Florida AG calls for investigation into $16M Bloomberg donations to help felons vote

[busybee01]

Always about race. Bloomberg is trying to influence an election maybe in violation to state law.

Sorry, but if you lose your vote via felonious behavior it's on you to pay back what the judge says for you to pay back.

That was not the intent of the voters who voted to restore the voting rights of felons.

It will be fun to watch you guys go after Bloomberg... his lawyers will crush you like bugs.

It's comical watching you cheer for the very plutorcrat type you usually bitch about.

But I expect a complete lack of moral fiber and consistency from you.

That plutocrat is using his money to help people.

Why does that upset you? I thought the conservatives of the country liked charity?

Joe rails against plutocrats but gives Bloomberg a pass, it's called hypocrisy.

Joe is going to raise Bloomberg’s taxes. He’s not getting a pass.

So why are you so scared that more people get to vote?

It's about the law, and Bloomberg may have broken it.

You only want them to vote because Bloomberg is paying them off to vote for Biden.

There’s zero evidence any law was broken. You’re only accusing Bloomberg of breaking the law because they may vote Biden.

It’s not illegal to pay someone’s fines.

It's illegal to influence someone's vote via monetary gain.

Bloomberg pays for the fees allowing the person to vote
Bloomberg supports Biden.

Not too hard to connect the dots here.

Driving someone to the polls allows them to vote.

Is it illegal for me to drive an elderly person to a polling place?

That's not paying them (or paying off their debts) to allow them to vote.

It’s providing something of monetary value to allow them to vote. No different.

Very different, and of usually very different overall value.

Go ahead and describe what’s so different.

As for the value, no doubt it’s different, however the law doesn’t say anything about the overall value. So according to the law, that would be irrelevant. It’s as illegal to give someone five dollars to go vote as five thousand.

Many bribery laws allow small gifts on under say $25 in value, this allows things like pens and bags at trade shows to be given to public employees without risk of bribery charges being brought about.

The concept is the same here, plus there is the overall monetary value of the service or payoff. A $15 ride is not paying off $5000 in restitution.

But keep defending shady practices because it helps your side, you dried up old miserable SJW twat.

Ha! Show me where it says that the relevant law and I’ll take your point seriously.

It’s not shady, you just don’t like that some people have a chance to vote against Trump

Let the investigation figure that one out.

And if they were all leaning Trump i'm sure you would be against it you no life cumsucking SJW shill.

You’re disgusting.

You're a hack.

You just make shit up and then act really nasty when called out.

I didn't make anything up, but you will spread your cheeks for any Democratic play no matter how underhanded or illegal.

You made up some nonsense about how monetary gifts are acceptable if it’s under a certain amount, which has zero relevance on the discussion.

It’s not underhanded or illegal. You’re just upset that people are getting to vote, which conservatives really hate and Floridian Republicans have been trying to prevent.

It's how many bribery laws work. I've been told it in my ethics courses I have to take very year.

Again

1. I pay $$ in the hundreds and thousands for you to vote
2. You know I support Biden
3, wink wink, nudge nudge.

You only want them to vote because they are being paid to vote against Trump.


And just so you known how much I despise you.

Colfax takes it up the ass, doo dah, doo dah
Colfax takes it up the ass, oh dee doo dah day!

You need to take more ethics courses. They are not being paid to vote against Trump. The hope is that they will. There are no guarantees.

Bullshit. Of course you support this because you want Biden to win whatever the cost.

How does it feel to have Bloomberg's cock so far up your ass you can taste the tip?

Why don't you get your tongue out of Trump's dick. The voters in Florida overwhelmingly voted to allow felons to regain the right to vote. That means that even Trump supporters agreed with that

 

[okfine]

Maybe Bloomberg should have thought about the fact that buying votes is illegal....

Florida AG calls for investigation into $16M Bloomberg donations to help felons vote

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody is calling for further investigation into whether billionaire Mike Bloomberg violated a state statute when he donated $16 million to help felons vote in the upcoming presidential election.

www.foxnews.com

Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody is calling for further investigation into whether billionaire Mike Bloomberg violated a state statute when he reportedly raised $16 million to help felons vote in the upcoming presidential election.


“Today, I sent a letter to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into potential violations of election laws," Moody said in a statement provided to Fox News.

GAETZ CALLS FOR ELECTION BRIBERY PROBE OF BLOOMBERG OVER PLEDGE TO PAY FLORIDA FELONS' FINES

"I have instructed the statewide prosecutor to work with law enforcement and any statewide grand jury that the governor may call," she said.

Just a day before, Bloomberg announced the hefty sum would go toward paying restitution and court fines that prevent Florida felons from voting.

House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla. pounced on the news of Bloomberg's donation Tuesday night, urging Moody to take up a criminal investigation against Bloomberg,

"[Under Florida law] it’s a third-degree felony for someone to either directly or indirectly provide something of value to impact whether or not someone votes," Gaetz told Fox News' "Hannity." "So the question is whether or not paying off someone’s fines and legal obligations counts as something of value, and it clearly does."

Pay my fine so I can vote and I will never forget it.

 

[meaner gene]

Maybe Bloomberg should have thought about the fact that buying votes is illegal....


"[Under Florida law] it’s a third-degree felony for someone to either directly or indirectly provide something of value to impact whether or not someone votes," Gaetz told Fox News' "Hannity." "So the question is whether or not paying off someone’s fines and legal obligations counts as something of value, and it clearly does."

Don't be ridiculous. What Bloomberg is doing is no different from a bail bondsman posting bond, thus allowing somebody to get out of jail and vote.

 

[martybegan]

It's only buying votes if he is paying for the vote.

I mean, hypothetically, all these people who had their fees paid off could still vote Republican... Can't see why they would, but it's a mystery to me why anyone making less than six figures votes Republican.

The real problem here is the people of Florida CLEARLY made their wishes known by voting to restore the voting rights of felons not convicted of violent offenses. The GOP Legistlature cheated to prevent them from voting, and Bloomberg is just helping them restore their rights.

Sounds reasonable to me.

There was nothing wrong with what Bloomberg did. He made a blanket gift. Not one based on party affiliation or loyalty. Trumpers are only crying foul because their attempt at cheating again has been foiled.

Bloomberg pays for them to have their voting rights restored
Bloomberg supports Biden

Wink, Wink, nudge, nudge.

You need more than that.

That's what an investigation is for.

I'm sure if some lawbreaking is found you will find an excuse for it.

There is no lawbreaking involved. The facts are clear. There is no need for a investigation. This is nothing but harassment.

1. I pay for you to vote
2. I support Biden
3. Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge.

He is paying to give them the opportunity to vote. Your wink wink nod nod is broken.

1. he pays for them to be able to vote again
2. He supports Biden vehemently
3. 1+1= attempt to influence their votes.

 

[martybegan]

Always about race. Bloomberg is trying to influence an election maybe in violation to state law.

Sorry, but if you lose your vote via felonious behavior it's on you to pay back what the judge says for you to pay back.

That was not the intent of the voters who voted to restore the voting rights of felons.

It will be fun to watch you guys go after Bloomberg... his lawyers will crush you like bugs.

It's comical watching you cheer for the very plutorcrat type you usually bitch about.

But I expect a complete lack of moral fiber and consistency from you.

That plutocrat is using his money to help people.

Why does that upset you? I thought the conservatives of the country liked charity?

Joe rails against plutocrats but gives Bloomberg a pass, it's called hypocrisy.

Joe is going to raise Bloomberg’s taxes. He’s not getting a pass.

So why are you so scared that more people get to vote?

It's about the law, and Bloomberg may have broken it.

You only want them to vote because Bloomberg is paying them off to vote for Biden.

There’s zero evidence any law was broken. You’re only accusing Bloomberg of breaking the law because they may vote Biden.

It’s not illegal to pay someone’s fines.

It's illegal to influence someone's vote via monetary gain.

Bloomberg pays for the fees allowing the person to vote
Bloomberg supports Biden.

Not too hard to connect the dots here.

Driving someone to the polls allows them to vote.

Is it illegal for me to drive an elderly person to a polling place?

That's not paying them (or paying off their debts) to allow them to vote.

It’s providing something of monetary value to allow them to vote. No different.

Very different, and of usually very different overall value.

Go ahead and describe what’s so different.

As for the value, no doubt it’s different, however the law doesn’t say anything about the overall value. So according to the law, that would be irrelevant. It’s as illegal to give someone five dollars to go vote as five thousand.

Giving someone the opportunity to vote is not the same thing. It is only illegal to pay someone to vote for a particular candidate.

This is practically paying someone to vote for a particular candidate.

It is not.

It sure as hell is, you only like it because you think they are Biden voters and Florida is a swing state.

 

[martybegan]

Always about race. Bloomberg is trying to influence an election maybe in violation to state law.

Sorry, but if you lose your vote via felonious behavior it's on you to pay back what the judge says for you to pay back.

That was not the intent of the voters who voted to restore the voting rights of felons.

It will be fun to watch you guys go after Bloomberg... his lawyers will crush you like bugs.

It's comical watching you cheer for the very plutorcrat type you usually bitch about.

But I expect a complete lack of moral fiber and consistency from you.

That plutocrat is using his money to help people.

Why does that upset you? I thought the conservatives of the country liked charity?

Joe rails against plutocrats but gives Bloomberg a pass, it's called hypocrisy.

Joe is going to raise Bloomberg’s taxes. He’s not getting a pass.

So why are you so scared that more people get to vote?

It's about the law, and Bloomberg may have broken it.

You only want them to vote because Bloomberg is paying them off to vote for Biden.

There’s zero evidence any law was broken. You’re only accusing Bloomberg of breaking the law because they may vote Biden.

It’s not illegal to pay someone’s fines.

It's illegal to influence someone's vote via monetary gain.

Bloomberg pays for the fees allowing the person to vote
Bloomberg supports Biden.

Not too hard to connect the dots here.

Driving someone to the polls allows them to vote.

Is it illegal for me to drive an elderly person to a polling place?

That's not paying them (or paying off their debts) to allow them to vote.

It’s providing something of monetary value to allow them to vote. No different.

Very different, and of usually very different overall value.

Go ahead and describe what’s so different.

As for the value, no doubt it’s different, however the law doesn’t say anything about the overall value. So according to the law, that would be irrelevant. It’s as illegal to give someone five dollars to go vote as five thousand.

Many bribery laws allow small gifts on under say $25 in value, this allows things like pens and bags at trade shows to be given to public employees without risk of bribery charges being brought about.

The concept is the same here, plus there is the overall monetary value of the service or payoff. A $15 ride is not paying off $5000 in restitution.

But keep defending shady practices because it helps your side, you dried up old miserable SJW twat.

Ha! Show me where it says that the relevant law and I’ll take your point seriously.

It’s not shady, you just don’t like that some people have a chance to vote against Trump

Let the investigation figure that one out.

And if they were all leaning Trump i'm sure you would be against it you no life cumsucking SJW shill.

You’re disgusting.

You're a hack.

You just make shit up and then act really nasty when called out.

I didn't make anything up, but you will spread your cheeks for any Democratic play no matter how underhanded or illegal.

You made up some nonsense about how monetary gifts are acceptable if it’s under a certain amount, which has zero relevance on the discussion.

It’s not underhanded or illegal. You’re just upset that people are getting to vote, which conservatives really hate and Floridian Republicans have been trying to prevent.

It's how many bribery laws work. I've been told it in my ethics courses I have to take very year.

Again

1. I pay $$ in the hundreds and thousands for you to vote
2. You know I support Biden
3, wink wink, nudge nudge.

You only want them to vote because they are being paid to vote against Trump.


And just so you known how much I despise you.

Colfax takes it up the ass, doo dah, doo dah
Colfax takes it up the ass, oh dee doo dah day!

You need to take more ethics courses. They are not being paid to vote against Trump. The hope is that they will. There are no guarantees.

Bullshit. Of course you support this because you want Biden to win whatever the cost.

How does it feel to have Bloomberg's cock so far up your ass you can taste the tip?

Why don't you get your tongue out of Trump's dick. The voters in Florida overwhelmingly voted to allow felons to regain the right to vote. That means that even Trump supporters agreed with that

And the legislature, elected by the people, enacted a law doing that, but requiring them to pay off any debts, fines, or resitituion.

Now Bloomberg is buying votes via paying off the money owed up to $1,500.00

 

[meaner gene]

1. he pays for them to be able to vote again
2. He supports Biden vehemently
3. 1+1= attempt to influence their votes.

If Bloomberg had a an ideological qualifier before being eligible, then you might have a point, but a program that applies to democrats and republicans equally, means there is no intention to influence their votes. No more than the groups that offer rides to the polls, or offer other voter assistance.

You confuse get out the vote, with influence the vote.

 

[meaner gene]

And the legislature, elected by the people, enacted a law doing that, but requiring them to pay off any debts, fines, or resitituion.

Now Bloomberg is buying votes via paying off the money owed up to $1,500.00

The people by over 60% wanted felons voting rights restored. The legislature worked against the will of the people by placing additional requirements.

This is no different than legislators fighting against a constitutional amendment approved by the will of the people,

 

[meaner gene]

And the legislature, elected by the people, enacted a law doing that, but requiring them to pay off any debts, fines, or resitituion.

Legislature elected by the people, that doesn't listen to the people. The people voted overwhelmingly to restore felon voter rights.

This is no different than somebody hiring a lawyer to represent him, and when he goes into court, he pleads "not guilty", only to have the lawyer he hired change his plea to "guilty".

And defending that action on the grounds the guy hired the lawyer.

 

[JoeB131]

The legislature represents the people.

Then they should have honored what they asked for in a referendum.

Again, if you guys spent half the time appealing to people you spend trying to cheat them out of votes, you might make some progress.

 

[colfax_m]

They could also sprout antlers and fart unicorn dust.

They could. Frankly, it would make about as much sense for anyone voting for Trump.

They are getting their fines paid so they CAN vote, and they know who is paying the fines for them, and they know who said person supports.

None of which compels them to vote for that person.

The reality is, the REpublicans are the ones who don't want ex-felons to vote because they know they will vote Democratic. It's just another form of voter suppression.

Bullshit.

And the only reason Bloomie is paying their fines and restitution is because he knows they will vote democrat, and he's paying for it.

How does Bloomberg know who they will vote for?

Then why buy their voting rights back?

Refusing to answer the question again.

Such a snowflake.

He knows how most of them will vote, that's why he's buying their vote.

And again you use the term snowflake wrong, twat.

How does he know how they will vote?

A snowflake refuses to answer questions because they’re too scared of the implications of the answers.

He doesn't have to know how every single one votes, he just knows they are more likely to vote for Biden because Republicans are always harder on criminals.

What am I scared of?

Do you agree that criminals are more likely to vote for Democrats? Why so?

Is it because they are usually weak on crime?

So the answer is that Bloomberg doesn't know how anyone's going to vote.

Sure, felons are more likely to vote Democratic, but as you said that may very well be because of policy disagreements which is certainly not Bloomberg's fault, therefore he cannot be held liable for the actions of Republicans.

As we can see, this isn't about criminality, it's about Republican fear of being voted out of office.

He assumes they will vote democrat, otherwise why is he paying for them to vote?

No, it's about Bloomberg potentially breaking the law trying to buy votes for Democrats.

And of course, as always, go fuck yourself with Kamala's extra large dildo.

So he doesn't actually know how they'll vote.

How can he be accused of buying votes if he doesn't know who they're voting for?

He can't. You're entire accusation crumbles.

He's betting on them voting democrat, why else would he pay for them to get their voting rights back?

Again, why is he paying for them to be able to vote?

He can “bet on” whatever he wants. Given he doesn’t know who is voting for who, it cannot be considered buying votes.

His intent is for them to vote for Biden. Most of them will. That's a plausible chain showing corrupting influence on their vote, and that is what the Statue prohibits.

For starters, you can't prove intent. Second, you can't prove influence. Third, you can't prove CORRUPT influence.

This is just Republicans shitting their pants because they thought they were going to prevent people from voting and now that they might be able to, are worried that those people are going to be pissed at them.

proving intent is a major component of any criminal prosecution. proving influence is part of bribery prosecutions, and proving it is corrupt is part of the whole fighting corruption thing.

And you have no evidence of intent. No evidence of influence. No evidence of corruption.

And that's why they have to investigate.

No predicate for investigation.

Plenty of reason for an investigation. Motive, actions, money changing hands, voters being influenced due to it.

Failed to provide sufficient cause to suspect any corrupt influence has been exerted.

This is merely criminalizing political support for an opposing candidate. How very Stalin-esque of you.

Not support, paying money to get them to vote for your candidate.

And you’ve failed to provide any reason to suspect he’s paying them to do anything.

Other than he's paying them to do something, i.e. vote?

Show me where he's made the payment contingent on them voting.

You can't which is why you cannot accuse him of paying them to do something.

 

[Aletheia4u]

Well the Dems has been pandering to the felons. Maybe Pres. Trump needs to get with the program and start pandering too.

Biden: 'Nobody should be in jail for a nonviolent crime'

The candidate pointed out the number of commutations that took place when he was vice president.

www.politico.com

Biden: World Leaders Don't Want My Staff In The Room Anymore

Biden: World Leaders Don't Want My Staff In The Room Anymore

www.huffpost.com

 

[martybegan]

1. he pays for them to be able to vote again
2. He supports Biden vehemently
3. 1+1= attempt to influence their votes.

If Bloomberg had a an ideological qualifier before being eligible, then you might have a point, but a program that applies to democrats and republicans equally, means there is no intention to influence their votes. No more than the groups that offer rides to the polls, or offer other voter assistance.

You confuse get out the vote, with influence the vote.

Again, He supports Biden, he pays for them to be able to vote again.

 

[martybegan]

And the legislature, elected by the people, enacted a law doing that, but requiring them to pay off any debts, fines, or resitituion.

Now Bloomberg is buying votes via paying off the money owed up to $1,500.00

The people by over 60% wanted felons voting rights restored. The legislature worked against the will of the people by placing additional requirements.

This is no different than legislators fighting against a constitutional amendment approved by the will of the people,

The petition didn't say how it was to be done, that was the job of the legislature, who are also elected by the people.

 

[martybegan]

And the legislature, elected by the people, enacted a law doing that, but requiring them to pay off any debts, fines, or resitituion.

Legislature elected by the people, that doesn't listen to the people. The people voted overwhelmingly to restore felon voter rights.

This is no different than somebody hiring a lawyer to represent him, and when he goes into court, he pleads "not guilty", only to have the lawyer he hired change his plea to "guilty".

And defending that action on the grounds the guy hired the lawyer.

The ballot proposal didn't include how it was to be done, which was left up to the legislature.

Not the same thing at all, the ballot proposal was for a concept, not an actual piece of legislation to enact felon voter rights.

 

[martybegan]

The legislature represents the people.

Then they should have honored what they asked for in a referendum.

Again, if you guys spent half the time appealing to people you spend trying to cheat them out of votes, you might make some progress.

What was the exact wording of the referendum?

No. 4 Constitutional Amendment Article VI, Section 4. Voting Restoration Amendment This amendment restores the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation. The amendment would not apply to those convicted of murder or sexual offenses, who would continue to be permanently barred from voting unless the Governor and Cabinet vote to restore their voting rights on a case by case basis.

Note the term "all terms of their sentence, including parole and probation". It does not exclude requiring fines and fees.

 

[martybegan]

They could also sprout antlers and fart unicorn dust.

They could. Frankly, it would make about as much sense for anyone voting for Trump.

They are getting their fines paid so they CAN vote, and they know who is paying the fines for them, and they know who said person supports.

None of which compels them to vote for that person.

The reality is, the REpublicans are the ones who don't want ex-felons to vote because they know they will vote Democratic. It's just another form of voter suppression.

Bullshit.

And the only reason Bloomie is paying their fines and restitution is because he knows they will vote democrat, and he's paying for it.

How does Bloomberg know who they will vote for?

Then why buy their voting rights back?

Refusing to answer the question again.

Such a snowflake.

He knows how most of them will vote, that's why he's buying their vote.

And again you use the term snowflake wrong, twat.

How does he know how they will vote?

A snowflake refuses to answer questions because they’re too scared of the implications of the answers.

He doesn't have to know how every single one votes, he just knows they are more likely to vote for Biden because Republicans are always harder on criminals.

What am I scared of?

Do you agree that criminals are more likely to vote for Democrats? Why so?

Is it because they are usually weak on crime?

So the answer is that Bloomberg doesn't know how anyone's going to vote.

Sure, felons are more likely to vote Democratic, but as you said that may very well be because of policy disagreements which is certainly not Bloomberg's fault, therefore he cannot be held liable for the actions of Republicans.

As we can see, this isn't about criminality, it's about Republican fear of being voted out of office.

He assumes they will vote democrat, otherwise why is he paying for them to vote?

No, it's about Bloomberg potentially breaking the law trying to buy votes for Democrats.

And of course, as always, go fuck yourself with Kamala's extra large dildo.

So he doesn't actually know how they'll vote.

How can he be accused of buying votes if he doesn't know who they're voting for?

He can't. You're entire accusation crumbles.

He's betting on them voting democrat, why else would he pay for them to get their voting rights back?

Again, why is he paying for them to be able to vote?

He can “bet on” whatever he wants. Given he doesn’t know who is voting for who, it cannot be considered buying votes.

His intent is for them to vote for Biden. Most of them will. That's a plausible chain showing corrupting influence on their vote, and that is what the Statue prohibits.

For starters, you can't prove intent. Second, you can't prove influence. Third, you can't prove CORRUPT influence.

This is just Republicans shitting their pants because they thought they were going to prevent people from voting and now that they might be able to, are worried that those people are going to be pissed at them.

proving intent is a major component of any criminal prosecution. proving influence is part of bribery prosecutions, and proving it is corrupt is part of the whole fighting corruption thing.

And you have no evidence of intent. No evidence of influence. No evidence of corruption.

And that's why they have to investigate.

No predicate for investigation.

Plenty of reason for an investigation. Motive, actions, money changing hands, voters being influenced due to it.

Failed to provide sufficient cause to suspect any corrupt influence has been exerted.

This is merely criminalizing political support for an opposing candidate. How very Stalin-esque of you.

Not support, paying money to get them to vote for your candidate.

And you’ve failed to provide any reason to suspect he’s paying them to do anything.

Other than he's paying them to do something, i.e. vote?

Show me where he's made the payment contingent on them voting.

You can't which is why you cannot accuse him of paying them to do something.

He's paying for them to vote, it doesn't have to be contingent, all it has to be is influence according to the Election law in question.

Him supporting Biden and his paying for their ballot isn't influence?

 

[colfax_m]

They could also sprout antlers and fart unicorn dust.

They could. Frankly, it would make about as much sense for anyone voting for Trump.

They are getting their fines paid so they CAN vote, and they know who is paying the fines for them, and they know who said person supports.

None of which compels them to vote for that person.

The reality is, the REpublicans are the ones who don't want ex-felons to vote because they know they will vote Democratic. It's just another form of voter suppression.

Bullshit.

And the only reason Bloomie is paying their fines and restitution is because he knows they will vote democrat, and he's paying for it.

How does Bloomberg know who they will vote for?

Then why buy their voting rights back?

Refusing to answer the question again.

Such a snowflake.

He knows how most of them will vote, that's why he's buying their vote.

And again you use the term snowflake wrong, twat.

How does he know how they will vote?

A snowflake refuses to answer questions because they’re too scared of the implications of the answers.

He doesn't have to know how every single one votes, he just knows they are more likely to vote for Biden because Republicans are always harder on criminals.

What am I scared of?

Do you agree that criminals are more likely to vote for Democrats? Why so?

Is it because they are usually weak on crime?

So the answer is that Bloomberg doesn't know how anyone's going to vote.

Sure, felons are more likely to vote Democratic, but as you said that may very well be because of policy disagreements which is certainly not Bloomberg's fault, therefore he cannot be held liable for the actions of Republicans.

As we can see, this isn't about criminality, it's about Republican fear of being voted out of office.

He assumes they will vote democrat, otherwise why is he paying for them to vote?

No, it's about Bloomberg potentially breaking the law trying to buy votes for Democrats.

And of course, as always, go fuck yourself with Kamala's extra large dildo.

So he doesn't actually know how they'll vote.

How can he be accused of buying votes if he doesn't know who they're voting for?

He can't. You're entire accusation crumbles.

He's betting on them voting democrat, why else would he pay for them to get their voting rights back?

Again, why is he paying for them to be able to vote?

He can “bet on” whatever he wants. Given he doesn’t know who is voting for who, it cannot be considered buying votes.

His intent is for them to vote for Biden. Most of them will. That's a plausible chain showing corrupting influence on their vote, and that is what the Statue prohibits.

For starters, you can't prove intent. Second, you can't prove influence. Third, you can't prove CORRUPT influence.

This is just Republicans shitting their pants because they thought they were going to prevent people from voting and now that they might be able to, are worried that those people are going to be pissed at them.

proving intent is a major component of any criminal prosecution. proving influence is part of bribery prosecutions, and proving it is corrupt is part of the whole fighting corruption thing.

And you have no evidence of intent. No evidence of influence. No evidence of corruption.

And that's why they have to investigate.

No predicate for investigation.

Plenty of reason for an investigation. Motive, actions, money changing hands, voters being influenced due to it.

Failed to provide sufficient cause to suspect any corrupt influence has been exerted.

This is merely criminalizing political support for an opposing candidate. How very Stalin-esque of you.

Not support, paying money to get them to vote for your candidate.

And you’ve failed to provide any reason to suspect he’s paying them to do anything.

Other than he's paying them to do something, i.e. vote?

Show me where he's made the payment contingent on them voting.

You can't which is why you cannot accuse him of paying them to do something.

He's paying for them to vote, it doesn't have to be contingent, all it has to be is influence according to the Election law in question.

Him supporting Biden and his paying for their ballot isn't influence?

Of course it has to be contingent. Otherwise he’s not paying for anything. Buying something means there’s an agreement. There is no agreement.

If you weren’t so committed to this nonsense, you’d agree.

 

[martybegan]

They could also sprout antlers and fart unicorn dust.

They could. Frankly, it would make about as much sense for anyone voting for Trump.

They are getting their fines paid so they CAN vote, and they know who is paying the fines for them, and they know who said person supports.

None of which compels them to vote for that person.

The reality is, the REpublicans are the ones who don't want ex-felons to vote because they know they will vote Democratic. It's just another form of voter suppression.

Bullshit.

And the only reason Bloomie is paying their fines and restitution is because he knows they will vote democrat, and he's paying for it.

How does Bloomberg know who they will vote for?

Then why buy their voting rights back?

Refusing to answer the question again.

Such a snowflake.

He knows how most of them will vote, that's why he's buying their vote.

And again you use the term snowflake wrong, twat.

How does he know how they will vote?

A snowflake refuses to answer questions because they’re too scared of the implications of the answers.

He doesn't have to know how every single one votes, he just knows they are more likely to vote for Biden because Republicans are always harder on criminals.

What am I scared of?

Do you agree that criminals are more likely to vote for Democrats? Why so?

Is it because they are usually weak on crime?

So the answer is that Bloomberg doesn't know how anyone's going to vote.

Sure, felons are more likely to vote Democratic, but as you said that may very well be because of policy disagreements which is certainly not Bloomberg's fault, therefore he cannot be held liable for the actions of Republicans.

As we can see, this isn't about criminality, it's about Republican fear of being voted out of office.

He assumes they will vote democrat, otherwise why is he paying for them to vote?

No, it's about Bloomberg potentially breaking the law trying to buy votes for Democrats.

And of course, as always, go fuck yourself with Kamala's extra large dildo.

So he doesn't actually know how they'll vote.

How can he be accused of buying votes if he doesn't know who they're voting for?

He can't. You're entire accusation crumbles.

He's betting on them voting democrat, why else would he pay for them to get their voting rights back?

Again, why is he paying for them to be able to vote?

He can “bet on” whatever he wants. Given he doesn’t know who is voting for who, it cannot be considered buying votes.

His intent is for them to vote for Biden. Most of them will. That's a plausible chain showing corrupting influence on their vote, and that is what the Statue prohibits.

For starters, you can't prove intent. Second, you can't prove influence. Third, you can't prove CORRUPT influence.

This is just Republicans shitting their pants because they thought they were going to prevent people from voting and now that they might be able to, are worried that those people are going to be pissed at them.

proving intent is a major component of any criminal prosecution. proving influence is part of bribery prosecutions, and proving it is corrupt is part of the whole fighting corruption thing.

And you have no evidence of intent. No evidence of influence. No evidence of corruption.

And that's why they have to investigate.

No predicate for investigation.

Plenty of reason for an investigation. Motive, actions, money changing hands, voters being influenced due to it.

Failed to provide sufficient cause to suspect any corrupt influence has been exerted.

This is merely criminalizing political support for an opposing candidate. How very Stalin-esque of you.

Not support, paying money to get them to vote for your candidate.

And you’ve failed to provide any reason to suspect he’s paying them to do anything.

Other than he's paying them to do something, i.e. vote?

Show me where he's made the payment contingent on them voting.

You can't which is why you cannot accuse him of paying them to do something.

He's paying for them to vote, it doesn't have to be contingent, all it has to be is influence according to the Election law in question.

Him supporting Biden and his paying for their ballot isn't influence?

Of course it has to be contingent. Otherwise he’s not paying for anything. Buying something means there’s an agreement. There is no agreement.

If you weren’t so committed to this nonsense, you’d agree.

You are imposing limitations that are not part of the law. Any form of monetary compensation for action doesn't have to include an agreement written in blood.

I pay for your family to go on vacation, you give me that juicy government contract, wink wink, nudge nudge.

 

[colfax_m]

They could also sprout antlers and fart unicorn dust.

They could. Frankly, it would make about as much sense for anyone voting for Trump.

They are getting their fines paid so they CAN vote, and they know who is paying the fines for them, and they know who said person supports.

None of which compels them to vote for that person.

The reality is, the REpublicans are the ones who don't want ex-felons to vote because they know they will vote Democratic. It's just another form of voter suppression.

Bullshit.

And the only reason Bloomie is paying their fines and restitution is because he knows they will vote democrat, and he's paying for it.

How does Bloomberg know who they will vote for?

Then why buy their voting rights back?

Refusing to answer the question again.

Such a snowflake.

He knows how most of them will vote, that's why he's buying their vote.

And again you use the term snowflake wrong, twat.

How does he know how they will vote?

A snowflake refuses to answer questions because they’re too scared of the implications of the answers.

He doesn't have to know how every single one votes, he just knows they are more likely to vote for Biden because Republicans are always harder on criminals.

What am I scared of?

Do you agree that criminals are more likely to vote for Democrats? Why so?

Is it because they are usually weak on crime?

So the answer is that Bloomberg doesn't know how anyone's going to vote.

Sure, felons are more likely to vote Democratic, but as you said that may very well be because of policy disagreements which is certainly not Bloomberg's fault, therefore he cannot be held liable for the actions of Republicans.

As we can see, this isn't about criminality, it's about Republican fear of being voted out of office.

He assumes they will vote democrat, otherwise why is he paying for them to vote?

No, it's about Bloomberg potentially breaking the law trying to buy votes for Democrats.

And of course, as always, go fuck yourself with Kamala's extra large dildo.

So he doesn't actually know how they'll vote.

How can he be accused of buying votes if he doesn't know who they're voting for?

He can't. You're entire accusation crumbles.

He's betting on them voting democrat, why else would he pay for them to get their voting rights back?

Again, why is he paying for them to be able to vote?

He can “bet on” whatever he wants. Given he doesn’t know who is voting for who, it cannot be considered buying votes.

His intent is for them to vote for Biden. Most of them will. That's a plausible chain showing corrupting influence on their vote, and that is what the Statue prohibits.

For starters, you can't prove intent. Second, you can't prove influence. Third, you can't prove CORRUPT influence.

This is just Republicans shitting their pants because they thought they were going to prevent people from voting and now that they might be able to, are worried that those people are going to be pissed at them.

proving intent is a major component of any criminal prosecution. proving influence is part of bribery prosecutions, and proving it is corrupt is part of the whole fighting corruption thing.

And you have no evidence of intent. No evidence of influence. No evidence of corruption.

And that's why they have to investigate.

No predicate for investigation.

Plenty of reason for an investigation. Motive, actions, money changing hands, voters being influenced due to it.

Failed to provide sufficient cause to suspect any corrupt influence has been exerted.

This is merely criminalizing political support for an opposing candidate. How very Stalin-esque of you.

Not support, paying money to get them to vote for your candidate.

And you’ve failed to provide any reason to suspect he’s paying them to do anything.

Other than he's paying them to do something, i.e. vote?

Show me where he's made the payment contingent on them voting.

You can't which is why you cannot accuse him of paying them to do something.

He's paying for them to vote, it doesn't have to be contingent, all it has to be is influence according to the Election law in question.

Him supporting Biden and his paying for their ballot isn't influence?

Of course it has to be contingent. Otherwise he’s not paying for anything. Buying something means there’s an agreement. There is no agreement.

If you weren’t so committed to this nonsense, you’d agree.

You are imposing limitations that are not part of the law. Any form of monetary compensation for action doesn't have to include an agreement written in blood.

I pay for your family to go on vacation, you give me that juicy government contract, wink wink, nudge nudge.

Of course it’s part of the law. Buying and corrupt influence mean things and you are ignoring the plain language.

Compensation for an action requires SOME form of agreement and so far you’ve provided zero reason to believe there is any agreement.