“He does” Support Unions, But “don’t say that to people!” IN Senator Donnelly Masks Union Support, Says Wife Jill Donnelly

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”I wouldn’t say anything about unions… just say he’s for working families.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”Right to Work is a headline to pay people less than what they – but we can’t say that.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Jill Donnelly: “He does” Support Unions, Just “don’t say that to people!”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Campaign Volunteer and Union Member: “… his career began through organized labor” “He’s got like a 98% AFL-CIO voting record”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Donnelly Has to Play Down Being Liberal “especially in Indiana, just because like, it’s so conservative.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”I know for a fact that he’s losing voters [be]cause of Kavanaugh… [be]cause he voted no.”

 

This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates.

(Indianapolis) Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from current US Senator Joe Donnelly’s campaign. The video reveals that he masks his support of unions because of how polarizing they are in Indiana. This is the ninth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.

Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:

“We have seen this consistently in our investigations this year…where politicians say one thing publicly, and another thing privately.”

“Don’t say that to people!”

Featured in this report is Senator Joe Donnelly’s wife, Jill Donnelly, and a campaign volunteer, Tony Flora, a supporter of Senator Donnelly since 2004, and a member of the National Letter Carriers Union. They both say that the Senator cannot publicly support unions:

JOURNALIST: ” Oh Jill. Yeah, sorry just a quick question. I was talking to Mary um, what’s Senator Donnelly’s take on uh like, “Right to Work”? Do you know? We looked it up-”

JILL DONNELLY: “You wanna answer this or do you want me to?”

FLORA: “No.”

JILL DONNELLY: “Work – It takes away worker’s rights and destroys unions… He’s for working families… I wouldn’t say anything about unions.”

FLORA: “Yeah, we don’t use that either it’s for working families.”

JILL DONNELLY: “Don’t use unions, just say he’s for working families…”

Donnelly continued, saying “we can’t say that”:

JOURNALIST: “Okay, [be]cause we were looking up – trying to look it up. And it was like, right to try instead.”

JILL DONNELLY: “No… Right to Work is a headline to pay people less than what they – but we can’t say that.”

When asked whether or not to bring up unions to voters, Donnelly and Flora both say, “no.”

“But he supports the unions, right?”

JOURNALIST: “But he supports the unions, right?”

JILL DONNELLY: “Don’t say that to people!”

JOURNALIST: “… I’m just wondering for myself to-”

FLORA: “Yes, yes.”

JILL DONNELLY: “He does.”

FLORA: “He’s a big AFL-CIO, he’s got like a 98 percent AFL-CIO voting record.”

Flora and Donnelly both agree that while they think that “Right to Work” helps workers, they can’t say so to voters:

JILL DONNELLY: “[Right to Work] helps workers, but you can’t say it.”

FLORA: “Can’t say it.”

JILL DONNELLY: “When [voters] say how does he feel about Right to Work, you’ll say he’s for working families.”

Especially in Indiana…

Another individual who works on Senator Donnelly’s campaign, David Madden, says that Donnelly has to suppress his liberal views because Indiana is “so conservative”:

JOURNALIST: “… it’s almost like Donnelly has to play down being liberal. Does that make sense?

MADDEN: “Yeah, he does. Especially in Indiana, just because like, it’s so conservative.

Will Talcott, another individual working on the Donnelly campaign, says that Donnelly is losing voters because of his decision to vote against the confirmation of then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh, and that Senator Donnelly tries to play safe politics to get elected:

TALCOTT: “I know for a fact that he’s losing voters [be]cause of Kavanaugh.”

JOURNALIST: “[Be]cause he voted no.”

TALCOTT: “[Be]cause he voted no… [Donnelly] tries to sort of make it about things that are tough to say no to. Like, I’m gonna keep your healthcare. No one’s gonna get pissed about that.”

Fake Moderates

This is the ninth release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

 

“Nobody needs to know” Beto Campaign Appears to Illegally Spend Funds on Supplies for Caravan Aliens, Campaign Manager Says “Don’t Worry”

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”I just hope nobody that’s the wrong person finds out about this.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”It’s f***ing happening.” O’Rourke Campaign Staff Uses Pre-Paid Cards for Honduran Alien Supplies
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”Don’t ever repeat this…” Campaign Staffers Explain How to Hide Campaign Expenditures for Aliens
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]”If you get caught in some sort of violation that’s like a $50,000 fine,” “For me I can just ignore the rules and I’m like f**k it.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Transporting Aliens to “airports… bus stations,” “None of this is like sh*t there is a rulebook for”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Staffer Says She Sent Confirming Texts to Director

 

(Austin) Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from current Congressman and US Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke’s campaign. The video exposes how his campaign staff appear to be illegally using campaign resources to buy supplies and help transport Honduran aliens. This is the eighth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.

Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:

“Charity and helping your fellow man are things we applaud at Project Veritas Action.  The problem is, you can’t break the law when you do it.” 

“Don’t ever repeat this”

Featured in this report are campaign staffers who work on Congressman O’Rourke’s US Senate campaign discussing how they use campaign resources to help Honduran aliens and transport them to airports and bus stations. Said Dominic Chacon and AnaPaula Themann, who work on O’Rourke’s campaign:

Chacon: “The Hondurans, yeah… I’m going to go get some food right now, like just some stuff to drop off…”

Themann: “How did they get through?”

Chacon: “Well I think they accepted them as like asylum-seekers… So, I’m going to get some groceries and some blankets…”

Themann: “Don’t ever repeat this and stuff but like if we just say that we’re buying food for a campaign event, like the Halloween events…”

Chacon: “That’s not a horrible idea, but I didn’t hear anything. Umm, we can wait until tomorrow for that.”

Themann: “Well that’s exactly the food we need. And I will just mark it as, I do have dozens of block walkers.”

Using “pre-paid credit cards” … “some sort of violation”

A Project Veritas Action attorney reviewed the footage and assessed:

“The material Project Veritas Action Fund captured shows campaign workers covering up the true nature of spending of campaign funds and intentionally misreporting them. This violates the FEC’s rules against personal use and misreporting. It also violates Section 1001, making a false statement to the federal government. The FEC violations impose civil penalties, including fines of up to $10,000 or 200 percent of the funds involved. Violations of Section 1001 are criminal and include imprisonment of up to five years.”

Chacon and Themann also explain how they go about concealing their use of campaign funds for alien support purposes:

Themann: “There’s actually stores that just mark it as ‘food’ they don’t mark different types… at Albertsons, on the receipts, it marks it just based off of brand…”

Chacon: “I think we can use that with those [campaign pre-paid] cards to buy some food, all that s**t can be totally masked like, oh we just wanted a healthy breakfast!”

Themann says that she doesn’t “want to make it seem like all of us are from [the O’Rourke campaign]” when going to distribute supplies to the Honduran aliens. She adds, “I just hope nobody that’s the wrong person finds out about this.”

Chacon elaborates on the usage of pre-paid campaign cards, saying, “We’re going to use more of those cards to get them more supplies too. So it’s all going to work out. I’m done being nice. I’m done being professional. [Be]cause nothing is professional. None of this is like s**t there is a rule book for, you know?”

Later in the report, Chacon also reveals “there’s not really an approval process” regarding the usage of the pre-paid cards, and that “we can just go and get the food and we can come up with a BS excuse like as to why we needed to get this stuff.” He adds, “Under the table just sort of do it.”

“Nobody needs to know”

Chacon explains that Jody Casey, the campaign manager for the O’Rourke campaign, was happy to hear about their efforts supporting aliens with campaign funds:

Chacon: “She texted us afterward and was like, I’m so happy that we have a staff that gets it and was there, I was so happy to see y’all there, still working, still contributing, we have the best team ever… she was good about it.”

Journalist: “So, Jody knows?”

Chacon: “Well, she doesn’t know we used the pre-paid card, but she doesn’t need to know.”

Added Chacon, when discussing the possibility for using campaign vans to help the Honduran aliens, “we could probably get away with using the vans… Nobody needs to know.” Chacon also says, “For me, I can just ignore the rules and I’m like f**k it.”

When asked about using campaign resources to help the Honduran aliens, Casey said “don’t worry”:

Journalist: “It just made me really concerned, like, you know, because I know that we’re using some of the campaign resources to help with the migrants and like, I just didn’t want anybody to get in trouble with that…”

Journalist: “Like I didn’t want them to ask me any questions about people using resources…”

Jody Casey: “Don’t worry.”

Andrea Reyes, who also works on the O’Rourke campaign, revealed that she has text messages showing she received approval for using the pre-paid cards:

Reyes: “The thing is yeah, as long as we’re not advertising it. I mean yeah, I don’t really know. They said it was fine sooo *throws hands up* I mean I don’t know, okay. I told you about it! I have the text messages to prove it, sooo…”

Journalist: “So you told Jody?”

Reyes: “Yeah. I told Jody and I told my director.”

When asked about using campaign vans to assist the Honduran aliens, Chacon reveals that they are going to transport the aliens to airports and bus stations:

Chacon: “… we’re going to give rides to some of the immigrants too. Like to the airport, to the bus station, like why not, you know?”

More Elections…

This is the eighth release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

FL Governor candidate Andrew Gillum

Gillum Makes Promises He Can’t Keep, “that’s not for [voters] to know” Says Campaign Staff in Undercover Video

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Empty Promises Exposed: “Fairy tales in the modern day begin with ‘once I am elected.'”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Deceiving Voters: “None of the programs that people are hoping for would happen” but “That’s not for [voters] to know.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Candidate’s True Politics: “Gillum is a Progressive” and “He is a part of the crazy, crazy, crazies.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Election Strategy: “You whip ’em up. The poor, the middle income. You have to whip them up into a frenzy in order for them to vote.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Secret Gun Control Agenda Revealed: “three day waiting period for everybody,” “small steps” to ban assault rifles; “I don’t think he can say it [be]cause he’s trying to get the moderates”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Florida is a “F***ed up,” “cracker state,” “you have to appeal to white guilt”

 

This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates. 

(Tallahassee) Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from Florida gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum’s campaign, revealing his election strategy includes making empty promises to voters. This is the seventh undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.

Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:

“What we found in the Gillum campaign was just what we found in Missouri, Tennessee and Arizona, a candidate lying to the voters he needs to win the election.”

Gillum campaign makes promises it knows it can’t keep

Featured in this report is a campaign staffer who works on Andrew Gillum’s gubernatorial campaign. Omar Smith, who says he went to college with Gillum, reveals Gillum cannot fulfill his campaign promises even if he wanted to.

When asked how Gillum would fund all the programs he says he wants to fund, Smith says Gillum “can’t,” and when asked if voters are aware that Gillum cannot deliver on his proposed programs, Smith says:

SMITH: “That’s not for them to know… That’s not for them to know. Remember our saying, modern day fairy tales start with ‘once I am elected.'”

Smith explains that most of Gillum’s campaign promises could never be implemented, and that the Gillum campaign knows this:

SMITH: “So, let’s go back to Mr. Gillum’s platform, right? Raise the corporate tax in Florida from 7 to 11 percent. That will never happen. Raise teacher’s pay to $50,000, that will never happen. Give me another position. Medicare for all, that will never happen. The reason being, the legislature that write the bills is all Republican controlled. Democratic governor, Republican legislature. So, unless the legislature writes a bill, and it got voted on the floor, it cannot pass.”

Smith says that “the rules in Florida are f***ed up” and that Florida is a “cracker state,” explaining that the Florida legislature has to become racially black for Gillum’s agenda to advance.

“Whip up” the poor into a “frenzy in order for them to vote.”

Smith says that in order to get voters on board with Gillum’s fairy tale platform, the campaign must “whip” lower income individuals “into a frenzy.”

SMITH:  “You whip ’em up. The poor, the middle income. You have to whip them up into a frenzy in order for them to vote. Once Gillum is in, in another 2 years, other Republican Senators and Legislators will be on the ballot. So, you have to whip up the Andrew Gillum voters again in those counties to vote out the Republican to get a Democratic Legislature in order for his (Gillum) will to be executed.”

Smith adds that because not all Democratic voters are the same, that the Gillum campaign needs to appeal to “white guilt” to turn out the vote:

SMITH: “You have to appeal to white guilt… [be]cause that’s what it is.”

Smith also explains that the Gillum campaign can’t let voters know what Gillum’s true agenda is before election day:

SMITH: “… We don’t, do we have to let [the voters] know what the agenda is ahead of time? We can’t… We cannot… You alienate everybody. Then you get painted like, oh, Gillum is being painted, no. You are a socialist, you are way out of left field…”

Gillum is a “crazy, crazy,” Democrat

Smith also explains Gillum’s political worldview, saying that “Gillum is a progressive… He is a part of the crazy crazy crazies.”

Cliff Eserman, who works for the Broward County Democratic Party adds that during the Democratic primary, Gillum had to campaign on values he does not really believe:

ESERMAN: “In order to win he had to be… He’s really left of center. So he was being left, not left of center… For the primary. Now [in the general] he’s going back to left of center.”

Dale Holeness, who is the Broward County Commissioner and also works on Gillum’s campaign, explains Gillum’s gun control views:

HOLENESS: “There ought to be at least a three-day waiting period for everybody and a full background check for everybody… And we need to- And these automatic guns with sixteen rounds a minute, they ought to not be on the streets either, so that’s his plan.”

Adrian Young, who works for the Florida Democratic Party also elaborates on Gillum’s gun control views in the report:

YOUNG: “… I do think he’s not saying specifically like I’m going to ban bump stocks or I’m against ATs, only because he’s running a race right now. I do think he would support anybody doing that stuff, Bill Nelson… But I don’t think he can say it just [be]cause he’s trying to get the moderates and the gun-toting people in North Florida…”

More Elections…

This is the seventh release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country. Project Veritas Action Fund will continue to publish undercover reports in this series.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

AZ Sen Candidate Sinema “can’t be talking about” Gun Bans; Says Arizonans Will “actually shoot you”

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Campaign Staff Mocks Sinema Platform: “She’s going to stand up and protect Arizonans values. Whatever the f**k that means.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Sinema’s Immigration Proposal: “path to citizenship” For All Non-Criminals
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Sinema Campaign Manager: “We can’t be talking about an assault weapons ban,” Describes an Incremental Approach to Gun Control
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Top Donor Says Gun Control “couldn’t be a platform issue…” But Sinema Would Still Vote for It
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Campaign Staff Says: “… she is pro-choice. She is very liberal, she’s progressive”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Sinema Donor: Can’t Do “anything that’ll alienate any voters… gotta be all Martha McSally is a c**t and uh, and [Sinema is] good”

 

This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates. 

(Phoenix) Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from current Congresswoman and US Senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema’s campaign, exposing the campaign’s belief that to win in Arizona, Sinema must appear more moderate than she really is, and hide her progressive views from voters in the process. This is the sixth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.

Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:

“Kyrsten Sinema used to be quite the radical firebrand.  But now because she knows she must get moderate voters to win her senate race, she has perfected the art of playing it safe while diminishing her prior views and behavior.”

Arizonans will “actually shoot you”

Featured in this report is Sinema’s campaign manager Michelle Davidson, who explains that because of political pressures, Sinema cannot outright campaign on an assault weapons bans:

DAVIDSON: “… I think Kyrsten’s approach is so, I think, important. We can’t be talking about an assault weapons ban… “

In the video, Rep. Sinema says that Arizonans will “actually shoot you” if you support gun bans in an Arizona campaign. Davidson says that while Rep. Sinema can’t outwardly campaign on gun bans, what she can do is champion other gun control points:

DAVIDSON: “So we can’t talk about that [assault weapon bans] right? So what Kyrsten… the conversation that she can lead is how do we get to a place where we can, background checks… We’ve got to fix the gun show loophole, we have to fix the background check system. We’ve got to make it harder for people who have been convicted of domestic violence and other violent crimes to get guns—I mean those are the conversations we can have.”

Also featured in the report is Steve Andrews, a big donor to Sinema’s campaign for the Senate, who says that while not being able to campaign on assault weapon bans “voting I’d have to assume she’ll be okay.” Andrews adds “she won’t support assault weapons, I don’t think.”

Sinema Another Fake Moderate

Rep. Sinema makes her stance toward immigration clear, saying she believes the United States should grant a path to citizenship to anybody in the country who has not committed a “bad crime”:

SINEMA: “I believe that we should offer citizenship to every person in this country who isn’t bad. You know, if you haven’t committed a bad crime, you know, then you should get a path to citizenship. That’s what I believe.”

Also in the report are staffers working on Kyrsten Sinema’s campaign who admit that she is more progressive than she lets on. Lauren Fromm, a field organizer also featured in the report, says:

FROMM: “There’s a lot of very conservative people in Arizona and so [Sinema] can’t alienate the conservative or moderate conservative voters by being super pro- she is pro-choice. She is very liberal, she’s progressive.”

Fromm continues, saying Rep. Sinema doesn’t “want to draw too much attention to being progressive” because she’s trying to be more electable in such a conservative state. Fromm reiterates this, saying Rep. Sinema “has to capture all the moderate voters” because “Arizona is a red state.”

Another individual working on the campaign, Madison Snarr, says that Sinema will vote “democratic.” In discussing campaign messaging, Snarr mocks Sinema’s platform:

SNARR: “She’s going to vote for the interests of Arizonans. She’s going to stand up and protect Arizonan values. Whatever the f**k that means.”

Snarr says that if Arizonans like President Trump, they should not vote for Kyrsten Sinema.

Andrews, a donor to Rep. Sinema’s campaign, believes that she is a liberal, “but that’s not a way to win in this state.”

ANDREWS: “… She probably is [progressive] in her heart, but she knows to survive and get elected, she’s gotta walk the walk a little bit. And I respect that, I’m tired of losing.”

Andrews also explains that Rep. Sinema needs to be careful not to alienate any voters, but will still be a vote “against Trump”:

ANDREWS: “[Sinema can’t do] anything that’ll alienate any voters at this point in time. It’s gotta be all good. It’s gotta be all Martha McSally is a c**t… But she’ll be a vote… She’ll vote against Trump. If [the Democrats] get control of both houses during the Trump administration, it would be big, that’s why we’re so heavily invested in the Senate.”

Michael Smyser, another individual who works on Rep. Sinema’s campaign, explains that since US Senate seat terms are longer than US Congressional terms, Sinema will have more time to advance a more progressive agenda and will only have to be moderate once time for reelection comes.

SMYSER:  “I could totally see this happening… see, this is why it makes sense as well why she’s a more moderate democrat, in the house at least.  Like, her voting.  Um, it’s just because those are only two-year terms.  And so, with that, with such short terms they just really, there’s not a lot of time for them to like get their… the public that’ they’re representing on board with a lot of like more swinging left type things.  Um, but when there’s six years, with a Senate seat…”

JOURNALIST: “She has more time to do more progressive things.”

SMYSER: “Yeah.”

More Elections…

This is the sixth release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country. Project Veritas Action Fund will continue to publish undercover reports in this series.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

 

 

Senator Hietkamp Director Describes Bait and Switch: “If and when she gets elected she’s going to be super liberal”

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Running Away from Obama: Campaign Staff hides Obama Merch from Press, “doesn’t poll well here”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Heitkamp Digital Director: “she’d probably be bolder” Once Re-Elected
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Heitkamp Campaign Deliberately Vague on Support for Border Wall
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Senate Staff Assistant: “If the country moved further to the left, [Heitkamp] would move to the left.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Campaign Organizer: Pressure Trump with Impeachment if “we get the Senate back”
This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates. 

(Washington DC) Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from incumbent Senator Heidi Heitkamp’s campaign and Senate staff exposing bait and switch politics to court moderate voters. This is the fifth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.

Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:

“As we’ve seen from our undercover reports this October, politicians, will lie, obfuscate and hide their real politics to win a few votes. Senator Heidi Heitkamp from North Dakota is no exception.”

Heitkamp Will Be “Super Liberal” Once Re-Elected

Featured in the report is Senator Heitkamp’s Digital Director, Jesse Overton, who says that Senator Heitkamp will be “super liberal” should she be re-elected:

OVERTON: “It’s an election year for her. She’s being careful about pissing people off, and … said basically like, after the election, if and when she gets re-elected, she’s going to be super liberal.”

Overton alleges that during the campaign, Senator Heitkamp plays politics “safe,” but if she wins a third term “she’d probably be a little more bolder about it.”

Also in the report are staffers from Senator Heitkamp’s Fargo, North Dakota campaign office, including Hallie Skripak-Gordon and Lauren Dronen, who reveal they make Senator Heitkamp’s campaign appear more moderate than it really is to the press and voters.

JOURNALIST: “I don’t like that you took the Obama poster down [in the Fargo campaign office.]”

SKRIPAK-GORDON: “It’s because the press was here. When Trump was here… the day that Trump was, we had press in here because we had a lot of volunteers. So we take it down when the press comes.”

Skripak-Gordon continues, saying that “people don’t want [Heitkamp] to be like a Democrat-Democrat. You know, they want her to be a moderate, so you don’t want like a super liberal President to… maybe the association wouldn’t actually be beneficial to her.” Added Mary, another campaign staffer, the association with President Obama “doesn’t poll well here.”

Another individual who works in Senator Heitkamp’s Senate office, Prescott Robinson, also says that once re-elected, Senator Heitkamp could be “more progressive.”

ROBINSON: “Maybe she wins by twenty points and she goes ‘okay I can be a little more progressive.'”

JOURNALIST: “Yeah.”

ROBINSON: “And it also depends, if she starts supporting something, and then the calls come screaming in, maybe she goes back.”

Robinson adds:

ROBINSON: “The thing with politicians is that they’re politicians… If the country moved further to the left she would move to the left.”

JOURNALIST: “Yeah.”

ROBINSON: “Like I think that if we had a Democratic Senate, she would vote for more policies that you see more Democrats support.”

Vague on Trump’s Wall

Dronen explains how Senator Heitkamp’s campaign is deliberately vague regarding support for President Trump’s proposal for a border wall so that voters on both sides of the issue won’t be alienated:

JOURNALIST: “So don’t say she doesn’t support the wall?”

DRONEN: “Yeah, I would just say she supports effective border security that includes barriers in some places but whatever folks on the ground think is effective.”

JOURNALIST: “… So don’t say that she doesn’t?”

DRONEN: “Yeah.”

Impeachment

Another individual who works on Senator Heitkamp’s campaign, Ian Childs, explains plans for the impeachment of President Trump:

CHILDS: “It’s time. We get this, we get the Senate back, [Trump’s] gonna have some pressure on him. He’s gonna start acting right or he’s gonna face some consequences… Well he’ll know that he’s gotta that impeachment word looking at him.”

More Elections…

This is the fifth release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country. Project Veritas Action Fund will continue to publish undercover reports in this series.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

On the inside? Contact us at VeritasTips@protonmail.com 

Veritas Attorney to Missouri AG: Reject Senator McCaskill’s Demands

View the original letter here. 

Dear Attorney General Hawley,

I represent James O’Keefe and Project Veritas Action Fund in connection with the demand letter sent to you on October 18, 2018, by lawyers for Senator Claire McCaskill and McCaskill for Missouri. For the following reasons, you should reject the Senator’s demands.

Senator McCaskill’s demand letter represents a desperate and disgraceful political stunt designed to manipulate the legal system for her political gain, at the expense of Missouri taxpayers.

Similarly offensive, Senator McCaskill appears eager to want to criminalize journalism that truthfully, completely, and accurately reported the Senator’s own words. The Press is not the enemy of the people, but, that appears to be exactly the message espoused by Senator McCaskill and her lawyers, in her letter to you. Now more than ever, an independent and free press is an essential pillar of our democracy.

Heavy on invective and light on thorough, accurate legal analysis, Senator McCaskill’s demand letter fails to establish any lawful basis for you to acquiesce to the Senator’s demands. Senator McCaskill’s invocation of Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act is insidious as she twists the meaning of the Act to try and invent a crime. The Act, which makes false pretenses and misrepresentation “in connection with” the “solicitation of any funds for a charitable purpose” an unlawful practice, has no application here. Project Veritas Action Fund’s actions in this investigation were acts of journalism, not acts making fraudulent misrepresentations in fundraising.

As a threshold matter, Project Veritas Action Fund is not registered to do business in Missouri and is not registered as a charitable organization in Missouri. Further, Project Veritas Action Fund does not solicit funds for a charitable purpose in Missouri.

Next, Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act is designed to protect consumers and citizens from being defrauded. The law is not designed to protect deceptive political statements or political campaigns from investigative journalists. The Act was “designed to regulate the marketplace to the advantage of those traditionally thought to have unequal bargaining power as well as those who may fall victim to unfair business practices.” Huch v. Charter Commc’ns, Inc., 290 S.W.3d 721, 725 (Mo. banc 2009). The Act simply has no application to roaming reporters testing the veracity of political statements and campaigns. Laws like these are common in most states and protect against unscrupulous salesmen making false promises or non-existent charities from defrauding senior citizens. These laws do not apply to investigative journalists, even when they assume an identity.

Indeed, Missouri courts have applied the Act in a manner consistent with the above. Cases like Nixon v. RCT Development Association illustrate that the reach of this law is to protect citizens of Missouri from non-existent charities or ones making fraudulent claims in their solicitations. 290 S.W.3d 756 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). Missouri has the full authority to protect its residents against conmen posing as charities. Missouri has no authority to protect incumbent politicians from the roving eye of curious reporters who accurately and completely report the words of incumbent politicians.

Finally, the First Amendment protects investigative journalists reporting about issues of public concern. State anti-fraud laws are properly used to protect against real fraud, not reporters digging up items of newsworthiness for the American public. The First Amendment stringently protects the freedom of Project Veritas Action Fund to assume identities and ask questions of incumbents and political staff members. This is protected at the bedrock of the First Amendment. Misapplying Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act here would turn the Act into the Missouri Incumbent Politician Protection Act and would stop all investigative journalists from providing salient information to voters across the state. The First Amendment protects Project Veritas Action Fund’s journalism here and any attempted prosecution based on misusing this law will fail.

The Senator continues to publicly protest much regarding her statements reported truthfully, completely, and accurately by Project Veritas Action Fund’s investigative journalist. In doing so, Senator McCaskill ensures this news story documenting her statements remains at the top of the journalism news cycle and continues to focus Missouri voters on her conduct, statements and voting record as exposed by the lawful journalism of Project Veritas Action Fund. It is the Senator’s choice to do so. You should reject, however, the Senator’s baseless demand for your recusal and meritless claim for an investigation.

I am surprised and disappointed – as many Missouri voters may be – that Senator McCaskill and her lawyer (a former prosecutor and former Chief of Staff and Counsel to Democratic Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon, respectively) would take a position devoid of legal merit, in contravention of the protections of the First Amendment, and apparently designed to improperly influence the Missouri election to the Senator’s political benefit.

Sincerely,

Paul A. Calli

James O’Keefe: Senator McCaskill Should Be Embarrassed

View the original document here. 

Senator Claire McCaskill’s campaign recently presented this letter to the Missouri Attorney General’s office, seeking an investigation of “possible felonies committed by Project Veritas.” Because the McCaskill complaint is so divorced from reality, we can only assume it is nothing more than a political stunt designed to save face.

Alleging illegal activity against journalists is a serious matter. As with all journalistic efforts, Project Veritas Action Fund’s newsgathering is protected by the First Amendment. Senator McCaskill should be a vigorous supporter of the First Amendment.

Regarding the letter’s central grievance, Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act is not designed to protect political campaigns from investigative journalists. As an attorney and former prosecutor, Senator McCaskill should know better than to subject the Missouri legal system to such an embarrassing and self-indulgent charade. She clearly is choosing political theater over her ethical responsibilities as a member of the Missouri Bar.

Misapplying Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act in this case would render it: the Missouri Incumbent Protection Act. Missouri has the full authority to protect its residents against con men posing as charities; but no authority to protect incumbent politicians from the roving eye of journalists seeking the truth. 

Additionally, the incendiary diatribe directed at Veritas, coupled with the recitation of a series of frivolous lawsuits by other investigative report subjects, is only evidence that this is in fact a politically motivated attack, not a serious request of the Missouri Attorney General, who coincidentally is her opponent in her bid for reelection to the U.S. Senate.

The Senator was in such a hurry to take the heat off the mismanagement of her campaign and volunteers, the letter never references the actual organization that gathered and produced the stories that Senator McCaskill wished had never seen the light of day.

If the candidate is embarrassed by what was reported in our videos she should take that up with her staff. It’s their words that embarrassed her, not ours.

The Attorney General should chargeback the author of the McCaskill campaign’s complaint —a blatant attempt to politicize the Attorney General’s office for the benefit of her campaign—for any time they spent investigating and responding to it.

 

James O’Keefe

Founder and President

Project Veritas Action Fund

McCaskill Campaign “Essentially” Lies to Get Elected; Campaign Conceals Planned Parenthood Contributions, “donations through separate means”

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Campaign Staff: Planned Parenthood Doesn’t Directly “donate to Claire because they don’t want to ostracize pro-life Democrats in Missouri”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]McCaskill Staff Confirms Planned Parenthood Still Contributes: “They put it through different organizations.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Senator McCaskill Will “100%” Support Abortion, Is “very pro-choice” But Doesn’t Want to Appear “too far left to get the moderate voters.”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Staffer Agrees: McCaskill “essentially” Has to Lie to Get Elected

 

This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates. 

(St. Louis) Project Veritas Action Fund has released a fourth undercover video from campaigns during this 2018 election season. This is the second report featuring staff from incumbent Senator Claire McCaskill’s campaign. It exposes how McCaskill contributions from Planned Parenthood are delivered indirectly in order to not alienate moderate or pro-life voters.

James O’Keefe, founder of Project Veritas Action said:

“Politicians are notorious for saying one thing during an election and then doing something entirely different once they are in office. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri has turned that practice into an art form.”

Planned Parenthood Making Indirect Contributions?

Campaign staffers working for Senator McCaskill explain how Planned Parenthood contributes to her campaign indirectly. Nicholas Starost, who works on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, alleges that Planned Parenthood does not outwardly support the campaign to avoid ostracizing moderate voters:

STAROST: “… Planned Parenthood will never donate money to Claire [McCaskill] even though she’s very pro-choice. because they don’t want to ostracize those pro-life democrats that might not vote for her, if there’s Planned Parenthood funding her.”

JOURNALIST: “So, they just, they just funnel it through Emily’s List?”

STAROST: “Probably. They go through other means to get us that money.”

Starost continued, saying Planned Parenthood “…put[s] it through like different organizations.” He added that most voters would not figure out this source of McCaskill’s campaign funds:

STAROST:  “Unless they go like deep, deep, deep down into a campaign, like finance. Which most people just do not.”

When asked if the intent of the scheme was to get contributions without disclosing Planned Parenthood’s name specifically, Starost says, “Yup… It’s f***ing beautiful… It’s great when it works for us and not against us.”

Another individual who works on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, Grace Richardson, corroborates the Planned Parenthood contribution scheme is to protect McCaskill’s appeal to moderate voters:

JOURNALIST: “So, I’m still trying to wrap my head around that, that… thing Nick [Starost] was talking about the other day, that Planned Parenthood won’t donate to us.”

RICHARDSON: “Oh yeah.”

JOURNALIST: “I don’t understand why, I don’t get it.”

RICHARDSON: “I think it’s the same with Obama not endorsing any red state democrats, it’s so like…  It’s so that that democrat isn’t coming off as too leftist establishment.”

Richardson adds that even though Planned Parenthood is not publicly supporting Senator McCaskill, McCaskill will still “100%” work to support abortion rights.

RICHARDSON: “Yeah I think it’s like a tactic that’s to like make them not too far left to try to get the moderate voters.”

JOURNALIST: “But we’re still going to support abortion, right?”

RICHARDSON: “Yes. Yeah, 100%. It’s more of like them not… They go through other means to support and give money…”

Other individuals working on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, Melissa Balke and Darcy Becker, also spoke to the nature of Planned Parenthood’s contributions:

JOURNALIST: “Grace was telling me that while we don’t take donations from Planned Parenthood, we take donations from Planned Parenthood.”

BALKE: “Indirectly.”

 

BECKER: So it’s not that they don’t support Claire, it’s because of… They know it’s a tough state to win for a Democrat, and they don’t want to hurt her chances of winning it by donating money. Cause even some moderate Dems are pro-life. And even those Republicans that are gonna vote for Claire, cause they’re pretty moderate, she could lose them if Planned Parenthood donated money to her.”

Becker added that Planned Parenthood intentionally makes its contributions indirectly to Senator McCaskill “… because they know it could hurt [her] in the election.” Becker also believes Planned Parenthood doesn’t “…want to hurt her chances of getting those lean GOPs and the undecided [voters.]”

“… more progressive than she lets on?”

Balke and another individual who works on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, Carson Pope, indicate that McCaskill is not as moderate as she purports to be:

JOURNALIST: “You were saying that you think [Senator McCaskill is] more progressive than she lets on?”

POPE: “Yeah.”

BALKE: “I think so too. I think she’s a lot more open-minded to taking like alternative routes to things but she can’t be open about that.”

JOURNALIST: “Why not?”

POPE: “Because this is a 19-point Trump state.”

BALKE: “Because she would completely isolate the moderate Republicans.”

More Elections…

This is the fourth release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country. Project Veritas Action Fund will continue to publish undercover reports in this series.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

“People just can’t know that.” MO Sen. McCaskill Hides Agenda Including “semi-automatic rifle ban” from Moderate Voters, Staffers Reveal in Undercover Video it “could hurt her ability to get elected.”

[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Senator McCaskill on Tape: “Of  course!” She Would Vote Yes on Gun Bans”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Campaign Staff Says: McCaskill supports “a semi-automatic rifle ban
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]McCaskill is Quiet on Gun Views “because she has a bunch of Republican voters,” Secretly Supports Gun Control Group
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]Staff: Wait Until After Election to Bring up Trump Impeachment; to Voters: “Get over it”
[icon size=”14″ icon=”icon-circle-full” display=”true” ][/icon]“People just can’t know” McCaskill and Obama “essentially have the same views on everything.”
This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates. 

(St. Louis) Project Veritas Action Fund has released a third undercover video from campaigns during this 2018 election season. This report exposes how incumbent Senator McCaskill and individuals working on her campaign conceal their liberal views on issues in order to court moderate voters.

Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:

“This undercover report shows just how broken our political system has become. Senator McCaskill hides her true views from voters because she knows they won’t like them.” 

Senator McCaskill Talks Gun Bans on Tape

Senator McCaskill revealed her intention to vote on various gun control measures in undercover footage:

MCCASKILL: “Well if we elect enough Democrats we’ll get some gun safety stuff done. They won’t let us vote on it, we’ve got 60 votes for a number of measures that would help with gun safety, but McConnell won’t let ’em come to the floor.”

JOURNALIST: “Like bump stocks, ARs and high capacity mags…?”

MCCASKILL: “Universal background checks, all of that… But if we have the kind of year I think we might have I think we could actually be in a position to get votes on this stuff on the floor and we’d get 60 [votes]…”

JOURNALIST: “So you would be on board with the bump stocks and… high capacity mags.”

MCCASKILL: “Of course! Of course!”

Despite her strong views on gun control, Senator McCaskill does not tend to promote them on the campaign trail or on her website. Rob Mills, who works on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, says that is “…because she has a bunch of Republican voters.”

Another individual who works on Senator McCaskill campaign, Carson Pope, adds that “…a semi-automatic rifle ban is more so what she would support.”

“People just can’t know that.”

According to Mills, Senator McCaskill conceals her support of Moms Demand Action, a gun control group, and other similar organizations because they would “…hurt her ability to get elected.”

MILLS: “But she doesn’t openly go out and support groups like ‘Mom’s Demand Action’ or just like other groups that are related to that. Because that could hurt, her ability to get elected. Because people like see that and they’re like well I don’t want to support her even though they stand for the same policies…”

MILLS: “She’s worked out stuff with Mom’s Demand Action to make sure that she can support their goals without supporting the organization openly. And you know, Mom’s Demand Action does the exact same thing. Like a lot of our volunteers are actually from there. She’s really good about strategy and making sure she has a goal and can get there.”

Nicolas Starost, another individual who works on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, explains how President Obama won’t campaign for Senator McCaskill in Missouri despite their similar views on politics. Starost says this is because Senator McCaskill needs to distance herself from the Democratic party to appeal to more voters:

STAROST: “Because of how like, cause he’s a very liberal candidate. And like… Claire distancing herself from the party is gonna help her win more votes than it will saying like: “Oh here’s Obama, the former President of the United States, to now speak on my behalf.” Which is unfortunate because I love Obama to pieces, and I’d love to see him come here.”

JOURNALIST: “And they essentially have the same views on everything?”

STAROST: “Yeah. People just can’t know that.”

Impeachment

Another individual who works on Senator McCaskill’s campaign, Glen Winfrey, explains plans for the impeachment of President Trump:

JOURNALIST: “So, here’s the real question, Claire holds off on impeachment to get the moderate. What do we tell the moderates when we drop the impeachment hammer afterward?”

WINFREY: “Get over it. It was a national security question. That information was confidential, and she did her duty by not revealing the information until afterward.”

 

More Elections…

This is the third release in a series Project Veritas Action Fund began publishing in October 2018 exposing dishonesty and unethical conduct in elections across the country. Project Veritas Action Fund will continue to publish undercover reports in this series.

View the other investigative reports in this series:

This is a breaking news story. Refresh the page for updates. 

US Senate Candidate Phil Bredesen Responds to Undercover Video Sting



UPDATE: (10/15) A FOX Nashville investigation has revealed that Mark Brown, Tennessee Democratic spokesperson lied when attacking the undercover report. 

(Tennessee) Speaking to News Channel 11, US Senate candidate Phil Bredesen responded to an undercover report published earlier this week showing staffers from his campaign offices explain his recent statement in support of then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh was plainly a “political move” in order to court “moderate” voters.

Said Bredesen in the News Channel 11 report:

“I think it’s kind of a reprehensible way to treat young people…”


“There was somebody who came in sort of posing as a senior volunteer, all grown-up, from the other campaign, and basically got these young people talking in that fashion.”


“I would have been a yes with all the information I had at the time to make that decision.”

James O’Keefe, founder of Project Veritas Action Fund said in response:

“The Bredesen campaign is officially on defense. Thanks to the undercover report, Tennesseans can see right through Bredesen’s remarks, which amount to just another empty ‘political move,’ designed to save face.”

Also in the report, a spokesperson for US Senate candidate Marsha Blackburn’s campaign said:

“… now they’re seeing ‘Phony Phil’ at his worst. This is exactly the kind of ‘say whatever to get elected’ politics Tennesseans hate…”


You can view the original undercover report here.