Hillary Clinton Announces Koch Killing Plan To Get Rid Of Citizens United

Hillary Clinton
Citizens United has been going after Clintons since 1992 and now they’re going to feel the heat.

Hillary Clinton has a plan to go after the nefarious dark money that’s trying to buy elections and it goes beyond a Constitutional amendment. It’s fair to say that of anyone talking about Citizens United, no one has been on the receiving end of their nefarious lies like 2016 Democratic Presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Watch her campaign video here, which details some of the problems resulting from the disastrous Citizens United decision:

Citizens United started by a conservative group that was lobbying against Hillary Clinton, so Clinton starts off saying it’s personal. Knowing that, her statement takes on a new edge.

“We have to end the flood of secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections, corrupting our political system, and drowning out the voices of too many everyday Americans. Our democracy should be about expanding the franchise, not charging an entrance fee,” Clinton said in a campaign statement. “It starts with overturning the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, and continues with structural reform to our campaign finance system so there’s real sunshine and increased participation.”

Details of Clinton’s plan were released by her campaign Tuesday and include:

· Overturning Citizens United by appointing Supreme Court Justices who value the right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections, and by pushing for a Constitutional amendment to allow common sense rules to protect against undue influence from special interests and restore the role of average voters in elections.

· Ending Secret, Unaccountable Money in Politics by pushing for legislation to require public disclosure of significant political spending, and, until Congress acts, promoting SEC rulemaking requiring publicly traded companies to disclose all political spending to their shareholders and signing an Executive Order requiring federal government contractors to fully disclose all political spending.

· Amplifying the Voices of Everyday Americans by establishing a small donor matching system for presidential and congressional candidates that will incentivize small donors to participate in elections and candidates to spend more time engaging a broad, representative cross-section of constituents.

While Clinton would need Congress to pass legislation to accomplish the small-donor matching funds and a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, she could, as President, sign an executive order on her first day of office requiring federal contractors to disclose their spending as well as promoting rules for the SEC that would require publicly traded companies to disclose all political spending to their shareholders.

And these ideas, which have been pushed by campaign finance reform groups, would be immediately effective. Corporations would be branded with pushing lies, and that isn’t great for business.

Campaign finance reform advocates at Every Voice are pressuring candidates to address dark money in politics and they called Clinton’s plan “strong” and “bold”. “With the release of this strong, bold plan, Hillary Clinton recognizes that in order to create government of, by, and for the people—not just the wealthy campaign funders—it’s crucial to amplify the voices of regular voters,” said David Donnelly, president and CEO of Every Voice.

Pundits are already suggesting that Clinton is being pushed left on this issue by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), which has possibly been the case on other issues but on this one, that opinion ignores history. Citizens United has been going after Clintons since 1992 when they published “Slick Willie” — an attack on former President Bill Clinton.

“We’ve been working consistently since 1992 on all things Clinton,” David Bossie, longtime president of Citizens United said according to Business Insider.

The entire Citizens United debacle came about because in 2007, Citizens United was trying to pass off a hit job titled “Hillary: The Movie” as a “documentary”. They’re doing it again with a new movie “Hillary: The Sequel”, which if media’s willing complicity with the conservative conspiracy-oriented book already pushed is any indication, will be treated as factual when first released — thereby continuing the media’s aiding and abetting of the conservative plan to tar Hillary Clinton with constant unfounded accusations.

Later, when the truth comes out, the public has moved on and what is left is the accumulated, lingering stench of vague scandal. (See the Republicans’ ongoing efforts to turn the Benghazi tragedy into a scandal, in spite of facts.)

The media should be asking why Citizens United is spending so much money to spread lies. After all, if they think their ideas are so great for the people, by all means share them. Get their candidates elected on their actual platform. But of course, they can’t do that because their platform equals theft from the people in order to enrich the top 2% to steal from, pollute, poison, and sometimes even kill the average citizen in service of profit. (I wish that were hyperbole, but it’s not.)

In a normal world, decades of vitriolic hatred and slobbering trolling would cause normal people to recoil, and ask why the heck Citizens United hates the Clintons so much.

Citizens United has made a powerful enemy in Hillary Clinton.

32 Replies to “Hillary Clinton Announces Koch Killing Plan To Get Rid Of Citizens United”

  1. why wait for Hillary, President Obama needs to act now, if we wait for Hillary the kocks will have already stolen the election. Think that not possible? Our media is already corrupted, any disqus ‘moderated’ site already manipulates and censors comments with a goal to propagandize republican lies and christianist dominionism.

  2. Anyone heard of Citizens United Not Timid (see the misogynist acronym?) an anti-Hillary Clinton group that financed, made, and tried to air a 60-minute long Republican campaign ad disguised as a documentary in 2008 and was stopped by a federal judge?

    Two years later, Citizens United vs FEC found victory, thanks to the pro-Corporate Republican justices on SCOTUS.

    We need to neuter this SCOTUS with justices who actually honor and respect precedent and the good of all people, not just corporations and rich folk.

    So Hillary Clinton is correct to say that this is personal, and that she’ll go after them hard. Let’s give her that chance.

  3. You’re correct, djchefron.

    Citizens United and Citizens United Not Timid (a 527) are two separate anti-Hillary Clinton groups.

    In fact, C.U. threatened to sue C.U. Not Timid for trademark infringement.

    But both are lying, sleazy anti-Clinton organizations. That, they have in common.

    However, it was Citizens United that made the anti-Hillary Clinton movie. C.U. Not Timid “only sold t-shirts” with the misogynist acronym emblazoned on them.

    My apologies for the mix-up.

  4. Yeah,Koch adds death after life & plz take your meds. The Koch Nazi are on a mission their father, Fred left for them to fulfill by any means necessary.

  5. Nor is it the main part, unlike Senator Sanders’ plan which, iirc, made a constitutional amendment the only part.

  6. The Supreme Court had to know what they were unleashing when they ruled on Citizens United. They did the same intentional dirty work on the Hobby Lobby ruling. With a gerrymandered majority in the House, they knew there wouldn’t be a Constitutional Amendment passed any time soon to reverse this evil deed. BTW, do they really think they fool any intelligent people with their misleading titles?? Citizens United my a**! Corporations Corrupted would be much more apt. Only the incurably stupid believe those ads. Unfortunately there seem to be a lot of them in America these days.

  7. Well duh everyone knows it will take a Constitutional amendment to overturn it. Now I know Sanders grand plan is to appoint judges to overturn it if he don’t get his amendment. The problem with is would the court overturn its own decision? And if he has a litmus test good luck getting that through the Senate. They would be Borked so fast they wouldn’t even see the bench

  8. I wouldn’t bet on that Dj. When Bernie wins the oval Office he will bring a Senate with him that will approve his judicial nominations and agenda.

  9. I read (somewhere) that several justices were expected to retire in the near future. Is there anything to that, or is it just wishful thinking, and would those be the justices we’d all like to see leave?

  10. Well seeing at least 3 of them have paid up their life insurance its a good bet the next President will shape the court for the next 30 years that’s why this election is so important

  11. When the Supreme case happened Hillary (recently released State email) had an instant reaction to it, yes it is personal.

    I knew CU was against her, I knew about CU with the N & T added against her in 2008. I knew about the CU Case as it was going before the SCOTUS and that it originated against her.

    I also read they were connected. I didn’t know they were not the same people till now. But they sure had the same mission.

    I just checked Media Matters and the photo capture looks just like Trey Gowdy too!


    I know Stone wrote a few books – Benghazi and last week there was discussion here about a War on Women book with Stone as co-author. His first trick is in DJs link – lying to kids in school about school being expanded to Saturday.

    Same old GOP dirty tricks.

  12. Three, possibly even four are rumored to retire in the next decade (or earlier).

    Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, Scalia, and Kennedy are rumored to want to retire. Justice Stephen Breyer, too, has mentioned he would like to retire in the next coming years.

    That’s why the Kochs are willing to spend nearly a billion dollars, and those wealthy GOP-supporting billionaires are putting up a lot of dough to defeat any Democratic candidate this election. They KNOW what’s at stake – the Supreme Court of the United States.

  13. People, People it does not matter how we get rid of the legalized bribary ruling all that matters is that we get rid of it. We also must get rid of corporations are people ruling also. So please stop bickering and get to work, becuase you can sure bet conservatives are not going to get rid of it.

  14. Media Matters had their number long ago.

    They pretend to be “liberal” then they attack liberals as soon as they endorse them – right up to election day.

    They get their money from Republican advertisers – the cost of a house to get a one page ad for one day in black and white let alone a color ad on a Sunday.

  15. Do you realize you come across as creepy and a bit deranged?

    Really? You believe that insanity?

    I won’t click on your links – likely trojan sites – but FCS you are like an ill wind.

  16. Bravo for Hillary – at long, long last – and after she has vacuumed up over a billion dollars in corporate backing for her own presidential campaign. If only she had made this speech one year ago, she would not seem like a disingenuous candidate frightened by shrinking poll numbers and a pending federal investigation into her conduct of her office Secretary of State. This statement makes her seem both desperate and hypocritical.

  17. Well David maybe you were too busy dreaming about Jeb! Marco! or Trump! becoming president to actually hear her speak about this issue before now. The day they came out with the Supreme decision she reacted with saying it has to be an amendment and when she first declared she was running she was asked and said the same thing.

    Want to know about her days at State? Read “Hard Choices” it is a bit wonky but good biography of those 4 years.

    Want to find dirt on her – join the millions of people looking for some here at her fully transparent, not required to make public, email release:


  18. …notice from Trump!!! campaign: Trump wants 3 exclamation points after his name, and everyone else restricted to one…

  19. SCOTUS has already struck down statutory efforts to reign in corporate political spending.

    McCain/Feingold was a statute. This SCOTUS struck it down in CITIZENS UNITED v. FEC.

    The aggregate contribution limit was a statute. This SCOTUS struck it down in McCUTCHEON v. FEC.

    Arizona had a publically financed election law. It was a statute. This SCOTUS struck it down in FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB’S FREEDOM. CLUB PAC ET AL. v. BENNETT.

    Montana had a 100 year-old campaign finance law that prohibited Corporations from contributing to political campaigns. That was a statute. This SCOTUS struck it down in AMERICAN TRADITION PARTNERSHIP, INC. v. BULLOCK.

    This SCOTUS has told us, in no uncertain terms, that they don’t give a . . . that they don’t care what statutes we pass. They are not going to allow us to reign in corporate power with mere laws.

    A Constitutional Amendment is our only option. Everything else is just nibbling around the edges of the problem.

  20. The only proposed constitutional amendment currently before Congress that says the TWO things that need to be said: 1) that inalienable rights recognized under the U.S. Constitution belong to natural human beings, only (and not to artificial legal entities such as corporations or labor unions); and, 2) money is not speech (and thus political fundraising, and political spending, can, and should be regulated, is Move to Amend’s WE THE PEOPLE AMENDMENT, which you can read at: http://www.movetoamend.org/wethepeopleamendment

    Check it out, and join the almost 500,000 Americans who have signed on in support of the WE THE PEOPLE AMENDMENT.

    Then, get involved with the Move to Amend affiliate near you. And if there isn’t one near you . . . START ONE!

    Steve Justino
    Chair, Colorado Move to Amend

  21. So tell us how will you get 2/3 of congress with 2/3 of the states to amend the Constitution? Remember a no brainer the ERA failed and you think brain dead Americans will understand the impact of citizens united?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.