Kent Sorenson pleads guilty to accepting payments to switch support

[Galileo Galilei]

Yes, just because there is one that pleads, doesn't mean there won't be more. And we don't know what was in the sealed documents with his plea.
Also, there is a slight difference between a conviction and a plea agreement. We don't know yet if Sorenson will be convicted/punished by the judge yet, or if he is being offered some major leniency for his testimony and evidence against others.

They are going after Kesari. They got nothing on Benton. What crime are you proposing that Benton committed?

 

[Galileo Galilei]

Yes, just because there is one that pleads, doesn't mean there won't be more. And we don't know what was in the sealed documents with his plea.
Also, there is a slight difference between a conviction and a plea agreement. We don't know yet if Sorenson will be convicted/punished by the judge yet, or if he is being offered some major leniency for his testimony and evidence against others.

Sorenson is already convinced of 2 crimes. As I said before, the good snitches do it before they are charged.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

It sure looks like laundering money to me. Also, the articles I've read say buying an endorsement is illegal under Iowa law, at the very least. And I imagine this can't look good for the campaign treasurer either.

This is a federal investigation.

 

[kylejack]

This is a federal investigation.

Sure, but state authorities can use evidence the feds uncovered. Not against Sorenson because of his immunity deal.

 

[kylejack]

They are going after Kesari. They got nothing on Benton. What crime are you proposing that Benton committed?

We shall see. His abrupt resignation makes me wonder what hadn't been revealed yet.

 

[jjdoyle]

They are going after Kesari. They got nothing on Benton. What crime are you proposing that Benton committed?

Jesse Benton was aware of it in November 2011. And it doesn't matter if it's Jesse, Kesari, or Tate, or NONE of them, if the campaign is spending one dime on legal advice because of this stupid decision, as is evidenced in the latest FEC report. It's a waste of supporters' money, and some supporters asked for a refund, and were denied.

"OpenSecrets.org has learned that two grand juries have been investigating the events in Iowa, one focused on the Paul campaign and one on Bachmann’s. Last August, OpenSecrets.org published a copy of a memo written by Aaron Dorr, the head of the Iowa Gun Owners, in which he outlined Sorenson’s demands to switch his endorsement. Included in the emails surrounding the negotiations were several top Paul campaign officials, including Benton.
Nobody has been indicted in connection with making the payments to Sorenson."

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/20...s-guilty-to-accepting-money-to-back-ron-paul/

And they usually offer a plea deal, if they have a bigger fish to fry. And I think this fish, was sitting on $800K as of July. Sorenson can't pay the fines. So, they will go after the campaign.
Again, Jesse was aware of the Sorenson issue from at least November 2011. Sorenson didn't start getting under-the-table payment from Ron Paul 2012 through the shell company until 2012.

Who was in charge of the shell company that made the payments to Sorenson (maybe Kesari?), but who approved the payments from Ron Paul 2012 to the shell company?
That's why I said you could have more than one plea agreement here. They could get Kesari on offering the check, and he could say, "It wasn't me, it was the Manager and Chairman (Tate & Benton)."
And since they already have him on charges, they could say, "If you plead guilty on these charges, we'll offer you reduced sentencing for your cooperation and testimony against the others."

But again, doesn't matter if it's Benton, Tate, Kesari, or the others listed in the complaint, or none of them, if Ron Paul 2012 is wasting funds on this stupid issue. As is evidenced in the FEC reports.

 

[kylejack]

So far I don't see a Benton smoking gun, just an e-mail he sent asking if Sorenson would be joining the campaign. I suppose it's possible that Kesari paid Sorenson off without Benton's knowledge, and told Sorenson not to mention the payoff to Benton.

I don't personally find it very probable. The chairman of the campaign would have no knowledge of $80K going out the door? I doubt it.

 

[kylejack]

Bachmann’s Iowa political director, Wes Enos, who like Sorenson joined her campaign in its first days, released a statement under Ron Paul’s letterhead refuting Bachmann’s assertion that Sorenson had been paid to go. Sorenson and Enos both say the state senator decided to back Paul because he had many friends on that campaign, and believed Paul has the best chance of winning.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...wa-despite-loss-of-senior-campaign-officials/

So the Ron Paul 2012 campaign published on their letterhead a statement from Wes Enos that they should have known to be false... They had agreed to pay Sorenson for the endorsement but let Enos lie.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

Sure, but state authorities can use evidence the feds uncovered. Not against Sorenson because of his immunity deal.

There won't be any bribery charges. Even if there is a state law that could be construed in the way you want it, the feds want the glory. The state law, if it exists as you claim, is unconstitutional.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

We shall see. His abrupt resignation makes me wonder what hadn't been revealed yet.

The resignation is a prudent precautionary measure for political reasons. The media and the democrats will spend less time on the issue because of it. In the end, this will be a footnote to history.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

Jesse Benton was aware of it in November 2011. And it doesn't matter if it's Jesse, Kesari, or Tate, or NONE of them, if the campaign is spending one dime on legal advice because of this stupid decision, as is evidenced in the latest FEC report. It's a waste of supporters' money, and some supporters asked for a refund, and were denied.


https://www.opensecrets.org/news/20...s-guilty-to-accepting-money-to-back-ron-paul/

And they usually offer a plea deal, if they have a bigger fish to fry. And I think this fish, was sitting on $800K as of July. Sorenson can't pay the fines. So, they will go after the campaign.
Again, Jesse was aware of the Sorenson issue from at least November 2011. Sorenson didn't start getting under-the-table payment from Ron Paul 2012 through the shell company until 2012.

Who was in charge of the shell company that made the payments to Sorenson (maybe Kesari?), but who approved the payments from Ron Paul 2012 to the shell company?
That's why I said you could have more than one plea agreement here. They could get Kesari on offering the check, and he could say, "It wasn't me, it was the Manager and Chairman (Tate & Benton)."
And since they already have him on charges, they could say, "If you plead guilty on these charges, we'll offer you reduced sentencing for your cooperation and testimony against the others."

But again, doesn't matter if it's Benton, Tate, Kesari, or the others listed in the complaint, or none of them, if Ron Paul 2012 is wasting funds on this stupid issue. As is evidenced in the FEC reports.

Benton may have known some of the details about it, but Sorenson already pleaded guilty to the crime of causing a false FEC report to be written. Hence if Benton were charged with conspiracy to write a false FEC report, he would clear himself by blaming it on Sorenson.

And I should also add there other factors at work. There is knowing with first hand knowledge, and there is "knowing" as in hearing about it 2nd-hand or third-hand. Benton very likely had no first hand knowledge of the deal which sounds stupid on its face. Why pay $80K for a state senator endorsement? Why not just hire the dude as a consultant, the salary would not show up until the FEC repot due by April 15.

 

[jjdoyle]

The resignation is a prudent precautionary measure for political reasons. The media and the democrats will spend less time on the issue because of it. In the end, this will be a footnote to history.

Do you know what was in the sealed documents with the plea agreement, and why Ron Paul 2012 lied to supporters during/after the campaign and turned down refund requests?

 

[Galileo Galilei]

Do you know what was in the sealed documents with the plea agreement, and why Ron Paul 2012 lied to supporters during/after the campaign and turned down refund requests?

Not exactly, but I know buying an endorsement is not bribery in the legal sense. I also know that good snitches flip right away before they are charged with any crimes. The feds are looking for someone and something to charge. It is highly improbable that Jesse Benton will be charged. They are going to charge Dimitri Kesari it looks like. What exactly is your beef?

 

[jjdoyle]

Not exactly, but I know buying an endorsement is not bribery in the legal sense. I also know that good snitches flip right away before they are charged with any crimes. The feds are looking for someone and something to charge. It is highly improbable that Jesse Benton will be charged. They are going to charge Dimitri Kesari it looks like. What exactly is your beef?

My beef? A campaign that was openly lying to supporters for months to simply string them along for more money, wasting months of time and millions of dollars in funds, and then turning down a few refund requests after ending with more than a million cash-on-hand.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

My beef? A campaign that was openly lying to supporters for months to simply string them along for more money, wasting months of time and millions of dollars in funds, and then turning down a few refund requests after ending with more than a million cash-on-hand.

Lying about what? Who was lying? Sorenson is the one who lied and caused the false FEC report to be written. And Ron Paul 2012 denying a bribe is true because it is not a bribe to hire a state senator for your campaign.

 

[fr33]

And Ron Paul 2012 denying a bribe is true because it is not a bribe to hire a state senator for your campaign.

Well sure it is. $80k with no receipt for services rendered. The payed him to leave the person he was first supporting publically and do a few appearances supporting RP. Regardless of legal technicalities, anyone can see that for what it is; a bribe.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

Well sure it is. $80k with no receipt for services rendered. The payed him to leave the person he was first supporting publically and do a few appearances supporting RP. Regardless of legal technicalities, anyone can see that for what it is; a bribe.

Really it's a bribe? So what about the people who pay Tiger Woods and Lebron James for endorsements? Huh?

 

[fr33]

Really it's a bribe? So what about the people who pay Tiger Woods and Lebron James for endorsements? Huh?

If they made it clear that they supported another very different brand before, yeah. I'm not saying it should even be prosecuted. This was one of those rare examples of the campaign spending money proactively.

 

[Galileo Galilei]

If they made it clear that they supported another very different brand before, yeah. I'm not saying it should even be prosecuted. This was one of those rare examples of the campaign spending money proactively.

I think there was a deep plant buried inside the campaign. There is no other way to explain the known facts. If you want Sorenson, you just outbid Bachmann for his services, pay him January 1, 2012, and report the payments on April 15, 2012 when the 1Q report is due. You do not need to launder money, lie to the people making FEC reports, or lie to investigators. And $80K for a state senator looks like way too much to pay even granted it was just before the Iowa caucus.

Another weird thing is that Bachmann knew about it right away, Sorenson told her it appears. This is inexplicable.

 

[jjdoyle]

Lying about what? Who was lying? Sorenson is the one who lied and caused the false FEC report to be written. And Ron Paul 2012 denying a bribe is true because it is not a bribe to hire a state senator for your campaign.

Anybody else sending fundraising emails telling supporters there was a delegate strategy. It was a lie. Simply to drag supporters along, to continue to milk them for money.
Sending emails stating, "Every single dollar will go toward winning this race, putting Ron Paul in the White House, and taking our country back." was a lie.
Ron Paul 2012 agreed as far back as February 2012 to not attack Mitt Romney due to a threat from Romney's campaign, and Ron Paul 2012 didn't let supporters know about that decision (though it was obvious to some of us during the campaign) until Doug Wead was interviewed about it at the RNC.