Documents show guilty D.C. businessman gave $600K for Hillary canvassers
WASHINGTON — A campaign adviser to Hillary Rodham Clinton was involved in an off-the-books operation to help the former first lady's 2008 presidential campaign in four states and Puerto Rico, according to federal court documents.
Washington businessman Jeffrey Thompson told prosecutors that Clinton adviser Minyon Moore sought his help in funding “street teams” to bolster Clinton's get-out-the-vote effort during primary contests in Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina, Texas and Puerto Rico, according to court papers. Thompson funneled more than $600,000 to a New York marketing executive to fund the street teams and canvassers — an expenditure never reported to the Federal Election Commission, the documents show.
Thompson pleaded guilty on Monday to two conspiracy charges in a case that has engulfed D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray, who allegedly was the beneficiary of a “shadow campaign” organized by Thompson. The assistance helped Gray get elected in 2010.
Prosecutors have said they have no evidence that Clinton was aware of the get-out-the-vote operation.
Dewey Square, the public affairs firm where Moore works, said in a statement that Moore “fully cooperated with the government's investigation, and the facts make clear that she was entirely unaware of any inappropriate activities.”
Polls put Clinton, the former secretary of state and New York senator, as the leading Democratic contender for president should she seek the White House again.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- DEA chief to retire amid scandal over ‘sex parties’
- Woman pleads guilty to running over husband for not voting
- House to vote on cyber threat bill
- Charge reduced against trucker in fatal pileup on Wyoming interstate
- Tulsa deputy who mistook gun for Taser pleads not guilty, is cleared for vacation
- Report: Major changes needed for nation’s power infrastructure
- Residents near N.C. ash dumps told not to drink well water
- Senate deal clears way for vote on Lynch confirmation
- Feds to investigate man’s death while in custody of Baltimore police
- Obama chides Dems opposed to trade deal
- Federal judge who blocked Obama immigration order painted as unbiased