RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 7:57:11 AM)


ORIGINAL: Termyn8or


ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Lessee here. this is not OK but it was OK for Blacks to scare Whites away from voting places.

Whites have a long history of doing that very thing. Why does it offend you when it is returned?




Nice editing motherfucker.

Keep the bitch off the street and I wont fuck her.

YOU KNOW what the next line said in my post yet you snipped it. You snipped it because you are a paqthetic hypersensitive politically correct rag and because I mention differences in races I must be a knuckle dragging redneck.

You have clearly established your credentials in that area.

Because you can never mention any difference in race because "we are all the same under the skin" even though after you are dead a hundred years they can tell which side of what hill you were born on.

Until you got some validation for that I will call bullshit.


And even though skeletal remains show quite plainly the differences,

Really???what exactly does it planely show?

of course they make no difference in the traits of a being. That an Oriental is exactly the same as a Swede for example, is the liberal dogma.

Cite please[8|]

We are not the same under the skin and we are not equal either.

That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion.


Equality means equal treatment.


Why is it that in your world 1+1 is not = to 2?





ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 11:35:06 AM)

quote:

Why on earth would you think that?

Common sense, if they are publicly funded then the local state laws will apply just as in a general election
quote:

I don't know one way or the other, however electioneering law is federal law. Ie., FEC.

Then why do States have election laws and regulations
quote:

Fed law trumps state law in most cases, wherever it applies.

So what Federal law trumps the Massachusetts state law regarding campaigning in a polling place?



DominantWrestler -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 4:40:44 PM)

It's considered hinderance of voters or something like that. It's to preserve the peace. All orders by election officials within the guard zone (wrong terminology?) must be obeyed. That is more explicit within the law, which Bill also disobeyed directly. There are also a second layer of laws to prevent misinformation and fraudulence regarding running, especially on Election Day.



mnottertail -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 4:58:37 PM)

Seems to me somebody could choke up an actual statute.



DominantWrestler -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 9:28:37 PM)

Bill broke at least 3 laws, but I'm doing this on a phone and will not be citing the others

53.03(18)(d)

Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined by 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person, party or political position on a ballot question to be voted on at the current election.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/lawlib/900-999cmr/950cmr53.pdf


Mnotter, I am not the typical right wing propogandsit. The Clintons bring shame to the Democratic Party. Disassociating from them will benefit democrats for decades



Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 9:37:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

Why on earth would you think that?

Common sense, if they are publicly funded then the local state laws will apply just as in a general election
quote:

I don't know one way or the other, however electioneering law is federal law. Ie., FEC.

Then why do States have election laws and regulations
quote:

Fed law trumps state law in most cases, wherever it applies.

So what Federal law trumps the Massachusetts state law regarding campaigning in a polling place?


You're changing the topic. You were speaking of federal rules regarding fundraising.
Other than states that are under DOJ review for voter disenfranchisment, most of election law regarding selection of delegates, polling place picketing etc are set at the state level.



Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 9:39:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Bill broke at least 3 laws, but I'm doing this on a phone and will not be citing the others

53.03(18)(d)

Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined by 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person, party or political position on a ballot question to be voted on at the current election.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/lawlib/900-999cmr/950cmr53.pdf


Mnotter, I am not the typical right wing propogandsit. The Clintons bring shame to the Democratic Party. Disassociating from them will benefit democrats for decades


Thank G-d a democrat with honesty. There is just too much corruption involved with the Clintons- ALL democrats should be calling for special prosecutor investigations.

And for the record, I would be perfectly ok with special prosecutor investigations of bushes. Honesty should be required of all candidates, left or right.



ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 1:38:41 AM)

quote:

You're changing the topic. You were speaking of federal rules regarding fundraising.

No I wasn't, I never mentioned federal laws or fundraising. It's you who is changing the topic.
quote:

most of election law regarding selection of delegates, polling place picketing etc are set at the state level.

And the Massachusetts state law is all I made reference to.

You really need to pay closer attention to what you are replying to in the future.



DominantWrestler -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 4:49:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Bill broke at least 3 laws, but I'm doing this on a phone and will not be citing the others

53.03(18)(d)

Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined by 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person, party or political position on a ballot question to be voted on at the current election.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/lawlib/900-999cmr/950cmr53.pdf


Mnotter, I am not the typical right wing propogandsit. The Clintons bring shame to the Democratic Party. Disassociating from them will benefit democrats for decades


Thank G-d a democrat with honesty. There is just too much corruption involved with the Clintons- ALL democrats should be calling for special prosecutor investigations.

And for the record, I would be perfectly ok with special prosecutor investigations of bushes. Honesty should be required of all candidates, left or right.




I agree the bushes and their administrations should be investigated

On a side note, I hope this wins some good will next time you and I butt heads Phydeaux



MrRodgers -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 5:04:35 AM)

But as the Mass. Atty said, does this come up to a violation of law ? NO !!

Besides as I've written, we are talking 'election' laws while nobody was...being elected to anything. A primary is a private party affair and as a selection of a candidate not an election for anybody to any elective office. It would be thrown out of court.



mnottertail -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 7:15:10 AM)

http://www.wcvb.com/politics/state-explains-why-bill-clintons-polling-place-visits-were-legal/38282842

There is no topic, no laws were violated, regardless of the nutsucker commandeering of a states rights issue in their overreach for a huge federal government owned by the military industrial complex and their simultaneous attempt to keep voting rights out of the hands of the citizenry.



Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 8:36:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: DominantWrestler

Bill broke at least 3 laws, but I'm doing this on a phone and will not be citing the others

53.03(18)(d)

Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined by 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person, party or political position on a ballot question to be voted on at the current election.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/lawlib/900-999cmr/950cmr53.pdf


Mnotter, I am not the typical right wing propogandsit. The Clintons bring shame to the Democratic Party. Disassociating from them will benefit democrats for decades


Thank G-d a democrat with honesty. There is just too much corruption involved with the Clintons- ALL democrats should be calling for special prosecutor investigations.

And for the record, I would be perfectly ok with special prosecutor investigations of bushes. Honesty should be required of all candidates, left or right.




I agree the bushes and their administrations should be investigated

On a side note, I hope this wins some good will next time you and I butt heads Phydeaux


Its in people like you that our nation has a chance - willing to put aside party and follow the law. I give a lot of credence to that.
On a side note, I've enjoyed discussing things with you a lot - (trying to put this nicely) once you stopped insulting me.
Best wishes.



Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 8:47:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

But as the Mass. Atty said, does this come up to a violation of law ? NO !!

Besides as I've written, we are talking 'election' laws while nobody was...being elected to anything. A primary is a private party affair and as a selection of a candidate not an election for anybody to any elective office. It would be thrown out of court.



Are you kidding me.. you are seriously making that argument?
Primaries are not private affairs. They are run at government polling places, using government election officers, government workers, etc.


Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 54, ยง 103A applies Massachusetts election laws to primaries:
Sections eighty-six to one hundred and three Q, inclusive, of this chapter, sections twenty-one and twenty-seven of chapter fifty-six and sections thirty-four A and thirty-seven A of chapter fifty-three shall, so far as applicable, apply to special and regular city primaries, preliminary elections, elections and to town primaries, preliminary elections and elections whether special or regular and to special and regular regional vocational school district elections including elections called to authorize bond issues for said districts.


The fact that the Massachusetts attorney says no law was broken is a damning indictment that the democrat party controls him, rather than laws and regulations.

The law states:53.03(18)(d)

Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined by 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person, party or political position on a ballot question to be voted on at the current election.


So its clear: Massachusetss law applies (chpt 54) and Bill broke the law. Chprtrr 53.03.




mnottertail -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 8:49:40 AM)

and what was the offending quote that is credible and citable , exactly?



MrRodgers -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 10:39:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

But as the Mass. Atty said, does this come up to a violation of law ? NO !!

Besides as I've written, we are talking 'election' laws while nobody was...being elected to anything. A primary is a private party affair and as a selection of a candidate not an election for anybody to any elective office. It would be thrown out of court.



Are you kidding me.. you are seriously making that argument?
Primaries are not private affairs. They are run at government polling places, using government election officers, government workers, etc.

.....apply to special and regular city primaries, preliminary elections, elections and to town primaries, preliminary elections and elections whether special or regular and to special and regular regional vocational school district elections including elections called to authorize bond issues for said districts.


Within 150 feet of a polling place as defined by 950 CMR 53.03(18)(c), no person shall solicit votes for or against, or otherwise promote or oppose, any person, party or political position on a ballot question to be voted on at the current election.


Sorry, doesn't add up Phy. This was not a 'special and regular city primaries' this was not a 'preliminary elections, elections and to town primaries' this was not a 'elections and elections whether special or regular and to special and regular regional vocational school district elections including elections called to authorize bond issues for said districts.'

The function was a private democratic presidential candidate primary and only the first two provisos of the code would apply anyway as the rest refers only to 'elections' once again.

Plus, did Clinton actually solicit votes, promote anybody or position ? OR did he just go meet and greet ? And don't for a minute tell me that it would be specious partisan spin to claim as much, because the right is expert as such spin upto and including right wing judges.



ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 11:35:35 AM)

quote:

A primary is a private party affair

Not when the government is paying for it .



BamaD -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 1:43:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

A primary is a private party affair

Not when the government is paying for it .

bingo



DominantWrestler -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 2:24:54 PM)

Even having a candidate shake hands with strangers within a polling place in Massachusetts is illegal, be it primaries or regular election.

Mnottertail and Mr Rodgers, i side with you two more often than not, but what he did is illegal. Not only that, but he was warned before hand (which is another law he broke). He intentionally broke the law to sway a vote that was 50-49.

Once again, sorry Phydeaux. I was met with hostility and insult the first or second post I ever made (not by you), and once peace has been broken, it's hard to reestablish



Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 2:59:31 PM)

No worries mate.

But let me second what Dizzy said (what a strange day)..

Even if the democrats were paying for it; even if the parties didn't get significant support from the government; case law is clear - primaries are public events; electioneering laws apply.

Mr. Rodgers, I find this kid of posturing abhorrent. It is such an extreme point of view I can't imagine anyone not a paid shill making it.

What you are saying is that its a private law - and electioneering law doesn't apply. So if it was a private event, you're saying the democrat party could choose to disenfranchise people. Could choose to say to blacks - no you can't vote.
Really??

Usually, while I don't agree with your positions, you reasons for your point of view. This one is so out there.. I don't get it. Why is it so hard for you to accept that once again a clinton broke the law?



mnottertail -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/8/2016 3:41:26 PM)

And it is an election paid for by the state of Massachusetts and the state of Massachusetts says no law was violated.

Why is it so hard for nutsuckers to turn themselves away from big overreaching noxious government and propaganda?






Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625