By Isabel Matos
Rick Shaftan is a Senior Analyst at Neighborhood Research Corporation. He has been a campaign consultant for several decades and knows the ins and outs like FEC rules and regulations. He’s in Mississippi doing boots on the ground research on possible irregularities concerning the race-baiting ads that aired on radio stations that tried to knee-cap Chris McDaniel. There are rules and laws about campaigns not being allowed to coordinate with outside groups because of a $2600 contribution limit to the campaign. The campaign can to some extent coordinate with the party committees, but the party committees cannot coordinate with outside groups like Mississippi Conservatives or the shadowy All Citizens for Mississippi that ran these ads. A money trail to these outside groups does not even need to be traced or involved. If there is just coordination and/or collaboration is involved it’s totally illegal. The Senatorial Committee, for example, is considered being on the Cochran campaign’s side, so they can’t have anything to do with these other groups. Mississippi Conservatives could (and did) fund All Citizens for Mississippi, it’s legal. But the Cochran campaign cannot work in unison with All Citizens for Mississippi and it is starting to appear that it happened to some extent. If there was this kind of coordination such as resources, communication, money .. if these lines were crossed, it would be a serious violation of the law. What is the evidence that this illegality took place? If the NRSC sent $175,000 to All Citizens for Mississippi, that would be coordination with an outside group. Apart from the content of the reprehensible ads, what the NRSC did would be considered criminal. Rob Portman has been trying to cover himself by saying he paid the NRSC but had no idea they would pay for ads attacking Chris McDaniel, painting him as a member of the KKK. Had he asked for money from an outside group or Pac to pay for these ads, it would have all been legal, but..
H/T William Davis Focal Point video
Please go to Part II of this Interview in the Next Article
Update: The interviewed guest’s last name is Shaftan not Shaft. It has been corrected thanks to Mr. Shaftan himself who contacted me to thank me for sharing his work. Pretty cool, I think. He was spot on. In both interviews.