We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong

[Faun]

I'll bet it was over $1 billion.

Never make a bet with a conservative. They never pay up when they lose.

 

[Faun]

Kinda like when a democrat says "We're going to get to the bottom of this", huh?

Looks like Bragg is.

 

[Flopper]

Every positive story for Hillary has to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right. However it an article is actually telling the public how to vote, that would be an election contribution.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right. However it an article is actually telling the public how to vote, that would be an election contribution.

If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right.

They have a 1st Amendment right to make a campaign contribution by influencing the election?
If paying a bimbo and then killing the story is a contribution, paying and publishing is as well.

 

[Faun]

If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right.

They have a 1st Amendment right to make a campaign contribution by influencing the election?
If paying a bimbo and then killing the story is a contribution, paying and publishing is as well.

You're still going on about this? You're clueless.

52 U.S.C. § 30101

(9)(A) The term “expenditure” includes--

(i) any purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office;  and

(ii) a written contract, promise, or agreement to make an expenditure.​

(B) The term “expenditure” does not include--

(i) any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;​

​

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right. However it an article is actually telling the public how to vote, that would be an election contribution.

Not even then. Newspaper editorial boards all endorse candidates in virtually every election.

So no attention needs to be given to this weird little red herring.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're still going on about this? You're clueless.

52 U.S.C. § 30101​

​

(9)(A) The term “expenditure” includes--​

​

(i) any purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office;  and​

​

(ii) a written contract, promise, or agreement to make an expenditure.​

​

(B) The term “expenditure” does not include--​

​

(i) any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;​

​

Oh, so some people can influence an election freely while others can't.
Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Oh, so some people can influence an election freely while others can't.
Thanks for clearing that up.

It's almost as if a lot of people thought about your red herring before you did... like, waaaaay before...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's almost as if a lot of people thought about your red herring before you did... like, waaaaay before...

Some animals are more equal than others.

 

[Vrenn]

Some animals are more equal than others.

And you animals spread hate. But we are getting over it.

 

[Flopper]

If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right.

They have a 1st Amendment right to make a campaign contribution by influencing the election?
If paying a bimbo and then killing the story is a contribution, paying and publishing is as well.

That might seem right but that is not how the FEC looks at it. I have always wondered why newspapers can make recommendations of how the public should vote for presidents and other offices on their editorial page and that is not considered an election contribution. Yet if I buy billboard that says elect Biden and set it up, that will be called an election contribution.

 

[Flopper]

Oh, so some people can influence an election freely while others can't.
Thanks for clearing that up.

I think is a matter of enforcement and dollar value of the election contribution.