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.
you are a democrat defending a billionaire who is using their megawealth to circumvent the law for the purpose of gaining a political advantage.
No. I am an intelligent individual pointing out that the billionaire didn't break the law in this specific case.
He didn't give them anything of value in order to get them to register to vote (since they are ALL already registered), and he didn't give them anything of value in exchange for their voting a certain way. Thus, no crime.
104.061 Corruptly influencing voting.—
(2) No person shall directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote or to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote. Any person who violates this subsection is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. However, this subsection shall not apply to the serving of food to be consumed at a political rally or meeting or to any item of nominal value which is used as a political advertisement, including a campaign message designed to be worn by a person.
It will all boil down to Bloomberg's intent
It won't boil down to anything. There was no requirement placed on those receiving monies to vote a certain way, or to even vote at all. Hence, no crime.
The problem is that Bloomberg staffers are on the record stating that the express purpose was to help democrats, and Joe Biden in particular. At the very least an investigation is warranted. A couple of subpoenas should clear things up
Given that leftists take the word of a disbarred felon (Cohen) in leading them to launch criminal investigations, surely this is enough to warrant a criminal investigation.
Sure, investigate away. Vigilance and liberty go hand in hand. But I expect they'll find nothing and all this will go away after the election.
You are speaking mightily confidently about that when certain facts are not established for the record, which is a problem. As I mentioned, the staffers for Bloomberg are on record stating that the money is used to get them to be able to vote in accordance with the law so that they can back Biden. At the very least, this warrants an investigation. If nothing comes of it, fine. But there is more than enough to open a criminal investigation in this matter.
I am speaking confidently because the law is what it is. The monies are given without any requirement that the voter vote a certain way or vote at all. Any investigation will be funded by tax dollars. I only hope one investigation will be enough for conservatives, because I think multiple investigations are a waste of money.
The monies have no strings attached. They can vote, or not, they can vote however they like. Thus, no election interference.
It certainly seems like a stretch, since the money is used to make it possible for the felon to vote without actually requiring the felon to vote or vote a certain way. As you said, no strings attached.
(1) Whoever by bribery, menace, threat, or other corruption whatsoever, either directly or indirectly, attempts to influence, deceive, or deter any elector in voting or interferes with him or her in the free exercise of the elector’s right to vote at any election commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084 for the first conviction, and a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, for any subsequent conviction.
(2) No person shall directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another intending thereby to buy that person’s or another’s vote or to corruptly influence that person or another in casting his or her vote. Any person who violates this subsection is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. However, this subsection shall not apply to the serving of food to be consumed at a political rally or meeting or to any item of nominal value which is used as a political advertisement, including a campaign message designed to be worn by a person.
[/SIZE]
Last edited by hbdwihdh378y9; 09-23-2020 at 10:02 AM..
"securing a commitment" is irrelevant - it will boil down to whether Bloomberg intended to influence the voters.
He didn't intend to influence the voters. He intended to provide funds to felons who want to vote and need the funds to "complete their sentences", so that they can vote. That's not influencing them. No requirement has been placed on them to vote a certain way, or even to vote.
He didn't intend to influence the voters. He intended to provide funds to felons who want to vote and need the funds to "complete their sentences", so that they can vote. That's not influencing them. No requirement has been placed on them to vote a certain way, or even to vote.
He intended to provide funds to certain felons. ones likely to vote Democrat.
So? He didn't intend to influence them in any way, his intent was to enable them to vote. That's legal.
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.
