McCain turns down FEC matching funds

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Gunny, Apr 14, 2008.

  1. jillian
    Online

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    76,149
    Thanks Received:
    13,904
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +27,126
    Huh? The guy makes a comment that's off the charts absurd and he shouldn't be questioned?

    I'm sorry it bothers you that McCain probably broke the law. Don't shoot the messenger.
     
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    41,538
    Thanks Received:
    6,460
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +11,417
    ya, be ? mark there, I love how NcCain PROBABLY broke the law on your say so but Clinton did not break the law when he LIED to a Judge while under oath. Can we say PARTISAN?
     
  3. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    It's a case of first impression. There will be one citation when McCain loses. But other legal principles dictate that result, and if you can't find contrary case law yourself, that's okay. Just explain why my reasoning is wrong.

    Under your own logic, support your position or STFU.
     
  4. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    That was contempt of court, but not perjury. Perjury requires a falsehood as to a material fact. At best, the falsehood about Lewinski was about a matter that might lead to relevant evidence (the evidentiary standard for discovery).

    But nice try to hijack the thread. Anyone wanting to pursue this, start your own thread. Other hijackers will be ignored.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    LMAO,LMAO,LMAO.....:rofl:

    There is explicit terms in the contract, contracts are to be performed as they are written not by your imaginary terms.....LMAO
     
  6. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    There is terms, is there?

    What kind of law school takes someone who has failed to learn simple subject and verb agreement.

    Your laughing makes you sound like an idiot, and your grammar confirms it.

    Go back to third grade, poser. I'm done with you.
     
  7. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    I am not writing a thesis here...just responding to an idiot.
     
  8. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    I believe it. Writing a thesis requires knowledge of your subject matter. Stick to improving your defective writing skills.
     
  9. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    I promise to work on my writing skills, if you work on your thinking skills.:rofl:
     
  10. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    Opps wrong again as usual...

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/judge-dismisses.html
    ABC News' Tahman Bradley reports: A federal judge today dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Democratic Party that tried to prevent presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, from opting out of the public financing system. The Democratic National Committee had asked that the court force the Federal Election Commission to take action against McCain, saying he had already made use of the program by securing a bank loan on the promise of public money.

    Judge John Bates wrote in a five-page decision that the case is the FEC's to decide, and even though the commission has been unable to obtain a quorum for several months, the matter still remains in their jurisdiction. Federal law requires a party to file a complaint with the FEC and then wait 120 days before filing suit, Bates, an appointee of President Bush, pointed out in his ruling. The DNC complaint, which asks for investigation of a bank loan agreement the McCain campaign entered into with Fidelity and Trust Bank of Bethesda, was filed in April. Before the FEC's quorum troubles, the panel asked the McCain campaign to explain the agreement.

    Of course it's because the judge is a Bush appointee....:rofl:
     

Share This Page