Guilty, yes..but of what? Once again you seem to be deliberately conflating what the prosucutors claimed and what the administrator plead guilty of.
ACORN was obligated by law to submit them. It did not have a legal option of culling them. If they had tried to remove the farudulent ones, they would have been violating the law and doing something “wrong.”
All they could legally do was flag them as suspicious, which they did. No fraud. No attempt at fraud. Just following the letter of the law.
What this office pled guilty to had nothing to do with voter registration fraud, but with how they paid canvassers.
That’s true.
So what do you think happened here?
I am willing to track this information down, but I have a funny feeling that the response is going to be, “Geeze, Bricker, get a life.”
And it WON’T be, “OK, I admit it; ACORN submitted fradulent coter registrations.”
Am I wrong?
Cite?
And would it, in fact, have been wrong to just throw out a registration for, say, Mickey Mouse? Not legal or illegal, but in Dio-tongue, “wrong?”
You are wrong and a lying piece of shit.
ACORN was not allowed by law to do anything else.
With you, Bricker, I know someone has caught you out on your bullshit when you resort to personal attacks.
Gives me warm fuzzies to see it.
So, ignoring something is the measure? You who were participating vigorously in the thread, you who was debating Scalia’s originalism vs. textualism with me in that thread, you who responded to a different post I made in that thread as well as responded to other people after my cite, you who are known for thoroughness and attention to detail.
Reagan claimed to have forgotten things too. No one believes it. People can sit in court and claim ignorance, they can still be found guilty. Preponderance of the evidence. I am content to let the readers here be the judge of your convenient lapse.
Nice of you to point out now. I am sure this is not something you just learned in the last three months. I made my case for his originalism in that thread, you claimed textualism. This would seem to have been a salient point to make in that thread.
But neither did ACORN plead guilty to submitting fraudulent voter registrations. Am I wrong?
What the fuck is the point of this thread, if you apparently can’t even understand what law ACORN pled guilty to violating?
As Czarcasm wonders, it appears to me that you are asserting that these were the names on the list.
What if it were Tony Romo, Roy Williams, Sean Lee and Mike Jenkins?
And where is it said that the director and the organization pleaded guilty to anything that relates to Tony Romo’s name?
You’re flitting again. The thing that ACORN plead guilty to was NOT “submitting fraudulent voter registrations”. It was paying people according to the number of voter registrations submitted. That some of those voter registrations were fraudulent was not something that ACORN could do anything about other than flagging them as suspicious. BY LAW, all voter registrations have to be submitted to the state by the organization collecting them. ACORN could not make a determination of which registrations were frauds, even if it were obvious (“Mickey Mouse”, “Donald Duck”, “Adolf Hitler”). That would be illegal.
Yes, I surely would have said something similar in that thread.
If I had seen your posts.
Gee, since you’d rather not bother we’ll never know…which allows you to play your “I could do this, but you’d only(fill in the blank), so I’m not gonna!” game.
Can I steal this? 
You did respond to me on that topic. Several times in fact. That point could have been made in any of them.
Could you please cite? I mean, when you take on these issues, you adopt the tone of an expert on, in this case, Nevada law regarding voter registration. Previously it was Georgia law regarding the investigation of homicides, for instance. So I kind of expect you to be able to respond more thoroughly than “cite”?
Otherwise, it would be nice if you could tone down the expert attitude, if of course your expertise comes from reading online as to what Nevada’s voter registration laws are or what Georgia’s homicide investigation protocols are.
Are you fucking kidding me? We went over this countless times two years ago. This is really news to you?
ACORN was not legally allowed to make determinations as to whether registrations were legitimate or not. All they were allowed tp do was flag the “Micky Mouse” forms as supicious (which they did) and submit thm. They had no legal option to do anything else. This is really the first you’re hearing of this?
Before I go digging up cites, I want to know if it’s going to make any difference to you. What are you going to say if I can prove to you that ACORN was obligated by federal law to submit all registrations, no matter how suspicious? Are you going to alter anything you’re saying about ACORN doing anything “wronbg?” Are you going to drop your insinuations that ACORN was deliberately involved in registration fraud? Are you not aware that ACORN flagged the forms as suspicious itself?
At best you are half right-they were required to submit those voter registrations without altering them, whether they were fraudulent or not.
I agree. I said exactly that in response to Gadarene.
I’m saying that “ACORN submitted fradulent voter registrations” is something that a reasonable debater ought to concede here, even though they didn’t plead guilty to doing it, because every grownup knows they did it.
I’m saying that if you insist on a cite before conceding this point, that’s your privilege, but youy can’t argue that way and expect me to graciously concede “everybody knows” points on my side.
Cite?
Cite?
Before we dig up the cites, please tell us how you’re going to respond when we do.