Porter disregards supportive billionaires, focuses on megadonors aiding her rivals
Porter Accuses Schiff’s Campaign of Using Millions in Donations to Spread Lies
Following her defeat to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) on Super Tuesday, Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA) made a bold claim, suggesting that Schiff’s campaign had utilized millions of dollars donated by billionaires to spread falsehoods and secure a Republican opponent for the general election.
“Our opponents threw everything — every trick, millions of dollars, every trick in the playbook — to knock us off our feet. But I’m still standing in high heels,” Porter declared passionately during her concession speech.
Interestingly, despite her claims of not accepting money from corporate political action committees, Porter herself received millions of dollars in campaign funding. Open Secrets reports that she received $32,000 from Apple and Google, $58,000 from the Universities of California San Francisco and Irvine, and a substantial $600,000 from lawyers and law firms.
In total, Porter managed to raise an impressive $28 million for her Senate campaign, slightly less than Schiff’s $31 million. Meanwhile, Steve Garvey, the Republican candidate who will be facing Schiff in the general election, raised $2 million for his own campaign.
Porter expressed frustration at the significant financial advantage her opponents had, stating, “We’re standing three to one in TV spending and facing an onslaught of billionaires who spent millions peddling lies. Furthermore, our opponent is investing more in boosting the Republican candidate than promoting his own campaign.”
Under California’s open primary rules, the two candidates with the highest number of votes, regardless of party affiliation, proceed to the general election. Consequently, Schiff and Garvey will be competing for the Senate seat previously held by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein this November.
Click here to read more from The Washington Examiner.
How does Porter’s own acceptance of corporate political action committee funding contradict her claims of not accepting such donations?
Porter’s claims about Schiff’s campaign utilizing millions of dollars in donations to spread lies have sparked a new controversy in the political arena. After her defeat on Super Tuesday, Porter boldly accused Schiff’s campaign of resorting to unethical tactics to secure a Republican opponent for the general election.
During her concession speech, Porter passionately declared, “Our opponents threw everything — every trick, millions of dollars, every trick in the playbook — to knock us off our feet. But I’m still standing in high heels.” This statement sheds light on the fierce competition and the lengths candidates are willing to go to win an election.
Interestingly, despite claiming not to accept money from corporate political action committees, Porter herself received millions of dollars in campaign funding. According to Open Secrets, she received $32,000 from Apple and Google, $58,000 from the Universities of California San Francisco and Irvine, and a substantial $600,000 from lawyers and law firms. These contributions raise questions about the source and influence of campaign funds, suggesting that even candidates who denounce corporate donations may still benefit from them indirectly.
In terms of fundraising, Porter managed to raise an impressive $28 million for her Senate campaign, slightly less than Schiff’s $31 million. This financial advantage highlights the importance of campaign funding in today’s political landscape and the extent to which candidates rely on it to secure victory. Meanwhile, Steve Garvey, the Republican candidate who will be facing Schiff in the general election, raised a mere $2 million for his own campaign, further emphasizing the stark disparity in funding resources between the two parties.
Expressing frustration at the financial disadvantage she faced, Porter stated, ”We’re standing three to one in TV spending and facing an onslaught of billionaires who spent millions peddling lies. Furthermore, our opponent is investing more in boosting the Republican candidate than promoting his own campaign.” These remarks reflect her discontent with the significant financial advantage her opponents held and the role of billionaires in shaping the outcome of elections.
It is important to note that under California’s open primary rules, the two candidates with the highest number of votes, regardless of party affiliation, proceed to the general election. As a result, Schiff and Garvey will be competing for the Senate seat previously held by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein in November. This election will undoubtedly be closely watched, given the controversies surrounding campaign funding and the allegations of falsehoods being spread.
In conclusion, Porter’s accusations against Schiff’s campaign have shed light on the significant role of money in politics and the potential manipulation of the democratic process. The claims made highlight the need for transparency and accountability in campaign financing. As the general election approaches, it remains to be seen how voters will respond to these allegations and what impact they will have on the outcome of the Senate race.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
