August 2006 Weddings
caden
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
LMW
I beat my deadline : )?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/22/cbsnews_investigates/main4539410.shtml
But one of the most famous political fashion designers of the year, Susanna Chung Forest, who designed Hillary Clinton?s pantsuits says it would be unusual for a candidate as famous as Sarah Palin to need to buy clothes.??Why do you need to pay for it?? Forest told?CBS News?from her boutique?Susanna Beverly Hillssaying that most designers would offer to clothe a candidate for free.
Just for fun they throw in that Hillary's suits are $6,300 apiece retail. Of course, she probably didn't pay for them. ?
Re: LMW
Facinating!
But again, where was the illegal aspect of what the dems did? I thought that was what you were finding for me...that dems were somehow engaging in illegal behavior?
I thought this was interesting:
However, the political party (such as the Republican National Committee) can make coordinated expenditures with the candidate?s campaign of up to $19.2 million dollars. The FEC says the possible outstanding question is: Are coordinated expenditures the same as if it were the campaign? The FEC tells CBS News that to determine this someone would have to file a complaint and then the FEC would investigate.
Can we at least both laugh at the fact that the DNC expects handouts and the RNC pays for what it wants?
I can't tell you if donated clothes are illegal b/c to my knowledge no one has ever filed a complaint about it. Obviously there are strict rules about non-cash gifts thanks to lobbyists. But I don't know what they are. Apparently the FEC doesn't discuss legal issues until a complaint is filed.?
So I guess you'll need an FEC investigation before you agree that the RNC did nothing wrong. From my limited reading McCain's law barred using campaign money from purchasing personal expenditures*. This clothing wasn't for personal use, it was for the campaign stops. Secondly the law doesn't mention party committees, which is who bought these clothes. From our previous thread I posted a quote that it's common for committees to purchase clothing. If it occurs all the time I would bet that it's not illegal, before I bet that it was. I'd love for a complaint to be filed so we can be done with this.
*My mom is a public speaker and is allowed to use corporate money to buy her wardrobe. It's legal if the wardrobe is only used when she speaks and not for personal use. So there's a private sector?equivalent, to the extent of my general knowledge.
My only issue was that you seemed very confident that the Dems were breaking some ethics law when, if anything, it's not entirely clear. Nor is it clear that MPC is breaking ethics laws. Every time I refer to the legal issues surrounding this clothing snafu, I couch it in "may or may not have broken law."
What is clear is that even if Palin and the RNC have broken no law, it's still looks pretty hypocritical of her to make the case that she is the Every American Average Woman in kicky $2500 boots. But that is another conversation for another thread.
Another thing that is clear, ethics laws are very unclear.
They are very unclear. This is what I was thinking:?I'm pretty sure non-cash contributions are treated like cash contributions so they're allowed but there's a cap on the amount. If those pantsuits were donated to Hillary directly they're way over the limit, which I think is something like $2300. I'm sure Hillary's smart enough to figure out a way around it.?
I don't think this is worth a FEC complaint or an investigation.
I'm sure Hillary's smart enough to figure out a way around it.
You mean like returning them after she is done?