Minneapolis marketing firm CEO was big donor to Obama fund

  • Article by: Jim Spencer and Corey Mitchell , Star Tribune staff writers
  • Updated: April 22, 2013 - 11:00 PM

Minneapolis firm’s founder, once guilty of “theft by swindle,” gave $225,000 in January for Obama’s second inauguration.

  • 21
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
whosaysApr. 22, 13 9:33 PM

So, they don't know if this guy is an American citizen but he gave 225K to the Presidential election campaign? Is there something wrong here?

43
7
swmnguyApr. 22, 1310:16 PM

Isn't this just free speech? I mean, money is speech, and corporations are people who have rights, right?

17
18
drposterApr. 22, 1310:31 PM

It doesn't matter, the AP will just publish another puff piece on what a tough week Obama has had and all will be forgotten.. And to think they called Reagan the teflon president.

32
13
dogmanApr. 22, 1311:12 PM

"So, they don't know if this guy is an American citizen but he gave 225K to the Presidential election campaign? Is there something wrong here?" -- yes... he didn't give $225k to the presidential campaign fund, for one. Also, I remember Romney's foreign fundraising trip where he insulted every country he visited. I don't recall his fundraising being an issue then. But I guess the headlines were full of his gaffes.

11
34
staredApr. 22, 1311:37 PM

I thought the Dems (and the media) always say that Pres. Obama got most of his funding by $5-10 donations. What a crock!

34
11
elmore1Apr. 23, 1312:09 AM

Why would this guy give a quarter million to an anti-business President? It should go in Ripley's believe it or not.

19
7
cartoonconnApr. 23, 1312:22 AM

225k out of 43mil is not a small donation.

21
5
bl24601Apr. 23, 1312:44 AM

I thought this article was about the inauguration fund (a pretty big and wild party!), not election campaigning. That's a different ball game with different but equally weird rules.

13
3
handsomepeteApr. 23, 13 3:13 AM

Usually, the media tries to hold Republicans "accountable" for the sources of contributions but in this case the media seems to be fanning the flames under the Obama inauguration committee (which spent millions upon millions on a party while middle-class incomes were falling, falling, and 2 million people were filing for unemployment that month). Why in the world would anyone expect a political committee of any stripe to do a complete, thorough background check on each and every one of their thousands of contributors? That would be impossible. I'll tell you how it works: a donor writes a check, a form is submitted to the FEC, and some lowly campaign worker takes the check, stamps it, and puts it with other checks to take to the bank. They do not do head to toe background checks on each donor and do not have the resources to do that. It is absurd to suggest that any political committee do such a thing.

9
6
jcinmnApr. 23, 13 5:53 AM

drposter "It doesn't matter, the AP will just publish another puff piece on what a tough week Obama has had and all will be forgotten.. And to think they called Reagan the teflon president" Reagan was "the great communicator". Clinton was the teflon president

4
6

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT