Illegal Forward Pass....

At 4:58 in the p.m. yesterday, Sen. John McCain's hard-working headquarters deputy communications director, Brian Rogers, forwarded to the campaign press list the statement released by McCain's Senate office on Sen. Russ Feingold's Iraq withdrawal bill.

He was trying to be helpful.

But it turns out that Senate ethics rules frown on such forwarding of official Senate press releases from campaign e-mail addresses.

It's a minor thing... and totally inadvertent... but the commissar of Senate ethics has an extra obligation to be fully attentive to these rules, especially as the Democratic National Committee is not going to give McCain one mole of breathing room over the next six months.

Comments

The hypocrisy here is stunning. Why hasn't the blogosphere picked up on this USA today story which says while Obama touts his refusal to take donations from Washington lobbyists he accepts money from their co-workers who are not registered to lobby.

Or how about the sweetheart tax breaks he gave to companies owned by campaign contributers:

Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign has accepted $54,350 from members of a law firm that in 2006 lobbied him to introduce a tax provision for a Japanese drug company with operations in Illinois, according to public records and interviews. The government estimates the provision, which became law in December 2006, will cost the treasury $800,000.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-02-25-tax-breaks_N.htm

Or how about the Centre for Responsibe Politics hitting Obama on spending nearly $700,000 to BUY specific super-delegates by contributing to their re-election campaigns.

There are so many ethical lapses and breaches by Obama it isn`t even funny.

Posted by Jesse | February 27, 2008 12:23 PM

There are so many ethical lapses and breaches by Obama it isn`t even funny.

McCain's ethical lapses make Obama look like a boy scout.

Posted by goethean | February 27, 2008 12:38 PM

How on earth was it "inadvertent" that Rogers forwarded the press release to the campaign's press list? If he was "trying to be helpful" then it wasn't inadvertent.

The bigger question is, Was it illegal or just a violation of Senate ethics rules?

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 27, 2008 12:47 PM

I'm curious about the "frowns on," and I highly doubt it's illegal. There's supposed to be a sort of wall of separation between campaign activities and legislative activities. It's usually a greater concern about using legislative resources for campaign purposes. In this case, though, it's taking a legislative notice and distributing it to a campaign e-mail list; that strikes me as far less problematic than a campaign notice distributed to a legislative constituency e-mail list.

A quick look at the Senate Ethics rules wasn't helpful. That said, it may require more than a quick look.

Posted by dt | February 27, 2008 1:15 PM

Hard to say if democrats will give McCain more or less than one mole of air - that's only ~22 liters of air. Let's keep chemistry out of politics.

Posted by wjr | February 27, 2008 1:36 PM

That may be an impossibly precise estimate of the amount of breathing room that the DNC will give to Senator McCain. That's only 22 liters of air. Please...let's keep chemistry out of politics.

Posted by Frank Van Buren | February 27, 2008 1:40 PM

Illegal? Don't get your hopes up Jeff Larson.

The senate ethics committee "frowns" on a lot of activities that have nothing to do with any law.

Now Obama's real estate deal, on the other hand, could potentially be illegal. We've just learnt via the London Times that a British-Iraqi billionaire (friend of the Rezko's) lent millions of dollars to an Obama fundraiser just weeks before he purchased his Rezko tainted mansion.

There's some speculation that this money could have been funnelled to Mrs. Rezko (who had no income or assets) to put a $125,000 downpayment on the piece of property neighbouring Obama's. As we know, she later sold part of her property to Obama, making his property value soar, while making her property unusable under bylaws.

Read about the whole sorid scandal yourself. Is there any doubt that Obama was involved in some kind of fundraising kick-back scheme with this guy??

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3433485.ece?token=null&offset=0

Posted by Jesse | February 27, 2008 1:49 PM

We've just learnt via the London Times

put a $125,000 downpayment on the piece of property neighbouring Obama's

I don't know about y'all, but I don't let slimy foreigners tell me how to vote.

Posted by MEDVEDEV | February 27, 2008 2:24 PM

Um, yeah, there's plenty of doubt whether Obama was in a kickback scheme with Rezko. That's why no one has yet reported one, a year after Chicago papers first broke the story. That's why the Times piece says over and over that the affair "raises questions" about O & R's relationship, without giving any hard answers.

That's kind of the definition of doubt.

Posted by shaggy | February 27, 2008 3:02 PM

[T]he Democratic National Committee is not going to give McCain one mole of breathing room over the next six months.

Not to quibble, but I think you mean "iota" and not "mole" in your post. A mole is a quite large stand-alone number (6.02214 × 10^23, or 602,214 followed by 18 zeros), while an iota would be the nonexistent space the DNC will allow McCain.

Love the blog; keep up the great work!

Posted by Jake | February 27, 2008 8:33 PM