You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

1
9

[–] epsilona01 1 point 9 points (+10|-1) ago  (edited ago)

No, that's not it. The banks will refund the money to the consumer, but they most likely won't get it back from the campaign. (or even try) Therefore the campaign now gets to keep $97 instead of $23 or w/e, with the bank essentially giving them the difference without having to claim it as campaign contribution.

This is campaign finance fraud on a major scale.

0
2

[–] Spaceballs-1 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Honestly, I've never heard of a bank NOT trying to get back every penny but depending on the total amounts ( if it's 1200 a month per state that's 60 grand per month - plus now that it's reported expect amounts to multiply!) this could turn into some serious shit.

0
4

[–] epsilona01 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Mind you, it's just an assumption... but these banks do support her after all. Sounds like a great way to skirt campaign finance laws and give their chosen candidate money.

0
2

[–] 6330015? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Before I entered the IT world, I used to work in payment investigations for a credit card company. They can try to charge back the amount but in the end they usually write off amounts under $20-25 (sometimes even more) because it would cost them that much to get it back. Now, in a case like this they usually would try to get them back because it is the same entity doing it over and over and the total is a lot more than normal write-off amounts. There may be something going on in the background with state AG to put some pressure on someone.

0
0

[–] Men13 ago 

Say they do try to get the money back. Money she already spent. After the election. Can't her campaign just declare bankruptcy at that point? What's the downside for them? Their job is already over...