by 1990, 2000 or 2005 without anyone on the left using their money to support progressive causes?

And, yeah, there is a HUGE difference when Kochs and RWers do it to fulfill their fascist agenda, and when Democrats do it to NOT enrich themselves personally, but, do it in support of issues concerning equality, worker's rights, women's rights, and the environment.

Further - the Dems have never even come close to the 10s of BILLIONS that built the RW machine since the 80s.

Your both sides are the same implication is utter HORSESH!T!

So....tell us how YOU have been fighting the RW machine the last 20 years, and have become too pure for the likes of Soros, or Cheryl Haim, or women's groups, or.....

....or....are you just completely unaware that there have been a good number of us who have been in these battles against the fascist agenda for DECADES?

Real change happens from the grassroots level; Civil Rights, Womens Rights, Gay Rights all came about because the disaffected groups stood up and marched and pursued activism for their rights. Suggesting that all it takes is a billionaire to swoop in and sprinkle money and all is well is crazy.

I am a voter who never voted nationally except for Sanders and if he loses and things stay the same it will likely be the reality I will go back to.

I am a progressive independent and I donate my time and money to local grassroots efforts and I think we will have to agree to disagree because I consider it very troubling and wrong that the Koch Brothers and other right wing sources are pouring huge amounts of money into the political process, but I also think it is equally as wrong when the same thing happens on the left side.

I think if the Democratic Party rejected all billionaire money and ran a platform that average Americans wanted then they would have no problem winning elections and gaining back seats they lost, that they seem so intent on marginalizing Sanders shows what they think about doing that.

Frankly, the Democratic Party exposed itself to progressives for what it really is when it couldn't do much of anything progressive even when Obama first got in and Democratic party controlled all parts of the government.

adjusting their platform?

Those groups fighting for their rights were ALSO funded by money.....and took decades....decades of activism that was also FUNDED by small donors and large donors. Even the marches happened with money. Have you EVER organized anything big that DIDN'T have costs attached?

Your eagerness to claim that wealthy people donating to progressive causes and political groups is JUST AS BAD as the financiers of groups seeking to deny rights and equality and to further pollute the planet in order to empower and enrich themselves personally, is interesting. Especially since we have been seeing a huge increase in posts like yours these days. I remember not too long ago when Rand Paul supporters came here pushing that line. It was horsesh!t then and still is.

What issue regarding rights or the environment is important enough to YOU to fund? I only know you are focused on this primary race and nothing else in the few weeks you've been here at DU, so that is why I am forced to ask.

and you keep saying that I am suggesting donating to progressive causes is bad. Hillary Clinton SuperPacs are not progressive causes and I can say that it is fact that Bernie Sanders is outraising Hillary Clinton now without needing to take any money from Billionaires. If he had started fundraising the same time as Hillary he might even be toe to toe with her fundraising even including her SuperPacs. This shows to me loud and clear that a progressive message focused on issues most Americans support can work without needing Billionaires. I'd also point to Jeb Bush who received the most money of all the candidates and spent thousands of dollars per vote failed miserably.

Billionaires can do good things without pouring the money into the political process especially via the SuperPacs and Dark money groups where they can pour unlimited amounts.

If a billionaire wants to donate a lot of money to one of the local LGBTQ youth shelters here in Atlanta, is that wrong? NO, but that is very different then buying politicians and influence on the policies that are enacted in the government.

youth and build a shelter. Who doesn't KNOW something that simple?

You need to be TOLD what GOVERNMENT can do? It can STRIP protection of LGBTQ youth, as NC did last week.

Get back to the BOTTOM LINE here - you are never going to stop the RW machine from being funded. You know it - you just want to do your best to attack and smear those most likely to donate large sums of money to the political groups supporting progressive policies.

You attacked them, imo, based in your own vanity, a vanity that is certain that YOUR acts and donations this election year are pure and earnest, and Cheryl Haim and George Soros' acts and donations over the last few decades couldn't possibly be as pure and earnest as yours.

We expect targets to be drawn on anyone's back who stands up to counter the RW machine - we shouldn't expect people claiming to be progressives to be the ones taking aim at them, too.

While I understand your concern with the tone of the OP, and the nature of your objection, there is an important underlying point that I think is important. Maybe a couple of points....

First point. It ios not a bad thing to know who is the major influence and source of support for politicians.

Second point: The extent of influence of a close circle of wealthy supporters does smack of Oligarchy.

Philanthropy is good -- but the nature of the philanthropy is also important. Penny Pritzger, for example, is an all out exponent of free trade agreements like TPP. While she is entitled to her opinion, her influence and closeness to the Clintons and Obama helps to shut out opposing views.

Likewise the Sabans. He is a right-wing supporter of the more militaristic aspects of the relationship with Israel. He is also incredibly wealthy and influential (and was a former business partner with Rupert Murdoch.)

I find the paragraph below somewhat disturbing and typical of how Oligarchs (no matter what their intentions) have too much influence when they are so cozy with politicians (who are also part of the oligarchy).

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/05/10/the-influencer
The Influencer -- New Yorker magazine

I'm not as eloquent a writer and sometimes I succumb to being a bit snarky...

And your quote:

for decades and now some on DU want to join in on the attacks and smears.

Yeah....this exchange was generated by the 'No difference between the two parties' crowd that used to be recognized as RandPaul2016. Let's just make it No Difference from GOP Underground and keep recommending these posts right up to election day.

I know all about Saban and was welcomed into his home for an AIDS Research fundraising event in the 90s.

Sorry, but I pick SIDES. Some here can flit from side to side - I will NOT reward the decades of RW smears and propaganda by furthering the perception that there is no difference.

And I am appalled that some of my longtime compatriots here will not draw the line at that horseshit.

and even made Soros their prime boogeyman for funding progressive groups and publications, is NOT something I would ever agree to, Armstead.

I've been fighting the RW propaganda machine since my days with FAIR and then MWO. I thought we were doing that here at DU. Apparently, for THIS election cycle, the RW propaganda has found a comfortable place to call home.

I highly doubt that Sanders approves of these attacks on these people and groups by some claiming to be in his camp.

Perhaps your sense of smell isn't what it used to be.

It raises a lot of fundamental issues, which are probably best left until after the heat of the primary. Since we both at least agree that Sanders is a preferred candidate, let's leave it at that for now.

The OP didn't go after giant corporations, did he?

Nope - he kept it narrowed to people who have been funding progressive causes and policy issues for the last few decades and as a small COUNTER to the RW's enormous machine.

If you really believe that Soros and Kochs are motivated by the same policies and greed, then keep applauding posts like this one - I think these posts are set up for dupes.

So what have you been doing?

BTW, I've also never voted single party - I'm a progressive and I've honored all both parties on the left with my vote when necessary. If one party dumps on your, teach them a lesson. I'm older and I never voted status quo when change was needed.

BTW#2, you are awfully emotional. Calm down and use logic. Passion is one thing but passion and emotional outbursts are not the same thing.

yeah, I read his post as an enormous insult to Cheryl, and an insult to all the progressive groups who have been funded over the years thanks to people who don't fund these progressive groups to enrich themselves financially.

Equating the years of funding women's groups, equality groups and environmental groups and the politicians aligned on those issues with what the Kochs and their ilk have been doing is a LIE.

try again because I'm not sure who or what you are addressing. "his post" - you mean mine?

Big money . . . faux small donors from State . . . c'mon. It is all a lie. Bernie hasn't asked people to send small donations every other day so he can claim all small donors. No, that's staged.

How many more times do you want to pretend my post was about yours?

Reading is fundamental.

I think that it is a huuuge problem that 10 people are almost ℅20 of donations. Though I think that we have the supreme Court to thank for this boondoggle. It's not just the Democrats that are thinking this way either. I see countless posts on Facebook talking about this problem on the Republican side, and I live waaay back in the mountains of Tn and hear this. So it's not just a D issue.

As a matter of fact, this is probably a good reason that this election cycle has just been crazy with Trump. One of the big things you hear about him from people is, " He is self funded with no strings attached." Now whether that is true or not, that is what's being said.

I think you are spot on.

Thank you for an excellent OP and thread, GeorgiaPeanuts.

When money is power in politics, the result is oligarchy.

I'm glad that multiple fact-checkers have pushed back against all this nonsense about Hillary's donations.

Corporations don't contribute to campaigns.

You know, in your Soros is no different than Kochs world.