Are There Legal Issues For Frederick?
By Jason Kenney | Tuesday, March 31st, 2009 | PoliticsYesterday Jim Hoeft reported that Jeff Frederick had retained legal counsel for Saturday’s SCC meeting in which his Chairmanship will be put to a vote. Many have speculated as to why Frederick would seek counsel and many Frederick supporters have contended that none of the ten points the SCC filed against Frederick amount to illegal activity.
Or do they?
From the Contemporary Conservative:
1. Are Federal Contractors allowed to give, donate, or otherwise contribute “in-kind” political services directly to political parties during Federal election cycles?
2. Is the Frederick company “GSX Strategies Inc.” a federal contractor?
3. If federal contractors are prohibited from performing “in kind” services to political parties during Federal election cycles and if a federal contractor does so anyway, what law, statute, rule, or regulation has been violated, if any?
CCMaximus provides the FEC rules and helps draw the conclusion that this is a serious offense.
Did Jeff Frederick accept a Federal in-kind contribution from a Federal contractor during a Federal election year? And how does this weigh on the minds of not only the SCC but all Republicans who want strong, ethical leadership at the top?
We’ll find out on Saturday.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Jason Kenney has blogged at J’s Notes since 2001, is the director of RedStormPAC providing online fundraising for Republican candidates in Virginia, and co-founder of K6 Consulting. He is a graduate from Virginia Commonwealth University and resides in Richmond, Virginia.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
29 Responses to "Are There Legal Issues For Frederick?"
The legal counsel is not to represent Frederick on any criminal changes or for illegal activity. The counsel has been secured to ensure fair and smooth proceedings before the SCC. Frederick felt that if he had counsel he would be better able to articulate his points to the committee and highlight the fact that this is BAD for the party and namely Bob McDonnell who would be severely hurt by a convention in which the focus was the election of a new chairman and the possible loss of votes in May by scorned Frederick supporters.
may in the last sentence should read november
I paste my comment from the original Contemporary Conservative post below:
Guys…relax and take a deep breath. You’re hyperventilating again.
The prohibition you cite is for federal activities only. Maximus conveniently forgot to quote the whole context, in particular the part that reads: “This prohibition does not apply
to contributions or expenditures in connection with State or local
elections.” 11 CFR 115.2(a). The GSX in-kind contribution was to RPV, and not to RPV’s federal account. Indeed, GSX does not show up as a donor on any FEC reports, nor could it, as corporations cannot make federal campaign contributions at all.
With these types of vindictive, sloppy, and pseudo-legal accusations flying around, are you *really* surprised that Frederick might want to bring a lawyer with him?
Maybe some bloggers will need the lawyers ?
More importantly, isn’t it GXS? As in, Gen-X Strategies?
JR whats your point?
What if federal monies were received in donation via the in-kind. Also this donation takes place in a federal year so I do believe that has impact also. Lastly this in-kind was only filed on a amended filing this month in March.Sometime in the middle of the month
So now RPV Network Chief Frederick Fan OP Ditch is threatening bloggers??? Bloggers will need lawyers? For what, expressing their opinions on a very public figure and his mishandling of RPV’s public image?
More of the Frederick as victim BS.
H:
Frederick needs help articulating his points to the SCC? He can’t do this for himself? Maybe he should also ask for counsel to help him articulate his points so he won’t be such a boob when he talks to the media.
Being able to articulate one’s message in a persuasive way is sort of a core skill set for the Party Chairmanship one might think…
H’s explanation makes the most sense. An attorney might be best for formulating the best argument based on the facts for why J-Fred should stay.
An attorney or team of attorneys provide two more benefits: They could monitor the process to ensure J-Fred’s case to overturn the decision if proper procedures(of which there are few) are not followed. More importantly, J-Fred can have strategy sessions with these folks that would be covered by attorney client privilege.
In a bizarre world (I know the world is pretty strange) J-Fred is setting up defamation lawsuits against those who pushed the accusations. In an even more bizarre world he intends to sue bloggers.
If there is something criminal it has not been made clear. The federal fundraising violations, do not appear applicable.
If he is booted, he can claim to be damaged by those publicly smearing his name.
Those calling him a “theif”, “embezzler”, and “fraud” should hope that either Frederick is not booted(thus not damaged) or he is found guilty in a court of law of committing a real crime.
These new allegations are just another grasp at straws in hopes that something sticks to Frederick.
Hairpiece,
Lawyers will help provide an avenue and probably a clear head to the table so that when it turns into a yelling match someone will be there to articulate the necessary points and progress the discussion in a meaningful and constructive way.
While i agree that Frederick has not been the best at the chairman duties, most of you are missing the point…. This WILL impact Bob McDonnell (the true face of Virginia politics at the moment) in a negative manner. I was upset that he got involved in all of this but we have to find some way to get around hurting his chances to be elected governor. If that means that Frederick has to stay on past the convention and then be replaced, then so be it, but i just dont see how yelling, screaming, and forcing a guy to step down, shifting the conventions focus, is good for our chances in November.
Everyone…
Go research this and read the rules on Contributions during a federal election year and who can give and how? Come back and tell me what ya’ll find.
Wait, Federal contractors can’t make contributions?
Um, no.
Um no they cannot make Federal contributions they are allowed to make State contributions without limit. However the question is how can you make a state in-kind but receive federal contributions… documented federal contributions via something on the State account.
Anyone know if bloggers are covered under the fair comment law? You know, where before you report a story regarding serious accusations about anyone you must give them a call for fair comment? Is that really a law or just an age old journalistic standard? If it is a law then I know JR, Brian, and others would certainly be guilty of violating it. If it is not a law and just an ethical standard, well then…you get the point.
Where are you seeing the federal contributions? What it says is “contributions to RPV,” not McCain/Palin or anything else.
Now, he may be afoul of some McCain-Feingold limits on PAC contributions (I have no idea how RPV is set up) but I don’t think the chapter and verse cited in the original piece applies.
Brad – RPV filed the in kind contribution as a contribution to it’s Federal account, which appears to be in violation of FEC rules
Jason, Thank you.
Max your anger issues are showing again. Remember squeezing the midgets can help.
Now everyone here is something we as bloggers both pro-Jeff and Anti-Jeff should be sinking our teeth into. Its all documented. Research it people. There are serious problems here.
Jason, can you point to your source for that? I’m looking at the FEC website and the only in-kind contributions listed for the last 10 years are from the RNC. By contrast, VPAP lists the in-kind contribution from GXS as having been reported in September. These two facts suggest it was recorded to the RPV’s state account.
Not sure if this link will work, but here’s what I found from FEC:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/com_rcvd/C00001305/
OMG! The ultimate irony. O.P. Ditch, RPVNetwork creator (Frederick die-hard fan), threatens First Amendments rights when his network prohibited anti-Frederick groups.
Steve
Jeff put the in-kind under the state account. Fine except it was during a federal election year. And then he used the in-kind to raise federal dollars…
Are you telling me thats legal?
Lee,
I don’t know much about the relevant law, but I do know that money raised during a federal election year does not necessarily need to be reported on the federal account, just as odd year contributions don’t necessarily have to be reported to the state account. This is true for in-kind or cash. What you’re probably basing this on is a method of allocation of expenses that are used for both federal and non-federal activities. I’m not sure that method applies (I think there may be other methods more applicable), nor am I sure that any of the activities in question constitute federal activities. For instance, we don’t know if any website contributions during that period were allocated to the federal account, or even if a simple pass-through to the federal account from an agent of RPV would constitute a reportable expense (see, e.g., 11 CFR 102.6).
As you said, Lee, we need to do the research. I just wish the research had been done BEFORE the accusations were flung about.
The donations filed through the in-kind were reported to the Federal account. So in my mind this becomes at best a mixed in-kind with some going to state and some to federal. And that is a no no…
And Steve. These weren’t accusations… this is what happened the question is.. is it a violation or not.
Lee, we shall see. Like I said, I don’t know much about the law on this, but I’ll go out on a limb and bet you there’s no violation. Loser buys the drinks?
Now your talking! You are on.
Are there any Lawyers out there that can look and give a actual legal thought on this? I’m thirsty.
Max, the “fair comment” common law has absolutely nothing to do with calling the subject of an article for comment.
Now, go back to your comic books like a good boy.
Leave your response