(ThePatriotSource.com) – Pete Buttigieg might have just won the Iowa caucuses, but his campaign isn’t without controversy. In fact, one of his opponents in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination has accused him of potential breaking campaign finance law.
After his controversial “victory” in Iowa, Michael Halle, his campaign strategist, touted Buttigieg’s history as a veteran, writing: “Pete’s military experience and closing message work everywhere, especially in Nevada where it’s critical they see this on the air through the caucus.”
That tweet raised the eyebrows of some of his challengers, particularly Senator Elizabeth Warren, whose campaign said the tweet seemed to be an attempt to coordinate with a group called VoteVets. This group is known as a “dark money group” that is progressive and has spent loads of money supporting Buttigieg throughout the early states in the primary.
In response to Halle’s tweet, Warren’s campaign manager, Roger Lau, tweeted this question: “Was this meant to be a DM or did you mean to tweet out this instruction to your super PAC?”
By the Warren campaign didn’t stop there with that public call-out. Instead, in a fundraising email, they called out Buttigieg specifically, calling the Halle tweet “a prime example of just how easy it is for campaigns to exploit our broken campaign finance laws.”
Current campaign finance law states that no candidate may coordinate with any outside groups, such as super PACs, that aren’t bound by any fundraising limits. Simply mentioning Buttigieg’s career in the military was seen by some of his opponents as an attempt to reach out to the VoteVets group.
Warren’s fundraising email detailed this further:
“Pete Buttigieg’s campaign, and a few other campaigns in this race, are being boosted by the support of Super PACs and the bigwig donors who can donate millions to them. It’s illegal for candidates and Super PACs to coordinate strategy with one another. But we saw this tweet from one of our opponents’ senior strategists, and we wanted to make sure you saw it.”
But Warren’s campaign isn’t the only one criticizing the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana. Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which has backed Warren in the past, said this:
“Pete entered the race as a Boy Scout but has corrupted his brand by becoming the candidate of big-money corporate donors. It’s a slap in the face of campaign finance law to so brazenly and unethically direct a Super PAC how to spend on his behalf — all while leaving New Hampshire to do big-money New York fundraisers.”
It’s possible that Warren and the other candidates are just sour at Buttigieg for claiming victory of the Iowa caucuses as controversy ensued regarding the results and the app that was being used to report them. In fact, he event claimed that he was “going on to New Hampshire victorious” before all the votes were even counted, and while he was basically in a deadlock with Bernie Sanders.
How Buttigieg’s campaign responds to this, if at all, or to future “victories” in other states’ primaries will go a long way in determining how the Democratic race will be held.