‘Ron Paul billionaire’ to get behind Chuck Baldwin

i need help with my math homework buy cialis new york victoria climbie case study https://caberfaepeaks.com/school/essay-order-online/27/ viagra kaufen in berlin source link how long does viagra take to kick in watch https://tasteofredding.org/5701-viagra-and-acetaminophen/ http://laclawrann.org/programs/canadian-health-and-care-mall/17/ free shakespere term paper essay writing ppt see url https://nyusternldp.blogs.stern.nyu.edu/how-to-delete-emails-on-iphone-6s-plus/ essay on advantages and disadvantages of computer and internet http://pejepscothistorical.org/education/college-application-essay-ideas/03/ https://dvas.org/propecia-propak-11678/ how to delete email contacts from ipad air 2 who has bought viagra online buy essay australia http://teacherswithoutborders.org/teach/best-writing-services-reviews/21/ upload essays online psychology essay ideas follow https://thejeffreyfoundation.org/newsletter/can-you-do-a-phd-in-anything/17/ creative writing scary stories cialis is for daily use click here custom essay papers net https://rainierfruit.com/viagra-use-in-urdu/ preparation of antifebrin coursework 1 2 pill of viagra Anonymous sources from inside the Baldwin campaign say that the famed “Ron Paul billionaire” — whose existence was confirmed by Stephen Gordon Ron Paul’s spokesman and grandson-in-law, Jesse Benton (correction) — is in negotiations to get behind Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin.

While the unknown benefactor, whom many still consider to be a hoax, allegedly sought to spend $50 million in a parallel campaign for Ron Paul, he’s reportedly willing to part with only a fraction of that — between $2 million and $3 million — for Baldwin. Still, this would be an enormous boon to the Baldwin campaign which, to date, has raised only around $40,000.

Reports say that negotiations between the billionaire and the Paul campaign fell through when Ron Paul was unwilling to meet the issue-related demands of the billionaire backer. Our sources say the only request the billionaire has of Baldwin is that he comes out strongly against the Fed and for free-market currency. Baldwin is willing to do so, our sources say.

Below is the original “Ron Paul Billionaire” post from RonPaulForums, originally posted January 16.

Open Letter To Fellow Ron Paul Patriots:

This information was being held back for the right moment. We now believe that moment’s time has come. The intention of those controlling the hearts and minds of a large portion of the American People by blatant manipulation of the international media outlets was clear months ago. Recently the obvious nature of this manipulation has become so blatant that the time to act is upon us. What was obvious to a supporter now has reached the point that even non-supporter will be able to notice the intentional manipulation and see through the smoke and mirrors.

The purpose of this information is in no way intended to change anything you are currently doing to support Ron Paul. The grassroots efforts have been tremendous and instrumental in getting Ron Paul to the level of support he currently enjoys. By all means continue to do what you have been doing. Continue donating to the campaign and by all means continue your support on the street by passing the word about Ron Paul, the next President of the United States. Don’t forget the next big donation date just around the corner January 21, the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King.

For over 3 months a very wealthy libertarian minded individual has been lurking among you on numerous Ron Paul websites. He has been carefully watching the media, the various state GOP organizations, the National GOP, the grassroots efforts and the various candidate forums. He has come to one conclusion; the people behind the scenes, the ones that really have the most to lose are doing everything possible to derail the Ron Paul movement and campaign. People that were compromised inside of various organizations some time ago have collected and provided a plethora of evidence and documentation to provide a clear connection between numerous candidates’ staff and media personnel to harm Ron Paul. There are memos clearly stating “official editorial opinion” inside these organizations in collusion with interested parties that violate numerous laws and certainly ethics issues. Teams of individuals have been hired by candidates to write disinformation about Ron Paul on forums, including here, to manipulate polls and to post on the social networking sites. Furthermore even one media outlet has also dedicated individuals to deal with the grassroots postings online. The rabbit hole runs deep and when you see some of the people involved you will be amazed. As a matter of fact one person is in a position of trust that will be so embarrassed they will most likely resign from their job.

All things considered some actions have been taken. The individual involved in promoting what I am about to describe is no friend of the government and has no political ties. In fact he despises the IRS to whom he has paid tens of millions of dollars for many years. He has been involved in broadcasting in the past and knows the business quite well. He therefore decided months ago to prepare for the possible contingency that he would need to step forward and provide direct public support of the one person he feels can make a much needed difference in our country and the world, Ron Paul. That time has come.

A little over a two months ago we began production of a mini-series called “Ron Paul – The Peoples President”. Part One covers everything about Ron Paul from his introduction to politics to his voting record over the years. It documents his struggle against the entrenched elite and how these individuals have duped the American people for many decades. It shows the clear bias against Ron Paul and how he has many times stood alone in the interest of the American public only to be ignored in Congress. Part Two discusses 8 major issues of utmost importance to the American People to include Healthcare, taxes, constitutional values, monetary policy, the Federal Reserve System, a sound foreign policy, loss of liberties, the war on terrorism, real social security reform; it is all covered. Part Three which is now in it final days of post production explains how the various policies by which Dr. Paul stands could be implemented and how they would benefit the American People. Each part is one hour in length and is designed to run commercial free. In addition 3 different commercial trailers have been produced to advertise in advance the “mini series” to bring the maximum number of viewers to the program. The 3 one minute production trailers are “The war in Iraq, Oil and Corporate Profiteering” , “The Personal Income Tax & Social Security – Real Answers” and last “The American Healthcare Crisis, a Real Solution.”

This production has been quietly ongoing, in a privately owned production studio for months. The production quality is everything you would expect from a Hollywood production house. To give you an example the host speaks on a set every bit as nice as the production set used by Wolf Blitzer’s Situation room, well actually nicer. I am also pleased to announce that the host is a well known actor.

The exclusion by Fox News in the forum days before the New Hampshire primary was bad enough but the complete “blackout” to follow was the final straw. In the words of the individual behind this “It is time to roll. These people have awakened a sleeping giant and they will not know what hit them.” Of course, he was referring to himself and the resources available to him to deliver the message on primetime television.

Why is this information being posted here and now? Because we know, from our inside contacts, this forum is very well watched. Actually this forum is called the “paulhive” internally to one of the media organizations. After reading this they will realize what I am typing is true and that they do in fact have a leak. Yes, gentlemen, you are soon to be exposed. So the first thing he feels this does is serve a warning to the media; you are on notice that your days of disinformation are numbered. Your corruption and illegal activities soon will be exposed. In addition there has been collaboration among the news organizations to universally drop coverage. Yes, there has been a formal agreement and policy has been passed down. This is also going to be exposed and individuals are going to be called out, by name. Secondly, he has noticed a little too much negativity building among the most important people, the grassroots. I have been asked to say this to you. “Rome was not built in a day. Now is not the time to give up hope. Now is the time to double your efforts. This is far from over. You never know who lurks among you that are with you and your efforts.”

So where do we go from here? That decision is going to be made in the next few days. It has not yet been determined when mini-series time will be purchased. It should be before the Super Tuesday states. A lot depends on the media, the GOP and a few other important television specific factors. This broadcast time is going to be very expensive and needs to be planned carefully.

The bottom line is that this will run and we will do everything possible to get the GOP nomination. If it is clear that the media and GOP will do everything possible to derail a GOP nomination then perhaps the only solution left will be to elect Ron Paul as an independent non-party President. Yes, we know Ron Paul has said that he will not run third party or independently but with the backing of a Billionaire running a 3 hour national broadcast mini-series, once if not twice perhaps even three times, to support the grassroots would be more than enough to make history by electing an Independent President. All it takes is for people to hear his message in clear understandable terms and not soundbites and the rest takes place naturally. We hope all this considered would motivate Dr. Paul to continue to carry the torch of liberty to November for all of us regardless of the GOP nomination. They can have him as a Republican President or an Independent; the choice is now theirs. One thing is absolutely certain, he will have a voice until November when he returns the White House to the people.

Keep your heads up and keep doing what you can. Donate money, donate your time and keep spreading the word about our next President, Dr. Ron Paul. Support is critical at this time. Just remember, you never know who lurks around you.

In closing, this account was created on a public computer for the express purpose of releasing this notice. No private messages will be read or responded to so please do not write any private responses asking for details. When the time is right this individual will step forward and make his identity known. For reasons including government harassment and media interference this individual must remain anonymous as he is well enough known for this to quickly make news. Distractions right now would not be productive.

In addition, please do not contact the Ron Paul Campaign about this as we have not contacted them and they are learning about this at the same time as you. They do not have any information nor will they until we are ready. We will have a press office open at the time we make an official release in the coming future to answer any questions.

Keep up the great work patriots our country is once again soon to be ours!

68 thoughts on “‘Ron Paul billionaire’ to get behind Chuck Baldwin

  1. Fred Church Ortiz

    “Reports say that negotiations between the billionaire and the Paul campaign fell through when Ron Paul was unwilling to meet the issue-related demands of the billionaire backer. Our sources say the only request the billionaire has of Baldwin is that he comes out strongly against the Fed and for free-market currency.”

    So does that mean… The billionaire disagreed with Paul on stuff he agrees with Baldwin on already?

  2. G.E. Post author

    If the report is accurate, my guess is that it would mean one of two things:

    1) The billionaire is culturally conservative and wanted Paul to emphasize some aspect of cultural conservatism that Paul did not share but Baldwin does. (Immigration, gay rights, etc.)

    2) The billionaire feels he blew his opportunity with Paul and/or is willing to drop $2-3 million on Baldwin even if they’re not in complete agreement.

  3. Deran

    Okay, the thing is. Unless said billionaire is himself running for president, his ability to endlessly support another candaite is limited by the same FEC regs that regulate all donors.

    And I believe the notorious 527 committees can only run negative ads against a candidates? I could be wrong there.

    I think any married couple would be limited to a combination of maybe $200k? That includes doantions to party committees. Does the CP have an FEC qualified/recognized National Committee?

    Does anyone have any other knowledge of FEC regs that would permit an individual to “legally” massively fund a candidate; excluding themselves as that candidate?

    Now, if said mystery billionaire has many other super-rich friends who would also give the max to the candidate and party, then, that would be serious.

  4. G.E. Post author

    Deran – An individual can spend as much money as he/she wants, independently of a political campaign. There’s still SOME free speech left in America.

  5. gregsarnowski

    I find this really hard to believe. This “billionaire” rumor has been floating around since January, and so far it’s been all talk, no action. It certainly effectively distracted the Ron Paul grassroots, though.

    No billionaire is going to come out of the sky and give Chuck Baldwin millions of dollars.

  6. G.E. Post author

    Greg – The existence of this billionaire has been confirmed by Stephen Gordon and Jesse Benton, the latter of which is Ron Paul’s grandson-in-law, who met Ron Paul’s granddaughter through the campaign. You think he and Gordon are lying?

  7. Trent Hill

    My understanding was not that the Billionaire bailed out on Ron Paul because of issue disagreements, but because of timing. The billionaire didnt have a budget and such set up until right after Feb. 5th, when he felt all was lost.

  8. gregsarnowski

    Even if this billionaire exists, he doesn’t seem particularly interested in parting with his money. Actions speak louder than words. Time will tell, I guess.

  9. sunshinebatman

    1. Jesse is not Dr. Paul’s grandson-in-law. The wedding is in August.

    2. Jesse did not “confirm” the billionaire story.

    3. Dr. Paul’s actual grandson mentioned the billionaire rumor DERISIVELY on his online radio show (Jesse was a guest that episode), which the FMNN report retardedly to as a “confirmation.” Find the file and listen for yourself.

    I think those are the only 3 ways this report is mistaken, incorrect, wrong, or otherwise stupid. I’ll let you know if there’s a fourth.

  10. G.E. Post author

    Wow. So the wedding isn’t until August. Oh no! This really affects the validity of the report.

    #2: We cite the source that says Jesse Benton confirmed the story. Blame that source, not us, if it’s untrue.

    #3: This has nothing to do with anything.

    This report is not “mistaken” — it is reporting SPECULATION. It says “MANY PEOPLE CONSIDER THE RON PAUL BILLIONAIRE TO BE A HOAX.”

  11. angelatc

    Oh blogger, you’re right on the edge of making a fool out of yourself. If you want to play journalist, you need to check your own facts.

    Over in the Ron Paul Forums, there’s a post by Matt, who is Ron Paul’s grandson. In that post, he clearly states that they were mocking the concept of a secret billionaire when they discussed it on the air.

    Make a note – Free Market News Network is a crap organization. They totally screwed with the campaign on at least 2 occasions.

  12. Pingback: Constitution Party’s Baldwin To Get A Billionaire Moneybomb Boost? : Post Politics: Political News and Views in Tennessee

  13. richardwinger

    When the US Supreme Court upheld the McCain-Feingold law that limits how much an individual can give to a political party, it said that an “as applied” challenge can always be brought in case of a specific wealthy individual who wants to give to a minor party. If the billionaire does come through, I hope he and the Constitution Party will file a lawsuit to overturn the part of the McCain-Feingold law that limits how much an individual can give to a minor party.

  14. richardwinger

    Also, the billionaire could be nominated to run for presidential elector pledged to Baldwin, in whatever state he or she lives in. Does anyone know what state the billionaire lives in? Even if it’s Texas (one of the two states in which it is now too late to get on the ballot) he could be a candidate for presidential elector if Chuck Baldwin files as a declared write-in candidate. Since the Constitution protects the right of a candidate for any public office to spend as much of his or her own money as desired, the billionare could spend money legally that way.

  15. sunshinebatman

    “The story” linked doesn’t even say Benton “confrimed” it. It mentions Paul’s grandson — Matt Pyeatt — who was on air with Benton, who at that time in January, was not engaged to anyone.

    And again, “the story,” which doesn’t say what you say it said in the first place, got it wrong anyway, something which you could easily have checked by listening to the show.

    Good luck staying on google news, btw.

  16. sunshinebatman

    hmmm, okay, Gordon claims to have talked to a frontman for the mysterious billionaire…

    Did anyone ever vet the “frontman”?

    I wonder if Mark Cuban was involved in this scam. He promised Aaron Russo $10 million to distribute Freedom to Fascism — and welched. Then he did the same thing to the Loose Change kids.

  17. angelatc

    Hey, I hope I’m wrong, but that’s probably the same goofball who posted the original rumor on the Ron Paul Forums.

    Here’s the RPF post http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=95598 , and here’s another by the same author : http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1005701#post1005701

    Not that mlpyeatt is Matt Pyeatt, RP’s grandson.

    Remember who owns thirdpartywatch.com now, and couple that information with how dibilating the billionaire rumor was to the RP campaign.

    Of course, the rumor is taking on life of it’s own now, and speculation is that Anita Andrews brought the billionaire with her.

    I think this money will show up at the same time the Michelle Obama “whitey” tape does.

  18. Trent Hill

    Yea. TPW was owned by Stephen Gordon, who was a major player in Ron Paul’s campaign and played an even larger role in Alabama.

    Honestly–Im not banking on this money showing up–I doubt the validity of the rumor. But saying the original billionaire didnt exist seems ignorant in light of the fact that several higher-ups have confirmed it.

  19. Fred Church Ortiz

    How exactly did the billionaire rumor debilitate the RP campaign? Everyone was skeptical of it at the time, from what I recall. Hell, it was damn obvious from the moment it was first posted that there wasn’t enough time to put it all in place by Feb 5th.

  20. Trent Hill

    Fred,

    exactly. It didnt. At worst, it was a rumor that got out of hand. At the least, it was a true story that never followed through.

  21. SovereignMN

    IF the billionaire rumor were true, could they skirt the donor cap issue by putting his name as a VP candidate on 1 state’s ballot? The CP Convention gave Baldwin the leeway to have different VP candidates in different states.

  22. Trent Hill

    SovereignMN,

    Yes, the “billionaire” could circumvent the law that way. Or,if he preferred anonymity, he could use Richard Winger’s method.

  23. G.E. Post author

    sunshinebatman – You are right, I did get it wrong. In my haste to publish the story, I misread the FMN report. Thank you for calling the error to my attention.

  24. sunshinebatman

    Trent, the big question n the mystery billionaire story is, how much do you trust Steve Gordon?

    And does that trust extend to include trusting his sense of which billionaires are trustworthy?

  25. John P Slevin

    What BS.

    GE. you wrote: “If the report is accurate, my guess is that it would mean one of two things”

    No, it only could mean one thing—it would mean both the Baldwin campaign and the “billionaire” were breaking the law.

    One CANNOT conspire with a major contributor. No way, no ifs ands or buts. Cannot be done.

    Really stupid article to have missed that simple FEC point

    Really stupid.

  26. G.E. Post author

    Read Richard Winger’s posts, JPS.

    You’re wrong, anyway. It’s not coordination to ask a candidate where he stands on issues and what he intends to emphasize in his campaign.

    The U.S. is not quite that fascist anyway.

  27. John P Slevin

    Now the original article has been changed to remove the name of the Ron Paul relative and to substiture Stephen Gordon’s name.

    Ron Paul’s campaign never would have been so stupid as to have had such and obviously illegal conversation.

    I don’t know that Baldwin’s campaign is so stupid.

    The whole premise is saying Baldwin’s campaign is engaged in a conspiracy to violate campaign spending law.

    Any individual is limited to 2.300.00 for the General Election. Not one penny more.

    There can be no deals…it really is very simple.

  28. G.E. Post author

    Dude – YOU ARE WRONG on the legality. You are so wrong, it’s embarrassing. Read Richard Winger’s posts. You think you know more than him? The guy could be an elector. The FEC has no teeth, anyway. Let it go to the Supreme Court. And thirdly, having a conversation to discuss issue positions and campaign emphasis is NOT coordinating campaign activities! It is perfectly legitimate. I have free speech rights, right? I can’t ask Chuck Baldwin where he stands and what he intends to emphasize, and then spend money if I like his answers? That’s absurd.

    Actually, one more point: What do you think — the toothless FEC is going to cite a speculative report on IPR in its non-ability to prosecute Baldwin? There’s no “crime” in violating an illegitimate, unconstitutional law — even if a law were being violated, which it would NOT be in this case.

  29. John P Slevin

    I did read Richard’s posts.

    Richard is not saying what you imply he is saying…if he did say it he would be wrong.

  30. John P Slevin

    There is no way around the limit, no legal way.

    You do not know what you are talking about.

    Your misinterpretation of Winger aside.

  31. John P Slevin

    “There’s no “crime” in violating an illegitimate, unconstitutional law — even if a law were being violated, which it would NOT be in this case.”

    What a bunch of tripe. If anyone coordinated campaign positions with a person who in exchange promised to spend more money to support that campaign, that is conspiracy to violate the law.

    The fact that the law shouldn’t exist doesn’t get around the fact that the law does exist.

  32. John P Slevin

    and YES, if record is anything, if Richard Winger were to say that it was alright, then certainly, I know more than RIchard.

    LOL. What a bunch of bs. Read FEC sometime, it ain’t that complicated.

    Richard is referring to court decisions.

    There are ALOT of decisions, means almost NOTHING.

  33. John P Slevin

    Just do something like this, and you might find out how “toothless” the FEC is.

  34. Gene Trosper

    This has got to be one of the sillier rumors I have heard since, well….some silly rumors about a “billionaire” who was going to help Ron Paul. I seriously don’t know why people give these rumors such credence. I mean, has ANYONE identified this person? I haven’t heard any names. Also, has anyone confirmed that is mystery person is indeed a billionaire?

  35. G.E. Post author

    JPS continues to embarrass himself with his ignorance.

    Anyone can spend any amount they want on personal political speech.

    Asking a candidate what his positions are and what he intends to emphasize does not bar a person from exercising his First Amendment rights.

    PERIOD.

    The $2,300 is a limit on a donation to a campaign. THERE ARE NO LIMITS on independent expenditures.

    And then JPS identifies the various sub-sections of my argument — where I say “even if you were right about this, which you’re not, you’d still be wrong because of A, B, and C” — and attacks them as if they’re my core argument.

    So I’ll just stick to the obvious tract: YOU ARE WRONG.

    It’s like me asking Hillary. “Hillary, what is your stand on universal healthcare? Will you emphasize this in the campaign?”

    According to JPS, she has to say “no comment” or else I’m barred from taking out an ad on her behalf.

    Come on, JPS! You can’t be this daft. What about the guy who spend several hundred thousand on ads in USA Today for Ron Paul? You’re telling me that if he asked Ron Paul a couple of questions, the FEC would have thrown him in Gitmo?

    Your crush on Barr is leading you to seriously delusions.

  36. John P Slevin

    Yes Gene, it’s all bs. I don’t know why places publish this crap, but it started on Ron Paul forums now it’s over here.

    I give great interest to the fact that first the key part of the “story” was attributed to a Ron Paul relative, then that was changed to Stephen Gordon.

    As a simple education, NEITHER could have anything to do with an attempt to get money to Baldwin or to Baldwin’s party…that too is long established law.

    Very clear, very simple. Not saying it’s right, but that is the way it is. Anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know anything.

  37. G.E. Post author

    Secondly, Richard is pointing out that if the guy is an elector, he cannot be limited in his expenditures under any circumstances, AND, if the guy wanted to give Baldwin a check for $2 million (which he doesn’t), the Supreme Court very well might let it stand. IF it were even challenged, which it probably wouldn’t be.

  38. G.E. Post author

    JPS – I made a mistake, which I’ve noted. I linked to the guy correcting me. It was an error! Jesus Christ.

    I’m not saying the rumor is true. Why are you Barrbarians so dense as to confuse the REPORT of a rumor as a fact? What is wrong with you people?

  39. G.E. Post author

    Damn it, JPS. How can I spell it out for you any more simply: THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GIVING MONEY TO BALDWIN OR HIS PARTY (which may stand up in the SC anyway) AND AN INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE BY A RICH INDIVIDUAL.

    You are aware a guy spend several hundred thousand publishing Ron Paul ads, right? And I assume you heard of the Ron Paul blimp.

  40. John P Slevin

    Ads, such as the full page ads for Ron Paul, can be bought as an independent expenditure…there can be no coordination with the campaign.

    The blimp was advertising, again, no coordination with the campaign allowed.

    The key point here is not the money, it’s the sitting down with the campaign of someone else and coordinating…that is illegal. It’s illegal for anyone, elector or not.

  41. Bill Woolsey

    I think it would be legal for someone to ask for clarification where the campaign stood on various issues.

    And then, based upon those answers, to decide whether or not to support the campaign.

    And then make independent expenditures.

    On the other hand, asking the campaign about campaign emphasis in order to determine what kind of things to emphasize in the “independent” expenditures, would be a a legal problem. (What issues should I emphasize in my “independent ads?)

    A quid pro quo (I will contribute money to you if you take certain positions) looks like bribery.
    Prohibiting that would be the ostensible purpose of campaign finance laws.

    Anyway, I think part of the debate here is about a confusion between the first and second scenario. Notice that they could be described in similar ways.

  42. Austin Cassidy

    If Steve Gordon, or some other Ron Paul staffers, were coordinating to create a budget for this mythical billionaire… that seems like a violation of the law.

    But regardless, even $2-$3 million for Chuck Baldwin wouldn’t make much of any difference. Consider that Pat Buchanan blew through tens of millions of dollars in 2000 and failed to get a half million votes.

    Votes for a minor party Presidential candidate are amazingly expensive to buy.

    Money matters up to a point. It matters in gaining ballot access, allowing for continued travel and a professional-enough looking campaign staff, materials, etc.

    But this guy couldn’t give Baldwin that sort of support. I don’t think he could buy ballot access or actual campaign materials for him.

    He could really just do tv, radio ads, mail… and that

    Third party candidates with near 50 state ballot access have a certain floor of support. A couple hundred thousand votes. Those are guaranteed whether they spend $300,000 or $30,000,000 campaigning.

    Badnarik 2004
    ———————-
    300,000 votes = free w/ ballot access
    97,000 votes = $1 million campaigning

    To get traction and start climbing away from that floor you need to be taken seriously by the media… Nader sorta was in 2000. Perot was in 1992 and 1996 *because* of his money.

    But just giving someone $2 million to run for President doesn’t mean a whole lot because it’s not enough for the media to take real notice and treat them like a serious candidate.

  43. Fred Church Ortiz

    Regarding your Buchanan example Austin, many people believe Pat’s sister embezzled a good deal of those funds. At least, that’s what a lot of Reform Party types were saying to me back then. I’m trying to find a link to give you on it, but no luck yet. Don Lake would probably know 😉

  44. Deran

    Okay, Mr. Slevin is making the points I was trying to make. If said billionaire talks to the Baldwin campaign, that is coordination and the everything done is regulated by the FEC.

    And as Mr. Slevin said indie expenditures have to be UNCOORDINATED with the campaign.

    If he is going to take Mr. Winger’s proposed path (as an elector) he should do it right now and start that law suit.

    And rather than call others names, anyone who doubts the regs around indie expenditures in a federal race just ring up the FEC and ask them.

  45. G.E. Post author

    Talking = coordination?

    So if Baldwin and the “billionaire” (who may not even exist, mind you) are in the same room, they need to give each other the silent treatment?

  46. John P Slevin

    G.E.,

    Talking = coordination?

    So if Baldwin and the “billionaire” (who may not even exist, mind you) are in the same room, they need to give each other the silent treatment?

    Your original article clearly articulates much more than that.

    You insultingly mentoned a nothing like Stephen Gordon and proposed that he knew something, when, legally, he could not

    Then, you grasped on Richard Winger’s comment regarding a Supremes decision which you stubbornly refuse to understand.

    All the while you treated my original comment like some Barrism.

    Don’t grasp at some the fantasies of some invetereate liar like Stephen Gordon to tell me I don’t know what I am talkinga about as far as campaign finance law goes.

    Stephen Gordon’s entire story, as related by you, shows a conspiracy to violate campaign finance law.

    NOTHING Richard Winger posted obviates that.

    Gordon is so far off any reservation as to be laughable.

    Who is their right frigging mind would hire some STUPE like Gordon to create a budget for a high budget campaign? Show me ONE person, EVER, who has hired Gordon for such an effort. Just show me ONE.

    Be honest.

  47. John P Slevin

    The simple facts are these.

    No individual may contribute more than 2,300.00 to ANY coordinated effort…

    There are some larger amounts for individuals (constantly in flux) when those “gifts” are made to “parties”.

    NO such larger amounts apply in the case of electors. Sure, everyone, LONG TIME, has understood the “elector exception”…pure BS and I’m not sure why Richard even weighed in with this TOTAL BS and TOTALLY disconnected thought.

    But it got you going, right? Shit, read the decision, if you can’t understand what Richard actually posted here…he shouldn’t even have posted it.

    One CAN NOT coordinate. It IS that simple. There IS NO workaround.

    THAT, and the absolutely sTUPID NOTION that Stephen Gordon EVER has had anything to do with even ONE successful campaign is really too much to swallow.

    GET SOME FACTS BEFORE YOU PUBLISH.

    LEARN SOMETHING.

    Even by your own standards, this guy has sold out your party, and you herald the idiot?

    COME ON?

  48. John P Slevin

    Here’s the simple factual truth. Richard Winger does know alot about ballot access law and NEVER has done field work.

    I do field work.

    Stephen Gordon steals from those who do actual work.

  49. John P Slevin

    Again, I demand, that IPR and YOU put up or shut up. Show me the ONE successful campaign ever run by one Stephen Gordon. Come on, show me!

  50. John P Slevin

    With ALL unnamed sources, Gordon spins the yarn that he was connected, and lemmings like G.E. follow.

    Why they do this is simple. They like to THINK they are connected to some ultimate reality.

    But, as G.E.’s original post shows, he has no clue…like his hero Gordon, G.E. has no clue.

  51. John P Slevin

    Finally, this stuff is BASIC campaign finance law. G.E’s original post was BS. Gordon’s comments, pure B.S. by a scam artist.

    Wingers’, misinterpreted by G.E.

    The simple fact is….FUCK THE BILLIONAIRE.

  52. John P Slevin

    and fuck the LP and those past and current employees, like Stephen Gordon, who know nothing except how to win the confidence of dolts like G.E.

  53. John P Slevin

    remember, G.E. posted the gem above about how Stephen Gordon doesn’t lie.

    Stephen Gordon is Bill Redpath’s butt boy. Stephen Gordon’s involvement in this should raise a red flag to anyone.

    Stephen Gordon has NO actual campaign experience ANYWHERE.

    And, in that way, Stephen Gordon is EXACTLY what passes for LP for someone like G.E.

  54. John P Slevin

    Whether is is Bill “keep guns away from everhone but me” Redpath; Stephen Gordon “I’ve never run or had an actual key role in ANY campaign Gordon” or Mr. “screw all the faggots” Andrews, they all are the same.

    Understand that with the past and the CURRENT LNC, you get more of this.

    Understand that you don’t make it better with shit like G.E. publishes here.

    You make it worse.

  55. John P Slevin

    cause we must ount on outsiders to rid our ranks of people like Gordon, Andrews and Redpath
    Folks like G.E. count on them. Like truthers count on Alex Jones.

  56. John P Slevin

    G.E. incredibly STUPIDLY asked this:

    Talking = coordination?

    So if Baldwin and the “billionaire” (who may not even exist, mind you) are in the same room, they need to give each other the silent treatment?

    YES, you dimwitted follower of all who know nothing. YES.

  57. John P Slevin

    If one couln’t imagine someone as stupid as G.E., well, we’d have to call L. Neil to create him.

  58. John P Slevin

    Talking does NOT equal coordination, talking IS coordinaton

    Especially when you do it on a discussion board…now, you and Gordon may wish to continue our confab here, but I can assure you it is prosecutable…

    No one who gives is hurt, just you and your butt buddy Gordon…the imbecile.

  59. Trent Hill

    “If Steve Gordon, or some other Ron Paul staffers, were coordinating to create a budget for this mythical billionaire… that seems like a violation of the law.”

    Gordon was nota staffer for Paul at the time–just an unofficial advisor–which is completely legal.

    Also, GE is right. This billionaire could easily just ask Baldwin about the issues, and then make an independent expenditure. Or, he could plan to be a VP is one of many states, or an elector–and contribute an ENDLESS amount of his personal money DIRECTLY to the campaign AND coordinate it with that campaign.

  60. G.E. Post author

    JPS is the man! Your latest flurry of posts cracked me up, so I hope that was their intent.

    I love how you hate Gordon and Redpath, etc., and yet you love Barr — the candidate they arguably conspired to the LP nomination. I suppose you hate Cory, Viguerie and the rest of the Barr conspiracy too, right?

  61. Sean Scallon

    I’ll belive in the “Ron Paul Billionare” as soon as a I hear a name. A simple name. Mr. So-and-So. As Shakespear wrote “What’s in a name?” Well a lot when it comes to this rumor. If you actually say who this person is, then maybe we can judge whether this persons exists or not, whether he has the money he says he does and whether he truly is a libertarian.

    Short of that, then there is no “Ron Paul Billionare” because you cannot tell us who he is. If there is no name, then this person does not exists outside the realm of fanatsy.

    In other words, put up or shut up. The last think Chuck Baldwin needs is to be caught up in the flotsam and jetsam of the Ron Paul campaign.

  62. Pingback: Eunomia » Baldwin Campaign To Get Cash Infusion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *