Acorn - We Have No Shame

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
No Annie, she's just got her time line wrong. Maybe you should actually bone up on a subject before your fingers hit the keys:

http://crooksandliars.com/silentpatr...ed-acorn-rally

Wrong you are. I'm well aware of what I'm addressing.

Now you're just being stubborn......Obama's direct interaction with Acorn was years earlier before McCain's...but there has NOT been an on-going, hands on working relationship, as most neocons allude to. My link DOES document McCain's relationship/advocacy with Acorn. Deal with it.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Isn't there a whistleblower exception to that law? I thought I remembered it...

Nobody here is a Maryland lawyer.

found this...would appear to be relevant...

False Assumption #1: Maryland law prohibits the "taping" or "recording" of conversations without the consent of all persons.

The Truth #1: Maryland law prohibits the "interception" of "communications" without the consent of all persons to the communication and does not even mention "taping" or "recording" anywhere in the part of the statute related to criminal violations.

Explanation #1: Maryland law states the following verbatim:

Unlawful acts. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle it is unlawful for any person to: (1) Willfully intercept, endeavor to intercept, or procure any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication;

(2) Willfully disclose, or endeavor to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subtitle; or

(3) Willfully use, or endeavor to use, the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subtitle. Cts. & Jud. Proc. §10-402(a)(1)-(a)(3). (emphasis added)

Nowhere in the law are the words "tape" or "record" ever used.

http://www.rightgrrl.com/tripp/woods.html

 

[christiefan915]

...and Obama has known them for how long now?

So knowing them is suspicious?

ACORN's political action committee endorsed Obama for president. We note that Obama said he worked "alongside" ACORN, but not for ACORN. And ACORN itself says Obama didn't work for them during that time.

We provide all of this information so that you can decide how deep the president's ties are with the embattled ACORN.

As for Rove's claim that Obama used to be a lawyer for ACORN, yes, Obama once took on a case for ACORN. But Obama was never a staff attorney for ACORN. He did not do ongoing work for the organization. He handled one case along with two other attorneys. ACORN was one of several plaintiffs. And the U.S. Department of Justice sided with ACORN in the case. We think Rove's comment suggests a deeper legal relationship between Obama and ACORN than actually existed. And so we rule Rove's statement Half True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ove-claims-obama-used-to-be-lawyer-for-acorn/

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

So knowing them is suspicious?

ACORN's political action committee endorsed Obama for president. We note that Obama said he worked "alongside" ACORN, but not for ACORN. And ACORN itself says Obama didn't work for them during that time.

We provide all of this information so that you can decide how deep the president's ties are with the embattled ACORN.

As for Rove's claim that Obama used to be a lawyer for ACORN, yes, Obama once took on a case for ACORN. But Obama was never a staff attorney for ACORN. He did not do ongoing work for the organization. He handled one case along with two other attorneys. ACORN was one of several plaintiffs. And the U.S. Department of Justice sided with ACORN in the case. We think Rove's comment suggests a deeper legal relationship between Obama and ACORN than actually existed. And so we rule Rove's statement Half True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ove-claims-obama-used-to-be-lawyer-for-acorn/

um.....that is not just "knowing" them.....he had a relationship with them....why do you want to deny that.....are you going to throw acorn under the obama bus now?

 

[PostmodernProphet]

So knowing them is suspicious?

ACORN's political action committee endorsed Obama for president. We note that Obama said he worked "alongside" ACORN, but not for ACORN. And ACORN itself says Obama didn't work for them during that time.

We provide all of this information so that you can decide how deep the president's ties are with the embattled ACORN.

As for Rove's claim that Obama used to be a lawyer for ACORN, yes, Obama once took on a case for ACORN. But Obama was never a staff attorney for ACORN. He did not do ongoing work for the organization. He handled one case along with two other attorneys. ACORN was one of several plaintiffs. And the U.S. Department of Justice sided with ACORN in the case. We think Rove's comment suggests a deeper legal relationship between Obama and ACORN than actually existed. And so we rule Rove's statement Half True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ove-claims-obama-used-to-be-lawyer-for-acorn/

and the rest of us rule Rove's claim as all true......he either was their attorney or he wasn't.....he wasn't their half assed attorney (well, maybe).....the case he was involved in was against Citibank....you remember, the one which required them to loan money to people who couldn't pay it back.....

 

[Taichiliberal]

So knowing them is suspicious?

ACORN's political action committee endorsed Obama for president. We note that Obama said he worked "alongside" ACORN, but not for ACORN. And ACORN itself says Obama didn't work for them during that time.

We provide all of this information so that you can decide how deep the president's ties are with the embattled ACORN.

As for Rove's claim that Obama used to be a lawyer for ACORN, yes, Obama once took on a case for ACORN. But Obama was never a staff attorney for ACORN. He did not do ongoing work for the organization. He handled one case along with two other attorneys. ACORN was one of several plaintiffs. And the U.S. Department of Justice sided with ACORN in the case. We think Rove's comment suggests a deeper legal relationship between Obama and ACORN than actually existed. And so we rule Rove's statement Half True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ove-claims-obama-used-to-be-lawyer-for-acorn/

My, my....all those nasty little facts just keep interferring with Blabba's rosey neocon world.

 

[christiefan915]

My, my....all those nasty little facts just keep interfering with Blabba's rosey neocon world.

Funny, isn't it. Wingnuts supported bush's illegal, immoral war and the killing of thousands but they have a hissy fit over ACORN. The left wouldn't have despised bush as much as they did if all his scandals were acorn-sized.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Funny, isn't it. Wingnuts supported bush's illegal, immoral war and the killing of thousands but they have a hissy fit over ACORN. The left wouldn't have despised bush as much as they did if all his scandals were acorn-sized.

lol.....the war wasn't illegal and if it is immoral....and i believe you're talking about iraq....or both iraq and afghan......if so.....

then obama is also guilty.....

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
My, my....all those nasty little facts just keep interfering with Blabba's rosey neocon world.

Funny, isn't it. Wingnuts supported bush's illegal, immoral war and the killing of thousands but they have a hissy fit over ACORN. The left wouldn't have despised bush as much as they did if all his scandals were acorn-sized.

 

[christiefan915]

lol.....the war wasn't illegal and if it is immoral....and i believe you're talking about iraq....or both iraq and afghan......if so.....

then obama is also guilty.....

"Bush was required to prove to the Congress that Iraq was in violation of UN Resolutions by still being in possession of weapons of mass destruction, and secondly, that Iraq was behind 9-11. Both claims have been disproved and discredited...therefore, under U.S. law, the war is illegal."

I'm not happy we're still in Iraq and especially, that more troops were sent to Afghanistan. Obama didn't start these wars but I hope he rethinks his plans for the two of them.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

"Bush was required to prove to the Congress that Iraq was in violation of UN Resolutions by still being in possession of weapons of mass destruction, and secondly, that Iraq was behind 9-11. Both claims have been disproved and discredited...therefore, under U.S. law, the war is illegal."

I'm not happy we're still in Iraq and especially, that more troops were sent to Afghanistan. Obama didn't start these wars but I hope he rethinks his plans for the two of them.

it doesn't matter if obama started them....if it is illegal and immoral....obama is continuing both actions.....hence....he is guilty of the same

 

[Taichiliberal]

"Bush was required to prove to the Congress that Iraq was in violation of UN Resolutions by still being in possession of weapons of mass destruction, and secondly, that Iraq was behind 9-11. Both claims have been disproved and discredited...therefore, under U.S. law, the war is illegal."

I'm not happy we're still in Iraq and especially, that more troops were sent to Afghanistan. Obama didn't start these wars but I hope he rethinks his plans for the two of them.

You're wasting your time.....in the last 8 years all these willfully ignorant just ignore the facts and keep repeating the excerpts. "Dems voted for it too"...but they don't want to deal with what exactly the Dems voted for, and how the Shrub & company violated those rules.

"The UN thought Hussein had WMD's too"...but they don't want to deal with the UN stating that America violated an agreement by forcing the WMD inspectors out before they concluded their findings.

It goes on and on.....they just won't admit what all the facts demonstrate...or how the aftermath confirms the facts as not just "libs hating Bush", but how he was WRONG. Neocon parrots are like religious zealots....blind to everything but their faith.

 

[Annie]

Now you're just being stubborn......Obama's direct interaction with Acorn was years earlier before McCain's...but there has NOT been an on-going, hands on working relationship, as most neocons allude to. My link DOES document McCain's relationship/advocacy with Acorn. Deal with it.

No, I'm not being stubborn, you sir are being disingenuous.

 

[TuTu Monroe]

"Bush was required to prove to the Congress that Iraq was in violation of UN Resolutions by still being in possession of weapons of mass destruction, and secondly, that Iraq was behind 9-11. Both claims have been disproved and discredited...therefore, under U.S. law, the war is illegal."

I'm not happy we're still in Iraq and especially, that more troops were sent to Afghanistan. Obama didn't start these wars but I hope he rethinks his plans for the two of them.

Look for more troops to be sent to Afghanistan.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Now you're just being stubborn......Obama's direct interaction with Acorn was years earlier before McCain's...but there has NOT been an on-going, hands on working relationship, as most neocons allude to. My link DOES document McCain's relationship/advocacy with Acorn. Deal with it.

No, I'm not being stubborn, you sir are being disingenuous.

You cannot logically or factually disprove what I put forth. So go blow neocon smoke somewhere else.

 

[Annie]

You cannot logically or factually disprove what I put forth. So go blow neocon smoke somewhere else.

Hmm, you've not a clue to what you've said. Thanks.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Hmm, you've not a clue to what you've said. Thanks.

Typical neocon bullshit cop out.....sorry to inform you, sweety...the thread shows exactly what has transpired, and the written words do not support your insinuation here. If you can't transpose your thoughts to a post with enough clarity for all to understand, that's your problem. I go by what you wrote...and you can't support your assertions. Carry on.

 

[Annie]

Typical neocon bullshit cop out.....sorry to inform you, sweety...the thread shows exactly what has transpired, and the written words do not support your insinuation here. If you can't transpose your thoughts to a post with enough clarity for all to understand, that's your problem. I go by what you wrote...and you can't support your assertions. Carry on.

Right.

 

[DamnYankee]

Actually, you're just parroting the lies and wishful thinking of the neocon propaganda machine. You and your ilk were wailing this crap within less than 2 months of the man's first term...so it's not about facts and logic with you clowns. You can't even be honest about the number of Freedomwork zoombies that show up to disrupt town meetings and demonstrations...much less own up to just being plain wrong, as the video I sourced in the thread "Teabagger DC Follies".

Actually I stated my desire for Obama to fail before his inauguration; hardly a "n---- parrot".

The DC TEA Party has been shown to have had approximately 1.7 million participants.

 

[DamnYankee]

Isn't there a whistleblower exception to that law? I thought I remembered it...

Nobody here is a Maryland lawyer.

If there was then the ACORN lawsuit should be thrown out and they should pay court costs and attorney's fees to the whistle blowers along with restitution.