Bloomberg Helping Ex Felons In Florida To Vote

Norman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
28,832
Reaction score
11,459
Points
900
No state, prior to the civil war, and 14th amendment....

barred those imprisoned from voting. Voting rights were never taken away from Felons.

It was not until the black man, was given a right to vote, did Southern States initially, change their laws to prevent felons, who were disproportionately black men, from voting.

One state followed the other, except my state of Maine, kept their law as it was prior to the civil war..... some say that our State should not boast for not being bigots because they kept their law the same, even after the black man could vote....

but only because Maine's population consisted of less than 1% of their population being black....the men in jail at the time, were near all white....there was no need to discriminate against the black citizens....
Nobody cares. The law is intended to produce the best nation that we can be. Not to conform to your vision of equality nonsense where criminals start making decisions for other people. It is absolutely clear to anyone with a brain that expanding the voting rights was a mistake. Voting should be for informed, smart Americans.

Regardless, the law is what it is.
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
34,856
Reaction score
4,095
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,372
Reaction score
13,237
Points
2,290
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
Apparently prison time doesn't either. So should we stop sending criminals to prison too?
 

Norman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
28,832
Reaction score
11,459
Points
900
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
It does deter him from voting and making as bad decisions on my behalf. The deterrent is far less important, although exists.
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
55,393
Reaction score
13,904
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
No state, prior to the civil war, and 14th amendment....

barred those imprisoned from voting. Voting rights were never taken away from Felons.

It was not until the black man, was given a right to vote, did Southern States initially, change their laws to prevent felons, who were disproportionately black men, from voting.

One state followed the other, except my state of Maine, kept their law as it was prior to the civil war..... some say that our State should not boast for not being bigots because they kept their law the same, even after the black man could vote....

but only because Maine's population consisted of less than 1% of their population being black....the men in jail at the time, were near all white....there was no need to discriminate against the black citizens....
Nobody cares. The law is intended to produce the best nation that we can be. Not to conform to your vision of equality nonsense where criminals start making decisions for other people. It is absolutely clear to anyone with a brain that expanding the voting rights was a mistake. Voting should be for informed, smart Americans.

Regardless, the law is what it is.
History, isn't nonsense.
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,485
Reaction score
6,793
Points
1,815
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
the REAL "get real"---is---How about a study on just
how many of the people in jail are registered voters?
CURIOUS PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW
 

Dragonlady

Designing Woman
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
25,729
Reaction score
8,189
Points
910
Location
Niagara Escarpment
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
Jonathan Turley - he's that right wing loon who sided with Trump on his impeachment, and also testified against Bill Clinton on his impeachment, arguing that Trump should not be impeached for extortion of a foreign government to his own benefit, but Clinton should be removed from office for his perjury, which had no impact on the American people at all.
 

Norman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
28,832
Reaction score
11,459
Points
900
No state, prior to the civil war, and 14th amendment....

barred those imprisoned from voting. Voting rights were never taken away from Felons.

It was not until the black man, was given a right to vote, did Southern States initially, change their laws to prevent felons, who were disproportionately black men, from voting.

One state followed the other, except my state of Maine, kept their law as it was prior to the civil war..... some say that our State should not boast for not being bigots because they kept their law the same, even after the black man could vote....

but only because Maine's population consisted of less than 1% of their population being black....the men in jail at the time, were near all white....there was no need to discriminate against the black citizens....
Nobody cares. The law is intended to produce the best nation that we can be. Not to conform to your vision of equality nonsense where criminals start making decisions for other people. It is absolutely clear to anyone with a brain that expanding the voting rights was a mistake. Voting should be for informed, smart Americans.

Regardless, the law is what it is.
History, isn't nonsense.
History?

We aren't a universal democracy, the idea that felons would get to vote makes the founders turn in their graves. Democratic nonsense which is the reason we are going down hill. Don't wonder why the criminals are burning cities to ground, when they were the ones who elected the leaders.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,691
Reaction score
10,986
Points
2,040
This is how to get around the new Florida scheme to prevent former felons from voting in Florida.

Bloomberg is paying their fines and restitution. He's paying for over 31 thousand ex felons fines so that they can vote in the election this November.

So nearly 32 thousand more people in Florida will be able to vote in November.

I wonder how the governor and the republicans in Florida are going to prevent them from voting now. I'm sure they are working hard to come up with another scheme to take voting rights away from legal voters.

They lost their voting rights because they were criminals, and felons to boot, as part of their punishment for their crimes.

Should they get their 2nd amendment rights back as well?
Yes
Automatically? Get out of Jail and get your guns back?
If you are done with yer sentence and paid yer fines sure, why not?
because you still owe a debt. Most states you can petition to show you are back to being a productive member of society and are responsible again.

And if you are on parole you haven't finished your sentence.
Well he just said DONE WITH YOUR SENTENCE. So that would mean done with parole.

In Louisiana felons automatically get the right to vote back as soon as they finish parole or probation.
I'm ok with that. In the Florida case it seems it's about restitution or fines that were unpaid.
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,485
Reaction score
6,793
Points
1,815
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
Jonathan Turley - he's that right wing loon who sided with Trump on his impeachment, and also testified against Bill Clinton on his impeachment, arguing that Trump should not be impeached for extortion of a foreign government to his own benefit, but Clinton should be removed from office for his perjury, which had no impact on the American people at all.
It had impact on me. Clinton should have been impeached-----He as MILITARY COMMANDER IN
CHIEF and he had (UHM) carnal relations with
a subordinate women-----if it can happen to an
ADMIRAL, it should happen to him,. The good news
was that his act gave us insight into the hypocrisy of
mrs clinton. As to "Trump's extortion" ----sheeeesh ---business is business
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,902
Reaction score
19,249
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
Can't be.
There could never be anything illegal about rewarding people for voting, as long as the reward is not contingent upon who you voted for.
Agree, but that is not what Bloomberg is asking.... he's not asking them to vote at all....he's simply paying off their penalty debt, to make them free men, again.

So it appears.....?

They get their debt paid, regardless of whether they vote.
And why is he doing that? From the pureness of his heart?

I believe he even admitted to paying their debts for the obvious reason we all know. But it's irrelevant, since everybody knows the reason. One big Satan spawn we got there.
I don't think anyone believes that. But purity of heart has nothing to do with legal/illegal.
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,485
Reaction score
6,793
Points
1,815
No state, prior to the civil war, and 14th amendment....

barred those imprisoned from voting. Voting rights were never taken away from Felons.

It was not until the black man, was given a right to vote, did Southern States initially, change their laws to prevent felons, who were disproportionately black men, from voting.

One state followed the other, except my state of Maine, kept their law as it was prior to the civil war..... some say that our State should not boast for not being bigots because they kept their law the same, even after the black man could vote....

but only because Maine's population consisted of less than 1% of their population being black....the men in jail at the time, were near all white....there was no need to discriminate against the black citizens....
Nobody cares. The law is intended to produce the best nation that we can be. Not to conform to your vision of equality nonsense where criminals start making decisions for other people. It is absolutely clear to anyone with a brain that expanding the voting rights was a mistake. Voting should be for informed, smart Americans.

Regardless, the law is what it is.
History, isn't nonsense.
History?

We aren't a universal democracy, the idea that felons would get to vote makes the founders turn in their graves. Democratic nonsense which is the reason we are going down hill. Don't wonder why the criminals are burning cities to ground, when they were the ones who elected the leaders.
not so sure-----anyone out there need a Ph-d thesis idea-------find out the DEMOGRAPHICS of felons
who are registered voters
 

Norman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
28,832
Reaction score
11,459
Points
900
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
Can't be.
There could never be anything illegal about rewarding people for voting, as long as the reward is not contingent upon who you voted for.
Agree, but that is not what Bloomberg is asking.... he's not asking them to vote at all....he's simply paying off their penalty debt, to make them free men, again.

So it appears.....?

They get their debt paid, regardless of whether they vote.
And why is he doing that? From the pureness of his heart?

I believe he even admitted to paying their debts for the obvious reason we all know. But it's irrelevant, since everybody knows the reason. One big Satan spawn we got there.
I don't think anyone believes that. But purity of heart has nothing to do with legal/illegal.
Yes it does. If he gave the money to influence a vote, he himself is a felon, and not pure of heart.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,902
Reaction score
19,249
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
What he is doing is far more significant than giving someone a ride. These people could not vote at all if it wasn't for him.

It's absolutely scandalous and sums up the democrat non-morality in its entirety.
Not really...if people had no way to get to the polls they can't vote.
Yes, but people DO HAVE ways to get to the polls. Are you retarded? We don't yet live in the planned shithole of the democrats thank God.
And felons, conceivably have ways of paying fines and registering to vote - even without Bloomberg.
True, so why is Bloomberg doing this then?
Obviously in hopes of getting more Democrat voters out of it...much like Republicans are trying to prevent it, and get fewer Democrat voters. None of which is in itself illegal - motivation doesn't matter.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,902
Reaction score
19,249
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
Can't be.
There could never be anything illegal about rewarding people for voting, as long as the reward is not contingent upon who you voted for.
Agree, but that is not what Bloomberg is asking.... he's not asking them to vote at all....he's simply paying off their penalty debt, to make them free men, again.

So it appears.....?

They get their debt paid, regardless of whether they vote.
And why is he doing that? From the pureness of his heart?

I believe he even admitted to paying their debts for the obvious reason we all know. But it's irrelevant, since everybody knows the reason. One big Satan spawn we got there.
I don't think anyone believes that. But purity of heart has nothing to do with legal/illegal.
Bad decisions have a lot to do with a felon/not felon.
Which is irrelevant to this.
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,485
Reaction score
6,793
Points
1,815
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
What he is doing is far more significant than giving someone a ride. These people could not vote at all if it wasn't for him.

It's absolutely scandalous and sums up the democrat non-morality in its entirety.
Not really...if people had no way to get to the polls they can't vote.
Yes, but people DO HAVE ways to get to the polls. Are you retarded? We don't yet live in the planned shithole of the democrats thank God.
And felons, conceivably have ways of paying fines and registering to vote - even without Bloomberg.
True, so why is Bloomberg doing this then?
Obviously in hopes of getting more Democrat voters out of it...much like Republicans are trying to prevent it, and get fewer Democrat voters. None of which is in itself illegal - motivation doesn't matter.
how are republicans trying to prevent democrats from
voting.........LET ME COUNT THE WAYS ?????????
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,902
Reaction score
19,249
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
That is one argument that doesn't work - if jail time, death penalty, and fines aren't sufficient threats I seriously doubt voting is. Most of those people likely don't even think about voting.
 

Norman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
28,832
Reaction score
11,459
Points
900
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
What he is doing is far more significant than giving someone a ride. These people could not vote at all if it wasn't for him.

It's absolutely scandalous and sums up the democrat non-morality in its entirety.
Not really...if people had no way to get to the polls they can't vote.
Yes, but people DO HAVE ways to get to the polls. Are you retarded? We don't yet live in the planned shithole of the democrats thank God.
And felons, conceivably have ways of paying fines and registering to vote - even without Bloomberg.
True, so why is Bloomberg doing this then?
Obviously in hopes of getting more Democrat voters out of it...much like Republicans are trying to prevent it, and get fewer Democrat voters. None of which is in itself illegal - motivation doesn't matter.
how are republicans trying to prevent democrats from
voting.........LET ME COUNT THE WAYS ?????????
Thanks for admitting that democrats are criminals.

And yes, criminals obviously should not vote.
 

Norman

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
28,832
Reaction score
11,459
Points
900
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
That is one argument that doesn't work - if jail time, death penalty, and fines aren't sufficient threats I seriously doubt voting is. Most of those people likely don't even think about voting.
Exactly, and since they don't even think about voting, they should not vote. Which is what the law is about.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
85,902
Reaction score
19,249
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I wonder have democrats ever considered that they are just as wrong as people think they are - when their plan to victory involves getting elected by felons.

Obviously felons should not vote. There already are enough democrats who vote just like criminals - not for the benefit of the nation but to buy themselves free shit.
Why, assuming they did their time? The initial big push for felonies (other than the most egregious) to be ineligible for voting was racism. I don't care if they vote, just like I don't care if RWNJ racists vote. It's an American right.
You all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.

I'm OK with them rejoining society, but it lowers the disincentives for committing crimes.. So MAYBE -- the sentencing and parole procedures need to be tightened to compensate.

It's clear that this story about Bloomberg is correct.. They selected only the "Cheaper pay-outs" -- less than $2000.. And the process is not complete unless the FELON follows thru with a state appeal.. SO -- I'm CERTAIN that the organization that Bloomberg formed has VERBAL maybe physical contact with the recipient to make sure that they follow thru QUICKLY on submitting the paperwork in time for the Nov election. Time's running out in Florida to register.. Don't KNOW the date -- but even if they miss this election, that adds a city size chunk of Dem voters to the rolls. And when the felon ASKS where the money comes from -- Bloomberg craftily added a funding arm with prime sports/entertainment figures covering his money.. A bit like laundering the "quo"...

But it would only take ONE of these beneficiaries to rat them out and MAKE it completely illegal if they were TOLD that prominent Democrats were SOLELY behind the efforts "to help them vote"... But the rest of us KNOW -- this is already obvious. Sorry you dont get it..
does not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thing
You can take a felon to lunch-----but if you take him to lunch so he will vote for your candidate and especially if you are dumb enough to admit it---then you get to go to prison. Bloomberg has been in NY to long---he thinks he is above the law and can buy votes----Florida isn't New York

And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions that Bloomberg is particularly moral, but you guys have a ways to go to prove he is "buying" votes. So far - your arguements could apply to anyone who donates to this group and hopes they will vote a certain way afterwards.
Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.
Can you show me where he wrote that he is donating this money with the contingency that the recipients must vote for Biden? If he did that, then yes, he royally screwed himself.
And why are we going down this rabbit hole....................contingency or not makes no different...he admitted that he was donating the money in order to buy votes from felons who expected to net him around 30000 votes in florida basically....this is a FELONY in Florida. And btw under rico conspiracy charges when one is guilty all are--------so now we got Bloomberg and all of those other racist dem thugs like LeBron James...the only thing that may save them is that I dont think they actually gave out any of the money yet-----------
Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.

Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.

You can DONATE money - but regardless of what he says, it isn't a felony unless it can be shown that there was a quid pro quo attached to the money. And, an investigation might well turn that up but as of now I don't see strings attached saying you get the money only if you vote for xyz.
There doesn't have to be a quid pro quo. The intent of giving the money was to influence the person TO vote regardless of how they do. That's the way the law is written.
I *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.
Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts that

104.012 Consideration for registration; interference with registration; soliciting registrations for compensation; alteration of registration application.—
(1) Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash to any person in consideration for his or her becoming a registered voter commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This section shall not be interpreted, however, to exclude such services as transportation to the place of registration or baby-sitting in connection with the absence of an elector from home for registering.
However it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.

Bloomberg is in big trouble.
It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cash

So does it meet that?

Jonathan Turley gave a good analysis here: Did Bloomberg Commit A Crime In Paying Off The Debts Of Black and Hispanic Former Felons To Allow Them To Vote?

Section 1 refers to “bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly” as the means for influencing the votes. Paying the debt of former felons is a lawful action and would not satisfy any of those criteria. “Corruption” is not a colloquial but a legal term. It must refer to a clear nexus of securing unlawful derived benefits. The term is most often used in public corruption cases, but the Supreme Court has routinely rejected broad interpretations of this term (something that I discussed in the Trump impeachment). See McNally v. United States, Skilling v. United States, McCormick v. United States, and McDonnell v. United States.

That leaves Section 2. That provision can be broken into two parts. First, there is the language “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote.” Bloomberg is not securing a commitment of how these individuals would vote. It is true that they are assuming that Black and Hispanic ex-felons will vote for Biden but, unless Bloomberg or the Florida Rights and Restoration Coalition have expressly made such a quid pro quo with the beneficiaries, there is no purchase of a vote.

The second part of that provision allows a charge for any effort “to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote.” This language however is narrowly construed in criminal cases. It is not a “corrupt” purpose to clear the way for voting.

The memo (and the racial exclusion of other beneficiaries) does make these determinations more difficult since it undermines the public claim that Bloomberg was simply trying to restoring voting rights. However, they would need something more concrete to establish a corrupt purpose or a quid pro quo.

Of course, the racial exclusion of other votes and the memo could justify a criminal investigation shortly before the election. That would allow Florida investigators to seize material and interview staff members. Even if a basis for a criminal charge is not found, the memo destroys the high ground for Bloomberg in defending the right to vote for some, but not all, former felons.
That's ludicrous interpretation of the law. Obviously buying someone a Mercedes while not redeemable in cash directly, is still illegal. Thousands in direct cash is obviously illegal.
So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?

A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
How about a gift card that can't be redeemed.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Situations like this are exactly what the law was written for. I can't see how any American can defend what he is doing. Democrats are truly disgusting.
The law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOL
you believe that courts should not have the power to
impose fines? People who punch meter maids in the face should not have to pay a fine? GOOD----and people should not have to pay rent or any bills at all?
Fines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
I wish I had more information. Do all people who go to jail ALSO have fines? I am not into conspiracy theory. I cannot accept the idea that law makers said
"let's see how we can keep poor people (minorities of
course) from voting----AHA!!!! if they do not pay fines." Also---I wonder how much those fines are---eg what are the "court costs"? Why not do away with fines ALTOGETHER? I don't like paying fines either
Nobody likes it. But the idea of putting up deterrents to crime is the only way to control it. What the Blooming Idiot wants to do is remove that deterrent.
come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at least
That is one argument that doesn't work - if jail time, death penalty, and fines aren't sufficient threats I seriously doubt voting is. Most of those people likely don't even think about voting.
Exactly, and since they don't even think about voting, they should not vote. Which is what the law is about.

Is that how rights work in your world? So...if a person doesn't even think about owning a gun, he shouldn't be allowed to?

Voting is a right, whether or not you choose to exercise it.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List