'Give the Money Back,' Demands Tlaib After $1 Million Donation to House Dems From Real Estate Tita

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

Source: Common Dreams

'Give the Money Back,' Demands Tlaib After Revelation of $1 Million Donation to House Dems From Real Estate Titan

Following the revelation Tuesday that House Democrats received $1 million from the chairman of an apartment rental company weeks before they let the nationwide eviction moratorium expire, Rep. Rashida Tlaib led calls to return the money—and extend the federal eviction moratorium.

"Democrats were bought off for leaving six million Americans without an eviction moratorium."
—Jackie Fielder, Daybreak PAC

As Common Dreams reported Tuesday, The Daily Poster's Andrew Perez and Joel Warner revealed that George Marcus—who is chairman of both the real estate brokerage firm Marcus & Millichap and the real estate investment trust Essex Property Trust—donated $1 million to the House Majority PAC on June 1, days after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention extended the pandemic-related moratorium through late June.

Additionally, Marcus gave $263,400 last month to a committee benefiting the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) reelection campaign. He has also donated at least $6.5 million to PACs supporting Democrats' congressional campaigns, among other Democratic candidates and causes.

Tlaib (D-Mich.) called on Democrats to return Marcus' donation, arguing that accepting the check "does not help in building trust among people we are fighting for."

/snip

Read more: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/08/03/give-money-back-demands-tlaib-after-revelation-1-million-donation-house-dems-real?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1628033324

[Mr. Sparkle]

1. Dont give it back!

If they decide they dont want it, give it to a charity for the homeless.

[George II]

2. Give us a break!

[NurseJackie]

3. Good fucking grief! Give me a goddamned break!

In reality, what "does not help in building trust" is this type of grandstanding and showboating. Politicians who do this sort of thing are typically not genuinely concerned with any sort of imagined improprieties and instead more concerned with drawing attention to themselves and making headlines. I always view things like this as being a cynical ploy for publicity (and/or fundraising letters.)

"Democrats were bought off for leaving six million Americans without an eviction moratorium."
—Jackie Fielder, Daybreak PAC

Jackie Fielder from the "Daybreak PAC" can kiss my fat ass. What a load of horse shit!

[Evolve Dammit]

4. Weren't there limits on donations???

[malthaussen]

5. Couldn't be corruption. They're not Republicans. n/t

[AllaN01Bear]

6. to the person who demands this , turn in all your monies that were donated to u all.

otherwise , ehhhh sheeedep. !!!! (bugs bunny style )

[George II]

7. Meanwhile, in the 2020 cycle, Rep. Tlaib received more than $4M. Top 15 occupations:

PHYSICIAN
ATTORNEY
PRESIDENT
CEO
RETIRED
HOMEMAKER
MANAGER
DOCTOR
OWNER
ENGINEER
PROFESSOR
BUSINESS OWNER
PHARMACIST
SOFTWARE ENGINEER
VICE PRESIDENT
DENTIST

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. What's the difference between those in bold and those not?

And are you saying she supported regulations particularly favourable to any of them? If so, which?

[George II]

20. Just my cursory assessment of all the occupations from which "establishment Democrats" get bashed...

....for accepting contributions.

Healthcare
CEOs, Presidents, Business owners
Pharma
Tech

There's also various Real Estate, Leasing, Rental occupations but they don't fall in the top 15.

As for your last point, no, I'm not implying or saying anything about motives. But unfortunately she is with her "give the money back" demand, as though that $1M, although a lot of money, would sway decisions by "House Dems". That $1M is a smaller % of the overall contributions received than she has received from similar occupations and industries.

In fact, the decision to NOT extend the moratorium was made by the Supreme Court, not "House Dems" (of which she is one) She's now pointing fingers but from June 29 to July 31 many of those doing so sat on their own hands and did nothing to avoid the expiration of the moratorium.

We're all in this together, there should be no finger pointing or subtle accusations about the motives of ANY Democrats in Congress.

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. You seem to have selected dates with precision

Is that because they did urge an extension just before that period, and again after?

If we were all in this together, then the entire Democratic party, including the President, would have been pushing for the extension.

No, the occupations you bolded (though rather randomly - you have not classed engineers as "tech", for instance) are not similar to landlords. Most importantly, they haven't just had a moratorium expire. Tlaib's call is based on an actual interest the donor had in a favorable outcome; you, on the other hand, appear to be playing class warfare, by broadbrushing certain occupations as ones you think compromise Tlaib by their donations.

[George II]

23. No, I haven't selected any dates, just the last full campaign cycle, 2020....

There are no other references to any dates.

And I didn't say those that I bolded were in real estate occupations, in fact I specifically said real estate categories didn't fall in the top 15 that I listed.

Those I bolded, as I explained, are occupations that are normally singled out to imply that those "establishment Democrats" who accept money from them is done so with ulterior motives.

The "Tech" industry includes communications and software developers (i.e. Google, Microsoft, etc.), that's why I included "software engineer". I was an engineer for 40+ years (1972-2013), but I didn't work in what is considered a "tech" industry, as software engineers do. I designed valving, piping, and fluid control systems, certainly not part of the "tech" segment. That's why I didn't include the generic "engineer" category.

Now, how does anything I said fall into "playing class warfare"?

Finally, I don't think those occupations "compromise" Tlaib by their donations, I don't think I said anything like that. But as I've pointed out now twice, others claim donations from those occupations compromise "establishment Democrats", just as Tlaib is implying or saying outright that a $1M contribution to House Democrats (of which she is one) compromises House Democrats.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. "June 29 to July 31" - those are dates

Obviously, engineers are part of "technology". I have an engineering degree myself. Your class warfare is selecting occupations that you think are not suitable for donations to - perhaps any Democrat, perhaps just Democrats like Tlaib. Either way, you've excluded your own occupation, and pointed your finger at others. Rather than addressing the subject of the thread - the eviction moratorium, and the business of this donor and the timing of this donation, you're pretending that this is about certain occupations. You've put the occupations into 'OK' (including your own) and 'not OK' - you've classified them, and said that the occupations and industries that don't include you are similar to the apartment rental business. Hence 'class warfare'.

[George II]

26. Ah, those dates. I thought you were referring to the dates of the financial information I posted...

June 29 is the date that the Supreme Court issued their ruling that no extension of the moratorium could be extended without legislation from Congress, and July 31 is the date the moratorium expired. The reason I zeroed in on those dates is that those now complaining about lack of action by the House said virtually nothing between those dates. They only started clamoring for "action" on the day the moratorium expired.

"TECH" is the category that many use (when discussing financial influence on candidates) when referring, as I said, to companies like Google, Microsoft, communications, and other software/high-tech segments. They don't generally single out any general industrial corporations or manufacturers of "durable" goods. Software engineers are in an entirely different type of occupation than generic "engineers".

Those categories are NOT mine, they're the ones others single out when complaining about the influence of money on politics and politicians. I didn't put any into "ok" and "not ok", others who carry on about that subject did.

NOWHERE have I said anything about any classes, class warfare, etc. That's just your reading into what I said.

I did address the subject of the OP, I believe twice, when I pointed out somewhere that Tlaib herself has accepted a higher % of her contributions from real estate interests than the "House Dems" did, even with that $1M contribution.

Assuming that "House Dems" (again, she is one of those "House Dems&quot receives $250M, that $1M represents 0.4% of their total. On the other hand, in the 2020 cycle she received just over $2M, of which $15,000 was from real estate interests. That's 0.7%, almost double the % that "House Dems" received.

You said "you're pretending that this is about certain occupations", but that is precisely what Tlaib did with her demand.

I guess that's my bottom line point - if one is going to criticize anyone for doing something that is implied as being questionable, that one had better make sure that he/she isn't doing precisely the same thing.

Summing up, I am NOT engaging in any so-called "class warfare" (claiming that is insulting), I'm just very objectively pointing out the industries that those critical of others have singled out and drawing relative comparisons.

Good evening!

[Midnight Writer]

8. Her problem should be with the States that have not used the money Congress made available.

[PatSeg]

17. Yes, would be a better use of her time and energy

[happy feet]

40. THIS!

But it's easier to make useless headline grabbing demands than get behind taking concrete action to get the monies distributed. What percent of the rental assistance has been distributed in her state? The moratorium will end at some point. ALL the back rent will be due so time to take actions NOW for this impending REAL crisis.

So tired of the grandstanding by some.

[KPN]

9. She is right. Is she consistent herself in fidelity to her own views? I don't know, but big

picture-wise, she is right in my view. It's no wonder we've experienced populist reactions like "Occupy Wall Street" and "Antifa" to "systems that won't change on their own".

My two cents.

[ancianita]

12. Agree.

She is morally consistent, and so should the party be; it doesn't have to be perfect, but it doesn't need the money as much as it needs moral credibility.

[George II]

34. She has accepted a higher % of money from real estate interests than the "House Dems" have....

....according to FEC filings.

[brush]

37. The big relief act early in Joe's term provided millions for...

rental relief that has not been tapped by the states and localities. It's still there. Reps like Tiaib would do well to get that money released. If it was released the problem of extending the rental moratorium would not have come up.

There is money available.

[mcar]

10. $1 million ain't that much in the general scheme of things

WRT political campaigns.

[RussBLib]

11. it's simple. keep the money and do the right thing anyway.

but they were probably not given the money "out of the blue". Chances are whoever took the money was already inclined to do so and perhaps to do the bidding of the donor. Subtly, of course.

[George II]

35. That's probably what was going to happen anyway. It's sad that the automatic reaction is that....

...there are nefarious motives behind contributions. Even more sad that the accusations/implications come from our own Democrats.

[keopeli]

13. We're not Repukes! Why do we assume Dem donors are corrupt, as well as Dems?

Can't this donor be an honest Democrat? There is no proof provided that this was a quid pro quo. You can draw an imaginary line between ANY donor and ANY law, EO, position, etc. If it was a Repuke (a party that has a well-established and provable history of quid pro quos for donations), I would be suspicious (though they would NEVER return the money or admit that it "looked bad&quot . Even among Repukes, if there is no evidence of foul play, I would have to say leave it alone.

WHY is a Democratic member trying to smear her own party? I get being upset about the way the Moratorium has been handled recently, but there is NO evidence of foul play. The situation has been resolved, if temporarily.

To me, this looks like Tlaib is a DINO. There is more evidence here that Tlaib has an ulterior motive than there is evidence of a quid pro quo. But, I notice that this method of creating dissension within the ranks is effective, based on some responses by my fellow DU members.

Please, let's stick with provable facts and unified support for Democrats. Let's not eat our own. Remember, we have a difficult election approaching in 2022. It is not helpful to provide our opponents with ammunition based on speculation or assuming that our party members and the party itself are corrupt.

Keep it Blue in '22!!!

[George II]

14. That's what pisses me off, there is an immediate assumption that contributions from a certain....

....industry or group is done for favors.

Meanwhile, just a quick scan of Tlaib's contributions shows that she accepted contributions from several real estate sales or management companies.

Not $1M, but her campaign is on a much smaller scale. She accepted a total of more than $15,000 from 8 different real estate companies.

That's 0.7% of her receipts, that $1M is less than one half percent of what House Democrats received.

Will she give that back?

[PatSeg]

16. Sometimes it feels like some Democrats

put too much energy into being reactionary and often in ways that do not serve Democrats, but they do make headlines. Perhaps that is the point in some of the attacks and accusations? To make it into the news cycle? I don't know, but I don't see how this is constructive. It might, however, give republicans some ammunition in the next election. More experienced politicians usually realize that.

[question everything]

15. Oh, AOC generates headline so can other "squaders" be far behind?

[chowder66]

18. I don't see any link between the donation and the moratorium. Weird. nt

[Unca Jim]

22. But seriously...

You all can't see how that looks bad?

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. There's a feeling among some DUers that if a "Squad" member saying something's bad, it can't be

DU is a place where Democrats can be persuaded, so, for some, the struggle against wings of the Democrats that they disagree with must be kept up at all times.

[brush]

38. The big relief bill provided millions or rental relief to states...

Last edited Sun Aug 8, 2021, 11:01 PM - Edit history (1)

and localities. It is still sitting there untapped. Perhaps the Squad should work to get that money released to help renters. That might not get headlines though.

[Unca Jim]

43. Love all of that...

But it still looked bad. Fortunately, it got delayed again and will get dealt with going forward.

[marble falls]

27. Extremely mixed emotions. Give back 1/2 of it and donate the rest to a renter's union/organization?

[betsuni]

28. What Teddy Roosevelt said when told to give back large corporate campaign contributions: No.

It's "entirely legitimate to accept contributions, no matter how large," provided they were freely given.

The myth that campaign contributions to Democrats have an automatic diabolical corrupting power and that nobody who gives large contributions can be progressive, are giving money because they want Democrats elected to enact progressive policies. This has to stop.

[lapucelle]

29. Why is this posted on DU?

From the OP:

"Democrats were bought off for leaving six million Americans without an eviction moratorium."
—Jackie Fielder, Daybreak PAC

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

30. Rashida Tlaib is a Progressive Democrat

[lapucelle]

31. I'm talking about the specific quote from Jackie Fielder "Democrats were bought off

for leaving six million Americans without an eviction moratorium."

Rashida Tlaib didn't say that.

You included that quote in your post:



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is a quote from someone unequivocally stating that "Democrats were bought off" doing on DU?

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

32. ...

https://www.sfweekly.com/news/jackie-fielder-creates-progressive-pac/

[lapucelle]

36. So what? "Democrats were bought off" is a toxic, anti-Democratic Party talking point.

"Founders of progressive pacs" don't get a pass on unequivocally blathering that Democrats are corrupt.

And that talking point doesn't belong on DU.

[Hortensis]

39. Yes, it is. Because it's not true, which is easily confirmed

by honest people.

Of course it doesn't belong here.

[George II]

33. Is Jackie Fielder a "progressive Democrat"? She's the one who claimed that....

...."Democrats are bought off". She may consider herself a progressive (everyone has their own definition of that word) but if she's bashing Democrats she doesn't look like a "Democrat". I find it offensive that a so-called "Democrat", Jackie Fielder, claims that Democrats are bought off for any reason.

This doesn't belong on DU.

[okaawhatever]

41. Never mind that Mr. Marcus has been donating millions to DEMS

For a decades. Tlaib is gaslighting her supporters with this claim. I’m very disappointed in her for this. I expect it from Common Dreams, but not elected Democrats.

Also, June 1 is the first day of the third quarter, or the first day of the second half of the year, political donations from repeat donors frequently come in on these dates.

Don’t fall for this b.s.

[betsuni]

42. +1