As you may know, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana was implicated in the DC Madam case and has admitted that he committed a “very serious sin.” Kā jūs zināt, Senator David Vitter of Louisiana bija iesaistīti DC Madam lietu, un ir atzinusi, ka tā izdarījusi "ļoti smagu grēku."
Not only is he still serving as a United States Senator from Louisiana, but now he wants to use his campaign money to pay legal bills related to his being subpoenaed in the case. Ne tikai viņš joprojām kalpo kā ASV no Luiziānas Senators, bet tagad viņš vēlas izmantot savu kampaņu, lai samaksātu juridisko rēķinus, kas saistīti ar viņa tiek subpoenaed šajā lietā.
This guy just can't leave well enough alone. Šis puisis vienkārši nevar atstāt pietiekami labi vien.
Anyway, the issue recently went before the Federal Election Commission. Anyway, jautājums nesen gāja Federālā vēlēšanu komisijā. [1] [1]
They apparently agreed that he could use campaign money to pay for “$31,341 in public relations costs and legal work related to a complaint filed with the Senate Ethics Committee.” Tās acīmredzot piekrita, ka viņš varētu izmantot kampaņu naudu, lai samaksātu par "31.341 $ sabiedriskajām attiecībām izmaksas un juridisko darbu, kas saistīts ar iebildumu, iesniegts Senāta ētikas komitejā."
But when it came to dealing with the hookers things got tight: the vote dead-locked with the 3 republican commissioners saying the distinguished Senator could use his campaign money to pay legal bills not related to his official duties and the 3 democrats saying he couldn't. Bet, kad tas bija, kas nodarbojas ar hookers lietām got saspringts: balsošana termiņš bloķēta ar 3 republiku komisāru sakot atšķirt Senator varētu izmantot savu kampaņu, lai samaksātu juridisko rēķini nav saistīti ar dienesta pienākumu un 3 demokrātiem sakot, viņš couldn ' t.
Since I'm pretty sure problems with hookers had nothing to do with Senator Vitter's “family values” election platform the democrats are right on this one. Tā kā es esmu diezgan pārliecināts, ka problēmas ar hookers nebija nekāda sakara ar senatoru Vitter's "ģimenes vērtības" vēlēšanu platforma demokrātiem ir taisnība par šo vienu.
3 republican FEC commissioners, Donald F. McGahn, II, Caroline C. Hunter, and Matthew S. Peterson, taking care of a fellow republican. 3 republikas FEC komisārus, Donald F. McGahn, II, Caroline C. Hunter, un Matthew S. Peterson, aprūpējamu puisis republikas. [2] [2]
Now that's ”real family values.” Tagad tas ir "reālās ģimenes vērtības."
[1] [1] http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/08/fec_split_in_vitters_push_for.html http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/08/fec_split_in_vitters_push_for.html
[2] [2] http://www.fec.gov/members/members.shtml http://www.fec.gov/members/members.shtml . . The web-site doesn't tell you which ones are which. Tīmekļa vietnē nav pateiks, kuras ir kas. I had to call the FEC to find out. (202) 694-1000. Man bija aicināt FEC lai to noskaidrotu. (202) 694-1.000.
{ 3 comments… read them below or (3 comments ... lasīt tos zem vai add one pievienot vienu } )
When Republicans talk about family values they mean “family” in the Tony Soprano sense. Kad republikāņu runāt par ģimenes vērtībām, ko tie nozīmē "ģimene" in Tony Soprano nozīmē.
so what is the status, they do have a quorum now so they can vote, they're 7 now on the board. Tātad, kāds ir stāvoklis, tie ir kvorums jau tagad, lai viņi varētu balsot, viņi 7 tagad uz kuģa.
Where does he / she stand on this ? Kur viņš / viņa var stāvēt par šo?
You forgot: “Nor prohibition of payment of legal fees arising from said activities with other people's money.” Jūs aizmirsāt: "Arī aizliegums maksājumu maksu par juridiskiem pakalpojumiem, kas izriet no minēto darbību ar citu cilvēku naudu."