Undercover Video Shows Dem Operative Saying Clinton Wanted Trump Trolled By Donald Duck

Leah Barkoukis
|
Posted: Oct 25, 2016 8:30 AM
Undercover Video Shows Dem Operative Saying Clinton Wanted Trump Trolled By Donald Duck

In the third undercover video released by James O’Keefe and Project Veritas on Monday, Democratic operative Robert Creamer revealed a plan to troll Donald Trump that could put Hillary Clinton in hot water.

According to Creamer, Clinton personally approved a plan to have a nonprofit group use Donald Duck mascots to troll Trump at his rallies over his refusal to release his tax returns.

“In the end, it was the candidate, Hillary Clinton, the future president of the United States, who wanted ducks on the ground, so by God we would get ducks on the ground,” Democracy Partners’ Creamer says in the video. “Don’t repeat that to anybody.”

In the video Creamer said the group originally planned to use mascots of Uncle Sam, but it was Clinton who wanted Donald Duck—a messaged relayed to him by Hillary For America Deputy Communications Director Christina Reynolds.

“Christina Reynolds calls,” he says, “saying, ‘I have good news and bad news. The good news is the candidate would like to have a mascot following around ... Trump. But the bad news is she wants it to be Donald Duck.’ “My answer is, ‘Christine, if the future president wants ducks, we will put ducks on the ground,” he says boastfully.

If Clinton and the DNC did coordinate with the group Americans United for Change, it constitutes ‘illegally coordinated campaign expenditures,’ according to Project Veritas.

AUFC is tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(4) of the federal tax code, allowing it to conduct limited amounts of electioneering as long as it doesn't directly advocate voting for or against candidates.

It also doesn't have to publicly identify its donors, distinguishing it from super PACs which must disclose their income sources but can electioneer more aggressively.

The Federal Election Commission prohibits campaigns from working with outside groups where a tangible dollar amount is tied to back-and-forth communications.

Money spent to buy the duck costume, pay staff to wear it, and publicize each campaign stunt would be considered an illegal campaign contribution to Hillary For America.

“The connection between Creamer, President Obama and Hillary Clinton is undeniable as are the campaign law violations,” O’Keefe said. “If it looks like a duck, if it talks like a duck, and if it walks like a duck, then it’s probably a duck. They broke the law.”