NL- "Demands"? lol. Words like that just makes people dig their feet in deeper, ya know? When someone demands I do something, I probably just won’t.
from Xbiz.com
Weinstein Demands ‘No on Measure B’ Give Back Manwin’s $150K Contribution
By Rhett Pardon
Tuesday, Oct 30, 2012
LOS ANGELES — AIDS Healthcare Foundation President Michael Weinstein on Tuesday called on for the No on Measure B campaign to give back a $150,000 donation from Manwin, saying the contribution by the adult entertainment conglomerate was a violation of federal election laws.
Weinstein not only called for a return of the funds, but also announced that the AHF had filed a formal complaint on Monday with the Federal Election Commission over an alleged violation of the prohibition against contributions from foreign nationals.
Weinstein, at a press conference Tuesday, said that the $150,000 is significant for the No on Measure B because it represents about half of all donations the group has received.
"We are concerned about foreign entities dumping a ton of money in the last few days of this campaign buying this election with foreign funds," Weinstein said on Tuesday. "We are calling on No on Meaure B to give back this tainted money and not use it and not put a possible asterick over the outcome of the election."
Shortly after the press conference, the No on Measure B (No on Government Waste Committee) called Weinstein’s claims“baseless” and “idiotic” and a "shallow attempt to divert attention from the overwhelming community support building against Measure B."
“Once again, AHF has ably demonstrated they have no idea what they are talking about with this ridiculous allegation,” said James Lee, communications director for the No on Measure B campaign. “They know the polling as well as we do as voter sentiment throughout the county has turned against them and against Measure B and now they are trying desperately to do anything to save what is arguably the dumbest initiative ever to make a ballot.”
In the beginning of the campaign, Lee said, a clerical error resulted in a contribution being misidentified as coming from Froytal Services Ltd., when in fact it came from Manwin, USA, a U.S.-based firm registered in Delaware.
Manwin is based in Luxembourg but has offices in Los Angeles, Montreal and in Hamburg.
"The error was corrected and all campaign disclosures were updated," Lee said. "Federal and state election law clearly allows for contributions from overseas corporate entities so long as it comes from a subsidiary based and registered in the U.S.
"As an example, both the Romney and Obama presidential campaigns and related Super PACS have taken in hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from U.S.-based subsidiaries of foreign companies."
Measure B, funded and placed on the ballot by the AHF, would require the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health to license and permit adult movie productions in the county and require performers to wear condoms and create an unworkable system of on-set inspections and enforcement by county personnel.
It should also be noted that, according to the official statement from James Lee regarding AHF’s complaint, “They are so clueless, they even filed their complaint with the wrong government agency.”
Its ok for Weinstein to dump his $$$ into the measure but not Manin (opposition)? Smells of desperation to me on their part.
Lets get this straight. First Manwin donates 75k to No on B. Then James Lee says it was a clerical error that mis identified the source of the money, it actually came from Froytal Services.
Then Manwin donates another 150k, to No On B, then No on B writes a check to Froytal for 75k. Was this 75k a return of their donation?
Did the FSC make any public statements about their 40k donation to the No on B on 10/26/2012?
To answer my own question, the official No on B campaign disclosure forms show the 75k to Froytal was a refund. But on the FSC site it says, “In the beginning of the campaign, a clerical error resulted in a contribution being misidentified as coming from Froytal LTD. Services,when in fact it came from Manwin.”
So if Froytal never dontated 75k, then how do they get a 75k refund? And how does a campaign misidentify who their largest single donor is?
More important than what IS said is what ISN’T said.
We are told that there was a “clerical error”. But what haven’t we been told? WHO made the “clerical error” and WHAT KIND of “clerical error” it was. Was the clerical error made by the party receiving the donation in falsely recording the donor (i.e. the donation actually came from Manwin not Froytal but some idiot in the No on Measure B Campaign wrongly recorded it as coming from Froytal not Manwin)? That’s possible in theory but how on earth could such a clerical error arise in practice? Surely you just record what’s written on the check itself. Or was the “clerical error” made by the party making the donation (i.e. someone in the Froytal/Manwin group wrote a check from Froytal when he could and should have written one from Manwin)? The former would be a genuine clerical error. The latter might also be characterised as a “clerical error” but it would also (a) render the donation illegal and (b) justify the AHF’s complaint.
So come on Manwin / No on Measure B campaign. Spare us the spin and just tell us what kind of “clerical error” you’re referring to and who made it.