VBM plot thickens: "Entity 1" purportedly provided payroll services to Hoboken campaigns..."

The key to where The United States of America vs. Lizaida Camis is headed may lie in Paragraph no.4.

To the casual observer, it seems absurd that a 5-year investigation of endemic vote-buying in Hoboken, turns up a little fish named Lizaida.  That's it? some might ask. Well, the government's complaint suggests (loudly) that more lies ahead, and GA refers  you to Paragraph 4.  This line:

"According to bank records, on or about November 7, 2013, Voter 1 negotiated a $50 check issued by a company ("Entity 1") that purportedly provided payroll services to campaigns [plural] in Hoboken." 

pur·port·ed·ly
pərˈpôrdədlē/
adverb
as appears or is stated to be true, though not necessarily so; allegedly.

A little fish squeezed with $250,000 in fines and up to 5 years in jail might start talking. Safely assume that the Feds already know the identity of "Entity 1" and the [plural] "campaigns" Entity 1 worked for. 

Is "Entity 1" in trouble?  Who knows- not me.  But at the end of the day, this "payroll company" works for an individual, individual(s) or another entity (the "big fish"?) Or, is there an even bigger fish outside of Hoboken with an interest in determining who gets elected here, or whether a ballot referendum passes?

Here is what we do know from public documents.

WHAT WE KNOW 

(1) Lizaida Camis' alleged criminal activity occurred "on or about October 2013 and in or about November 2013"

source: United States of America v Lizaida Camis

(2) Let the People Decide, a political action committee, reported $1,600 in total paid to Lizaida Camis on its October 15, 2013 ELEC: 

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE

OCTOBER 15, 2013 ELEC REPORT

(3) Let the People Decide "Expenses" were reported on its January 15, 2014 ELEC.  "Expenses" were individuals generally paid $50 each and (3) entities. 

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE

JANUARY 15, 2013 ELEC REPORT

(4) Note, all of the "EXPENSES" are payments to individuals except (3) entities as follows:

ENTITIES

WHAT WAS LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE ? 

Let the People Decide was/is a political action committee working to eliminate Hoboken's protections for tenants living in rent controlled units.  In 2013, Let the People Decide delivered hundreds of VBMs in support of a November ballot referendum which would have loosened the City's rent control laws. A major donor was the Mile Square Taxpayers Association (MSTA), a group of developers and landlords long opposed to Hoboken’s tenant-friendly rent control codes.  As reported in The Hudson Reporter: " Hoboken’s legacy of vote-by-mail schemes Rent control referendum results stand, and shed light on dubious election pastime." 

Let the People Decide, [was] a pro-MSTA political action committee which submitted several hundred vote-by-mail ballots in the November election.... Frank Raia, a frequent candidate in Hoboken politics and a wealthy local real estate developer, supported Occhipinti in 2013, and is said to be a key player in the aforementioned Let the People Decide political action committee that worked with the MSTA... The address given for Let the People Decide, the committee that paid hundreds of campaign workers including Braxton and Camis, was the same building as Raia’s mailing address."

THE PLOT THICKENS

The Hudson Reporter failed to note that Frank Raia was also an At-Large Council candidate on the 2013 Occhipinti slate as well as a " key player in the aforementioned Let the People Decide political action committee that worked with the MSTA." 

Back to Paragraph 4: ""According to bank records, on or about November 7, 2013, Voter 1 negotiated a $50 check issued by a company ("Entity 1") that purportedly provided payroll services to campaigns [plural] in Hoboken."  

Paragraph 4 did not specify what kind of campaigns. 

If and when the identity of "Entity 1" becomes public information, this could blow open a Pandora's box of "payroll services" to other campaigns  including perhaps one or more in 2017?

Stay tuned.