Has pumapac ever been a legitimate Political Action Committee?  Let’s look at the facts;

1. Definition of a committee:  A committee (or “commission”) is a type of small deliberative assembly that is usually intended to remain subordinate to another, larger deliberative assembly—which when organized so that action on committee requires a vote by all its entitled members, is called the “Committee of the Whole“.

Question: Has there ever been anyone other than Murphy on the committee of pumapac? Who is the Chairperson? Who is the Secretary? Who are the voting members? Who is the Treasurer?

Answer: Is it by design that Murphy controls all aspects of this so called PAC? Doesn’t sound committee like to me, of course on any paperwork Murphy makes sure to list herself as the Treasurer, just sayin…

2. PACs must report all of the financial activities, including direct donations and other expenses, to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), which makes the reports available to the public.

Question: Besides the initial chicken scratch paperwork, has this so called PAC ever filed the correct forms with the FEC?

Answer: Nope and they/she continues to ignore the numerous warnings from the FEC that she should file the correct forms in the proper format. WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING MURPHY?

3.  Committees are a necessary aspect of organizations of any significant size (say, more than 15 or 20 people). They keep the number of participants manageable; with larger groups, either many people do not get to speak (and feel left out), or discussions are quite lengthy (and many participants find them duplicative and often boring).

Question: Was the formation of this committee of one really necessary or was this a scam designed to make Murphy the most money possible in the shortest amount of time under the guise of paying off Hillary’s debt?

Answer: It was definitely a scam, there was no pay-off of Hillary’s debt and their numbers were artificially inflated to make the most money from those who didn’t know any better.

4. Federal multi-candidate PACs are limited in the amount of money they can contribute to candidate campaigns or other organizations:

  • at most $5,000 per candidate per election. Elections such as primaries, general elections and special elections are counted separately.
  • at most $15,000 per political party per year.
  • at most $5,000 per PAC per year.

Under federal law, PACs are not limited in their ability to spend money independently of a candidate campaign. This may include expenditures on activities in support of (or against) a candidate, as long as they are not coordinated with the candidate.

Question: If the above is true then why didn’t Murphy make this clear to her members that there was no legal way that pumapac would be able to pay off Hillary’s debt? Where did the rest of the money go after the initial $5000 was given to Hillary’s campaign? HOW MUCH MONEY DID THE MURPHY COMPANY ACTUALLY MAKE OFF OF HILLARY SUPPORTERS?

Answer: We might never know, but it’s my guess that if the Fed’s look deep enough they will find a certified Ponzi scheme disguised as a Political Action Committee.

And finally;

In my opinion based on the facts, pumapac was never a legitimate Political Action Committee because they took no action, they made it seem like there was some sort of action but there actually was none. It’s a shame that donors hoping to help Hillary, were mislead into thinking they were making a difference, when in reality, even if they PAC was legitimate and they were able to raise the money, they couldn’t have legally helped Hillary, even if they wanted to. Pumapac is a scam, plain and simple and anyone who chooses to donate money to “keep the lights on” is just plain Stupid.


~ by Obotinchief on September 8, 2010.

4 Responses to “PUMA PAC?”

  1. I wonder when Candice Britt Britton or Mimi Planas will reveal how much assistance in finance or kind they recieved from the PAC.

    Also if PUMA was not a bunch of racist pigs could they explain this :-

    Delle 09.09.10 at 6:23 pm
    It looks like we are going to have a quran burning day after all – only in Kansas:


    Saturday is going to be an interesting day.

    Never mind the hillbuzzards or idiots at hillaryis44.

  2. Once again the PUMAs prove that it was never about sexism.

    vwade 09.14.10 at 10:14 am
    lorac #146
    I completely agree with your reasoning and comments.

    Dances, Pelosi is an asshole, and I am one woman that will never defend her. She’s done just as much as the “good ole boys” to destroy our Democratic Party. If a woman wants to act as ruthless and cunning as her male counterparts, then she should expect to be treated as they are. I can not root for a woman just because she’s woman. She has to have some substance. That would be like palling around with Ann Coulter and I can’t stand that bitch. Yes, I said bitch! Sue me!


    It was all about what they now all too easily dismiss, the racism.

    How’s that hard working white American do you or Dances? Oh yeah she is working for President Obama.

    PUMAS now and forever racist trash.

  3. Heh.A Gallup 2012 presidential matchup has Obama leading Hillary 52/37

    Cue exploding PUMA heads everywhere.

    Stamps foot, sulks!

  4. I don’t think the PUMA PAC gave a red cent to Hillary Clinton for President. If they did, it was less than $200. I checked the contributions to HRC’s campaign and it shows nothing from PUMA.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: