An online crowdfunding campaign entitled “Either Sen. Collins VOTES NO on Kavanaugh OR we fund her future opponent” has prompted a watchdog group to ask the Department of Justice to launch an investigation into bribery.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) has been one of the few Republicans whose stance on President Donald Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh is uncertain. Liberals are hopeful she will vote against the confirmation, but what lengths are they going to?
According to the crowdfunding campaign, if Sen. Collins votes “No” on Kavanaugh, people who pledged money to the campaign “will not be charged, and no money will go to fund her future opponent.” However, if Sen. Collins votes “Yes” on Kavanaugh, “your pledge will go to her opponent’s campaign, once that opponent has been identified.”
The crowdfunding campaign has received over 46,000 pledges and raised over $1.2 million thus far.
A watchdog group called The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) said Thursday it would send a letter to the Department of Justice asking them to trigger an investigation into bribery.
USA Today reports that the four-page letter from FACT alleges that Collins “has reported receiving threatening calls and letters as well as more than 3,000 wire coat hangers” from those who believe Kavanaugh would vote to repeal Roe v. Wade.
Collins herself even said that the events leading up to the confirmation vote amount to bribery. She said the following to Newsmax:
“I consider this quid pro quo fundraising to be the equivalent of an attempt to bribe me to vote against Judge Kavanaugh. If I vote against him, the money is refunded to the donors. If I vote for him, the money is given to my opponent for the 2020 race.” She added, “This effort will not influence my vote at all… I think it demonstrates the new lows to which the judge’s opponents have stooped.”
Collins also said she asked lawyers to opine, and they consider the letters to be extortion.
Will Democrats acknowledge that their constituents have crossed the line here, or will they continue scaring voters to proceed with such actions? What they should do is clear, but unfortunately so is what they will do. Or rather, what they won’t.