Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The website doesn't have the 3-digit security code field on the donation page.
The video shows a guy making donations as the first aunt and Nidal Hasan. The same tests were performed on the Romney and Santorum websites - and were rejected.
Barack Obama's electronic contribution site accepts donations from countries like China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Somalia -- although someone had the sense to remove North Korea from the list. The donor is only required to click a check-box, which attests they are legally allowed to contribute.
Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. There can't be anything illegal about any form of speech in a country that believes in free speech, as supported by the Supreme Court. No?
It consists of requiring a card holder to enter the CVV number in at transaction time to verify that the card is on hand.The CVV code is a security feature for "card not present" transactions (e.g., Internet transactions), and now appears on most (but not all) major credit and debit cards.
Other than that their pages are identical so this is possibly one of the most misleading threads I have ever seen.
Scroll down and see that they have the same "check box" asking if you are legally able to donate.
You just jogged my memory. I run a website for a non-profit station that takes donations over the web - and some years ago I had to set up the means for users to make donations.
You can set up how much verification you desire. You have a choice to use the CVV number or not. You have a choice to use AVS (address verification) or not. Obviously, the Obama donation site is using neither of these.
So you are right in that CVV is probably not the sole issue. However, from the video, they definitely aren't using AVS - and have their site set for minimal security for the purposes of taking money from questionable sources.
Last edited by DRob4JC; 04-04-2012 at 02:08 PM..
Reason: grammar
Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. There can't be anything illegal about any form of speech in a country that believes in free speech, as supported by the Supreme Court. No?
Lol! Illegal contributions are now free speech! Let me go put my waders on...
Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. There can't be anything illegal about any form of speech in a country that believes in free speech, as supported by the Supreme Court. No?
Receiving unlawful donations for campaign purposes is not speech. It's cheating. It's illegal.
The Obama website facilitates the ability to cheat.
Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. There can't be anything illegal about any form of speech in a country that believes in free speech, as supported by the Supreme Court. No?
Weren't they referring to that in the context of donations to outside groups? There are a lot more limits on donations directly to candidates.
Supreme Court has ruled that money is speech. There can't be anything illegal about any form of speech in a country that believes in free speech, as supported by the Supreme Court. No?
No. There is such thing as illegal speech (speech that entices violence or encourages treason - the 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater example).
So, indeed, some money can be deemed illegal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
