Joe Lieberman has a new campaign finance problem, a "petty cash" one. We may never know what he bought with nearly $400,000 in petty cash, but it sure purchased increased cynicism in the political process. Some say these are the kinds of problems that occur when an Enron Lobbyist is your former Chief of Staff.

image link

That's a $135,000 petty cash disbursement from Joe Lieberman's latest FEC report. It's not the only one either...

In fact, Lieberman's massive slush fund comprised almost 8 percent of all of his expenditures in the reporting period. That's almost one out of every $12 that Lieberman is effectively hiding. His campaign disbursed $387,000 in unmarked "petty cash" in just 12 days. That's $32,000 every single day, with no accounting at all for how it was spent.

What's worse, it happened right before the primary as their campaign was sending thugs to disrupt Ned Lamont events and instigate fights with the candidate, campaign manager and supporters.

What was Joe Lieberman buying? Who was Joe Lieberman buying? And did he break the law?

The last answer appears obvious, yes.

A political committee may maintain a petty cash fund out of which it may make expenditures not in excess of $100 to any person per purchase or transaction. If a petty cash fund is maintained, it shall be the duty of the treasurer of the political committee to keep and maintain a written journal of all disbursements. This written journal shall include the name and address of every person to whom any disbursement is made, as well as the date, amount, and purpose of such disbursement. In addition, if any disbursement is made for a candidate, the journal shall include the name of that candidate and the office (including State and Congressional district) sought by such candidate. -- 11 CFR 102.11.

HT: Adam B

Other administrative costs on Joe Lieberman's FEC report were accounted for.  He paid for gas, food, printing salaries and other "petty" expenditures, and noted those costs on the report.

So where did the money go?  

Here are more images of Joe's "petty cash" disbursements.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Ned Lamont's campaign itemized just $500 in petty cash during the reporting period.

David Lightman of the Hartford Courant has another important article in today's paper about Joe's FEC report. He joins Jenny Medina of the New York Times and Mark Pazniokas, also of the Courant, in detailed perusals of the incumbents source of campaign funding.

After voting against cloture on John Bolton, twice, Joe Lieberman indicated his support for the President's nominee for Ambassador to the United Nations. It's a nomination, by all accounts, that is already dead in the water.

Why the flip-flop?

Yesterday's debate between Ned Lamont (D), Alan Schlesinger (R) and Joe Lieberman (CFL) changed the dynamic of the entire U.S. Senate contest in one short hour. After receiving assurances of support and large sums of money from Republican heavweights, Joe Lieberman finds himself locked in yet another bitterly contested primary ... this one for the Republican nomination.

The Hartford Courant's Colin McEnroe wrote:

When Lieberman was invited to respond he said, pointing toward Lamont, "I thought the attacks were going to come from this side. I didn't know they were going to come from that side too." [...]

Lieberman unintentionally disclosed another thing he believes: that the fix is in and that he doesn't have to worry about Republican opposition.

Someone forgot to tell Alan Schlesinger yesterday.

As Mark Pazniokas writes, Joe Lieberman finds himself in a bit of a "no man's land," unable to even affirm the country would be better off with a Democratic House as a counter-balance to President Bush.

Another interesting wrinkle to this story is Connecticut's role in opposition to John Bolton. The state's Senior Senator, Chris Dodd, literally led the fight against Bolton in the United States Senate earlier this year. There was bipartisan support for his effort as well, as Lincoln Chafee provided the death blow to the president's ill-conceived nomination.

Ned Lamont released the following statement on Joe Lieberman's flip-flop:

“Once again, Joe Lieberman has broken with the people of Connecticut. A year ago, he opposed John Bolton's nomination to the United Nations because he was unqualified. At that time, he had the power of a bipartisan majority behind him in opposing Bolton. Today, when the political winds shift in the other direction, Senator Lieberman is supporting John Bolton, who has no more experience or qualifications for the job than he did a year ago. That's not leadership.

“Today it seems as if Lieberman's only constituents are George Bush and Dick Cheney. His support for the administration's foreign policies is wrong for America and wrong for Connecticut. The world is in crisis, and we need a UN Ambassador who's respected and effective at the UN. With major threats to this country such as Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, we need to have someone there who can deal diplomatically with our allies, advance our interests effectively, and keep America safe. That description does not fit John Bolton. [...]

“Lieberman's flip flop on Bolton as well qualified and deserving of the position further shows that he'll do anything to get re-elected. We need real leadership, not someone who for 18 years sticks his finger in the political winds and goes only where the wind is blowing, even when it's against Connecticut's interests. Lieberman previously opposed Bolton's nomination, but has now embraced him because George Bush asked him and Alan Schlesinger challenged him.

You can read Ned's entire statement at Connecticut Local Politics