Democrat commissioners on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) are showing us just how dangerous it would be if Democrat-backed election bills become law. As Kimberley Strassel explained in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, Democrat Commissioner Ellen Weintraub is a case study for selective enforcement of FEC regulations.

FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub is attacking political speech on Twitter again, this time objecting to an op-ed in the Washington Post praising Facebook's decision to allow micro-targeting of political ads.  As we have described many times in this blog, not only does Commissioner Weintraub want online political speech to be extensively regulated, apparently she is also opposed to allowing those who disseminate their speech online to do so in a "cost-effective" way:

The sole Republican on the Federal Election Commission, Caroline Hunter, published an op-ed in Politico today describing how her colleague Ellen Weintraub's attacks on President Trump and frequent tweets and media appearances are undermining the public perception, independence, and impartiality of the FEC:  

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has jurisdiction to issue regulations and enforce federal campaign finance laws; in other words, to interpret and enforce the regulation of Americans' political speech, which is protected by the First Amendment.  

For years, Democrats have attempted to expand regulation of political speech through onerous disclaimer, disclosure, and reporting requirements; low contribution limits; making the FEC a partisan body controlled by the President's party (such as in H.R. 1 and the perennial DISCLOSE Act); outright speech prohibitions; and even through spending limits (which the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional back in Buckley v. Valeo).  

With the resignation of Republican FEC Commissioner Matt Petersen, the FEC is back in the news.

As we have chronicled, Democratic FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub has used her position to attack President Trump (along with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, other Republicans, and supporters of free speech) in a variety of ways, including through the altFEC Twitter account operated by her staff and writing a letter to President Trump on FEC letterhead questioning his claims about voter fraud in New Hampshire and asking him to produce evidence.  At the request of the Cause of Action Institute, headed by RNLA member John Vecchione, the FEC Inspector General inquired as to whether Commissioner Weintraub had violated any ethical standards with her letter or not. Unfortunately, it concluded she had not.

It is rare for a Senate Majority Leader to address legislation in the House.  That has changed with the unprecedented assault on our Democracy undertaken by the Democrats in the form of HR 1.  Or as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called it in a speech today, "The Democrat Politician Protection Act":

This week, Democrats in the House are expected to pass the sweeping legislation I call the Democrat Politician Protection Act. It aims to give Washington D.C. vast new control over elections, give tax dollars to political campaigns, and give election lawyers more opportunities to determine the outcome of elections. 

Yesterday, Mother Jones reported that current FEC Chair Ellen Weintraub has decided to vote against allowing the FEC to defend its positions in court.  Because the FEC currently only has four members and the affirmative votes of four members are required for the FEC to take any official action, this means that Chair Weintraub will prevent the FEC from appearing in court to defend its position.  

(This is the last in a series of five posts on the demonstrated bias of Democratic FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub.  The first installment is here, the second here, the third here, and the fourth is here.)

FEC Vice Chair Ellen Weintraub's personal staff continues to mount a political campaign against President Trump at the same time they consider enforcement cases involving President Trump.  In many public pronouncements, Commissioner Weintraub's staff indicate they already have prejudged legal issues pending before the FEC.  Some tweets appear to be posted during regular government work hours.