CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26145
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:45 pm
 


Thanos Thanos:
Proggists? Progtards? Oh noez! What ever shall we do? :roll:

Image


Yeah, but where were you when this one popped up, Superguy?

BeaverFever BeaverFever:
conservative fuck-tard


You can't selectively save the day if you want to be a real hero.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9445
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:21 am
 


BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Wherever did I say liberals never lie? My link is an actual newspaper, not some conservative fuck-tard blog

:roll:
Another fine example of why normal people have distanced themselves from the Left leaving the disturbed, ranting, raving individuals like you.


Attachments:
image.jpg
image.jpg [ 70.97 KiB | Viewed 281 times ]
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:08 am
 


BRAH BRAH:
BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Wherever did I say liberals never lie? My link is an actual newspaper, not some conservative fuck-tard blog

:roll:
Another fine example of why normal people have distanced themselves from the Left leaving the disturbed, ranting, raving individuals like you.


Seriously - show please. I have said on these boards:

- I don't like Ignatief
- I don't like Justin Trudeau
- I don't like the federal Liberal Party
- McGuinty's gas plant shenanigans were scandalous
- Most US Democrats barely differ from US Republicans
- Chretien/Martin Liberals' cuts to social spending were worse than any Conservative government's
- Chretien Liberals did more damage to the military than other government (if not on this board, then possibly another).
- I don't trust the NDP

All of the above is far more conceding than we have ever heard from most of the Conservatives on this site, who cannot bring themselves to make even the slightest most humble criticism of their dear leaders.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 9:29 am
 


N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
bunch of stuff


It's not in dispute that Walker has the local court ruling on his side. What's in dispute is the claim that the case is closed and there was not a shred of evidence against him. Much of Judge Randa's orders (that all evidence against Walker be destroyed) were immediately overturned by the appeals court. And the investigation is not permanently closed as your links claim, it is suspended until the appeals court rules on the case.

And it's not without mention that Judge Randa's judicial assistant is married to one of Walker's lawyers on this case. And while the appeals court had the power deny the prosectuor's appeal entirely, they did not.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12398
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:39 am
 


BeaverFever BeaverFever:
Wherever did I say liberals never lie? My link is an actual newspaper, not some conservative fuck-tard blog



ROTFL ROTFL


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26145
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:30 pm
 


You keep those dreams alive Beave. Some day truth will out, the proletariat will prevail, the South will rise again, or whatever it is you're hoping for. I'm never sure.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:37 pm
 


$1:
the South will rise again


I'm pretty sure that's one that the right-wing hopes for.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Montreal Canadiens


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7835
PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2014 8:12 am
 


BeaverFever BeaverFever:
$1:
the South will rise again


I'm pretty sure that's one that the right-wing hopes for.


So, how does it feel getting morally outraged over an investigation that has already been shut down twice by two judges for having absolutely no probable cause to file such subpoenas?

Of course, that would mean reading the WHOLE article you posted, including, you know, the parts that actually discredit those prosecutors' claims. How interesting.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15244
PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2014 9:16 am
 


$1:
having absolutely no probable cause to file

Don't exaggerate. What Walker did is not disputed by either side - he coordinated the funding and campaign activity of different "independent" organizations.

What the trial judge decided is that technically Walker's activity didn't breach the threshold of crmininality, based on the judge's interpretation of what "Political advocacy" means. So it's a technical definition matter not an "absolutely no probable cause" matter.

The judge's interpretation is hotly disputed both in and out of the courts, which is why it's under appeal.

Did you even read the article?

$1:
Wisconsin Club for Growth maintains that prohibition does not apply to them and other conservative groups because they did not run ads explicitly telling people how to vote. Their efforts praised Walker and criticized his Democratic opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, but did not use the phrases "vote for" or "vote against," they argue.

Randa and the second state judge overseeing the probe, state Reserve Judge Gregory Peterson, have sided with conservatives on that point. Prosecutors are seeking to overturn those rulings in state and federal court.

The prosecutors say the work amounts to illegal campaign contributions. They contend Wisconsin Club for Growth doled out money to other groups, who then used it to help Walker or other Republicans.

For example, the organization gave $2.5 million to Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, which in turn placed ads supporting Walker and Republicans, and criticizing their foes.

The club gave $4.6 million to Citizens for a Strong America — a sum that represented 99.9% of its revenue. The group then passed on some of the money to other groups — $1.2 million to Wisconsin Family Action, nearly $350,000 to Wisconsin Right to Life, and $245,000 to United Sportsmen of Wisconsin. In addition, Schmitz alleged, Citizens for a Strong America was the creation of Jordahl and Johnson. Johnson's wife, Valerie, was the treasurer and a signatory on the bank account, the brief alleges.

Johnson directly controlled Wisconsin Club for Growth, and Jordahl was a signatory on the club's bank account, the brief states.

"We own CFG," Johnson has stated, according to prosecutors
That's the the 'judgement call' that the judge recently aggreed in favour of the conservative, not a 'obivous' or pre-existing fact.



So let's recap shall we?

What is alleged to be the crime?

The law says that a political campaign can't surrpetitiously campaign under false banners by controlling and coordinating with outside organizations. Nobody disputes that.

The republican campaign moved money and co-ordinted/controlled political advertising messages of 9 different outside orgnatization in every district. Nobody disputes that.

The republicans claim that it's only a crime if the messages and money are used to explicity say "Vote for/against Candidate X" but not if they are just used to say things like 'Candidate X is good/evil'.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Previous  1  2



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.