This line of attack is interesting to unpack: it's ultimately based on a misguided decision by @OpenSecretsDC to lump political giving by employees in with political giving by corporate PACs, which makes about as much sense as comparing what autoworkers give to with what GM wants 
Diane Mitsch Bush (a candidate I fundraise for) takes no corporate donations at all, but @OpenSecretsDC does not distinguish between what employees give as individuals and what their employer gives as a PAC, even when (like in the case of Google) the two are polar opposites
The whole thing is made funnier by the fact that Boebert does accept corporate PAC money, like this $5,000 donation from the American Crystal Sugar company, which for its own reasons has decided to support a Qanon-adjacent gun nut with a criminal record for Congress in Colorado
(You could run a PhD seminar on campaign finance in America by following the political donations of the American Crystal Sugar Company)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
