FEC Lawyer Used Government Job To Campaign For Obama

Another day, another example of an agency in Obama’s Administration without a smidgen of corruption.  My question is this – if a Republican president and his administration were being accused of illegally campaigning and/or targeting liberals, what would the news coverage be like?  I’m looking at you MSM.

An employee at the Federal Election Commission, the nonpartisan agency that oversees campaigns, has resigned after admitting to campaigning for President Obama in 2012, in violation of federal laws.

The employee, a lawyer whose name wasn’t divulged, solicited campaign donations for Mr. Obama and other political campaigns, and even took part in a web broadcast from an FEC facility where the employee criticized the GOP and Republican 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Those moves violate the Hatch Act, the federal law restricting federal government employees’ campaign activity. The Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which investigates Hatch Act violations, announced the steps — though a spokesman said they couldn’t give out any more details.

Since the FEC is supposed to be the government’s elections watchdog, its employees are subject to strict rules prohibiting campaign involvement.

FEC spokeswoman Judith Ingram said they placed the employee on administrative leave once the allegations were made, and that the employee has agreed to resign — but she said the case shouldn’t tarnish the rest of the agency.

“The commission is not aware of any information suggesting that these activities were anything other than the isolated acts of a single employee,” she said.

Seriously?  Shouldn’t tarnish the agency?  We’re well past “not tarnishing” any agency of this Administration.  This is just another example in a long line of “isolated acts of a single low-level employee” breaking the law.

Then again, what do you expect when you have a President that considers the Constitution more what you’d call “guidelines” than actual laws, and a DOJ that has “a vast amount of discretion” in how it interprets those laws.