You can find the claim on the Robert F KennedyJr X.com page:
“Kennedy’s campaign wrote:
This historic collaboration breaks the fundraising stranglehold that the two major parties have on this election. Together, the Kennedy campaign and the Libertarian National Committee are democratizing fundraising to make this independent run viable.
@StefanieSpear added
Historic! Kennedy campaign announces unprecedented fundraising agreement that significantly increases the amount individuals can donate to #KennedyShanahan24 campaign.”
Your editor cautions readers against relying on the claim made by Ms. Spear.
Meanwhile, he’s working the phones to get himself a job in the next Trump administration.
He is not even remotely libertarian. Never has been, never will.
Who do you mean? Rfk Jr? I hold no position on whether he is or has been a libertarian, whatever that means ideologically (it appears to depend on who you ask). Much less his future ideological evolution, which he himself couldn’t possibly know now, much less me or you.
I find your claim that he’s working the phones for a job in the next Trump administration, if that’s the claim you are making, worthy of exploration. What evidence, if any, do you have for such a claim?
If that’s not who you mean, who do you mean? No other male is referred to by name in the story. I don’t have a second guess.
Did you not read the national news yesterday? It was reported that RFK Jr spoke to Trump about a quid pro quo where he would endorse Trump for exchange for a job in Trump’s administration. RFK Jr’s son posted the audio of the call online (and quickly deleted it).
The party is willingly working with a candidate who’s actively turning against us before the ink is dry on that silly contract!! I’m stunned but in the end, not surprised as that’s been the MC’s MO all along.
The audio posted by RFKs son wasn’t clear. It was only a partial clip of the conversation. What Trump said, after talking about vaccines, was “I would love you to do so. And I think it would be so good for you and so big for you. And we’re going to win. We’re way ahead of the guy.” Then he moved on to talking about his assassination attempt and conversation with Biden.
It wasn’t at all clear from the video to what Trump was referring when he said “I would love you to do so.” It was a reference to something earlier in the conversation which may not have been recorded or, at least, wasn’t posted online. (Some media reported “so” as “something” but that doesn’t sound correct to my ears.)
And don’t believe for a second that leak was unauthorized. The lack of context and quick deletion were deliberate attempts to fuel media speculation and get RFK’s name in the media cycle around the Republican convention and Trump’s assassination attempt.
I’m seeing, only today, that unidentified sources made this claim. It’s highly counterintuitive and I’ve seen no actual evidence. This was the first I’ve heard of the audio clip, which doesn’t sound like it’s evidence either.
If Kennedy did drop out and endorse Trump, I’m not sure what that would prove about whether or not either one of them is a libertarian. Both went to the libertarian national convention and claimed to be libertarians. This year. Other people, both those who claim to be libertarians and those who don’t, make wildly different claims about who all and what all views are or are not libertarian. The term appears to be a rohrshach test.
Addendum:
The one verifiable fact as to rfk jr libertarianhood or lack thereof is that he cut a check, signed the oath, and became a dues paying party member in May. However, he’s clearly also not their nominee, having been rejected by them on the first of seven ballots.
“Together, the Kennedy campaign and the Libertarian National Committee are democratizing fundraising to make this independent run viable.”
What does “democratizing” mean in this context?
Off hand, making it possible for rich folks who are less rich than Nicole Shanahan to give five figures rather than four, thus allowing her to keep more of her millions or at least making their funding look less lopsided by making her share smaller.
It could mean something completely different, but I too am stumped as to what that may be.
Congress ought to abolish individual contribution limits altogether. Then, these complicated shell games that most parties and candidates play to evade the limits would diminish. and the FEC reports would show up front how much big donors are giving to each candidate directly.
Does anyone have any idea what the fundraising proposal will involve? Is it mail, phone, or events? That never is talked about.