We had been debating that point for awhile prior to the bit I just quoted.
In post #74 in that thread I once again debunked Scalia as a Textualist to a different poster (so you had two chances at seeing it).
You also replied to a different post I made in that thread after I posted Scalia’s quote but related to other things so you were still engaged in the thread.
Given that I will leave it to the jury to decide if you managed to conveniently missed it.
This is sort of a side note. I really don’t give a shit about ACORN or O’Keefe.
However, if the parties were switched and it was a republican group who had done the exact same thing, why I expect the vast majority of the posters in this thread would be shitting golden bricks and racing to be the one to point out how evil those republicans are. Oh, and it would be a plot by the RNC to destroy all poor people and make them work for free. Or something.
Additionally:
From here. Link.
I cannot speak to the constitutionality of the law. I have no idea what ACORN or the other defendants legal argument would be.
At the same time, if a for profit corporation had done the same thing I am certain that the vast majority of posters in this thread would have condemned the action and been out for blood.
Instead the argument is that either the law sucks (which may be the case and we will find out later if they do appeal) or that it doesn’t matter.
Slee
P.S. O’Keefe is an ass.
We were arguing the point for a bit after that. You can go back and re-read it. Links helpfully provided above.
In your view. My case was made in the thread linked earlier.
Wiggle and dance all you like. I am content to leave it to the SDMB jury.
Whether or not actual registrations were fraudulent in the colloquial sense is not relevant under the statute. Laws don’t really imply anything, as such, so I’m not sure about suspicions and all that, but I think the answer to your question is that the legislature decided that compensation which is tied to the number of registrations collected is inherently more susceptible to fraud than registrations otherwise collected. Which stands to reason, right; pay somebody to do something, and tell them you’ll give them X more dollars if they do it Y times, and they suddenly have additional reason to achieve that number by any means necessary, whether or not they act on that. The law’s purpose is protecting the integrity of the process, and that means that those who create the appearance of impropriety are just as guilty of that particular violation as those who both create that appearance and also actually have fraudulent intent. Of course, in the latter case we’d expect there to be some other laws being violated, but for the purposes of this discussion, you’re violating 293.805 regardless of intent and regardless of the presence or absence of faked registrations.
That’s how the ACORN compensation scheme worked, to answer your other question. You got an extra 5 dollars (not a typo - five bones) if you registered 21 or more voters on any given day.
It’s a very common legislative approach – punish everybody who breaks the letter of the law, and you can avoid running around trying to prove intent all the time. The extent to which ACORN should be held in public contempt for the violation of the law is of course debatable and being debated (well, “debated,”), but the law makes perfect sense as written, and I think that in slightly different circumstances we would unanimously agree that it’s reasonable to disallow those kinds of incentives.
But I don’t think this thread was started because of the larger issue of blameworthiness, but rather as a direct fuck-you to Diogenes et al on a very narrow issue - that a few people a long time ago spoke more broadly than was warranted about whether ACORN did anything wrong. On that issue, Bricker is right, and I can’t for the life of me imagine why anybody would engage him on those grounds rather than just giving him that tiny, tiny victory, and letting the simple fact that he’s asserting it be a statement in its own right. This really is one of the all-time universal piss-soakings I’ve seen around here. Congratulations, everyone. We’re all losers here.
ACORN knows where Jimmy Hoffa is buried.
ACORN always bogarts the joint.
ACORN does not brush its teeth.
No one is disputing that some dude employed by ACORN did something illegal.
It appears (near as I can tell) that it was done innocently. The guy did not know he was breaking the law. But ignorance of the law is no excuse so fine.
Now you say ACORN is the guilty party. You linked a Wiki page on it and I read it.
Tell me, if one of your employees breaks the law when is your company responsible for the crime?
You gave me reading on this which I read but you suggested I misunderstood.
Fine, you are the lawyer, explain it to me. Tell me how ACORN, as an entity, is complicit in this.
You may say, “I do not have to! They admitted guilt!”
Fine…called a plea bargain. The company no longer exists. I doubt they worry about civil suits against their defunct non-profit organization. Accept the $5,000 slap. Better than paying attorneys a helluva lot more for no reason. I am not sure what someone would sue ACORN over for this in civil court but even if they did what can they expect to get? Lot of effort, lot of attorney fees suing a defunct non-profit.
Of course they settled. ACORN…which does not even exist anymore…plead guilty to a crime.
Whoop-dee-fucking-doo
Do you think that this
might be a very bad thing when it comes to voter registration? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, there are people who would commit fraud to save their job?
Slee
ACORN touches all of the chocolates in the box, but only takes one.
There are people who commit fraud for all sorts of reasons. One of which would be to save their job.
Happens all the time. Examples abound. (Didn’t Baring’s Bank, one of the oldest banks in the UK, fold because of one bad employee?)
The issue is if the company abetted or was negligent in allowing it to happen.
Try running a company with a thousand employees. Tell me if your company should suffer because one smoked a joint.
What parties? Acorn was non-partisan.
It should be noted that this wouldn’t be voter fraud. It would be voter-registration fraud. Which actually isn’t that big a deal. If you register Mickey Mouse to vote so you can make your evil-ACORN quota you’re making a false registration.
Mickey Mouse isn’t going to show up to the polls, so it never actually gets to the voting phase.
Funny guy…
Voter registration drives are Commie plots.
Real Americans register themselves (and vote Republican).
No, No No. They registered people in poor neighborhoods. That makes them smelly hippies, and therefore, Democrats.
soon as I read this I know what was coming.
Bricker Allow me to quote from a famous movie
You know they are guilty, I know they are guilty, hell a sea slug could figure this out, but you are up against Dio. His mind is set like 2 week old concrete and he never lets little details like facts change it.
Forget it Bricker, it’s Dio.
Nice cherry picking and avoiding pages of detail.
It’s funny, Bricker’s usually the one adamantly arguing that wrong =/= illegal. I guess that equation doesn’t work both ways in his mind.
An admission of guilt is not the same thing as proof that the act was committed. For a bankrupt institution to admit guilt might just mean that the consequences cost less than fighting further would.
You know this as a lawyer. Therefore I “know” you cannot possibly believe that everyone reading this thread “knows” that they did exactly what they were found guilty of.
I might add the SCOTUS apparently thinks the State is not beholden to the same standards as ACORN. Never mind what malfeasance was committed by employees. They are off the hook.
Malfeasance hell. They outright conspired to murder a man. And Old Uncle Clarence says “enh.”
And you know, I have to take exception to Bricker’s contention that, due to this plea bargain, ACORN is guilty of doing something wrong. The fine the (now, apparently, defunct) company is going to have to pay is $5000. That’s a hell of a lot cheaper than paying lawyers to continue to fight the charges.
I don’t care if, legally, their plea bargain means that they’re guilty. Hell, for all anyone knows, the employee didn’t do it at all- but it was cheaper for the company (which no longer exists, remember?) to just agree to pay the fine.
So enjoy your little victory, Bricker. It comes at the cost of whatever respect you had left.