right ^^^^^ in their entire livesThat 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.come on. like a threat to not get to vote deters a guy from buying or selling cocaine. get real at leastNobody 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.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 saidFines are one thing, but denying voting based on fines is entirely and completely wrong.you believe that courts should not have the power toThe law is written to keep poor minority voters from voting when they cant' pay fines. well at least you're honest. LOLHow about a gift card that can't be redeemed.So you think Turley is ludicrous in this?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.It states this though: Any person who gives anything of value that is redeemable in cashHowever it does not exempt paying for someone's fines in an attempt to get them to vote for democrat.Amazingly, the fla law actually exempts thatI *think* you are wrong about that. that means someone, renting a bus, to drive people to the polls to vote is breaking the law.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.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-----------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.Who needs to prove it, he wrote about it.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.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 Yorkdoes not seem illegal to me------take a felon to lunch kinda thingYou all for restoring their gun rights also? How about running for political office.. We DO need more professional criminals in politics.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.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.
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..
And you and everyone else should know deep down inside that buying votes is illegal and immoral.
Not when you are doing it to buy votes---then it becomes a felony.Anyone can pay fines and fees for anyone.
Nothing illegal. Quite noble of Mayor Mike, in fact.
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.
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.
Bloomberg is in big trouble.
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.
A Mercedes by the way is certainly redeemable in cash. Sell it.
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.
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?
It gives an easy mechanism by which government can explicitly disenfranchise, when government should never be able to disenfranchise anyone at all.
"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