# Liberty Movement > Grassroots Central >  DOJ indicts Jesse Benton and John Tate

## tsai3904



----------


## puppetmaster

> http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...ce-violations/


  Hey they are lobbyists......
When political operatives make under-the-table payments to buy an elected official’s political support, it undermines public confidence in our entire political system.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> DOJ site - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - Wednesday, August 5, 2015
> 
> The timing is obviously purely accidental 
> 
> http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-...-state-senator


The day before the first debate? Purely a coincidence.

----------


## timosman

> TPTB have played their biggest card. The Ministry of Truth couldn't keep Rand out of the debate, so now it's time for the Ministry of Love to step in...


You have not seen nothing yet ....

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I wouldn't wish this on anyone. I hope the charges are false. I feel very sorry for both of their families.


Seriously, I agree.

To be sucked into the nightmarish quagmire of the AmeriKan legal system is a fate sometimes worse than death.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Hey they are lobbyists......
> When political operatives make under-the-table payments to buy an elected official’s political support, it undermines public confidence in our entire political system.





> “The FBI will aggressively investigate those who corrupt the integrity of our democratic process.”


Now I can vote hard in peace, knowing that the brave boys down at the DOJ are keeping the system safe and secure.

----------


## timosman

> Seriously, I agree.
> 
> To be sucked into the nightmarish quagmire of the AmeriKan legal system is a fate sometimes worse than death.


We have a bigger fish to fry here than to lament over Jesse's bad luck. He should have stayed away. He is a liability.

----------


## William Tell

> boneyard bill,  Brett85,  compromise,  menciusmoldbug,  MichaelDavis,  Okaloosa,  Rocco, Aratus,  AuH2O,  brandon,  CaptLouAlbano,  Crashland,  eduardo89,  Galileo Galilei,  IndianaPolitico,  lib3rtarian,  mwkaufman,  niklarin,  NY-Dano,  Randslide,  rbohlig,  specsaregood,  TaftFan,  WD-NY wouldn't that have been a peach?
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/poll.ph...do=showresults


 Yup, insanity.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> We have a bigger fish to fry here than to lament over Jesse's bad luck. He should have stayed away. He is a liability.


I realize that.

"I wouldn't wish such and such on my worst enemy"... ya know?

He's family to the Pauls, and just that alone is enough to warrant some sympathy, even if it was his own dumb ass that caused all this.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Dang, this sucks for everyone. I can't say I'm shocked it happened. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. I hope the charges are false. I feel very sorry for both of their families.





> Seriously, I agree.
> 
> To be sucked into the nightmarish quagmire of the AmeriKan legal system is a fate sometimes worse than death.


Five felonies a days? I always forget the exact number...

----------


## Uriah

Hitting MSNBC now. Saying its bad for Rand.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

First they came for Kokesh, now they have come for Benton and Tate...

----------


## William Tell

> He should have stayed away. He is a liability.


Certainly far more than any of the supposed 'kooky' supporters. But this is nothing to gloat over.

----------


## Brett85

Isn't Rick Perry under indictment himself and is still running for President?

----------


## wizardwatson

I warned that given his "supposed tactic" of pandering to the right that filibustering the Patriot Act was a bad idea.

Now they have this SuperPAC issue and also the fact that Rand was pushing his Presidential Candidacy moneybomb during his Patriot Act filibuster to the "detriment of national security."  Something that some pointed out isn't even legal.

No doubt, they are amassing these things to discredit him during the debates.  Will be interesting to see whose mouth these allegations come from during the debates.

----------


## phill4paul

> Hitting MSNBC now. Saying its bad for Rand.


  Sure. Anyone involved in the campaign knew that this was hanging over Jesse's head. For him to have been allowed to function in any capacity, including a PAC not directly involved with the campaign, was lunacy. Jesse himself, if he had Rand's interest at heart, should have avoided this whole campaign cycle.

----------


## DevilsAdvocate

The nail in the coffin for Rand's presidential campaign?

Benton has singlehandedly destroyed this entire movement. Killing the Ron Paul campaign TWICE, and now he's back to take Rand down too.

----------


## William Tell

> Isn't Rick Perry under indictment himself and is still running for President?


Yeah, but that's for some dumb charge about vetoing something. This doesn't look good at all.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Five felonies a days? I always forget the exact number...


Three.

But I suspect that number has increased.

*FFS, you never talk to cops once an investigation is underway.*

You watch, it's that USC 1001 charge that will send him to prison.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Certainly far more than any of the supposed 'kooky' supporters. But this is nothing to gloat over.


It's not "gloating" to point this nonsense out.

----------


## DisneyFan

The timing of the indictment is obviously politically motivated and anyone who denies that is a fool, but it is also true that Benton shouldn't have been put in charge of the Super PAC. I don't know what Rand was thinking.

----------


## Brett85

> Yeah, but that's for some dumb charge about vetoing something. This doesn't look good at all.


It should blow over as long as Benton and Tate resign from the PAC.  It wasn't Rand's campaign that they were a part of when this allegedly happened.

----------


## David Sadler

> Head of pro-Rand Paul super PAC indicted in payment scheme
> Politico
> 8/5/15
> 
> A close confidant of Sen. Rand Paul was indicted Wednesday for an alleged conspiracy to bribe an Iowa state senator in 2011 to shift allegiances to Paul’s father, Ron, then a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination.
> 
> Jesse Benton, a longtime aide to the younger Paul, who’s now helming a super PAC supporting the Kentucky Republican’s 2016 presidential bid, faces charges of conspiracy, obstructing an investigation, submitting false campaign finance reports to the FEC, and making false statements to the FBI. Two other operatives, John Tate and Dimitrios Kesari, also face charges connected to the alleged payoff.


Jesse Benton was a mistake from DayOne.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> The nail in the coffin for Rand's presidential campaign?
> 
> Benton has singlehandedly destroyed this entire movement. Killing the Ron Paul campaign TWICE, and now he's back to take Rand down too.


No, you're all wet, it was *these* guys. 

Just ask Matt Collins.

----------


## Dianne

Here is The Hill's  headline, which doesn't look too good:

*Head of Rand Paul super-PAC indicted*

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ign-conspiracy

----------


## cajuncocoa

> First they came for Kokesh, now they have come for Benton and Tate...


Please don't lump Kokesh in with those two.

----------


## CPUd

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-and-John-Tate
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...r-Jesse-Benton

----------


## Carlybee

> Sure. Anyone involved in the campaign knew that this was hanging over Jesse's head. For him to have been allowed to function in any capacity, including a PAC not directly involved with the campaign, was lunacy. Jesse himself, if he had Rand's interest at heart, should have avoided this whole campaign cycle.


^^^this

----------


## Dianne

Main story on politico.com .     This timing is no coincidence.

http://www.politico.com/

Head of pro-Rand Paul super PAC indicted in payment scheme

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Jesse Benton is now trending on Twitter...

----------


## CPUd

Checked to see if it was on cnn.com, but may be a while, because THEY FOUND A PIECE OF THAT PLANE

----------


## cajuncocoa

> No, you're all wet, it was *these* guys. 
> 
> Just ask Matt Collins.


Yep. The naked dope-smoking, tinfoil hat-wearing 9/11 Truthers. See all those signs?  "Restore the Republic" "Don't Tread On Me" They weren't authorized by Benton/Collins. They killed Ron.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Main story on politico.com .     This timing is no coincidence.
> 
> http://www.politico.com/
> 
> Head of pro-Rand Paul super PAC indicted in payment scheme


Nothing ever happens accidentally in politics.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

On the bright side, Rand will get some air time during the debate tomorrow...

----------


## Sola_Fide

Wow.

----------


## David Sadler

> The timing of the indictment is obviously politically motivated and anyone who denies that is a fool, but it is also true that Benton shouldn't have been put in charge of the Super PAC. I don't know what Rand was thinking.


Bad decisions upon misguided strategy and ineffective tactics.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Yup, insanity.


The names don't surprise me somehow.

----------


## jj-

> Sure. Anyone involved in the campaign knew that this was hanging over Jesse's head. For him to have been allowed to function in any capacity, including a PAC not directly involved with the campaign, was lunacy. Jesse himself, if he had Rand's interest at heart, should have avoided this whole campaign cycle.


He probably doesn't know how to do anything else.

I recall when he "held his nose" to support McConnell. McConnell is probably drinking some wine to celebrate this.

----------


## donnay

What a shame, this didn't have to happen if they believed more like Ron Paul.

"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads."
~ Ron Paul

----------


## phill4paul

> Yep. The naked dope-smoking, tinfoil hat-wearing 9/11 Truthers. See all those signs?  "Restore the Republic" "Don't Tread On Me" They weren't authorized by Benton/Collins. They killed Ron.


  Kind of ironic that someone that wanted conspiracy theorists to just go away was himself indicted for.....conspiracy.

----------


## SilentBull

Benton was already under investigation wasn't he? Why in the world did he get involved at all?? Rand should have told him to stay away.

----------


## phill4paul

> Benton was already under investigation wasn't he? Why in the world did he get involved at all?? Rand should have told him to stay away.


  Yes, he was. He even resigned from the McConnell campaign because of it. So the question is...if he cared enough to not sully McConnells name why would he bring his association into Rand's presidential  campaign?

----------


## jj-

All of the campaign finance laws are unconstitutional. What Benton did was actually legal.

----------


## Maltheus

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...4.html?hp=t1_r

Happy day! Apparently Rand was the only one who couldn't see this coming, or he wouldn't have been allowed anywhere near his super PAC. Benton should have been kicked to the curb, the second these allegations surfaced. The timing of the announcement should have been expected.

----------


## Carlybee

There's already 3 threads about it.

----------


## libertyplz

In regards to what this will do to Rand, the media will have a field day with this for the next week or so, but it will blow over shortly after I bet. They will play the usual guilt by assosiation bs, but as long as Rand doesn't say anything completely stupid about it, I don't think it will stick. I think the thing to worry about is other campaigns trying to take advantage of it in the future if Rand starts doing well. Wouldn't be surprised to see ads trying to link Rand with it, and try to make it out as if Rand is some sort of shady person even though in reality Rand is the cleanest one in the race.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> There's already 3 threads about it.


I think we just had a merge.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Benton was already under investigation wasn't he? Why in the world did he get involved at all?? Rand should have told him to stay away.


Hindsight is 20/20, but if Benton knew what was good for him, he would have stayed far away from the Rand campaign. I'd wager that he would not have been indicted if he had stayed away completely.

----------


## jllundqu

> A USC 1001 prosecution.
> 
> Well and truly $#@!ed.


No joke... That's like a 5 count indictment... that's 'pound-me-in-the-ass-prison' level screwed right there.

Adios Benton

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I think we just had a merge.


Busy day.

----------


## Carlybee

Congrats Benton.  You've managed to screw up 2 campaigns now.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...4.html?hp=t1_r
> 
> Happy day! Apparently Rand was the only one who couldn't see this coming, or he wouldn't have been allowed anywhere near his super PAC. Benton should have been kicked to the curb, the second these allegations surfaced. The timing of the announcement should have been expected.


To be fair, Rand wasn't the *only* one. Collins didn't see it either.

----------


## jj-

> Hindsight is 20/20, but if Benton knew what was good for him, he would have stayed far away from the Rand campaign. I'd wager that he would not have been indicted if he had stayed away completely.


I don't think Benton is capable of the amount of thought you're mentioning in this post.

----------


## CPUd

Jesse will be learning about the 5th Amendment the hard way.

----------


## AuH2O

I just read the whole indictment.  The email records are pretty damning.

----------


## Occam's Banana

SMH ... just ... SMGDH ...

----------


## jllundqu

> http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...4.html?hp=t1_r
> 
> Happy day! Apparently Rand was the only one who couldn't see this coming, or he wouldn't have been allowed anywhere near his super PAC. Benton should have been kicked to the curb, the second these allegations surfaced. *The timing of the announcement should have been expected*.


No kidding.  24 hours away from the debate and the DOJ just 'happens' to drop this today.....  Sure there's no bad intentions there....

----------


## Maltheus

> Benton was already under investigation wasn't he? Why in the world did he get involved at all?? Rand should have told him to stay away.


This is precisely the reason I stopped supporting Rand. The day Benton was announced as being in charge of Rand's super-PAC, with all of this hanging over his head, was the day I realized he had no serious intention of pursuing the presidency. It was just about making money for his family. I even assumed the indictment would roll out just before the first debate. This was all so predictable.

----------


## DevilsAdvocate

> This is precisely the reason I stopped supporting Rand. The day Benton was announced as being in charge of Rand's super-PAC, with all of this hanging over his head, was the day I realized he had no serious intention of pursuing the presidency. It was just about making money for his family. I even assumed the indictment would roll out just before the first debate. This was all so predictable.


For real? How much money has Rand made off his presidential campaign?

----------


## PRB

> Question is do they step down from America's Liberty PAC supporting Rand?


they'll be lucky if the feds don't shut down and seize the PAC's funds altogether. 

Looks like Rand is finally becoming a threat and the feds are getting desperate to trump up fake charges to disrupt the liberty movement.

----------


## PRB

> lol.... what can you even say about this. Political corruption at it's finest.  Let 'em fry.


he's innocent, stand with Rand.

----------


## presence

> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/poll.ph...do=showresults


Its a shame that thread was closed.  It should have been bumped day and night until the Pauls disassociated themselves.

----------


## PRB

> How many times will this fool have to embarrass us before he is run out of the movement for good? Or does nepotism trump everything else in the Paul sphere?


if you believe the feds above and before a Paul family member, you're part of the problem.

----------


## jj-

> For real? How much money has Rand made off his presidential campaign?


I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but the more he is known, the more his political books sell.

----------


## PRB

> Its a shame that thread was closed.  It should have been bumped day and night until the Pauls disassociated themselves.


it should be closed, because Jesse Benton is a good man, the feds are making $#@! up to destroy Ron and Rand's legacy. We should trust Rand and Ron's judgment on hiring their own family members, criticizing their staff is criticizing the family and campaign. This is just what the feds want, INFIGHTING. We need to stand together and work with people who believe in our cause, or else the NWO will win.

----------


## PRB

> I just read the whole indictment.  The email records are pretty damning.


they're made up

----------


## Todd

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5471627

Apparently Collins will be here soon to explain that Rands intention was something other than/bigger than winning.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> it should be closed, *because Jesse Benton is a good man,* the feds are making $#@! up to destroy Ron and Rand's legacy. We should trust Rand and Ron's judgment on hiring their own family members, criticizing their staff is criticizing the family and campaign. This is just what the feds want, INFIGHTING. We need to stand together and work with people who believe in our cause, or else the NWO will win.

----------


## Warlord

Anyone else concerned that the POLITICO article says Rand still has his back? He still wont have anything to do with Benton. Very worrying

----------


## William Tell

> 


PRB is a liberal, everything he is saying here is sarcasm. I guess you didn't know that?

----------


## presence

Dang Kent must have some badass audio/video skills.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/file/643166/download

----------


## cajuncocoa

> PRB is a liberal, everything he is saying here is sarcasm. I guess you didn't know that?


I have to admit, I haven't had much discussion with PRB.

----------


## Working Poor

> Why in the world did you post this in the Rand section?  This is about certain people from Ron's 2012 campaign.


Maybe to make him look bad.

----------


## Smitty

Now, now,..calm down. Just calm down, y'all.

Jesse is gonna be aw-ite.

After Rand gets elected, he's gonna appoint Jesse to the SCOTUS just as soon as one of them old bastards already on it get's their ticket punched.

Jesse will be taken care of.

----------


## garyallen59

This really won't make a difference.

----------


## Lord Xar

DOJ going after some ants trying to help a candidate who the establishment would NEVER let win.... while Hillary, Obama etc.. in all of their corruption goes untouched. Bust the marijuana smoker while cartels get funded.

I've been against Benson for a long while too. That dude is toxic.

Not even suggesting that they shouldn't be punished.... but priorities are all $#@!ed up.

----------


## Lord Xar

> they're made up


It takes an odd controlling/manipulative type of person with near 5k posts to troll constantly on a forum. 
I'm sure your intent is for the good of the collective. Tactics be damned, I will have them under my heel before long.

----------


## PRB

> It takes an odd controlling/manipulative type of person with near 5k posts to troll constantly on a forum. 
> I'm sure your intent is for the good of the collective. Tactics be damned, I will have them under my heel before long.


I'm defending a Paul family member and staff of their campaigns, and I'm a troll? You admit you know that the feds are targeting the liberty movement while letting worse criminals run free.

----------


## PRB

> Isn't Rick Perry under indictment himself and is still running for President?


he doesn't get to debate

----------


## TaftFan

Why can't the Pauls stay away from shady people? Please tell me why.

----------


## dannno

> Why can't the Pauls stay away from shady people? Please tell me why.


Because they decided to become pauliticians?

----------


## alucard13mm

Front page of yahoo news lol...

Foresight and hindsight.. most of us knew Benton is a shady person and that most of us would never donate to Rand if Benton was going to be related to Rand's campaign. Some people bite the bullet and donated because Benton was just gonna be working in a PAC.

Even if Benton was not guilty of those charges, it still carries a negative connotation (similar to how accused rapists are innocent, but their reputation is tarnished) for the campaign.

As for John Tate, I dont know or remember much about him since 2012 lol. So I dont know.

----------


## Carlybee

> Why can't the Pauls stay away from shady people? Please tell me why.


Because they're family?

----------


## Carlybee

> Front page of yahoo news lol...
> 
> Foresight and hindsight.. most of us knew Benton is a shady person and that most of us would never donate to Rand if Benton was going to be related to Rand's campaign. Some people bite the bullet and donated because Benton was just gonna be working in a PAC.
> 
> Even if Benton was not guilty of those charges, it still carries a negative connotation (similar to how accused rapists are innocent, but their reputation is tarnished) for the campaign.
> 
> As for John Tate, I dont know or remember much about him since 2012 lol. So I dont know.


It made TIME with the headline calling Benton a Rand Paul ally.

----------


## Lord Xar

I think Benton was akin to Fredo, from the Godfather.  - That is probably the reason he was tolerated and kept around.

----------


## PRB

> Why can't the Pauls stay away from shady people? Please tell me why.


he's a Paul, get over it. 

This is Hillary's camp getting back at Rand for trying to destroy her campaign.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...rt-117138.html

----------


## PRB

> Front page of yahoo news lol...
> 
> Foresight and hindsight.. most of us knew Benton is a shady person and that most of us would never donate to Rand if Benton was going to be related to Rand's campaign. Some people bite the bullet and donated because Benton was just gonna be working in a PAC.
> 
> Even if Benton was not guilty of those charges, it still carries a negative connotation (similar to how accused rapists are innocent, but their reputation is tarnished) for the campaign.
> 
> As for John Tate, I dont know or remember much about him since 2012 lol. So I dont know.


they charges are completely false, nobody close to Paul does anything criminal.

----------


## devil21

> boneyard bill,  Brett85,  compromise,  menciusmoldbug,  MichaelDavis,  Okaloosa,  Rocco, Aratus,  AuH2O,  brandon,  CaptLouAlbano,  Crashland,  eduardo89,  Galileo Galilei,  IndianaPolitico,  lib3rtarian,  mwkaufman,  niklarin,  NY-Dano,  Randslide,  rbohlig,  specsaregood,  TaftFan,  WD-NY wouldn't that have been a peach?
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/poll.ph...do=showresults


And most of those are just expendable predev persona handles, not real people.  Those same "types" are just using different names here now.  Some still using the same ones, even on this thread.  Quite the nerve!

Oh, and 'called it' on Benton being indicted at a politically opportune time for opponents.  Didn't take a rocket scientist to see that Benton is an infiltrator, toxic and should have been ostracized after the 2008 campaign.  Oh well.  I'm sure his associates still involved in the campaign are squeaky clean, though right?  Right?

----------


## Carlybee

> they charges are completely false, nobody close to Paul does anything criminal.


Oh God shut up. You're not fooling anyone.

----------


## Carlybee

> And most of those are just expendable predev persona handles, not real people.  Those same "types" are just using different names here now.  Some still using the same ones, even on this thread.  Quite the nerve!
> 
> Oh, and 'called it' on Benton being indicted at a politically opportune time for opponents.  Didn't take a rocket scientist to see that Benton is an infiltrator, toxic and should have been ostracized after the 2008 campaign.  Oh well.  I'm sure his associates are squeaky clean, though right?  Right?


My question is were they threatened with this stuff before Benton torpedoed Ron's campaign?

----------


## PRB

> Oh God shut up. You're not fooling anyone.


you're duped by the feds and I'm accused of fooling people?

----------


## PRB

> And most of those are just expendable predev persona handles, not real people.  Those same "types" are just using different names here now.  Some still using the same ones, even on this thread.  Quite the nerve!
> 
> Oh, and 'called it' on Benton being indicted at a politically opportune time for opponents.  *Didn't take a rocket scientist to see that Benton is an infiltrator*, toxic and should have been ostracized after the 2008 campaign.  Oh well.  I'm sure his associates still involved in the campaign are squeaky clean, though right?  Right?


Benton is family.

----------


## garyallen59

> you're duped by the feds and I'm accused of fooling people?


Wow. Who is this guy? lol

----------


## devil21

> My question is were they threatened with this stuff before Benton torpedoed Ron's campaign?


Breakfast with Bernanke.....





> Front page of yahoo news lol...


Don't put too much stock in Yahoo front page content, or other "news" aggregate websites, for that matter.  It's targeted to your browsing habits based on your cookies and past browsing tendencies tied to your IP address.  Your Yahoo front page is probably very different than the Yahoo front page for other people.  Just FYI.

----------


## Carlybee

> you're duped by the feds and I'm accused of fooling people?


You weren't even here during Ron's campaign.

----------


## asurfaholic

This is small stuff. I am waiting for Rand to be blamed for the next terrorist attack. 

They will stop at nothing. Jesse Benton is easy pickings for them.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Kind of ironic that someone that wanted conspiracy theorists to just go away was himself indicted for.....conspiracy.


Annnddd... *BOOM!!!* ... goes the dynamite.

----------


## timosman

> Annnddd... *BOOM!!!* ... goes the dynamite.

----------


## libertyplz

washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/05/rand-paul-super-pac-head-indicted-over-alleged-2012-campaign-finance-violations/

Ron's brief comments on it:




> Ron Paul speculated that the indictment may have been timed to hurt his son's presidential campaign.
> 
> "I am extremely disappointed in the government's decision," said Paul. "I think the timing of this indictment is highly suspicious given the fact that the first primary debate is tomorrow. My thoughts and prayers are with the families of those involved. I will not be commenting further on this matter at this time."


Benton's attorney:



> Benton's attorney Roscoe C. Howard, Jr. said in a statement that his client would be vindicated.
> 
> "We are deeply disappointed to learn of todays indictment by the Department of Justice," said Howard. "Jesse Benton, a prominent conservative Republican, has cooperated with the government during its multi-year investigation.  That this indictment is now suddenly announced on the eve of the first Republican Presidential debate strongly supports our belief that this is a politically motivated prosecution designed to serve a political agenda, not to achieve justice.  Mr. Benton is eager to get before an impartial judge and jury who will quickly recognize this for what he believes it is: Character assassination for political gain."

----------


## PRB

> You weren't even here during Ron's campaign.


you're right, I wasn't on here. What's your point?

You can't trash Benton without negatively hurting the Paul family. He's family, the family trusted him and paid him. If he's a plant, toxic, or infiltrator, what you're really saying is the family and campaign were too stupid to know and find out. I refuse to believe the Paul family makes mistakes and bad judgment calls, so the only logical conclusion is that the federal government and Democrats are out to get Paul's family.

----------


## PRB

> washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/05/rand-paul-super-pac-head-indicted-over-alleged-2012-campaign-finance-violations/
> 
> Ron's brief comments on it:
> 
> 
> 
> Benton's attorney:


yep, PERSECUTION from the federal government, liberals and the media. and our own supporters are buying it. this is what TPTB want, infighting, to the point that they're willing to throw a Paul family member under the bus.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> yep, PERSECUTION from the federal government, liberals and the media. and our own supporters are buying it. this is what TPTB want, infighting, to the point that they're willing to throw a Paul family member under the bus.


It's common around here.  Disgusting, isn't it.

----------


## Deborah K

This will be forgotten.  I highly doubt it will hurt Rand in the long-run.  It just forces the inevitable skin-shedding that Rand would have had to do where Benton is concerned.  Sooner is better.

On another note:  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5478845

LOL!

----------


## Smitty

> you're right, I wasn't on here. What's your point?
> 
> You can't trash Benton without negatively hurting the Paul family. He's family, the family trusted him and paid him. If he's a plant, toxic, or infiltrator, what you're really saying is the family and campaign were too stupid to know and find out. I refuse to believe the Paul family makes mistakes and bad judgment calls, so the only logical conclusion is that the federal government and Democrats are out to get Paul's family.


Jesse Benton has always struck me as this hog headed Pee Wee Herman type of character.

As for the rest of what you have to say,...."whatever".

----------


## Galileo Galilei

If you can pay Tiger Woods $2 million to endorse Gatorade, why can't you pay a state senator $25,000 to endorse Ron Paul?  Or pay a $25,000 salary to work for Ron Paul?

----------


## thoughtomator

After the way Benton screwed us all, I am astonished to see sympathetic words for him here.

----------


## devil21

> yep, PERSECUTION from the federal government, liberals and the media. and our own supporters are buying it. this is what TPTB want, infighting, to the point that they're willing to throw a Paul family member under the bus.


Give it a rest.  Benton married into the Paul family after he latched on to the 2008 campaign, he's not blood.  He woo'ed a young granddaughter of Ron's.  Very common infiltration tactic.

I also see no "infighting" here.  Long time supporters knew Benton was toxic a long time ago.

----------


## Galileo Galilei

> boneyard bill,  Brett85,  compromise,  menciusmoldbug,  MichaelDavis,  Okaloosa,  Rocco, Aratus,  AuH2O,  brandon,  CaptLouAlbano,  Crashland,  eduardo89,  Galileo Galilei,  IndianaPolitico,  lib3rtarian,  mwkaufman,  niklarin,  NY-Dano,  Randslide,  rbohlig,  specsaregood,  TaftFan,  WD-NY wouldn't that have been a peach?
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/poll.ph...do=showresults


This will help Rand in the GOP primaries.  The case has nothing to do with Rand, yet Rand can spin it as big government against little conservatives.  Benton could put Rand back at the top of the primary polls, especially if he has a loud bully pulpit.

----------


## liberalnurse

> you're right, I wasn't on here. What's your point?
> 
> You can't trash Benton without negatively hurting the Paul family. He's family, the family trusted him and paid him. If he's a plant, toxic, or infiltrator, what you're really saying is the family and campaign were too stupid to know and find out. I refuse to believe the Paul family makes mistakes and bad judgment calls, so the only logical conclusion is that the federal government and Democrats are out to get Paul's family.


Wrong.  It's easy to separate that  POS Benton from Ron Paul, family or not.  Ron was clueless of Jessie's bull$#@! with the grassroots. Benton's distain for us was obvious. The outsiders, the fringe, the undesirables. We didn't play the game.  You know, politics 101.  Just shut up, open your checkbooks mundanes and let the professionals run the campaign.  Ron made mistakes and trusting Benton was one of them. This runs deep for many of us.  We were heavily invested in Ron's campaign and I don't mean just financially.  You weren't there. You don't have a clue.

----------


## wizardwatson

> If you can pay Tiger Woods $2 million to endorse Gatorade, why can't you pay a state senator $25,000 to endorse Ron Paul?  Or pay a $25,000 salary to work for Ron Paul?


It's about lying on the FEC forms, not paying for an endoresement.  Sadly, it is legal to buy an endorsement.




> *For indicted Rand Paul ally, it truly is the cover-up — because there was no crime*
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...t-cover-it-up/
> 
> Missing from that list, you'll notice, is "paying money for an endorsement." That's because, according to Larry Noble of the Campaign Legal Center and former chief counsel for the FEC, that's not even illegal.
> 
> "It is illegal to falsely report. There is a federal law that prohibits buying votes," Noble said when we reached him by phone. "But I'm not aware of a federal law that would prohibit an endorsement."* If a campaign wanted to secure an endorsement with money, they can do so.*


You see in upside down world where we live, it's ok to mislead the population who is doing the voting about where your loyalties lie, it's just not legal to mislead the government about where your loyalties really lie.

----------


## phill4paul

> This will help Rand in the GOP primaries.  The case has nothing to do with Rand, yet Rand can spin it as big government against little conservatives.  Benton could put Rand back at the top of the primary polls, especially if he has a loud bully pulpit.


  You've deluded no one except yourself. Just a quick question before you respond...have you read the indictment?

http://www.justice.gov/opa/file/643166/download

----------


## Brian4Liberty



----------


## timosman

> Actually, Rand could parlay this circumstance into an advantage - people just might pay much closer attention to what he says tomorrow.  That could work in his favor if his answers are on point.


That could be the silver lining. It still does not take away the impression from both Ron and Rand campaigns to be rather infantile.

----------


## Deborah K

> Dominoes fall ...


Hillary still needs to answer to Benghazi as well (as far as a lot of people are concerned).  That one is going to haunt her.

----------


## Deborah K

> That could be the silver lining. It still does not take away the impression from both Ron and Rand campaigns to be rather infantile.


In the grand scheme of things.....I'll take 'infantile'.

----------


## Chieppa1

The negative spin against Rand has begun.

----------


## Ender

> TPTB have played their biggest card. The Ministry of Truth couldn't keep Rand out of the debate, so now it's time for the Ministry of Love to step in...


My first thought as well.

----------


## cajuncocoa

//

----------


## timosman

> Why was it so important to get Sorenson to endorse Ron Paul that he had to be bribed? How much did he matter?


Jesse got over his head at the opportunity to pull the strings behind the scenes. Two $#@!s got together and then $#@! happened.

----------


## devil21

> Yes, just like they *knew* that Ron's Campaign for Liberty were traitorous scum for appearing to support a candidate who wasn't pure as the driven snow in Colorado.


Ken Buck had not a single thing in common with the movement, not then and not now.  He is now in the House.  Would you like to provide a list of his liberty oriented votes since his election?  I'll wait.




> Many here were ripping people to shreds that Ron had personally appointed to their positions in the CFL and the attacks were more than a bit personal.  UNTIL, Ron called the owner of The Daily Paul and explained the whole thing and that Ron himself had been behind it and why it was important that it had been done.  Michael was more than embarrassed and posted a long retraction.  Here, however, I saw very few holding their heads in shame for what they had done.


I'm of the mind that Ron didn't do much of his staff picking, regardless of what he claimed.  Enter Benton and Rothfeld, et al, who I am convinced are not and never were friends of the movement.




> More than a few people here don't wait for the facts and they apparently care less what damage they do to the movement or individuals, for that matter.
> 
> You didn't used to be one of them.


My eyes are wide open.  There are very big stakes in this game and anyone still carrying today the same naivete' that they carried 7 years ago hasn't learned a thing.

----------


## Chieppa1

This is front page of the "politics" section on CNN. They will definitely attach this to Rand.

----------


## angelatc

> Jesse got over his head at the opportunity to pull the strings behind the scenes. Two $#@!s got together and then $#@! happened.


I honestly think youve nailed it.  Benton has always seemed to believe himself above the common man, and that rules did not apply to him.  And really, that is the attitude that breeds success in this country. That is why Congress is full of lawyers and not accountants.

The thing is  - the guys like Boehner, McConnell, Obama...they do this crap all the time.  And they ignore each other.  But to think that a young upstart that is looking to dismantle everything that DC stands for would be allowed to get away with it is naive. 

And that's why it should not have been allowed to happen.

----------


## Krugminator2

> Why in the world did you post this in the Rand section?  This is about certain people from Ron's 2012 campaign.


 This news is almost  entirely to do with Rand. I guess you are being sarcastic(?)

Given that this law is unconstitutional and unlibertarian, even if Benton is shown to have clearly broken the law, I have all the confidence in the world you will defend him against doing jail time for the exact same reasons and with the same passion you defended Snowden.

----------


## Smitty

Jesse

http://tomwoods.com/blog/my-memories-of-jesse-bento/

----------


## cajuncocoa

> This news is almost  entirely to do with Rand. I guess you are being sarcastic(?)
> 
> Given that this law is unconstitutional and unlibertarian, even if Benton is shown to have clearly broken the law, I have all the confidence in the world you will defend him against doing jail time for the exact same reasons and with the same passion you defended Snowden.


If I were a mod on this board, I would have done everything possible to move this from being associated with Rand right now.  After all, it's not *entirely* about Rand.  But, that's just me.

Comparing Benton to Snowden.....LOL

----------


## devil21

> This is front page of the "politics" section on CNN. They will definitely attach this to Rand.


It'll be a debate question and then get some time in the news cycle afterward to drown out the rest of his debate performance.  I don't think it'll hurt Rand in the long run unless there are other people involved in his campaign that will be indicted later.

I dig the avatar btw.  Always giggle when I see it.

----------


## Deborah K

> This news is almost  entirely to do with Rand. I guess you are being sarcastic(?)
> 
> Given that this law is unconstitutional and unlibertarian, even if Benton is shown to have clearly broken the law, I have all the confidence in the world you will defend him against doing jail time for the exact same reasons and with the same passion you defended Snowden.


Are you comparing Benton to Snowden?  Really???

----------


## phill4paul

> Jesse
> 
> http://tomwoods.com/blog/my-memories-of-jesse-bento/


  Bentonism. Kinda like Botulism, only worse.

----------


## Lord Xar

It is just sooo discouraging how controlled we all are.... and how the whole system is rigged. It really just infuriates me...

1.) released day before debates
2.) front page yahoo, cnn etc... RAND PAUL's super PAC head charged ... etc...

Then of course, all the news outlets propagate it and promote it.. its like a well oiled manipulative machine.

I'm just amazed at how organic government and its parasitic carryons have become. Literally moving and manipulating to keep its power intact.
It's becoming too powerful to overcome, imho.

----------


## Krugminator2

> Are you comparing Benton to Snowden?  Really???


Not as people. Benton is the worst of the worst. For him to be part of campaign is unconscionable. 

But on principle, yeah.  If you are going to defend one person on libertarian grounds against jail time, you should defend people consistently. Campaign finance laws violate the First Amendment and they violate property rights.

----------


## Carlybee

> you're right, I wasn't on here. What's your point?
> 
> You can't trash Benton without negatively hurting the Paul family. He's family, the family trusted him and paid him. If he's a plant, toxic, or infiltrator, what you're really saying is the family and campaign were too stupid to know and find out. I refuse to believe the Paul family makes mistakes and bad judgment calls, so the only logical conclusion is that the federal government and Democrats are out to get Paul's family.



Because you don't know what a lot of us felt he did to sabotage Ron's campaign..I'm not going into it..there are threads...and emails. I agree these indictments were saved and handed down at just the right time but that doesn't make Jesse Benton any less of a liability than he has been from the beginning. I would say his family is trusting.   Oh and everyone makes mistakes and bad judgment calls so if you are serious which I doubt, with that comment..that's just silly.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Not as people. Benton is the worst of the worst. For him to be part of campaign is unconscionable. 
> 
> But on principle, yeah.  If you are going to defend one person on libertarian grounds against jail time, you should defend people consistently. Campaign finance laws violate the First Amendment and they violate property rights.


Let me know when Benton has to move to a foreign country because he has to fear for his life in this one.

----------


## jj-

> Are you comparing Benton to Snowden?  Really???


Yes, why not? Both are indicted by unfair laws, that they have in common. Are you saying campaign finance laws are constitutional?

I guess some people think you can only compare two people if they're about exactly the same? What?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> It is just sooo discouraging how controlled we all are.... and how the whole system is rigged. It really just infuriates me...
> 
> 1.) released day before debates
> 2.) front page yahoo, cnn etc... RAND PAUL's super PAC head charged ... etc...
> 
> Then of course, all the news outlets propagate it and promote it.. its like a well oiled manipulative machine.
> 
> I'm just amazed at how organic government and its parasitic carryons have become. Literally moving and manipulating to keep its power intact.
> It's becoming too powerful to overcome, imho.


The Ministry of Truth and the Ministry of Love, working together like a well-oiled machine.

----------


## PRB

> The negative spin against Rand has begun.


if that's the best they got, it won't stick.

----------


## Deborah K

> Not as people. Benton is the worst of the worst. For him to be part of campaign is unconscionable. 
> 
> But on principle, yeah.  If you are going to defend one person on libertarian grounds against jail time, you should defend people consistently. Campaign finance laws violate the First Amendment and they violate property rights.


Motives are a factor when making comparisons like this.

----------


## Krugminator2

> Motives are a factor when making comparisons like this.


No they actually don't matter.

----------


## PRB

> Jesse Benton has always struck me as this hog headed Pee Wee Herman type of character.
> 
> As for the rest of what you have to say,...."whatever".


because you've been brainwashed by the liberal media.

----------


## jj-

Ok, for the emotional people who can't see Snowden and Benton in the same sentence, let's make a different comparison.

Let's not make a comparison between Snowden and Benton, but between their indictments.

Both Benton and Snowden were indicted under unfair laws. Campaign finance laws, which were used against Benton, are unconstitutional.

Does that mean Benton and Snowden are similar in being good or bad people? No.

Was that easier to take emotionally and understand?

----------


## Deborah K

> Yes, why not? Both are indicted by unfair laws, that they have in common. Are you saying campaign finance laws are constitutional?
> 
> I guess some people think you can only compare two people if they're about exactly the same? What?


I understand your point from a purely ideological pov, but does that mean bank robbers should not be indicted either, since money has no value?  Snowden's intent was to expose public privacy violations being committed by the gov't.  Benton was just playing a risky game.

----------


## Jamesiv1

naahh.... you guys got it all wrong.

What kind of lame-ass candidate (or someone within the inner circle) doesn't have an indictment or two?  Hell, in politics it's like earning your stripes.

Street cred.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> I understand your point from a purely ideological pov, but does that mean bank robbers should not be indicted either, since money has no value?  Snowden's intent was to expose public privacy violations being committed by the gov't.  Benton was just playing a risky game.



You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Deborah K again.

----------


## Carlybee

> Bentonism. Kinda like Botulism, only worse.


Another sigworthy

----------


## Legend1104

> Why in the world did you post this in the Rand section?  This is about certain people from Ron's 2012 campaign.


Because Fox News already has mentioned it and said that Rand may have to answer for it during the debates so they are already trying to use it to hurt him.

----------


## Matt Collins

Seems obvious to me the timing is political being the day before the first debate. Sounds like a Rove tactic. Let's not fall for the propaganda until there is a verdict.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Let 'em fry.


Don't you think maybe there should perhaps be a fair trial and due process first?

----------


## Matt Collins

> Do you recall that this was the move by Benton that gave Santorum the victory in Iowa?
> 
> Sorenson was supporting Michelle Bachman. That was beneficial to Paul because Bachman was taking votes away from Santorum. Then, after Sorenson was bribed to support Paul, Bachman's campaign collapsed, her support went to Santorum, and then he won Iowa.
> 
> It was a desperate move to stop Ron Paul from winning Iowa.


There is no polling to support this idiotic assertion.

----------


## DevilsAdvocate

> Seems obvious to me the timing is political being the day before the first debate. Sounds like a Rove tactic. Let's not fall for the propaganda until there is a verdict.


Yeah but didn't Rand set himself up for this? He gave them the ammunition, all they had to do was pull the trigger. Why was Benton appointed to the SuperPac?

----------


## Matt Collins

> The nail in the coffin for Rand's presidential campaign?
> 
> Benton has singlehandedly destroyed this entire movement. Killing the Ron Paul campaign TWICE, and now he's back to take Rand down too.


Uh no, incorrect. Not even close. Jesse has nothing to do with Rand's campaign at all.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Seems obvious to me the timing is political being the day before the first debate. Sounds like a Rove tactic. Let's not fall for the propaganda until there is a verdict.


Could have been avoided. We told you so.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Apparently Rand was the only one who couldn't see this coming, or he wouldn't have been allowed anywhere near his super PAC. Benton should have been kicked to the curb, the second these allegations surfaced. The timing of the announcement should have been expected.





> The timing of the indictment is obviously politically motivated and anyone who denies that is a fool, but it is also true that Benton shouldn't have been put in charge of the Super PAC. I don't know what Rand was thinking.


Rand had nothing to do with Jesse being in charge of the SuperPAC, the two can't coordinate.

----------


## Carlybee

> Rand had nothing to do with Jesse being in charge of the SuperPAC, the two can't coordinate.


Who made that decision then?

----------


## DevilsAdvocate

> Rand had nothing to do with Jesse being in charge of the SuperPAC, the two can't coordinate.


I wasn't aware of this. Is this true??? If it is true, then the media has no justification attacking Rand on this issue.

----------


## Matt Collins

So people who like the Constitution are supporting the enforcement of an unconstitutional law?

----------


## Brett85

Are Benton and Tate going to resign from the Super Pac while the trial is going on?  That seems like the smart thing to do.  I don't know whether they're guilty or not, but it's necessary to keep this as far away from Rand as possible.

----------


## Matt Collins

> It is just sooo discouraging how controlled we all are.... and how the whole system is rigged. It really just infuriates me...
> 
> 1.) released day before debates
> 2.) front page yahoo, cnn etc... RAND PAUL's super PAC head charged ... etc...
> 
> Then of course, all the news outlets propagate it and promote it.. its like a well oiled manipulative machine.
> 
> I'm just amazed at how organic government and its parasitic carryons have become. Literally moving and manipulating to keep its power intact.
> It's becoming too powerful to overcome, imho.


And whats worse is that lots of liberty-minded people are buying into it

----------


## acptulsa

> So people who like the Constitution are supporting the enforcement of an unconstitutional law?


Not everyone here is inclined to share The Establishment's view that free speech means money as much as it means speech.

Now.  Would you care to back up your assertion that Rand Paul genuinely had nothing to do with Benton's selection, or are you still allergic to making yourself useful?

----------


## Dianne

FOX is all over it.    Cameron was on, and the only thing he could say about Rand was this latest, breaking news on the indictments.   He said Rand will not mention it again, unless of course he is questioned about it at tomorrow night's debate.

FOX and Bush have bitch raped Rand.   I'm not even going to watch that sucking garbage FOX tomorrow night.       I have to laugh too, that the idiot Wallace was laughing an hour or so earlier at how campaigns are preparing for the twitter, facebook spin during and after the debate.    That showed someone from the Rand Paul campaign working on social media.   Chris Wallace, laughs and says the guy wasn't doing it correcting and turns out to be some guy living in his mother's basement.

They are going for Rand ..................................... WOW .

----------


## DevilsAdvocate

> Rand had nothing to do with Jesse being in charge of the SuperPAC, the two can't coordinate.


I've done a Google search on this, and it seems that Rand gave Benton the green light to head the PAC, which he officially endorsed. 

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-...r-pac-20150406

The PAC went on to utterly bomb in a tremendously embarrassing fashion. The failure of the PAC is scaring away donors and supporters.

http://www.targetliberty.com/2015/07...pac-bombs.html

----------


## presence

http://www.wsj.com/articles/longtime...nts-1438801636




> Politics
> 
> *Longtime Rand Paul Aide Charged in  Campaign-Payment Coverup* *Jesse Benton indicted along with two others who worked on Ron Pauls 2012 campaign*                              ENLARGE                     
>                      Jesse Benton, left, with Ron Paul in Atlantic, Iowa, in 2011.                                 Photo:                       Charles Dharapak/Associated Press                
> 
> 
> 
>                                     By                                  Rebecca Ballhaus                              
> 
> ...

----------


## CPUd

> I wasn't aware of this. Is this true??? If it is true, then the media has no justification attacking Rand on this issue.


It's probably what we'll hear from Rand's campaign and Rand himself.  It plays kinda weak in the press, but they usually move on to other things after that.  Ted Cruz did something similar on one of the Sunday shows when they asked him if he had contacts in his superPAC.

----------


## Matt Collins

> I wasn't aware of this. Is this true??? If it is true, then the media has no justification attacking Rand on this issue.


Duh..... but they do it anyway, this is politics where no one plays fair

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Rand had nothing to do with Jesse being in charge of the SuperPAC, the two can't coordinate.


That's why topics about Benton's indictment shouldn't be in Rand's sub forum.

----------


## CPUd

The trial probably won't happen before the general election, and definitely not before the primary season, for whatever that's worth.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Not everyone here is inclined to share The Establishment's view that free speech means money as much as it means speech.


Its not an establishment view, its a freedom view. If there is no money behind your speech then no one will hear it.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Why was Benton appointed to the SuperPac?


Rand didn't appoint Jesse to the SuperPAC

----------


## LatinsforPaul



----------


## Galileo Galilei

> It's about lying on the FEC forms, not paying for an endoresement.  Sadly, it is legal to buy an endorsement.
> 
> 
> 
> You see in upside down world where we live, it's ok to mislead the population who is doing the voting about where your loyalties lie, it's just not legal to mislead the government about where your loyalties really lie.


Its about infringement of freedom of speech.  Galileo lied to the grand jury, too.  This case stinks.

----------


## phill4paul

> Seems obvious to me the timing is political being the day before the first debate. Sounds like a Rove tactic. Let's not fall for the propaganda until there is a verdict.


How does one not get set up for Rove tactics? Answer: By not putting oneself in a position to get set up for Rove tactics.

----------


## Deborah K

> Its about infringement of freedom of speech.  Galileo lied to the grand jury, too.  This case stinks.


It is what it is.  Benton should have had enough sense to keep his nose clean - if you don't like the rules, don't play the game.  Seriously, this was an unnecessary and stupid risk to take.

----------


## phill4paul

> It said in the indictment that Ron Paul had no idea what was going on.  And Benton is not employed by Rand Paul.  Hopefully the liberals will try to stir things up, but this is just more technical campaign finance law crap.


  He is, however, the head of a Rand Paul super PAC. In the public mind it is guilt by association.

----------


## CaptUSA

I'm no friend of Benton, but come on...

The DOJ indicts him the day before the first GOP debate?  For getting caught at doing something that EVERY other campaign does?


It was a good thing Rand didn't hire Benton and let him do the SuperPac thing, but this will still sting.

----------


## PRB

> He is, however, the head of a Rand Paul super PAC. In the public mind it is guilt by association.


it's simpler than that, he's family.

----------


## PRB

> How does one not get set up for Rove tactics? Answer: By not putting oneself in a position to get set up for Rove tactics.


1. Blaming the victim
2. Buying the lies
3. Considering a person guilty before proven

----------


## PRB

> It said in the indictment that Ron Paul had no idea what was going on.  And Benton is not employed by Rand Paul.  Hopefully the liberals will try to stir things up, but this is just more technical campaign finance law crap.


these were laws designed from the beginning to trap and unfairly disadvantage candidates which don't have unlimited funds.

----------


## Carlybee

So what happens to the Super PAC?

----------


## PRB

> So what happens to the Super PAC?


they'll be lucky if it's not completely dissolved and seized.

----------


## idiom

I wish these would embed properly in this forum.

http://i.imgur.com/L8295i6.webm

It applies to a lot of people actually. Benton, Trump, Bush, Clinton, Obama

----------


## timosman

> Uh no, incorrect. Not even close. Jesse has nothing to do with Rand's campaign at all.


Are you trolling us, Sire ? Your presence was missed. Greatly.

----------


## libertyplz

Updated in the same article I posted earlier, from Rand's camp:




> Rand Paul's campaign, through an unnamed spokesman, offered similar criticism of the timing. "Senator Rand Paul is disappointed that the Obama justice department chose to release this just prior to the highly anticipated first Republican presidential debate," the campaign said. "It certainly appears suspiciously timed and possibly, politically motivated. Additionally, these actions are from 2012 and have nothing to do with our campaign."


I assume this will be the talking point on Rand's side whenever he is asked about it. Seems good to me, bring up the suspicious timing of it, and that regardless as to whether or not it's politically motivated, it has nothing to do with his campaign.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> I wish these would embed properly in this forum.
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/L8295i6.webm
> 
> It applies to a lot of people actually. Benton, Trump, Bush, Clinton, Obama


Change the "webm" extension to "gif" - like so: "http://i.imgur.com/L8295i6.*webm*" becomes "http://i.imgur.com/L8295i6.*gif*"

----------


## Maltheus

They may not have been able to legally coordinate, but when you're talking about a family member and former campaign manager taking on the role, everybody knows they are coordinating on some level. And Rand could have certainly asked Benton to stay away, if he had a problem with it. You'd figure he'd do the Paul's the same courtesy he did McConnell and step aside. If anything, I'm assuming Rand must have talked him into it.

The issue here is that this was entirely predictable. We all knew it was coming, after Sorenson pleaded guilty. And especially after he had to step down from McConnell's campaign. They were just holding off until it would make the most damage. This goes beyond family loyalty IMO, Rand is just an idiot as far as I can tell. I wrote him off the moment he said (last December) that Benton would definitely be involved in the campaign. There was no rational justification for it. Although I guess I should be glad he did get in the race. They likely wouldn't have gone after Benton, otherwise. I don't care if it's like getting Capone for tax evasion, so long as they got him.

----------


## rich34

Well, way to go Benton...  But you also have to question the damn timing of this all coming out, surely none of you think this was by accident.  It took them 3 to 4 years to finally bring charges like these to the forefront?  Damn...

----------


## angelatc

> Yeah but didn't Rand set himself up for this? He gave them the ammunition, all they had to do was pull the trigger. Why was Benton appointed to the SuperPac?


You might as well argue with the wall, but you're exactly right.

----------


## angelatc

> Uh no, incorrect. Not even close. Jesse has nothing to do with Rand's campaign at all.


Right.  It is entirely illegal for the campaign to coordinate messaging with the PAC.  But that was not the case before Rand announced, and since the PAC was formed specifically to give Benton a job, I think it's a safe bet that Paul had some say in the decision. 

After all, Benton made it clear that Rand would only be addressing one PAC during the campaign season.  How would Benton possibly know that if he was not in contact with the campaign?

That's a rhetorical question, btw. You can huff and puff, but we all know it's Benton who is blowing the house down.

----------


## brandon

So, I honestly thought he was already indicted. I thought I read this story months ago. I wasn't aware he had anything to do with Rand's PACs. I figured he was laying low for a couple years while this blew over. 

Obviously this $#@! was coming down the pipe.... I'm dumbfounded how a dude with this amount of political poison ended up in charge of Rand's biggest PAC.  Like seriously.... what in the world are these people thinking?

----------


## angelatc

> It is what it is.  Benton should have had enough sense to keep his nose clean - if you don't like the rules, don't play the game.  Seriously, this was an unnecessary and stupid risk to take.


Rand is the one who is ultimately responsible.

----------


## presence

> For getting caught at doing something that EVERY other campaign does?


Wait every campaign kicks Kent $35k for audio/video?  Dude must really be badass.

DJ Sorenson in the house!

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Uh no, incorrect. Not even close. Jesse has nothing to do with Rand's campaign at all.


That's interesting, because Rand promised Jesse would be involved in his campaign.
*

"Jesse is married to my niece and was a big help in the Kentucky election here in 2010 and a big help for Sen. McConnell. Yes, he'll help us," Rand Paul said, adding he did not think Benton "did anything wrong."


http://news.yahoo.com/asked-marijuan...-election.html*

----------


## specialkornflake

It seems like the only time I post on these forums is to say bad things about Benton. This is going back all the way to 2007, but I can't see posts from that far back. Ron wasn't good at picking the right people to keep around him. I give Rand some credit for relegating Benton to the Super PAC. This is why we can't make this movement about any particular person, but rather the ideas of Liberty.

To win the Presidency, Rand's campaign is much more viable than his father's. If Rand really brings his A game he could win this.

----------


## Peace Piper

Might be a good time for the "Liberty Movement" to look around and find some new faces that don't embrace nepotism.

Rand has done more damage to his fathers legacy than anyone on earth.

He endorsed Romney before the convention 
(if anyone had done that here, they would have been banned)

He lied about Russia and Crimea

He endorsed the rat Benton- after the whole scandal had been exposed

He just recently lied about Iran (no talk of that here that I've seen)
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2...-failure-liar/

I have supported Ron since the '80s and my reasons for that support are non-negotiable.

It's NOT about the Pauls. It's about the message. And Rand has all but destroyed that message. Enough is enough.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> So people who like the Constitution are supporting the enforcement of an unconstitutional law?


Wait just a $#@!ing minute...we're supposed to wink and nudge at the indictment, on felony charges, of an upper level campaign person connected to both Ron and Rand, because the law that they are being prosecuted under is somehow unconstitutional? 

(It's *not* by the way, *everything* that is happening to them, and the country, is *fully* constitutional and legal beagle, the government judges have *assured* us of that.)

That this won't do any damage, or hurt the chances of the candidate?

But free people exercising their free speech rights to support the candidate of their choice *does*?

GTFO here...

----------


## LatinsforPaul



----------


## Maltheus

> Hopefully, Rand can to turn this around on push their faces in it.. I hope he has a clever and honest retort.


If he's lucky, he'll be asked two questions in this debate, with one of them being "Senator Paul, why would you sanction someone to head your super PAC who had recently been forced to step down from the McConnell campaign over these same improprieties?" The other question will be about Trump or something. There's no turning that around in the 30 seconds or so that he'll get.

----------


## Original_Intent

Collins showing up to defend this or to tell everyone "nothing to see here" is about as predictable as Zippy pooh-poohing anybody that has the first clue about the economy.

----------


## Dianne

> If he's lucky, he'll be asked two questions in this debate, with one of them being "Senator Paul, why would you sanction someone to head your super PAC who had recently been forced to step down from the McConnell campaign over these same improprieties?" The other question will be about Trump or something. There's no turning that around in the 30 seconds or so that he'll get.


That's exactly what will happen !!

----------


## givemeliberty2010

> Do you recall that this was the move by Benton that gave Santorum the victory in Iowa?
> 
> Sorenson was supporting Michelle Bachman. That was beneficial to Paul because Bachman was taking votes away from Santorum. Then, after Sorenson was bribed to support Paul, Bachman's campaign collapsed, her support went to Santorum, and then he won Iowa.
> 
> It was a desperate move to stop Ron Paul from winning Iowa.


I remember her support as already collapsing.

----------


## phill4paul

> We all knew it was coming...


  A great majority did. The rest just continued to shove their noggins deeper into their sphincter.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Rand-Paul-2016

----------


## Texan4Life

> Jesse
> 
> http://tomwoods.com/blog/my-memories-of-jesse-bento/


I had forgotten about this. thx for sharing.. new members need to read it.


...I just hope Rand has some good answers for when they drill him about Benton in the debate.


Only time will tell if this will hurt, help, or not matter for Rand in the long run.

----------


## Texan4Life

> Well, way to go Benton...  But you also have to question the damn timing of this all coming out, surely none of you think this was by accident.  It took them 3 to 4 years to finally bring charges like these to the forefront?  Damn...


I agree.. they have been sitting on this waiting for a good time.

----------


## fr33

> Why can't the Pauls stay away from shady people? Please tell me why.


They are grifters. Benton is part of their group. He's made a lot of money of fools like us.

If Rand is serious about winning, why on earth would he announce that he's "officially cut ties" *wink* *wink* just in time for Benton to head up the PAC? Because Benton and the PAC are part of Rand's plans. It's a horrible idea. Did Rand not think that it was a bad idea? Everybody knew this indictment was coming.

----------


## timosman

> They are grifters. Benton is part of their group. He's made a lot of money of fools like us.
> 
> If Rand is serious about winning, why on earth would he announce that he's "officially cut ties" *wink* *wink* just in time for Benton to head up the PAC? Because Benton and the PAC are part of Rand's plans. It's a horrible idea. Did Rand not think that it was a bad idea? Everybody knew this indictment was coming.


http://ronpaulsupporters.com/paul-family-money/

----------


## Anti Federalist

> They are grifters.


Ouch... pretty harsh.

Can you back this up?

I have to admit I'm not happy about Ron running ads for .... oh hell... whoever that doomsday crank is...

----------


## Maltheus

> They are grifters. Benton is part of their group. He's made a lot of money of fools like us.
> 
> If Rand is serious about winning, why on earth would he announce that he's "officially cut ties" *wink* *wink* just in time for Benton to head up the PAC? Because Benton and the PAC are part of Rand's plans. It's a horrible idea. Did Rand not think that it was a bad idea? Everybody knew this indictment was coming.


Yeah, I just don't know what to make of it. Ron sounds so damn authentic, it's hard for me not to trust and respect him. And I like Rand most of the time. But I just don't get the motive here. If it were about fleecing people, he'd have fleeced a lot more by letting Benton go. There's something about their relationship that's never added up.

----------


## Badger Paul

"After Rand gets elected, he's gonna appoint Jesse to the SCOTUS just as soon as one of them old bastards already on it get's their ticket punched."

No, after Rand wins the White House he's going to give his first pardons of Presidency to Benton, Tate and Kesari. The day after the inauguration.

JJ you remember that speech in the movie _The Untouchables_ where Kevin Costner said: _"in Roman times when someone tried to bribe a public official that person was put into a bag with a wild animal and it was sewed shut and thrown into the river"_ Jesse should consider himself lucky he lives in the good old USA in 2015. The worst he'll probably get a year or two in club Fed prison and be let out early for good behavior. This has nothing to do with campaign finance laws. Benton, Kesari and Tate laundered cash to an Iowa state senator for his endorsement. That's a bribe and that's illegal. Period.

I could been Jesse Benton you know. I could have been one of those types who hangs around Washington or some state capital on the fringes, working for some political group, a coffee-boy for some no-name legislator or piddly-ass lobbyist. I could have been that. I wanted to be that growing up and be a part of the game, smell the power in the air. I'm very glad I didn't, because more often than not you wind up like him. He was a nobody who was hired by Kent Snyder because he worked cheap. There were many critical of his performance but one thing he did know how to do was marry the boss's granddaughter, of that he can be proud of as he wormed his way into the family and somehow thought himself indispensable.  Penny Langford-Freeman will tell you otherwise.

All I care about was the Ron didn't know about any of this. And why would he? He's out giving the message. Benton, Kesari and Tate et. al. let him down big time. It didn't take long for Bachmann to figure out what was going on (largely because Sorenson was on the take to her campaign so he had to be bribed to switch sides) and she immediately screamed bribery, which Sorenson denied and lied about.  But because the charge was thrown out there at the last minute without a proper response, I have to believe all the muck between Bachmann and Paul flying around simply convinced those Iowa voters who hand't made up their minds going into the caucus in 2012 to vote for Santorum. So the sure-fire plan win the caucuses on the back of a bribe to a crooked state senator only wound up backfiring on the campaign in the end. Way to go guys! 

Wasn't four-years before in 2008 that some campaign staffer in Iowa, in a fit of pique for whatever reason, wrecked the campaign's master canvass list on the day of the caucus and volunteers and staffers had to wait around 4 p.m., a good three hours before the caucuses began, just to get a back-up list after the computer techs worked out the snafu? Well I guess Team Paul made a lot of progress in four years, from malignancy and incompetence to illegality and incompetence so who knows what f-up they have in store come next February?

So say a prayer for Mrs. Jesse Benton that her husband won't be in the can for too long (and privately wonder what she saw in the little trouser snake) and that Rand wisely and soberly takes stock in his campaign and finds a way to keep it from being an embarassment. Oh and Collins, just FYI...you do have the right to remain silent.

----------


## RM918

Good ol' Jesse Benton, he's the gift that just keeps on giving! Didn't like him back in '08 and it just keeps going further and further downhill.

----------


## timosman

Jessy - the sad consequences of a pity $#@!.

----------


## puppetmaster

I swear benton is deep undercover.

----------


## timosman

> I swear benton is deep undercover.


He is actually pretty shallow. It is all the people around him providing cover. This guy can not stand on his own.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Not on Drudge yet but on The Blaze.

*Aides to Ron Paul’s 2012 Presidential Campaign Indicted on Conspiracy Charges*

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015...iracy-charges/

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Three people who worked for Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential campaign were charged Wednesday with conspiring to buy the support of a former Iowa state senator.

Among those changed is Jesse Benton, a political operative with deep ties to the Paul family. He now is a lead strategist for a super PAC supporting the 2016 presidential candidacy of Paul’s son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, and is married to Ron Paul’s granddaughter.

An indictment unsealed Wednesday charges Benton, John Tate and Dimitrios Kesari with conspiracy and several other related crimes.

“Federal campaign finance laws are intended to ensure the integrity and transparency of the federal election process,” said Assistant Attorney General Caldwell in a statement. “When political operatives make under-the-table payments to buy an elected official’s political support, it undermines public confidence in our entire political system.”

The indictment says the three Ron Paul staffers negotiated with former Iowa State Sen. Kent Sorenson to switch his support in the 2012 race from Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann to Ron Paul in exchange for money.

Sorenson last year pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the switch of support from one Republican candidate for president to another. Sorenson was state chairman for Bachmann’s campaign beginning in June 2011, and six days before the January 2012 Iowa caucuses, Sorenson declared his support for Paul, then a congressman from Texas.

Sorenson admitted to receiving thousands of dollars in “under the table payments” from a 2012 presidential campaign and lying about the money, the Justice Department said at the time.

Iowa state Senate rules forbid any sitting lawmaker from being paid by a campaign while in office.

The indictment says Benton, Tate and Kesari negotiated a payment of $73,000 to Sorenson, concealing the payments in campaign records and filings. 

The indictment also says the arrangement was concealed from Ron Paul himself and that Benton, who did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday, initiated the deal.

Benton and Tate have lead roles at the best-funded super PAC supporting Rand Paul’s 2016 campaign, America’s Liberty, which reported raising more than $3 million in the first six months of the year. That is almost a quarter of the money raised by Rand Paul’s campaign and outside groups backing his White House bid.

During that time, Benton’s consulting group was paid $63,000 and Tate collected about $35,000 in salary, according to documents filed with the Federal Election Commission.

A spokesman for Rand Paul’s 2016 campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Best comment.





> Since.I.Gave.Up.Hope.I.Feel.A.Lot.Better
> 
> - Aug. 5, 2015 at 2:35pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> ...

----------


## Badger Paul

_"Wait just a $#@!ing minute...we're supposed to wink and nudge at the indictment, on felony charges, of an upper level campaign person connected to both Ron and Rand, because the law that they are being prosecuted under is somehow unconstitutional?"_

Yes because they're ideologues, and ideologues amaze us with their ability to find any kind justification for any bad behavior so long as "fits the doctrine" or that the "flame of good intentions isn't squelched" to coin a phrase.  Don't bother them with logic they're too busy trying to nail a square peg into a round hole and then when they can't, they'll take a gun and shoot the hole.

I don't know, I'm not a lawyer but I think I read somewhere that bribery was illegal. Certainly if they thought they were above-board then why launder the money? Seventy-three grand?! Yeah, that's your money bomb money going to a good cause! It was well spent!.

Collins you're the same person who said Benton wasn't going to be indicted to begin with. So if I were you, instead of posting about the Constitution, I would be reading it, especially the part about the Fifth Amendment. 

Maybe this is a good thing now that a good chunk of the claque will be spending more time with their lawyers than with the campaign. But then that begs the question what was Rand's overall role in 2012? Did he help to staff the campaign, hire Sabre and other professional parts of it? Help set up the structure? People are going to be asking that. They're going to ask why person facing possible indictment was allowed to to have any connection with, even a Super PAC after stepped down from the McConnell campaign under fire. That's not good judgement. In a massive candidate field, the last thing you want is for something like this to make enough of a black mark for to lead voters to pass you over. We'll see what happens tomorrow night but I'll say this, the only way this won't be an problem is if Rand pulls the plug on the campaign. Something he needs to think about.

----------


## Badger Paul

_"Wait just a $#@!ing minute...we're supposed to wink and nudge at the indictment, on felony charges, of an upper level campaign person connected to both Ron and Rand, because the law that they are being prosecuted under is somehow unconstitutional?"_

Yes because they're ideologues, and ideologues amaze us with their ability to find any kind justification for any bad behavior so long as "fits the doctrine" or that the "flame of good intentions isn't squelched" to coin a phrase.  Don't bother them with logic they're too busy trying to nail a square peg into a round hole and then when they can't, they'll take a gun and shoot the hole.

I don't know, I'm not a lawyer but I think I read somewhere that bribery was illegal. Certainly if they thought they were above-board then why launder the money? Seventy grand?! Yeah, that's your money bomb money going to a good cause! It was well spent!.

Collins you're the same person who said Benton wasn't going to be indicted to begin with. So if I were you, instead of posting about the Constitution, I would be reading it, especially the part about the Fifth Amendment. 

Maybe this is a good thing now that a good chunk of the claque will be spending more time with their lawyers than with the campaign. But then that begs the question what was Rand's overall role in 2012? Did he help to staff the campaign, hire Sabre and other professional parts of it? Help set up the structure? People are going to be asking that. They're going to ask why person facing possible indictment was allowed to to have any connection with, even a Super PAC after stepped down from the McConnell campaign under fire. That's not good judgement. In a massive candidate field, the last thing you want is for something like this to make enough of a black mark for to lead voters to pass you over. We'll see what happens tomorrow night but I'll say this, the only way this won't be an problem is if Rand pulls the plug on the campaign. Something he needs to think about.

----------


## Badger Paul

Didn't mean to repeat. My apologies.

----------


## Matt Collins

> they'll be lucky if it's not completely dissolved and seized.


Why? It has absolutely nothing to do with the indictment.

----------


## Matt Collins

> That's interesting, because Rand promised Jesse would be involved in his campaign.
> *
> 
> "Jesse is married to my niece and was a big help in the Kentucky election here in 2010 and a big help for Sen. McConnell. Yes, he'll help us," Rand Paul said, adding he did not think Benton "did anything wrong."
> 
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/asked-marijuan...-election.html*


No go back and read the quote.... he said "he will help us" which doesn't mean being involved in the campaign. Independent expenditures can still help a candidate without actually coordinating with the candidate.

----------


## Matt Collins

> the PAC was formed specifically to give Benton a job



https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

----------


## Badger Paul

If we don't want argue the merits Benton's scumbaggery because it may divide us over the issue of "campaign finance", perhaps this explanation from RPF member Maltheus on another thread will inform everyone how Benton is more than willing to stoop to conquer, even if it costs us delegates:
_
"I saw this first hand in Colorado as Matt Holdridge worked against the grassroots to put only Santorum and Romney people on our ballot, and when our county revolted and told him that we were doing our own slate of actual Ron Paul delegates, he pretended to agree (to a room full of over 60 people) and not interfere, even got to vote. Then we get to the convention and pretends like he never heard about any of this and tried to convince the rest of the state that we were with the Romney campaign, trying to sabotage the RP campaign, when he was the one clearly doing that all along. He even admitted to me, flat out on a conference call that they were looking for people who "might even be willing to vote for Romney."

Of course, this was all borne out in the results. He went on to pretend like we were close to a majority of delegates, when we all know we didn't. Every single person elected off his slate voted for Romney in the end (many of them being notorious Ron-bashers in our state). And Holdridge bragged, along with his partners in crimes, that this was all Benton's strategy and that we shouldn't question it. We dominated that convention in numbers, yet walked away without a single vote, because of these crooks. And THAT'S why I (nor any of my compatriots) will not be wasting our time again, if they continue with the same crew._

----------


## Galileo Galilei

> He is, however, the head of a Rand Paul super PAC. In the public mind it is guilt by association.


Scott Walker had a whole bunch of his people in his office charged and convicted and no one cares in Wisconsin except a few disgruntled democrats.  Walker's poll numbers went up.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> No go back and read the quote.... he said "he will help us" which doesn't mean being involved in the campaign. Independent expenditures can still help a candidate without actually coordinating with the candidate.

----------


## Brett85

Have Benton and Tate resigned yet?

----------


## phill4paul

> Scott Walker had a whole bunch of his people in his office charged and convicted and no one cares in Wisconsin except a few disgruntled democrats.  Walker's poll numbers went up.


  I didn't read about that all over the internet or watch it play out in the media newz cycle. All of America ain't Wisconsin.

----------


## Anti Federalist

And sold out to Mittens.

I'm assuming with the understanding that he would "help" in future campaigns.

Damn near every one of GOP hopefuls trailed through Wolfeboro NH this summer, to meet with Romney.

All exact Rand.

He didn't get an invitation to the lakehouse.

That whole "let's throw dad under the bus" plan worked real $#@!ing great.

----------


## timosman

> https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause


Why are you even showing up here ? Are you trying to make sure the situation is under control ? It is. Now go back and stop harassing people.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> That's interesting, because Rand promised Jesse would be involved in his campaign.
> *
> 
> "Jesse is married to my niece and was a big help in the Kentucky election here in 2010 and a big help for Sen. McConnell. Yes, he'll help us," Rand Paul said, adding he did not think Benton "did anything wrong."
> 
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/asked-marijuan...-election.html*





> No go back and read the quote.... he said "he will help us" which doesn't mean being involved in the campaign. Independent expenditures can still help a candidate without actually coordinating with the candidate.

----------


## TaftFan

> Ouch... pretty harsh.
> 
> Can you back this up?
> 
> I have to admit I'm not happy about Ron running ads for .... oh hell... whoever that doomsday crank is...





> They are grifters. Benton is part of their group. He's made a lot of money of fools like us.
> 
> If Rand is serious about winning, why on earth would he announce that he's "officially cut ties" *wink* *wink* just in time for Benton to head up the PAC? Because Benton and the PAC are part of Rand's plans. It's a horrible idea. Did Rand not think that it was a bad idea? Everybody knew this indictment was coming.


Yep getting involved with Porter Stansberry was a bad, shady move. That relationship is in high gear as we speak.

And then there are the Isagenix MLM snake oil salesmen, one of whom is posting in this thread.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

>

----------


## Carlybee

> not a benton fan, and this was definitely timed well by the DOJ, but this doesnt do hardly any damage long term...in 2 weeks, no one remembers.


Unless the media makes sure everyone remembers.

----------


## Carlybee

//

----------


## angelatc

> asking people not to believe the media and federal government is trolling, got it.


 So you're begging us to believe those emails aren't real?

----------


## angelatc

> he has money, he's a Paul.


Woah.

----------


## New York For Paul

> Because I'm defending Paul & his associates for the same reason, to win. We can't afford to have mud slung on us and the media lying about us, it's bad enough that idiot Americans believe their lies, but people in the movement? We can't expect to win if we keep beating up people in our circle, in this case, it's Paul's FAMILY AND TRUSTED EMPLOYEE. Where would Campaign for Liberty be without Tate? Did you ever think about that?


It will be better off without Tate and company.

----------


## PRB

> So you're begging us to believe those emails aren't real?


Yes.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Jessie's a nightmare, but I was wondering when someone was going to start chiming in about the merits of the charges.


I stated a couple of times in this thread, how I think it will play out wrt to the indictment's charges:

I think they'll skate on the conspiracy and false records charges.

But the feds will burn Benton on the "false statements to the FBI" charge. A USC 1001 conviction is very easy to obtain.




> Jesse R. Benton, 37, of Louisville, Kentucky; John M. Tate, 53, of Warrenton, Virginia; and Dimitrios N. Kesari, 49, of Leesburg, Virginia, are charged by indictment with conspiracy, causing false records to obstruct a contemplated investigation, causing the submission of false campaign expenditure reports to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and engaging in a scheme to make false statements to the FEC.  Benton is additionally charged with making false statements to the FBI


http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-...-state-senator

That said, there's little doubt in my mind that the timing of the indictments are politically motivated.

----------


## phill4paul

> I stated a couple of times in this thread, how I think it will play out wrt to the indictment's charges:
> 
> I think they'll skate on the conspiracy and false records charges.
> 
> But the feds will burn Benton on the "false statements to the FBI" charge. A USC 1001 conviction is very easy to obtain.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-...-state-senator
> ...


 About the same as my assessment.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Well...there were some of us that said, over a year ago, that Rand should avoid Benton like the plague and have nothing to do with him.


Yeah, like virtually everyone!  Anyone with any kind of moral compass and understanding knows: you don't associate yourself with bad people.  That's it!  It's simple!  And anyone could see that the wheels were turning and the hammer was probably going to come down on Jesse & co. eventually.  The wheels of justice just turn slowly in the United States.  But there was an ongoing investigation, this was not a secret.

None of this is a surprise.  Everyone, almost unanimously, on RPF saw this coming.  You'd have to be a complete Collins to not.

And yet, Rand let him be head of his SuperPAC.  Well, everyone makes choices.  And then you live with them.

----------


## Deborah K

> ..... You'd have to be a complete Collins to not.......


LOL!  Sorry, but that right thar is funny!

----------


## phill4paul

> LOL!  Sorry, but that right thar is funny!


  No $#@!. Lmao.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Kind of ironic that someone that wanted conspiracy theorists to just go away was himself indicted for.....conspiracy.


Wow, that is too good.    Thanks, phill.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Remember the two things Ron said at the end of every speech.
> 
> Spread the message.
> 
> Have fun.


And maybe he should have added a third maxim:

"Don't be a dishonest, unethical, shady criminal person while doing so, and distance yourself from those who are!"

----------


## Texan4Life

Is it to soon to say we dodged a bullet on this one?  seems like media is on to bigger better things.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

I'm not much disturbed by the indictment; it'll have zero long term impact on Rand's campaign. 

I am, however, extremely disturbed by the reactions of some on this forum. Benton-phobia has never made any sense to me; I get the impression that a lot of liberty movement people scapegoated the man after their (unrealistically high) expectations weren't met in the last two cycles. I remember very clearly, in the spring of 2012, the sudden rise of Benton-phobia on the Daily Paul; and the people going after him were - almost to a man - the same ones trapped in denial about Ron's chances (by that point his chances were clearly 0%, just as a matter of delegate math). Then, naturally they started to turn on Ron "Well if Ron hired this guy he must be corrupt or stupid!"  I don't care about Benton one way or the other, personally, but to see these sentiments bubbling up again, with people cheering on an obviously politically motivated federal prosecution of a liberty movement person, designed to harm the movement, in the midst of the most important campaign in the movement's history thus far, is disgusting and shameful.

----------


## timosman

> I am, however, extremely disturbed by the reactions of some on this forum. Benton-phobia has never made any sense to me; I get the impression that a lot of liberty movement people scapegoated the man after their (unrealistically high) expectations weren't met in the last two cycles. I remember very clearly, in the spring of 2012, the sudden rise of Benton-phobia on the Daily Paul; and the people going after him were - almost to a man - the same ones trapped in denial about Ron's chances (by that point his chances were clearly 0%, just as a matter of delegate math). Then, naturally they started to turn on Ron "Well if Ron hired this guy he must be corrupt or stupid!"  I don't care about Benton one way or the other, personally, but to see these sentiments bubbling up again, with people cheering on an obviously politically motivated federal prosecution of a liberty movement person, designed to harm the movement, in the midst of the most important campaign in the movement's history thus far, is disgusting and shameful.


Cry me a river. Keep pretending like you do not know what this is about.

----------


## PRB

> I'm not much disturbed by the indictment; it'll have zero long term impact on Rand's campaign. 
> 
> I am, however, extremely disturbed by the reactions of some on this forum. Benton-phobia has never made any sense to me; I get the impression that a lot of liberty movement people scapegoated the man after their (unrealistically high) expectations weren't met in the last two cycles. I remember very clearly, in the spring of 2012, the sudden rise of Benton-phobia on the Daily Paul; and the people going after him were - almost to a man - the same ones trapped in denial about Ron's chances (by that point his chances were clearly 0%, just as a matter of delegate math). Then, naturally they started to turn on Ron "Well if Ron hired this guy he must be corrupt or stupid!"  I don't care about Benton one way or the other, personally, but to see these sentiments bubbling up again, with people cheering on an obviously politically motivated federal prosecution of a liberty movement person, designed to harm the movement, in the midst of the most important campaign in the movement's history thus far, is disgusting and shameful.


I was about to punch you for saying people have unrealistic expectations, but i agree with the rest of what you said, that people allow the outsiders to persecute Benton, we need cohesion and unity, not infighting, and definitely not infighting brought on by the federal government and media.

----------


## angelatc

> I was about to punch you for saying people have unrealistic expectations, but i agree with the rest of what you said, that people allow the outsiders to persecute Benton, we need cohesion and unity, not infighting, and definitely not infighting brought on by the federal government and media.


We pretty much are unified on the anti-Benton sentiments.  Feel free to join us.

----------


## PRB

> We pretty much are unified on the anti-Benton sentiments.  Feel free to join us.


Are Ron & Rand on your side? That's the "quality" of people I care about, not quantity.

----------


## Carlybee

> Is it to soon to say we dodged a bullet on this one?  seems like media is on to bigger better things.


No...they will trot it out at strategic intervals.

----------


## angelatc

> Are Ron & Rand on your side? That's the "quality" of people I care about, not quantity.


Which totally explains why you're here, then. Not.

It's fine if you don't care what we think.  But your wing of the movement is creating the drama, then insisting that we shut up and ignore it.  Which means, of course, that nothing has changed.

I seem to recall that Benton resigned from the McConnell campaign so that the allegations wouldn't sully the reputation of that candidate.  Why isn't he resigning now for the same reason? 

Again, that's a rhetorical question.  We already know the answer.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> I'm not much disturbed by the indictment; it'll have zero long term impact on Rand's campaign. 
> 
> I am, however, extremely disturbed by the reactions of some on this forum. Benton-phobia has never made any sense to me; I get the impression that a lot of liberty movement people scapegoated the man after their (unrealistically high) expectations weren't met in the last two cycles. I remember very clearly, in the spring of 2012, the sudden rise of Benton-phobia on the Daily Paul; and the people going after him were - almost to a man - the same ones trapped in denial about Ron's chances (by that point his chances were clearly 0%, just as a matter of delegate math). Then, naturally they started to turn on Ron "Well if Ron hired this guy he must be corrupt or stupid!"  I don't care about Benton one way or the other, personally, but to see these sentiments bubbling up again, with people cheering on an obviously politically motivated federal prosecution of a liberty movement person, designed to harm the movement, in the midst of the most important campaign in the movement's history thus far, is disgusting and shameful.


r3v, no one is cheering this.  No one is gleeful.  It is a shame, but it is not the conduct of RPF members that is shameful.  It's Benton's conduct that was shameful.

I mean, some people are just shady characters.  Based on the decent, normal people who have interacted with Benton (such as Tom Woods and Deborah K) this man is a shady character.  He is not an upstanding guy.  It's too bad the fist of tyranny is coming down on him, sure, but I can't bring myself to cry a river over every charlatan or scam artist or dishonest snake that happens to get in trouble with the law.  It's not a "phobia".  Nobody has a "phobia".  He's just a dishonest guy.  This is not someone to defend, r3v.  Don't spend your credibility points defending him.  He's not worth it.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> r3v, no one is cheering this.  No one is gleeful.  It is a shame, but it is not the conduct of RPF members that is shameful.  It's Benton's conduct that was shameful.
> 
> I mean, some people are just shady characters.  Based on the decent, normal people who have interacted with Benton (such as Tom Woods and Deborah K) this man is a shady character.  He is not an upstanding guy.  It's too bad the fist of tyranny is coming down on him, sure, but I can't bring myself to cry a river over every charlatan or scam artist or dishonest snake that happens to get in trouble with the law.  It's not a "phobia".  Nobody has a "phobia".  He's just a dishonest guy.  This is not someone to defend, r3v.  Don't spend your credibility points defending him.  He's not worth it.


This ^^^

----------


## PRB

> Which totally explains why you're here, then. Not.
> 
> It's fine if you don't care what we think.  But your wing of the movement is creating the drama, then insisting that we shut up and ignore it.


I stand with the candidates, what's "my wing"? 




> Which means, of course, that nothing has changed.
> 
> I seem to recall that Benton resigned from the McConnell campaign so that the allegations wouldn't sully the reputation of that candidate.  Why isn't he resigning now for the same reason? 
> 
> Again, that's a rhetorical question.  We already know the answer.


I don't know the answer, but go ahead and tell me.

----------


## angelatc

> I stand with the candidates, what's "my wing"?


Fair enough. Nixon had his supporters too. 





> I don't know the answer, but go ahead and tell me.


Now that I won't do, because there's no need.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> I seem to recall that Benton resigned from the McConnell campaign so that the allegations wouldn't sully the reputation of that candidate.  Why isn't he resigning now for the same reason?


Very interesting point.

I suppose one could try to "explain" it by suggesting that Benton was actually fired from the McConnell campaign - and that the "resignation" language was just a frame for "toning things down" for purposes of public consumption. (After all, both McConnell and Benton would have had an interest in downplaying the reasons for Benton's "departure.") The lack of any such "resignation" of Benton in the current affair could then be "explained" on the basis of familial loyalties or outright nepotism.

Of course, any such "explanation" would be erected upon speculation. But whatever the case may be, there doesn't seem to be any scenario (except decisively clear and total exoneration) in which Benton comes out not looking bad ...

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> r3v, no one is cheering this.  No one is gleeful.


I've read the entire thread and I beg to differ. 




> It is a shame, but it is not the conduct of RPF members that is shameful.  It's Benton's conduct that was shameful.


Regardless of Benton's conduct, it's shameful that some are spitefully licking their chops at this news, and moreover taking the opportunity to bash Ron/Rand.  




> I mean, some people are just shady characters.  Based on the decent, normal people who have interacted with Benton (such as Tom Woods and Deborah K) this man is a shady character.


Tom Woods has proved himself an imbecile when it comes to practical politics, so any opinion he has of Benton's value as a political operator is less than worthless: virtually a counter-indicator. I have no idea whether Deborah K is in a position to accurately judge Benton. I'm certain;y not just going to take her subjective impressions of him (sans any facts) as the gospel truth. 




> He is not an upstanding guy.  It's too bad the fist of tyranny is coming down on him, sure, but I can't bring myself to cry a river over every charlatan or scam artist or dishonest snake that happens to get in trouble with the law.  It's not a "phobia".  Nobody has a "phobia".  He's just a dishonest guy.  This is not someone to defend, r3v.  Don't spend your credibility points defending him.  He's not worth it.


Not defending Benton, criticizing the Bentonphobes.

It's about more than the (quite trivial) case of Jesse Benton. 

It's about a general pathology which exists in certain circles of the movement, which is - taken as a whole - far more dangerous than any number of Bentons.

i.e. politically naive and also chronically paranoid persons who think they know better than the campaign, who constantly criticize the campaign, who are always seeing treachery when the campaign fails to do as they're o-so-certain the campaign should do, always ready to quit in a huff; and who have no appreciation that this very attitude among some of its supporters is a major obstacle for the campaign, and bears a larger share of the blame for its failures than the imagined treasons and mistakes they drone on about

Electoral politics isn't a symposium, more like a military operation. It requires hierarchy, faith in one's leadership. 

The notorious unherdability of libertarian cats is _not_ cute or funny, it makes us _much_ less likely to succeed.

...and it pisses me off more with every passing year.

----------


## devil21

> I've read the entire thread and I beg to differ. 
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of Benton's conduct, it's shameful that some are spitefully licking their chops at this news, and moreover taking the opportunity to bash Ron/Rand.  
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Woods has proved himself an imbecile when it comes to practical politics, so any opinion he has of Benton's value as a political operator is less than worthless: virtually a counter-indicator. I have no idea whether Deborah K is in a position to accurately judge Benton. I'm certain;y not just going to take her subjective impressions of him (sans any facts) as the gospel truth. 
> ...


I'm sure I fall into this group that you are describing and if that's how you see it, that's on you.  I don't know who you are or your experience or direct involvement with this movement/campaign.  Some of us have watched as the same liabilities to the movement get brought on time and again, with the same end results.  Some of us have been directly involved and observed it up close.  It's particularly frustrating when the outcomes are _entirely_ predictable based on past events, yet folks like you think _we_ are more damaging?  Posters on a website are more damaging than federal indictments for fraud?  People that have spent much time and money over the years supporting the message are more damaging?  At some point, if one is remain intellectually honest and not be a blind cheerleader, one has to ask what's really going on here?  I do agree that the inability to 'herd' the liberty movement makes electoral success more difficult but if you recall, the movement wasn't founded on borg mentality in the first place and anyone that thought they could 'herd' the people never understood the kinds of people that the movement attracted.

----------


## Anti Federalist

+rep




> I'm sure I fall into this group that you are describing and if that's how you see it, that's on you.  I don't know who you are or your experience or direct involvement with this movement/campaign.  Some of us have watched as the same liabilities to the movement get brought on time and again, with the same end results.  Some of us have been directly involved and observed it up close.  It's particularly frustrating when the outcomes are _entirely_ predictable based on past events, yet folks like you think _we_ are more damaging?  Posters on a website are more damaging than federal indictments for fraud?  People that have spent much time and money over the years supporting the message are more damaging?  At some point, if one is remain intellectually honest and not be a blind cheerleader, one has to ask what's really going on here?  I do agree that the inability to 'herd' the liberty movement makes electoral success more difficult but if you recall, the movement wasn't founded on borg mentality in the first place and anyone that thought they could 'herd' the people never understood the kinds of people that the movement attracted.

----------


## timosman

> Tom Woods has proved himself an imbecile when it comes to practical politics, so any opinion he has of Benton's value as a political operator is less than worthless: virtually a counter-indicator.


Who, out of the entire Paul's (young and old) retinue, proved himself to be trustworthy and able to withstand public scrutiny ? Maybe this is the problem, Paul's inability to attract high caliber followers. Maybe the entire organization stinks to high heaven and really does not have a plan ? How else would you explain the relative vacuum around Paul ? Do you think his goofy debate performances are helping ? Where are his allies ? Certainly not us here, based on what you say.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Posters on a website are more damaging than federal indictments for fraud?


Continual resistance from behind, in various forms - from publicly attacking the campaign to leaving the movement over some petty grievance (like Benton) - most certainly hurts the us more than a federal indictment which won't stick to Rand and won't be remembered by anyone outside the movement in a week anyway. And, this is the wrong tack anyway. Even if the indictment is very damaging, _you don't help things by piling on and doing even more damage_.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Tom Woods has proved himself an imbecile when it comes to practical politics, so any opinion he has of Benton's value as a political operator is less than worthless: virtually a counter-indicator.


 OK, r3v, a couple things.  First, I respect Tom Woods.  I think he's a good man, he's my kind of man, and he's a traditional man.  You and all your "neo-reactionary" and moldbug buds claim to believe in and revere traditionalism and want to bring back traditional values.  Well, here I am, I'm _actually_ traditional, as opposed to theoretically-traditional-but-riding-the-tiger or whatever the heck bizarre stuff you guys are into.  And so is Woods.  We're your target audience, if you have one.  So maybe you shouldn't piss us off by calling us imbeciles.  Just a thought.  Whatever Tom Woods is, he's not an imbecile.  Second thing, it's not his opinion of "practical politics" that I respect.  I respect him as a person, and I respect him as a judge of character.  He judged Jesse Benton's character to be bad.  I have never met Benton, but I trust Tom's judgment.




> I have no idea whether Deborah K is in a position to accurately judge Benton. I'm certainly not just going to take her subjective impressions of him (sans any facts) as the gospel truth.


 Reasonable enough.  If you knew facts, you would have a better idea.  I know some of the facts, and because of that I do have a better idea.  Deb was in a position to accurately judge Beton.  Judge she did, and correctly as far as I can tell.

As for the rest of your post, OK, I now understand what you're railing against here.  I get it.

I personally have been sympathetic to Benton in the past.  I have been on his side.  For instances:




> This is when it all comes together!  11 days from now, if all goes well, we are all going to be _loving_ us some Jesse Benton.  Big time.





> These are the contests which determine whether Jesse Benton goes down in history as the greatest and most brilliant campaign manager of all time.  Win three of them, and it's a whole new ballgame, boys and girls.





> His campaign staff is not seasoned and veteran.  His media coordinator is just out of college.  Many members of the staff are young.  Revise that: virtually all of them are young.  Every person I've talked to at headquarters has sounded under 30.
> 
> *Jesse Benton won Rand's Senate race.  So yes, he's experienced.  That would be legendary, to win a long-shot (virtually impossible) Senate race and then a long-shot (virtually impossible) Presidential race back-to-back.  And at such a young age!  Jesse would be hailed as the greatest political genius of the century.  Karl Rove and James Carville would both cower in his shadow.*
> 
> Jon Downs, the guy making the commercials, is also experienced.  As is Doug Wead, the most experienced of them all.  So there's some experience on the team, and Wead would be considered a veteran, but other than who I've named (Wead, Downs, Benton) I think they're all pretty new faces.
> 
> Sadly, that may have been because they were all Ron could afford.


 So as for me, I was not undermining him.  I was a good soldier.  I was not second-guessing Benton's (and ultimately Ron's) decisions.

I have no expertise to determine whether he did a great job as a campaign manager or not.  I have run for office, but I've always lost!   So I still pass no judgment about that.  He might be a phenomenal, smart, excellent campaign manager.  Virtually everyone on RPF would vehemently disagree with that, would tell you he definitely was _not_ excellent, he was incompetent, etc., etc., and my own experience with the head office tended to confirm that, too.  And maybe they will come post all the facts they have to back them up in this thread, and once you have the facts you will agree with them.  But as for me, I reserve judgment.  If he had won, we'd be singing his praises as a political genius.

But I don't reserve judgment on whether he's a decent, honest, respectable person.  On that, I judge.  He is not.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> OK, r3v, a couple things.  First, I respect Tom Woods.  I think he's a good man, he's my kind of man, and he's a traditional man.  You and all your "neo-reactionary" and moldbug buds claim to believe in and revere traditionalism and want to bring back traditional values.  Well, here I am, I'm _actually_ traditional, as opposed to theoretically-traditional-but-riding-the-tiger or whatever the heck bizarre stuff you guys are into.  And so is Woods.  We're your target audience, if you have one.  So maybe you shouldn't piss us off by calling us imbeciles.  Just a thought.  Whatever Tom Woods is, he's not an imbecile.


I said that Tom Woods is an imbecile _when it comes to practical politics_ (as evidenced by his statements on that topic). 

Otherwise, as an academic, or just as a human being, he's excellent; I've sung his praises many times on that front. 




> But as for me, I reserve judgment.  If he had won, we'd be singing his praises as a political genius.


But since we lost, people hate him.

--->scapegoat




> But I don't reserve judgment on whether he's a decent, honest, respectable person.  On that, I judge.  He is not.


I don't have enough information to judge Benton's competence or character, one way or the other, and neither do 99.99% of the Bentonphobics: which is my point.

----------


## Carlybee

> I said that Tom Woods is an imbecile _when it comes to practical politics_ (as evidenced by his statements on that topic). 
> 
> Otherwise, as an academic, or just as a human being, he's excellent; I've sung his praises many times on that front. 
> 
> 
> 
> But since we lost, people hate him.
> 
> --->scapegoat
> ...


Were you a member here in May 2012?

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> I said that Tom Woods is an imbecile _when it comes to practical politics_
> 
> Otherwise, as an academic, or just as a human being, he's excellent; I've sung his praises many times on that front.


 I can see you're having a hard time here, so let me help you out.  Let me give you some Secret Inside Insight into traditional culture norms.  A man who you think is an excellent human being, who you think of and indeed want as an ally, you do not call that man an imbecile, no matter how qualified.  You do not say to other people behind his back "Old Pete, my good friend, he sure is an _imbecile_ on automotive matters".  You could say something like "Tom is weak in this area" or "I disagree with some of Tom's ideas about politics".  Now that may seem a very minor, semantic point to you.  I understand that in 15-year-old Youtube-comment culture it's probably just fine to call everyone an imbecile all the time and no one should think anything of it and that's all great.  That is a degenerate culture.  In civilized culture, people whom you respect, you treat with respect.




> (as evidenced by his statements on that topic).


  "Evidenced"!  Oh wow, evidenced.  That sounds very official.  Just short of "proven".  Sounds like an open-and-shut case.

Wait, just how is a man's knowledge of *practical politics* evidenced/proven?

Tom Woods has a popular podcast, several best-selling books, an extensive network of important people who like and respect him, and to sum up: a large and loyal following.  r3volution3.0 has.......... what, exactly?  Which of these two men is more influential?

_There's_ practical politics for you.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> I can see you're having a hard time here, so let me help you out.  Let me give you some Secret Inside Insight into traditional culture norms.  A man who you think is an excellent human being, who you think of and indeed want as an ally, you do not call that man an imbecile, no matter how qualified.  You do not say to other people behind his back "Old Pete, my good friend, he sure is an _imbecile_ on automotive matters".  You could say something like "Tom is weak in this area" or "I disagree with some of Tom's ideas about politics".  Now that may seem a very minor, semantic point to you.  I understand that in 15-year-old Youtube-comment culture it's probably just fine to call everyone an imbecile all the time and no one should think anything of it and that's all great.  That is a degenerate culture.  In civilized culture, people whom you respect, you treat with respect.
> 
>   "Evidenced"!  Oh wow, evidenced.  That sounds very official.  Just short of "proven".  Sounds like an open-and-shut case.
> 
> Wait, just how is a man's knowledge of *practical politics* evidenced/proven?
> 
> Tom Woods has a popular podcast, several best-selling books, an extensive network of important people who like and respect him, and to sum up: a large and loyal following.  r3volution3.0 has.......... what, exactly?  Which of these two men is more influential?
> 
> _There's_ practical politics for you.


How fascinating

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> How fascinating


 Glad I could help chase away the boredom.

No hard feelings, by the way, r3v.  As I'm sure you've noticed, because you're smart, I actually think the same way as you and am pushing for the same elitist, hierarchical Hoppe-topia.  I just like Tom Woods and don't appreciate you tearing him down, and I will defend him.  That's all.

----------


## Weston White

> So people who like the Constitution are supporting the enforcement of an unconstitutional law?


How are obstruction, fraud and conspiracy punishments unconstitutional?

----------


## angelatc

> Continual resistance from behind, in various forms - from publicly attacking the campaign to leaving the movement over some petty grievance (like Benton) - most certainly hurts the us more than a federal indictment which won't stick to Rand and won't be remembered by anyone outside the movement in a week anyway. And, this is the wrong tack anyway. Even if the indictment is very damaging, _you don't help things by piling on and doing even more damage_.


If Jesse resigned from the McConnell campaign to protect McConnell from the blowback, why isn't he resigning from the PAC to protect Rand Paul?  Nobody here cares if McConnell catches political flack  - he isn't our guy.  Some (and I do not include myself) would relish the chance to damage him.

But our opinions of Jesse do not matter to the McConnell crowd, so the fall out would have been minimal.  Add to that the fact that McConnell's seat isn't in play this cycle.  

So, why isn't Benton resigning again?

----------


## angelatc

> Electoral politics isn't a symposium, more like a military operation. It requires hierarchy, faith in one's leadership. 
> 
> .


I agree with that.  We don't.  Based on Rand's recent polling, we are justified in that sentiment.

----------


## angelatc

> So people who like the Constitution are supporting the enforcement of an unconstitutional law?


We aren't.  We are just frustrated with the fat little $#@! that thought it didn't apply to him.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> So, why isn't Benton resigning again?


I have no idea but (contrary to what you seem to be implying) I find it extremely improbable that he's _trying_  to harm Rand's campaign (or so inept that it never crossed his mind  that resigning might help Rand). Who knows (hint: you and I do not) what  exactly might be going on behind the scenes. I'm not going to second  guess them.




> I agree with that.  We don't.  Based on Rand's recent polling, we are justified in that sentiment.


Soldiers might be justified in criticizing their general for some error; it doesn't change the fact that abandoning him, dropping their weapons, and running is more likely to get them killed.

A badly led army is still superior to a confused, infighting mob.

----------


## angelatc

> Soldiers might be justified in criticizing their general for some error; it doesn't change the fact that abandoning him, dropping their weapons, and running is more likely to get them killed.
> 
> A badly led army is still superior to a confused, infighting mob.


Perhaps the error here is thinking that we signed up for this? This is a popularity contest he's trying to win.  If he has to toss us under a bus to win an election, I'm ok with that.  But he isn't winning.  His poll numbers are dropping, and I think it's probable that Fiorina will replace him in the next debate.

The PAC that Benton runs didn't raise very much money.  What messaging are they putting out?

Forgive me, but I see lots of things happening this cycle that happened in both 2008 and 2012. And since I have not had a frontal lobotomy, I am not prepared to sing happy songs and pretend that this time things wil be different.  Because they are not. They are, in fact, exactly the same.

Well, except Ron was polling higher.

So either tell me exactly what wonderful things Benton has done for this campaign, name the victories he is bringing us, or get over the fact that we have no faith in the man and we are resentful of the fact that he's pocketing more money than most of us make in 10 years while slowly killing the last remnants of the hope we once held.

----------


## Anti Federalist

It's as simple as that.




> Perhaps the error here is thinking that we signed up for this? This is a popularity contest he's trying to win.  If he has to toss us under a bus to win an election, I'm ok with that.  But he isn't winning.  His poll numbers are dropping, and I think it's probable that Fiorina will replace him in the next debate.
> 
> The PAC that Benton runs didn't raise very much money.  What messaging are they putting out?
> 
> Forgive me, but I see lots of things happening this cycle that happened in both 2008 and 2012. And since I have not had a frontal lobotomy, I am not prepared to sing happy songs and pretend that this time things wil be different.  Because they are not. They are, in fact, exactly the same.
> 
> Well, except Ron was polling higher.
> 
> So either tell me exactly what wonderful things Benton has done for this campaign, name the victories he is bringing us, or get over the fact that we have no faith in the man and we are resentful of the fact that he's pocketing more money than most of us make in 10 years while slowly killing the last remnants of the hope we once held.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

I've said my piece, do as you will.

----------


## phill4paul

> Soldiers might be justified in criticizing their general for some error; it doesn't change the fact that abandoning him, dropping their weapons, and running is more likely to get them killed.


  And sometimes a retreat allows one to fight another day instead of becoming just cannon fodder on a forgotten hill. Aren't analogies fun?

----------


## PRB

> How are obstruction, fraud and conspiracy punishments unconstitutional?


Punishments are not, the prosecution might be.

FEC laws are largely unconstitutional because it prohibits free speech and free transactions, I'm not saying Benton did it, I'm saying even if he did he's not supposed to be guilty if we had a free country that allowed people to spend moeny as they please.

----------


## PRB

> Fair enough. Nixon had his supporters too. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that I won't do, because there's no need.


You're comparing Ron & Rand to Nixon? 

Go ahead and give excuses not to answer.

----------


## angelatc

> You're comparing Ron & Rand to Nixon? 
> 
> Go ahead and give excuses not to answer.





> You're comparing Ron & Rand to Nixon? 
> 
> Go ahead and give excuses not to answer.


I am comparing people who held steadfast to the blind faith they had in Nixon to the people who have that blind faith in Ron, Rand and Jesse.   God bless 'em.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Ken Buck had not a single thing in common with the movement, not then and not now.  He is now in the House.  Would you like to provide a list of his liberty oriented votes since his election?  I'll wait.


In Ron's opinion, as I recall, he thought the other guy was so horribly bad, that it was important that Buck won instead.  Michael's (Daily Paul) letter is posted on these forums somewhere, if you really want to know more detail.  Or ask Ron himself.






> I'm of the mind that Ron didn't do much of his staff picking, regardless of what he claimed.  Enter Benton and Rothfeld, et al, who I am convinced are not and never were friends of the movement.


Friends of the movement?  lol   If you want to run a successful campaign, you make sure that you have a couple of true believers, but the rest, you'd damn well better hire the best talent that you can find and keep them within boundaries.





> My eyes are wide open.  There are very big stakes in this game and anyone still carrying today the same naivete' that they carried 7 years ago hasn't learned a thing.


Maybe.  But, if you are thinking that the best thing to do is to only hire true believers, regardless of skill at winning campaigns, then you are still harboring a ton of naivete.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Perhaps the error here is thinking that we signed up for this? This is a popularity contest he's trying to win.  If he has to toss us under a bus to win an election, I'm ok with that.  But he isn't winning.  His poll numbers are dropping, and I think it's probable that Fiorina will replace him in the next debate.
> 
> The PAC that Benton runs didn't raise very much money.  What messaging are they putting out?
> 
> Forgive me, but I see lots of things happening this cycle that happened in both 2008 and 2012. And since I have not had a frontal lobotomy, I am not prepared to sing happy songs and pretend that this time things wil be different.  Because they are not. They are, in fact, exactly the same.
> 
> Well, except Ron was polling higher.
> 
> So either tell me exactly what wonderful things Benton has done for this campaign, name the victories he is bringing us, or get over the fact that we have no faith in the man and we are resentful of the fact that he's pocketing more money than most of us make in 10 years while slowly killing the last remnants of the hope we once held.


Yeah, it's pretty sucky alright.  The media has been hard at Rand for over a month now.  I've just been going to google news and searching for Rand and nothing but one hit piece after another has been popping up for quite some time now.  And he has gotten very few interviews.  ugh

I personally think the GOP establishment has set the fix for Jeb to be the nominee.  The conservative vote is so split right now, that not a one of them are going to have the numbers.  If Rand is going to break free, we are going to need a miracle.  I am still hoping and praying for one.

----------


## fr33

> In Ron's opinion, as I recall, he thought the other guy was so horribly bad, that it was important that Buck won instead.  Michael's (Daily Paul) letter is posted on these forums somewhere, if you really want to know more detail.  *Or ask Ron himself.*


While you're at it, ask Ron why his hired help bribed politicians and why we should trust Jesse Benton.

It's not like Ron will give you an answer. How the f do you ask Ron these things? He emails me all the time grifting for money but never responds.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I can see you're having a hard time here, so let me help you out.  Let me give you some Secret Inside Insight into traditional culture norms.  A man who you think is an excellent human being, who you think of and indeed want as an ally, you do not call that man an imbecile, no matter how qualified.  You do not say to other people behind his back "Old Pete, my good friend, he sure is an _imbecile_ on automotive matters".  You could say something like "Tom is weak in this area" or "I disagree with some of Tom's ideas about politics".  Now that may seem a very minor, semantic point to you.  I understand that in 15-year-old Youtube-comment culture it's probably just fine to call everyone an imbecile all the time and no one should think anything of it and that's all great.  That is a degenerate culture.  In civilized culture, people whom you respect, you treat with respect.
> 
>   "Evidenced"!  Oh wow, evidenced.  That sounds very official.  Just short of "proven".  Sounds like an open-and-shut case.
> 
> Wait, just how is a man's knowledge of *practical politics* evidenced/proven?
> 
> Tom Woods has a popular podcast, several best-selling books, an extensive network of important people who like and respect him, and to sum up: a large and loyal following.  r3volution3.0 has.......... what, exactly?  Which of these two men is more influential?
> 
> _There's_ practical politics for you.


Revolution is right.  Tom Woods IS an imbecile when it comes to politics.  He's brilliant at other things and I am sure is a great man, but he doesn't know crap about running campaigns, or anything political for that matter.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> While you're at it, ask Ron why his hired help bribed politicians and why we should trust Jesse Benton.
> 
> It's not like Ron will give you an answer. How the f do you ask Ron these things? He emails me all the time grifting for money but never responds.


I'm not going to message Ron.  If you want to know, you go for it.

Just a bunch of frickin' quitters here.  lol.   About all that is left on this site are the dregs.  Won't do a damn thing to help.  But, oh, how you will complain and pat each other on the back for who quit first.  

Have fun, boys.

----------


## timosman

> While you're at it, ask Ron why his hired help bribed politicians and why we should trust Jesse Benton.
> 
> It's not like Ron will give you an answer. How the f do you ask Ron these things? He emails me all the time grifting for money but never responds.


The best part is they were using some kind of creative marketing back in May. That's why I actually showed up in this forum. It seems it was all bogus -
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...tName-LastName

----------


## fr33

> I'm not going to message Ron.  If you want to know, you go for it.


Again, how should I do this? You say to ask him. It seems impossible unless I'm willing to hire him for tens of thousands of dollars to speak. I've only given him a few thousands over the years. That apparently isn't worth it to him to give a response. 




> Just a bunch of frickin' quitters here.  lol.   About all that is left on this site are the dregs.  Won't do a damn thing to help.  But, oh, how you will complain and pat each other on the back for who quit first.  
> 
> Have fun, boys.


You know who had a lot of fun? Jesse Benton. He made almost 500k off us idiots in 2012. I'll cheer when he gets what's coming to him.

----------


## Weston White

> Punishments are not, the prosecution might be.
> 
> FEC laws are largely unconstitutional because it prohibits free speech and free transactions, I'm not saying Benton did it, I'm saying even if he did he's not supposed to be guilty if we had a free country that allowed people to spend moeny as they please.


Upon reading the above, for some reason this sprang to mind:




> "_Mr. Madison, what you've just said... Is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point, in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul._"
>  High School Principal, Billy Madison


This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, or to spend money, and related transactions; it is about false record keeping and making false statements during an official investigation.

----------


## devil21

> In Ron's opinion, as I recall, he thought the other guy was so horribly bad, that it was important that Buck won instead.  Michael's (Daily Paul) letter is posted on these forums somewhere, if you really want to know more detail.  Or ask Ron himself.


You're suggesting Ron himself was writing fundraising emails and general press release items?  Oooook.  I'm pretty sure it was the fundraisers writing those emails and still are.




> Friends of the movement?  lol   If you want to run a successful campaign, you make sure that you have a couple of true believers, but the rest, you'd damn well better hire the best talent that you can find and keep them within boundaries.
> 
> Maybe.  But, if you are thinking that the best thing to do is to only hire true believers, regardless of skill at winning campaigns, then you are still harboring a ton of naivete.


They got to you, eh?  Or 'your' handle at least.  There's not much sense in hiring people that in most cases would not be on your side, regardless of how 'expert' you think they are.  If they _personally_ oppose your positions then they are not going to help you win.  They will be happy to take the money and ensure you lose, however.  Such is the human condition and why 'true believers' are the only way to win an insurgent campaign, unless your victory is part of their bigger plan.  Considering some of the minds on this forum, it's obvious that some 'true believers' are every bit as 'expert' as the beltway gang, if not more.

----------


## SpiritOf1776_J4

Wow.  I'm not expecting much news with Trump artificially sucking up everyone's polling (as intended) and people here care about an indictment that isn't on Rand's staff, no one has heard about and everyone has hated for 8 years?

The problem is we need to be recruiting new members to the liberty movement.  That is why Ron's runs were wins even though he lost.  It is the key.  The liberty movement must grow and win new offices every election cycle.

Rand needs to attack the police state here not just spying or war there.  That's in the news a lot right now.  Come out hard against police beatings and murders.  Ask why the cops are even armed here when they aren't in Britain.

Trump isn't meant to last, just soak up time like cain and others did before him.  Rand must stay the ground, fight a clean war, and either win, or grow the liberty movement with honor.

----------


## fr33

> The best part is they were using some kind of creative marketing back in May. That's why I actually showed up in this forum. It seems it was all bogus -
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...tName-LastName


It's bogus. I've seen when their emails claim that they need ## supporters from my zip code while there is no way there are that many supporters from my zip code. I have the benefit of living in a very rural area and knowing that they are just lying.

It's also bogus when they send out the emails claiming that they are going to take on the IRS with our donations. Taking on the IRS is a worthy cause and would gain support amongst many but you'll never find anything on Ron Paul's youtube channel or any of his websites that would promote such a struggle. To win against the IRS is very difficult. Instead they just get idiots that fall prey to fear mongering to give them money that will probably never be used against the IRS.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Revolution is right.  Tom Woods IS an imbecile when it comes to politics.  He's brilliant at other things and I am sure is a great man, but he doesn't know crap about running campaigns, or anything political for that matter.


Politics is about gaining power.

Who has more power, Tom Woods or you?

And yet Tom Woods, despite being demonstrably, provably 1,000 times better and more successful at politics than you, would never, ever call you an imbecile.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Politics is about gaining power.
> 
> Who has more power, Tom Woods or you?
> 
> And yet Tom Woods, despite being demonstrably, provably 1,000 times better and more successful at politics than you, would never, ever call you an imbecile.


No, Tom has zero power, most people don't even those who think they do. Tom has not been politically involved at all whatsoever in anything as far as I know.

That's not to take away from his brilliance in law, history, economics, and oration. But those things have nothing to do with the political system (sadly).

----------


## P3ter_Griffin

> Upon reading the above, for some reason this sprang to mind:
> 
> 
> 
> This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, or to spend money, and related transactions; it is about false record keeping and making false statements during an official investigation.


I think if you pursue the matter far enough PRB is definitely right.  There should not have been an investigation in the first place.  Is it so though that if they had been open and honest (not that they should be forced to) about cutting this guy a check for his support, that they would have broken no laws?

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> No, Tom has zero power, most people don't even those who think they do. Tom has not been politically involved at all whatsoever in anything as far as I know.
> 
> That's not to take away from his brilliance in law, history, economics, and oration. But those things have nothing to do with the political system (sadly).


Umm, let me explain power to you.  Power is getting people to do what you want.  Power is being able to get done what you want to get done.  Power is being a Boss.  Powerful people are... powerful.  I don't know how to make that more clear.  Powerful people make a dent in the Universe.  Impotent people don't.

To repeat my previous post:

Tom Woods has a popular podcast, several best-selling books, an extensive network of important people who like and respect him, and to sum up: a large and loyal following. Matt Collins has.......... what, exactly? Which of these two men is more influential?

----------


## Matt Collins

> Umm, let me explain power to you.  Power is getting people to do what you want.  Power is being able to get done what you want to get done.  Power is being a Boss.  Powerful people are... powerful.  I don't know how to make that more clear.  Powerful people make a dent in the Universe.  Impotent people don't.
> 
> To repeat my previous post:
> 
> Tom Woods has a popular podcast, several best-selling books, an extensive network of important people who like and respect him, and to sum up: a large and loyal following. Matt Collins has.......... what, exactly? Which of these two men is more influential?


You're first paragraph is dead on.

Your second paragraph confuses "influence" or "access" with power. The two are not the same and in fact are almost the antithesis of each other. 

For example, Tom cannot get a single law changed or cause a politician to lose his seat. He doesn't know how (and worse yet is unwilling to learn). He can sell books, he can get paid for speaking, and he can educate people, but that does not equate into changing policy which at the end of the day is what we are trying to do.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Your second paragraph confuses "influence" or "access" with power. The two are not the same and in fact are almost the antithesis of each other. 
> 
> For example, Tom cannot get a single law changed or cause a politician to lose his seat. He doesn't know how (and worse yet is unwilling to learn). He can sell books, he can get paid for speaking, and he can educate people, but that does not equate into changing policy which at the end of the day is what we are trying to do.


Oh yes, I'm so confused.  Thank you for clearing up that in your world view, Andy Gilland, city councilman of Ozark, Alabama, is more powerful than Steve Jobs Larry Ellison, who has no power at all.

Matt, you don't even have any power here at RPF, or very limited.  Everyone hates you.  That's the opposite of power, the opposite of influence.  You have basically no power.  Your credibility on the subject of power is _zip_.

----------


## Okie RP fan

Good.

I hope the entire book is thrown at Benton. 
I thought he was bad for Ron's campaign, as did MANY of us, back during 2012. He's a snake, you could always tell something about him was off.

As for those bringing Tom Woods' name into this, let's not drag him through anything we can't prove. 
Thus far he's shown he can be trusted (for now), and he deserves that respect.

----------


## PRB

> I am comparing people who held steadfast to the blind faith they had in Nixon to the people who have that blind faith in Ron, Rand and Jesse.   God bless 'em.


I have blind faith in Ron and Rand, how else can I get them elected? Jesse is a Paul family member, so if his family trusts him, I will too. I asked if his family still stands by him, if they don't, I won't either. I don't trust the judgment of Paul's fans over his family. Last time I checked nobody here has a better chance of getting elected or raising money as the Pauls.

----------


## PRB

> Yeah, it's pretty sucky alright.  The media has been hard at Rand for over a month now.  I've just been going to google news and searching for Rand and nothing but one hit piece after another has been popping up for quite some time now.  And he has gotten very few interviews.  ugh
> 
> I personally think the GOP establishment has set the fix for Jeb to be the nominee.  The conservative vote is so split right now, that not a one of them are going to have the numbers.  If Rand is going to break free, we are going to need a miracle.  I am still hoping and praying for one.


Trump is trolling them, so Jeb might not get it so easy (or is he part of the show?)

----------


## PRB

> Upon reading the above, for some reason this sprang to mind:
> 
> 
> 
> This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, or to spend money, and related transactions; it is about false record keeping and making false statements during an official investigation.


It's an "official investigation" which shouldn't even take place if we had true free speech, true free market and privacy over money the same way we have privacy over votes. Yes, I get it, the investigation was legally justified, but morally the law shouldn't even exist to restrict or audit how people spend their money. I thought this was a FREE COUNTRY, now can't even buy the elections we want.

What's the point of sending Ron, Rand or SuperPACs money if they're not going to use it to win? Isn't that the point? Or are we all about principles and show for the world to laugh at?

The logic you guys use to justify this unconstitutional persecution is what got Jesus crucified, got slaves chained and got Al Capone arrested, got Ross Ulbricht imprisoned. You follow the law blindly, try following liberty and liberty candidates blindyl for a change, we might get somewhere.

----------


## Smitty

Jesse's next TV appearance will be on an episode of "Lockup Raw".

He'll come walking out in an orange jumpsuit and a pair of flip flops talkin' 'bout, "I ain't did $#@!!"

Matt Collins will be walking beside him (under him?) and be backin' him up,.....sayin', "That's right!,..that's right!"

----------


## timosman

> He'll come walking out in an orange jumpsuit and a pair of flip flops talkin' 'bout, "I ain't did $#@!!"


Nah, he'll be talking - "I am the $#@! !" Matt can keep his line.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Matt, you don't even have any power here at RPF, or very limited.  Everyone hates you.  That's the opposite of power, the opposite of influence.  You have basically no power.  Your credibility on the subject of power is _zip_.


You're welcome to believe whatever makes you feel good.

----------


## timosman

> You're welcome to believe whatever makes you feel good.


Why don't you disclose what powers you actually have ?  I hope you are not trying to keep secrets from us.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Why don't you disclose what powers you actually have ?  I hope you are not trying to keep secrets from us.


I was the state director in WV when we passed Constitutional Carry this year. I'm going to pass it in TN by 2017. I have killed numerous other bills, gotten some passed, and gotten legislators elected and tossed.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Oh yes, I'm so confused.  Thank you for clearing up that in your world view, Andy Gilland, city councilman of Ozark, Alabama, is more powerful than Steve Jobs Larry Ellison, who has no power at all.
> 
> Matt, you don't even have any power here at RPF, or very limited.  Everyone hates you.  That's the opposite of power, the opposite of influence.  You have basically no power.  Your credibility on the subject of power is _zip_.


What does that have to do with Tom Woods?  Woods has 0 knowledge of what it takes to win political campaigns.  That was the issue.  Please stay on track.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> I was the state director in WV when we passed Constitutional Carry this year. I'm going to pass it in TN by 2017. I have killed numerous other bills, gotten some passed, and gotten legislators elected and tossed.


Absolute truth: *People who are actually powerful do not have to try to convince people that they are powerful.*

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> What does that have to do with Tom Woods?  Woods has 0 knowledge of what it takes to win political campaigns.  That was the issue.  Please stay on track.


Well, I overestimated you.  You did not even comprehend my point.  Matt Collins, at least, did.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Why don't you disclose what powers you actually have ?  I hope you are not trying to keep secrets from us.


Laser eyes?  I'm going with the power to read his own mind.  

And the ability to fly.

----------


## Carlybee

Well...this has taken an amusing turn.

----------


## angelatc

I disagree with a lot of what LE said, and she disagrees with me. Everybody hates Matt.  PRB is.....something else.  But rather than rehash those particular points of contention for the umpteenth time, maybe we should focus on some of the things we agree on.  Point being - we are losing ground.

Rand Paul's tax plan deserves a lot more attention that it's getting.  If we spent as much time writing letters to the editor as we do posting long diatribes about how badly the campaign is being run, maybe we can at least get a little support for it outside of our universe.  Who's in?

----------


## PRB

> I disagree with a lot of what LE said, and she disagrees with me. Everybody hates Matt.  PRB is.....something else.  But rather than rehash those particular points of contention for the umpteenth time, maybe we should focus on some of the things we agree on.  Point being - we are losing ground.
> 
> Rand Paul's tax plan deserves a lot more attention that it's getting.  If we spent as much time writing letters to the editor as we do posting long diatribes about how badly the campaign is being run, maybe we can at least get a little support for it outside of our universe.  *Who's in?*


I am.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Absolute truth: *People who are actually powerful do not have to try to convince people that they are powerful.*


Knowledge of power is not ubiquitous, besides, I was asked.

----------


## Matt Collins

> Everybody hates Matt.


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I disagree with a lot of what LE said, and she disagrees with me.


Uh huh.  Because you have become just another whiner.  Sad, really.




> Everybody hates Matt.  PRB is.....something else.  But rather than rehash those particular points of contention for the umpteenth time, maybe we should focus on some of the things we agree on.  Point being - we are losing ground.





> Rand Paul's tax plan deserves a lot more attention that it's getting.  If we spent as much time writing letters to the editor as we do posting long diatribes about how badly the campaign is being run, maybe we can at least get a little support for it outside of our universe.  Who's in?


That would require people to actually do something, besides bitch.  Won't happen.

----------


## Cowlesy

Benton is innocent until proven guilty, and frankly I want to see the detail trace of each wire/check/account #. It sounds like a straw donation with "Here we'll purchase all these AV services from you *wink* *wink*". Yeah, you'll go to jail for that.

I'm sure this article is from a liberal hack, and hopefully everything below is false but it kind of sounds like someone really, really impressed with themselves.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins...yal#.ba9Xme1a9




> Those around him said Benton seemed to relish his new status. He bought a million-dollar house in Louisville, Kentucky. He slimmed down considerably, and swapped his baggy suits for a newly stylish wardrobe. He cultivated relationships with influential journalists, and won many of them over with his easygoing accessibility and authentic earnestness — traits rooted in the idealism of the protest campaigns he often worked on (and not commonly found among the more cynical political mercenaries in his industry).
> 
> In any case, Benton kept up the outward displays of confidence in August 2014, when Sorenson pleaded guilty on two federal charges and news of the federal investigation became public. Benton was forced to resign as McConnell’s campaign manager. According to of Benton’s colleagues, immediately after his departure from the campaign, the strategist bought a new Audi, and a gold Rolex for his wife.
> One of the colleagues was concerned by the the extravagance, and urged prudence. “Dude, you don’t know where your next paycheck is coming from,” he recalled telling Benton. “This is not the time to splurge.”


What really bothers me, is RON Paul getting involved with Porter Stansberry. Why, why would he do that? Why!?!?! 
http://briandeer.com/stansberry/stan...rch-scam-1.htm

There are ways to get rich quick, but they involve SUBSTANTIAL risk of loss. Let me tell you, to achieve just something beautiful like 20% returns consistently, is practically unicorn level. If you ever see these "I turned $3,000 into $300,000 and it was SIMPLE!", just walk away.  YES, you COULD! But it's EXTREMELY likely you'll lose your $3,000, and the $500 you spent for one of the umpteen billion newsletters promising to give you secrets.

Just no, Ron. What a horrible, horrible idea.

I'm just...I'm just lost at the lack of judgment exhibited in all of this. It's really disappointing. I don't even read Ron Paul emails anymore because it's always tin-cup rattling for money.

Disappointing.

----------


## angelatc

> Uh huh.  Because you have become just another whiner.  Sad, really.


You say whiner, I say realist.  






> That would require people to actually do something, besides bitch.  Won't happen.


Who's whining now?

----------


## jj-

> Benton is innocent until proven guilty


He is not guilty, campaign finance laws are unconstitutional.

----------


## phill4paul

> He is not guilty, campaign finance laws are unconstitutional.


  Odds of getting a jury that will nullify: .0001%. It has also been pointed out that the worst charge against him is violation of Section 1001. That is the charge they will hang him on.

----------


## KingNothing

> Matt, you don't even have any power here at RPF, or very limited.  Everyone hates you.  That's the opposite of power, the opposite of influence.  You have basically no power.  Your credibility on the subject of power is _zip_.


Even if true, why would you say that?  What constructive end does it lead to?

We're on the same team.  Be nice to each other.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> Even if true, why would you say that?


Because he was insulting Tom Woods.

----------


## KingNothing

> Because he was insulting Tom Woods.


He called Tom Woods brilliant, and wished politicians were like him.  He did not insult Tom Woods.  He spoke the truth - Tom Woods does not have power, and wished it were not the case.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

> He did not insult Tom Woods.


I personally think he did.  In this thread only indirectly (I can understand if you missed it), where he "merely" agreed with someone who called him an imbecile, but here directly:




> Who cares?
> 
> 
> These two [Lew Rockwell and Tom Woods] have *zero understanding* of electoral politics, or politics in general, and *no knowledge or experience* in the political field* at all*. In short, their opinions on the subject matter are no more relevant, prominent, or informed than anyone on the street.
> 
> Now regarding economics, history, and law they are both very learned scholars. *Politically they are dolts.*


And relatively, that's mild.  He's probably decided to back off and mix in underhanded compliments due to realizing the impossibility of making us hate Tom Woods.  Many, many, other times he has expressed more forcefully his low, low opinion of Tom Woods.  And it falls lower every time Tom criticizes Jesse Benton.

I am all for being nice to each other.  But Matt Collins has, in my opinion, lost his way.  He has simply lost his way.  I stand with Tom Woods, I take Tom Woods' side in this perpetual "dispute", not that you can call it that, of meaningless nobodies presuming to criticize and insult their betters.  Which Tom Woods is.  Tom Woods is a stand-up, honorable man.  Matt Collins has a problem with him only because of his absolute undying loyalty to Jesse Benton.

Looking back at his early posts, Collins used to be a decent person.  Collins used to be someone I could relate to.  Collins used to share many of the same values I cherish.  I don't think he's a bad person.  But what he did do, in the words of The Buttercream Gang, was pick the wrong friends, and ever since then he's been getting into trouble.  Going down a dark, dead-end path.  And probably feeling increasing frustration at the way his life is going.

There's my psycho-analysis.  You can leave the nickel in the jar.

----------


## Peace Piper

> I personally think he did.  In this thread only indirectly (I can understand if you missed it), where he "merely" agreed with someone who called him an imbecile, but here directly:
> 
> And relatively, that's mild.  He's probably decided to back off and mix in underhanded compliments due to realizing the impossibility of making us hate Tom Woods.  Many, many, other times he has expressed more forcefully his low, low opinion of Tom Woods.  And it falls lower every time Tom criticizes Jesse Benton.
> 
> I am all for being nice to each other.  But Matt Collins has, in my opinion, lost his way.  He has simply lost his way.  I stand with Tom Woods, I take Tom Woods' side in this perpetual "dispute", not that you can call it that, of meaningless nobodies presuming to criticize and insult their betters.  Which Tom Woods is.  Tom Woods is a stand-up, honorable man.  Matt Collins has a problem with him only because of his absolute undying loyalty to Jesse Benton.
> 
> Looking back at his early posts, Collins used to be a decent person.  Collins used to be someone I could relate to.  Collins used to share many of the same values I cherish.  I don't think he's a bad person.  But what he did do, in the words of The Buttercream Gang, was pick the wrong friends, and ever since then he's been getting into trouble.  Going down a dark, dead-end path.  And probably feeling increasing frustration at the way his life is going.
> 
> There's my psycho-analysis.  You can leave the nickel in the jar.


I'm thinking that collinz character and the rest hate Tom Woods because he makes them all look like the incompetent junior high school students that they really are. The vast amount of incredible talent that many volunteers showed (until they were made irrelevant by official staff) was ignored. The Pauls treat their supporters like they don't exist - until they need more money.

Imagine if Ron Paul had listened to Woods and others that actually know how to present an argument.

Instead we all got Benton and company, and Benton got an Audi, a Million Dollar House and his wife got a gold rolex. What a disgrace.

I remember when I first heard about the allegations that the paul campaign bribed someone to switch sides. I thought it was preposterous. I  stood up for Ron with every last bit of energy I had. Told people on other boards that they didn't know Ron Paul and wouldn't know integrity if it slapped their faces. Now I think Ron knew about it. 

I was taken for a fool and won't be making that mistake again. Enough with political families. Those in the fight for liberty shouldn't let this happen again.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> [Matt] probably decided to back off and mix in underhanded compliments due to realizing the impossibility of making us hate Tom Woods.  Many, many, other times he has expressed more forcefully his low, low opinion of Tom Woods.


For all that he claims to admire the "brilliance" of Tom Woods, I don't recall Matt ever posting much (if anything) favorable towards, by or about Woods - except when he then proceeds to crap on him. You'd think that someone who professes to think so highly of Tom's "brilliance" on such a variety of subjects (history, economics, etc.) would at least occasionally bother to post something of substantive relevance by Tom, without further qualification. But at this point, I am very skeptical that Matt has ever had anything but the most cursory familiarity with any of Tom's output - if even that much. (As I noted in the other thread - the one from which HH pulled that quote from Matt - I doubt that Matt had even bothered to listen to what Tom had to say before pissing on him about it.)

IOW: All of Matt's complimentary effusions regarding Tom Woods just turn out to be the deceitful handshake that comes before the knife in the back.

There's a word for people like that. Several, in fact ...

----------


## Anti Federalist

> What really bothers me, is RON Paul getting involved with Porter Stansberry. Why, why would he do that? Why!?!?! 
> 
> http://briandeer.com/stansberry/stan...rch-scam-1.htm
> 
> There are ways to get rich quick, but they involve SUBSTANTIAL risk of loss. Let me tell you, to achieve just something beautiful like 20% returns consistently, is practically unicorn level. If you ever see these "I turned $3,000 into $300,000 and it was SIMPLE!", just walk away.  YES, you COULD! But it's EXTREMELY likely you'll lose your $3,000, and the $500 you spent for one of the umpteen billion newsletters promising to give you secrets.
> 
> Just no, Ron. What a horrible, horrible idea.
> 
> I'm just...I'm just lost at the lack of judgment exhibited in all of this. It's really disappointing. I don't even read Ron Paul emails anymore because it's always tin-cup rattling for money.
> ...


+rep, giant truth in that.

----------


## Anti Federalist

///

----------


## Matt Collins

You're all wrong and none of you know what the hell you're talking about.  I have many of Tom's books and listen to his podcasts etc.... But you can all go shove it for all I care.

----------


## Danke

> You're all wrong and none of you know what the hell you're talking about.  I have many of Tom's books and listen to his podcasts etc.... But you can all go shove it for all I care.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> You're all wrong and none of you know what the hell you're talking about.  I have many of Tom's books and listen to his podcasts etc.... But you can all go shove it for all I care.


Truth hurts. Don't go throwing tantrums because you thought it was a bright idea to hitch your wagons to crooks like Jesse Benton. You made your bed and now you're going to have to sleep in it, little fella.

----------


## Lord Xar

> Yeah, it's pretty sucky alright.  The media has been hard at Rand for over a month now.  I've just been going to google news and searching for Rand and nothing but one hit piece after another has been popping up for quite some time now.  And he has gotten very few interviews.  ugh
> 
> I personally think the GOP establishment has set the fix for Jeb to be the nominee.  The conservative vote is so split right now, that not a one of them are going to have the numbers.  If Rand is going to break free, we are going to need a miracle.  I am still hoping and praying for one.


this 100%.

The establishment is not gonna take ANY chances whatsoever and allow Rand any traction.... they trolled Ron hard..... BUT, they only started hitting him hard AFTER he got a great foothold.... They will NOT give Rand that chance. They can't contend with more GOP'ers leaving the farm and getting wise to the establishment antics.

They will hit RAND VERY VERY HARD NOW UNTIL THE END..... They have Carson, Cruz, the fake Fiorina, the Fake Trump to carry the "conservative" mantle, while duping all the cows in the GOP farm. 

If RAND lasts, and he can get some great backing from some billionaires.. then YES, he will have a chance and a voice.

But I agree --- they are in blast mode.. and they will not allow another Ron Paul moment to happen. It created the wave of a TON of new liberty candidates... they despise liberty.


BUT BUT BUT -- I am not quitting on supporting the liberty candidate.... Rand. Yeah, I donate money.. Yeah, I donate time... 
Maybe most of you need to ante up... too.

----------


## LatinsforPaul

*Google Wont Let the Government See the Emails of Rand Paul's Aides*




> The three Rand Paul aides who were indicted earlier this month are doing their best to turn the government case against them into an example of government overreach, and Google has taken their side in the fight.
> 
> In the summer of 2014, federal investigators began probing whether Ron Paul's 2012 presidential campaign had paid Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson for his endorsement. After Sorenson confessed, investigators focused on three other men, including current presidential candidate Rand Paul's nephew-in-law, Jesse Benton, whose email account supposedly contained evidence.
> 
> After a brief skirmish with Benton's attorney about accessing Benton's emails, FBI agents got a search warrant that entitled them to read the emails without Benton's cooperation. But the plan did not go smoothly. Benton has a Gmail account, and Google's policy is to notify users when their accounts have been hit with a search warrant. Benton's attorney, Roscoe Howard, promptly filed a motion to block the search warrant, alleging that it was improper, and Google stopped cooperating with the FBI.
> 
> That was almost a year ago. Two weeks ago, Benton and two other top Paul aides, John F. Tate and Dimitri Kesari, were indicted on federal charges, including conspiracy, campaign finance violations, and making false statements. Prosecutors accused the men of paying Sorenson more than $73,000, hiding the payments by funneling them through a third party, and lying on campaign finance filings to cover them up.
> 
> The FBI still hasn't gotten ahold of Benton's emails. Last week, a judge ruled that the FBI had a right to the emails, but once again, Benton resisted and Google agreed. 
> ...


Continue reading: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ver-paul-aides

----------


## tod evans

^^^^^^^^^^^ This is big! ^^^^^^^^^^

Kudos to Google for doing the right thing!

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

Huh. I'm half-expecting a comparison to Clinton in light of this. Something along the lines of 'Well, if Clinton says she's got nothing to hide, why can't some of Rand Paul's _aides_, not even Paul himself, do the same thing?'

----------


## PRB

> ^^^^^^^^^^^ This is big! ^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Kudos to Google for doing the right thing!


so much for Google is in bed with NSA and forcing Americans to use it

----------


## Occam's Banana

> You watch what happens...
> 
> He'll skate on the actual FEC charges, but he's going to go to jail on a USC 1001 conviction.
> 
> If *any* statement he made to the everfucking feds during the course of the investigation turns out to be false, *for any reason*, then that is considered _prima facie_ evidence of guilt.
> 
> If he hung around here and listened to nutcases like me, he *might* have picked up the idea to dummy the $#@! up and *NEVER* talk to cops, ever.





> I stated a couple of times in this thread, how I think it will play out wrt to the indictment's charges:
> 
> I think they'll skate on the conspiracy and false records charges.
> 
> But the feds will burn Benton on the "false statements to the FBI" charge. A USC 1001 conviction is very easy to obtain.


Looks like AF nailed it: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...t-Jesse-Benton




> http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...rges-dismissed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The judge dismissed all charges against Benton except for a count of lying to federal investigators*, according to Politico... Both Pauls had questioned the timing of the indictment, which was handed down shortly before the first Republican presidential primary debate of the 2016 election cycle.

----------


## Anti Federalist

*Do Not Talk To Cops.*

----------


## Anti Federalist

bump

----------


## Cowlesy

> Looks like AF nailed it: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...t-Jesse-Benton

----------


## Anti Federalist

Was talking about this with some friends just now.

"But AF, you said not to talk to *cops*. These were FEC officials".

"Bah! Who gives a $#@!? Local cops, state cops, federal cops, global cops, investigators, regulators, officials...all just another name for some $#@!s with badges. Keep your mouth *shut* around any of them. It should not be like that, and it is not like that in a free country. But we are not that anymore."

----------


## devil21

I don't have a link handy but I read the other day that Ron himself will be called as a prosecution witness if this goes to trial 

Great job Jesse.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> I don't have a link handy but I read the other day that Ron himself will be called as a prosecution witness if this goes to trial


 http://www.kcci.com/news/ron-paul-ke...ffers/35694546

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
> Unexpected ?
> 			
> 		
> 
> Yeah, frankly.
> 
> I would have figured they, or their lawyers, would have had the sense to tell them to dummy up when talking to the feds.
> 
> ...


Yup.

----------


## Republicanguy

Benton was sentenced to home confinement. 

I only just read of this, well they deserved they got. They should of been sent to prison. Benton is Mr Paul's granddaughter's husband. LOL!

----------


## Matt Collins

They were sentenced to probation, 6 months home confinement, and a small fine.


Here is the full story:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/sto...mann/90742638/

----------


## Matt Collins

> I only just read of this, well they deserved they got. They should of been sent to prison. Benton is Mr Paul's granddaughter's husband. LOL!


What the hell is wrong with you? 

You want to send someone to prison for violating a federal law that is unconstitutional to begin with?

----------


## Suzanimal

> Top Ron Paul aide learns fate for 2012 campaign violations
> 
> DES MOINES -- The chairman of Ron Pauls 2012 presidential bid was sentenced Tuesday to probation and home confinement rather than prison, and two other top aides were awaiting their sentences for a scheme to cover up campaign payments to a former Iowa state senator who agreed to endorse their boss.
> 
> Although prosecutors were seeking more than two years in federal prison, Jesse Benton was sentenced to two years probation and six months of home confinement, along with community service and a $10,000 fine. He was convicted of conspiracy, causing false campaign contribution reports to be filed to the Federal Election Commission and participating in a false statement scheme.
> 
> Judge James Jarvey called the crimes serious and said Benton took advantage of the system designed to ensure transparency in how campaigns are financed.
> 
> Theres nothing like prison time to deter white collar activity, Jarvey said, before announcing that he thought the lesser punishment was enough of a deterrent in Bentons case.
> ...


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/top-ron-...gn-violations/

----------


## phill4paul

> “There’s nothing like prison time to deter white collar activity,” Jarvey said
> 			
> 		
> 
> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/top-ron-...gn-violations/


  Tell that to the bankers, Jarvey.

----------


## helmuth_hubener

Cheaters never win.

----------


## phill4paul

> Cheaters never win.


  Tell that to the bankers, helmuth_hubener.

----------


## Ender

> Tell that to the bankers, helmuth_hubener.


LOL

----------


## pcosmar

> What the hell is wrong with you? 
> 
> You want to send someone to prison for violating a federal law that is unconstitutional to begin with?


it's what he got caught for.

Dishonest is Dishonest.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> He was convicted of conspiracy, causing false campaign contribution reports to be filed to the Federal Election Commission and participating in a false statement scheme.


Could have beat two of the raps if he had *SHUT THE $#@! UP* around cops.

----------


## osan

So let me make sure I have this right:  Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, and the rest of that raft of raving, frothing felons commit all manner of overtly criminal acts and the DOJ remains flaccid.  But when Benton et al are suspected of campaign irregularities, DOJ is letting everyone have it all gooey in the eyes?

And some here _still_ think there is a "system-compliant" path toward the establishment of some reasonable facsimile of liberty in America?  What are you taking and why are you not sharing?  I'd really like to get some of that action.

Move along folks... nothing to see here.

----------


## Valli6

> ...That trick effectively "weaponized" the federal regulatory agency as part of their plot, the prosecutors said. *Voters across the country have said during the current election cycle that they believe the "system is rigged," and this case shows why that attitude persists*, Pilger said... http://www.desmoinesregister.com/sto...mann/90742638/


Wow! The election was rigged in favor of Ron Paul! Who knew?

----------


## timosman

> So let me make sure I have this right:  Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, and the rest of that raft of raving, frothing felons commit all manner of overtly criminal acts and the DOJ remains flaccid.  But when Benton et al are suspected of campaign irregularities, DOJ is letting everyone have it all gooey in the eyes?
> 
> And some here _still_ think there is a "system-compliant" path toward the establishment of some reasonable facsimile of liberty in America?  What are you taking and why are you not sharing?  I'd really like to get some of that action.


You see, this is why you get funny looks when you mention your libertarian ideas to people. Everybody knows this equality before the law is BS. The real world does not work that way. The sooner you get this simple idea through your thick skull the better for you. Now, sorry I gotta run, I just got a text from my master.

----------


## Occam's Banana

h/t unknown & Matt Collins: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...d-Jesse-Benton!

Jesse Benton pardoned:
- https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...emency-122320/
- https://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...on/4038489001/




> Two men convicted of multiple federal offenses stemming from a bribery plot during the 2012 Iowa Republican caucus received pardons from President Donald Trump late Wednesday.
> 
> John Tate and Jesse Benton were convicted in 2016 of various public corruption charges for paying an Iowa state senator to switch his endorsement to then-U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, during his 2012 presidential campaign, days before the first-in-the-nation nominating event. Sen. Kent Sorenson, an Indianola Republican, had been a supporter of U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.
> 
> Tate and Benton were convicted by a federal jury in Des Moines in May 2016. Each served six months home confinement and two years’ probation.

----------


## GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged

If none of the people that should be prosecuted are prosecuted then nobody should be prosecuted.

----------


## osan

This is so amusing...  Americans fiddle as the land burns.  We've been at it for over 100 years and still haven't bought the clue.

----------


## Galileo Galilei

This case was a joke, as are about 50% of federal non-drug cases. I am glad they were pardoned.

----------


## Jenard Butler

They were pardoned because they were put up to scandalizing the Paul campaign.  They were pardoned to ensure their silence as per their original agreement Im sure. Its the scenario that makes any sense.

----------


## Galileo Galilei

> They were pardoned because they were put up to scandalizing the Paul campaign.  They were pardoned to ensure their silence as per their original agreement I’m sure. It’s the scenario that makes any sense.


They were targeted because they backed Ron Paul, and the feds found some highly technical non-victim "crime" to convict them.  They were pardoned because the tables have turned over the past 8 years, now we have many defenders of liberty in powerful positions in the federal government fore the first time since the days of Calvin Coolidge.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

They sure as hell weren't pardoned because this POTUS has a soft spot for libertarians, so it's curious indeed. 

My take is that Trump, having lost, is just lashing out at everyone, trying to $#@! with them as much as possible on his way out. 

...and "they" do not like Ron Paul people. 

That's what this veto threat was about; $#@!ing with Mitch because Mitch acknowledged that Biden won.

...a final dick-waving exercise before he goes to the great ignored goodnight.

----------


## Matt Collins

> They sure as hell weren't pardoned because this POTUS has a soft spot for libertarians, so it's curious indeed. 
> 
> My take is that Trump, having lost, is just lashing out at everyone, trying to $#@! with them as much as possible on his way out. 
> 
> ...and "they" do not like Ron Paul people. 
> 
> That's what this veto threat was about; $#@!ing with Mitch because Mitch acknowledged that Biden won.
> 
> ...a final dick-waving exercise before he goes to the great ignored goodnight.


Rand convinced Trump to do it.

----------


## Galileo Galilei

> Rand convinced Trump to do it.


Agreed 100%.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Rand convinced Trump to do it.


Well, he'd have done better convincing him to not borrow another $10 trillion, but I guess this will have to do.

----------


## Galileo Galilei

> Well, he'd have done better convincing him to not borrow another $10 trillion, but I guess this will have to do.


Trump just vetoed the NDAA.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Trump just vetoed the NDAA.


If you're suggesting that the veto was motivated by concern for excessive spending, you're mistaken.

----------


## Galileo Galilei

> If you're suggesting that the veto was motivated by concern for excessive spending, you're mistaken.


Trump is anti-war as well as a budget hawk.

----------


## Aratus

> h/t unknown & Matt Collins: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...d-Jesse-Benton!
> 
> Jesse Benton pardoned:
> - https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...emency-122320/
> - https://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...on/4038489001/


JESSE BENTON got into trouble because ML  Mitch McConnell had been his boss. Asked him to do things. Trump gave Mitch an X-mas present.

----------


## Aratus

> Rand convinced Trump to do it.


Matt may be correct on how Doctor  Rand looked at this.  McConnell being McConnell.
Trump's mistake was that he got into a very minor quarrel with wily ole Mitch after
he gave him a rather nice X-mas present that was wrapped up in a very big nice bow.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

“First they came for Alex Jones.”

Well, actually...

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> First they came for Kokesh, now they have come for Benton and Tate...


Whoops, my bad. They came for Kokesh first.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> So let me make sure I have this right:  Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, and the rest of that raft of raving, frothing felons commit all manner of overtly criminal acts and the DOJ remains flaccid.  But when Benton et al are suspected of campaign irregularities, DOJ is letting everyone have it all gooey in the eyes?
> 
> And some here _still_ think there is a "system-compliant" path toward the establishment of some reasonable facsimile of liberty in America?  What are you taking and why are you not sharing?  I'd really like to get some of that action.
> 
> Move along folks... nothing to see here.


And look where we are today. Obama, Holder, Learner and friends were just getting started back then. It is amazing how so many of the same names keep coming up in these cases.

From the Benton prosecution, to the IRS persecutions, to the pre-election operations against Trump, to the prosecutions against members of the Trump admin, to the cover up of Hunter Biden’s laptop, it’s always the same inter-related cast of characters.

----------

