Utopia Talk / Politics / Biden Fined. Hot Rod orgasms

Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 14:06:42 WASHINGTON (AP) â?? Without the help of children to get Hot Rod's orgasmic satisification election watchdogs have fined Joe Biden's 2008 presidential campaign more than $219,000 for sloppy bookkeeping and accepting excessive contributions, including a discounted flight on a private jet. The audit by the Federal Election Commission was released Friday. The report says the Biden campaign accepted an illegal corporate contribution in the form of a round-trip flight between New Hampshire and Iowa in June 2007 for three people. The Biden campaign paid $7,911 for the first-class airfare, but the FEC says the campaign should have paid the charter rate of $34,800. Biden, who's now the vice president, was in the 2008 race for about a year. He dropped out in early 2008 after a poor showing in the Iowa caucuses.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 14:08:06 http://wcb...lation.campaign.2.1810360.html
so what Member	Mon Jul 19 14:11:13 Which corporation was it?
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Jul 19 14:15:58 who would pay $35,000 to go to Iowa?
so what Member	Mon Jul 19 14:17:25 Obama's lil'helper.
McKobb Member	Mon Jul 19 14:26:05 who would pay $7,911 to go to Iowa?
Madc0w Member	Mon Jul 19 14:30:41 To be fair, one could easily say the same about Alabama.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Jul 19 14:32:29 clearly anyone who can afford chartered flights is too rich
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 17:31:11 I told you he was crooked.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 18:23:43 Yep, just as much as Palin. Who wouldve thunk it?
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 18:27:17 Palin was accidental, Biden is a thief.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 18:42:08 No palin's wasn't.
yankeessuck123 Member	Mon Jul 19 20:00:09 Isn't Biden far too stupid to be a thief?
Madc0w Member	Mon Jul 19 20:14:11 "Palin was accidental, Biden is a thief. " Translation: I'm a Republican hack, so I'm going to blindly defend Palin while I attack Biden for doing the same thing.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 20:16:21 Madcow is correct. I want dipshit rod to step right in that pile of steamy shit (trap). And without fail proves his hyprocacy again.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 21:15:05 Her lawyers set up the defense fund and they used one single word that they should not have used. It was a mistake on the part of the lawyer that she had no part of. Unlike Biden whose campaign was riddled with sloppy bookkeeping and illegal freebies.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 21:23:00 LOL are you fucking kidding me? Than you for reaffirming the point of this thread.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 21:26:30 I am just informing you of the facts that your precious liberal media refuse to share with you.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 21:30:03 Cunt I know all about it. This situation and palins are virtually the same. Both guilty of shotty book keeping and excessive contributions. Both were fined. Lol like it was said earlier. You're a republican hack.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 21:37:05 I hope someday you will learn just how big a lie that is. You probably already know though and are already aware just how big a lie it is. "In 1993, Palin pleaded no contest to a charge of failing to register as a set gilnet permit holder. Such a license must be obtained in Alaska for commercial fishermen to use the underwater netting frequently designed to catch salmon. Does this woman's horribleness have no end? BTW, can you link where else she was *FINED?*
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 21:58:14 Dipshit, her legal defense fund. Yep, thanks once again rod for proving how much of a dumb shit you are. Continue to wallow in the complete retardedness that you and dukhat can share.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 21:59:10 Yeah, thought not. Just another left wing nut blowhard spreading more lies.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 22:00:14 Show me a link to where she was *FINED.*
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 22:06:28 *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.* *FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.**FINED.*
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 22:11:16 Why are you spamming? Are you spamming because you were shown how utterly wrong you were? Typical response of a failed hack.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 22:12:06 I must go now. I need to eat some soup and crackers.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 22:13:29 WHERE WAS SHE FINED? SHOW ME THE LINK.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 22:15:23 Yeah, run and hide cause you know damned good and well that I have you by the short hairs you lying sack of bird shit.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 22:15:51 Perhaps you didn't see my previous post? Going now. Eating soup. You were shown wrong again. Make a note of it.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 22:16:37 Why so angry? Why so serious?
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 22:16:57 I saw your previous post, show me where she was fined or admit you were "mistaken."
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 22:20:33 There is no mistake. She was found guilty. You have google. Look it up. Substantial ammount too. Don't be hatin'.
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 22:25:57 DU you misremember the case. She wasn't fined and in fact The investigation said she acted in good faith. If she wished she could sue lawyer for malfeasance.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 22:29:02 Awesome. Both dipshits are here. This is going to be fun. Nope no misrememberence or anything. A suim of money was extracted. What is that called again?
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 22:57:18 Dickhead, you are so damned sure of yourself why can't you post a link showing where she was *FINED* over the defense fund? You cannot do it because she was *NOT* fined. You are a lying sack of shit that does not have the courage to admit you are wrong.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:00:00 Dickhead - A suim of money was extracted. What is that called again? It is called 'returning of money.' There was no fine involved.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:01:47 Oh gee, golly, what is that thing called, when a sum of money is extracted because it was ordered due to the violations. Gosh, I can't put my finger on it, what is it called. Someone help me out here....
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Jul 19 23:02:07 apparently Palin has testicles from the spending state funds on her kids travel thing (the kids had to be listed as doing official state business): "For example, the girls flew to Anchorage from Juneau for the weekend on Feb. 9, 2007, with Palin charging the state $1,556.40 for their flights. Palin listed the girls' attendance as "official starter" of the Iron Dog snowmobile race, which their father has competed in for 14 years. The state paid the same amount for the three girls to spend a long weekend in Juneau in September 2007. Palin listed "First Family photos" as the official state business for that trip." takes balls to use those reasons as your entire family's official state business to justify your vacation expenses
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:03:36 It was not a fine. If it were a fine you would have no trouble linking it. You cannot. You are PWNED to the max.
Madc0w Member	Mon Jul 19 23:04:18 Hot Rod style: From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.44 [gcide]: Fine \Fine\ (f[imac]n), noun [OE. fin, L. finis end, also in LL., a final agreement or concord between the lord and his vassal; a sum of money paid at the end, so as to make an end of a transaction, suit, or prosecution; mulct; penalty; cf. OF. fin end, settlement, F. fin end. See {Finish}, and cf. {Finance}.] 1. End; conclusion; termination; extinction. [Obs.] ''To see their fatal fine.'' --Spenser. Is this the fine of his fines? --Shak. 2. A sum of money paid as the settlement of a claim, or by way of terminating a matter in dispute; especially, a payment of money imposed upon a party as a punishment for an offense; a mulct. 3. (Law) (a) (Feudal Law) A final agreement concerning lands or rents between persons, as the lord and his vassal. --Spelman. (b) (Eng. Law) A sum of money or price paid for obtaining a benefit, favor, or privilege, as for admission to a copyhold, or for obtaining or renewing a lease. {Fine for alienation} (Feudal Law), a sum of money paid to the lord by a tenant whenever he had occasion to make over his land to another. --Burrill. {Fine of lands}, a species of conveyance in the form of a fictitious suit compromised or terminated by the acknowledgment of the previous owner that such land was the right of the other party. --Burrill. See {Concord}, n., 4. {In fine}, in conclusion; by way of termination or summing up. From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.44 [gcide]: Fine \Fine\, verb (used with an object) & i. [OF. finer, F. finir. See {Finish}, v. t.] To finish; to cease; or to cause to cease. [Obs.] From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.44 [gcide]: Fine \Fine\, verb (used with an object) [imp. & p. p. {Fined} (f[imac]nd); p. pr. & vb. n. {Fining}.] [From {Fine}, adjective] 1. To make fine; to refine; to purify, to clarify; as, to fine gold. It hath been fined and refined by . . . learned men. --Hobbes. 2. To make finer, or less coarse, as in bulk, texture, etc.; as. to fine the soil. --L. H. Bailey. 3. To change by fine gradations; as (Naut.), to fine down a ship's lines, to diminish her lines gradually. I often sate at home On evenings, watching how they fined themselves With gradual conscience to a perfect night. --Browning. From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.44 [gcide]:
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:06:26 Oh look at that, madcow with the assist. Swish!! GG hot rod.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:06:42 tumbleweed, can you link that please. I know the kids traveled with her and she ended up paying the state for their travel, but that is the first I have heard of the reason you listed. BTW, she was not fined for that either.
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 23:07:28 She was not personally fined. The defense fund was.Just as Biden was not personally fined his campaign was. To say that these are idientical however is retarded in the extreme.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:07:39 Now you may apologize for spamming my thread.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:09:42 MadCow, she was not fined. You are smart enough to knowe that, Dickhead isn't. Or perhaps you would like to post the article showing where she was *FINED.*
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Mon Jul 19 23:10:18 I'm impressed. Garyd, oh garyd, with your origin of stupidity. Anyone with a brain can see the similarity.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:12:37 Lol still living in denial. Was she (her fund) or was she not ordered to pay back a sum of money? Gosh, what is that called again? Oh that's right madcow posted it. No seriously hot rod. GG.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Jul 19 23:13:06 the Palin's balls link: http://www...n-office-defends-charging.html
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:14:48 She was told to return the money collected during the time the error appeared on the website. That is not a fine. A fine is a punishment, she did nothing to be punished for. Why can't you post a link showing where she was *FINED* over the defense fund? WHY?
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:18:34 Right. She was ordered to return a sum of money due to the violations. -points towards madcows imitating style of you dispaying the defintions for the word 'fine'- I said GG.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:20:44 Dickhead, Was she (her fund) or was she not ordered to pay back a sum of money? Of course she was and she did pay the money back to the doners. But the government did *NOT* fine her. A fine is a punishment. From MadCow's definition. "especially, a payment of money imposed upon a party as a punishment for an offense; a mulct." "a sum imposed as punishment for an offense b : a forfeiture or penalty paid to an injured party in a civil action" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fine
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 23:20:57 To be similar is not to be the same. The crimes are not even the same. Biden has been convicted of election mistakes Palin of accepting her lawyers assurances that the defense fund was properly set up. Not being a lawyer herself, she whould have no way of knowing that those assurances were wrong. It's like saying that a fifty dollar speeding ticket and a ten million dolllar fine for insider trading are the same. The fund was required to make restitution to the individuals that had contributed to it. That is not a fine as a fine goes to the state rather than to individuals.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:22:04 She was not penalized. Show me your proof, you have none.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:23:31 2. A sum of money paid as the settlement of a claim, or by way of terminating a matter in dispute; GG.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:25:23 So she was ordered to pay a sum of moneu due to violations founded by a commission. You really want to keep this going? Lol Don't hate the player. Hate the game.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:26:47 Being found guilty and ordering to pay the money back seems like a pemalty to me. Or do you have hot rod's defintion for penalty. Hey! They're all lauging at you.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Mon Jul 19 23:29:56 Garyd you imbecile. A fine is not exclusive to a state or any establisment of any government. Read. A. Book.
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 23:30:46 An order to the fund to make restitution is not the same thing as a fine of Sarah Palin.
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 23:31:56 Legally stalker you idiot.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:33:27 tumbleweed, thanks for the link. You do know that when she was announced to be the VP candidate tha over two dozen lawyers and reporters were sent to Alaska to dig up all of the dirt they could on her. After months of investigations and several dozen charges of ethics violations her taking her her kids with her when she traveled on state business was the *ONLY ONE* that stuck. She reimbursed the state and that was the end of that. She was not fined, she was not punished.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Mon Jul 19 23:35:31 Garyd, you imbecile, with al due respect, imbecile, peanaltiess asses in a civil matter would in fact fall under as a "fine". Please heed my advice; Read. A. Book. Of you can wait till my next audio presentation of your failure to comprehend or having no knowldege of whatever you speak. Origins of stupidity.
Dickhead UPer Member	Mon Jul 19 23:38:02 Ordered to pay back a sum of money due to violations. She was guilty. Ordered to repay money. She did. Oh man they call that a fine due to various definations. Or dare say penalized. You just hate being wrong don't you.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:38:26 S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member Mon Jul 19 23:29:56 Garyd you imbecile. A fine is not exclusive to a state or any establisment of any government. Read. A. Book. I would much rather read the article that catagorically states, *SHE WAS FINED.* Can you link such an article? Thopught not.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:40:41 Dickhead, show me the article. Or shall I show you mine?
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 23:42:38 It was not a civil matter twit.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Mon Jul 19 23:43:30 Rod, dumbass to the 9th degree, garyd and I are talking about something that is different than what you and dickhead are. Please scroll up and see what we are talking about instead of butting into something. Thanks. You rotting piece of shit.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:46:17 No dipshit, you are saying that a reimbursement and a fine are similar. They are not. A reimbursement is just correcting an error. A fine is a punishment.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Mon Jul 19 23:46:35 Garyd, mr.imbecile of the year, depsite it not being a civil matter, news for the retard, I already know this, the point remains that a fine is not exclusive to the state or any government. Regardless on how you want to spin this it does fall under a category of a fine. Don't like it. Change the fucking defintion. As for me. I made my appearance. Have a happy go fuck yourself.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:53:17 OK you lying asshole, here is the true story of how the defense fund developed and ended. Palin defense fund deemed illegal in ethics probe by Rebecca Palsha Thursday, June 24, 2010 ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- After 15 months of investigation, a state investigator has found that former Gov. Sarah Palin's legal defense fund was illegal. Tim Petumenos, who investigated Palin's defense fund for the state ethics board, said Thursday that the fund violated state law -- requiring the return of money given to the fund by several thousand donors. Petumenos says the use of the word "official" on the fund's website suggested Palin endorsed it as governor. He also said that fund trustee Kristan Cole should never have been involved with it, because she's a public official. The announcement comes 15 months after a complaint was filed against the fund. "The independent counsel in this case has found two grounds for finding that the defense fund, as written, does not comply with the Alaska Ethics Act," Petumenos said. The decision means Palin's legal defense fund must return more than $386,000 to donors, all of it raised while she was in office. "The two grounds found was that the language of the website that was accompanying this defense fund trust constituted using public office to obtain a private benefit," Petumenos said. Palin's attorney, Thomas Van Flein, says she worked with seven top attorneys who told her the defense fund was legitimate. "She relied on their advice and they were a good legal team," Van Flein said. "It just so happens Mr. Petumenos doesn't think that they got it 100 percent right, there; the governor is fine with that. It's not worth fighting about, because she had one instruction: if it's lawful do it, if it's not lawful don't do it." The woman who helped create the fund, Palin advisor Meghan Stapleton, says she was told the legal defense fund was similar to ones used by other politicians. "We honored their legal expertise on both sides of the aisle to say this is just like every other trust fund set up like the Clintons, the Kerrys, the Ted Stevens of the world, and you're got no problems -- so go for it," Stapleton said. Petumenos says Palin did not knowingly break the state ethics law. "The governor asserted in connection with our investigation that the violation, if there was one, was not a knowing violation," Petumenos said. "Because the trust fund was created and the website was created and drafted fully with the advice of counsel, and with that advice there was a good-faith effort to comply with the act." Another issue Petumenos found was that the fund's benefits weren't just limited to Palin, and could also be used by members of her family. A new defense fund for Palin has been created. Contact Rebecca Palsha at rpalsha@ktuu.com http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=12704785
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Mon Jul 19 23:53:29 No Rod I'm saying the situations regarding palin and biden are similar. Both were faulted and both were penalized to an extent. Biden in a form of fines instituted by the government. And palin penalized in a form of paying back the contributions. Believe or not you twits. All fall under the definitions of a "fine". As I said before, got a problem, take it up with the dictionary. Or both of you putz get together and issue "hot rod and garyd's first edition of warped definitions that fit our realm of relativity" working title of course. Enjoy your stupidity.
Hot Rod Member	Mon Jul 19 23:55:20 A 15 month investigation to prove that a 'single word' was misused by the layers who set up the fund and that Gov. Palin was blameless. You are free to show us where it says she was fined.
garyd Member	Mon Jul 19 23:59:02 Legally a fine is a means to either compel or inhibit an action fines are established by the state. A reimbursement isn't technically a fine however much you'd like it to be. I sell a man a bicycle. It breaks and he asks for his money back I reimburse him. I was not fined I merely returned his money to him. That is the case with what has happened to The Sarah Palin Defense Fund. By the way what if those people to whom the money is to be returned decide not to accept the reimbursement? The is not an option with a fine.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 00:02:00 stalker - Both were faulted and both were penalized to an extent. Biden in a form of fines instituted by the government. And palin penalized in a form of paying back the contributions. NO! Biden was penalized. Palin merely had to return the money. One is a punishment, the other is just returning the money.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 00:04:08 The Collaborative International Dictionary of English (CIDE) was derived from the 1913 Webster's Dictionary and has been supplemented with some of the definitions from WordNet. WordNet: Noun * S: (n) fine, mulct, amercement (money extracted as a penalty) Verb * S: (v) ticket, fine (issue a ticket or a fine to as a penalty) "I was fined for parking on the wrong side of the street"; "Move your car or else you will be ticketed!"
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 00:55:32 LOL!! Oh my is this still going on? Both of you are undoubtedly some of the dumbest posters on these forums. Let's break it on down shall we? Maestro, KICK IT! I want you to add these words to your vocabulary: FUND: a supply of money or pecuniary resources, as for some purpose. (For example Palins legal defense) DONATION: an act or instance of presenting something as a gift, grant, or contribution. (which eludes to the fact that it, it being money, does not, will not, shall not be returned to the donors) Now let's say that that you have an independent counsel investigating matters that pertains to the states ethic act and they happend to find Palin, who had a fund, which there were donations, guilty for violating (which constitutes a penalty) such acts and is ordered to give back the FREE MONEY she was given to the donors that was in the amount of approximately 400k. (Where some individual actually took over for her and paid it back instead of her, how nice of the private citizen) So the FREE MONEY she was given is now ordered to give it back because it violated the states ethic act. You know FREE MONEY when means you get to keep and never give back because it was donated to you. But now you are ordered to give it back because you violated some states ethic law. So in lieu of being penalized by the state, it would appear she was penalized in a fashion of returning the money back to the donors. Which still falls under those pesky words; FINE and PENALTY. FINE: A sum of money paid as the settlement of a claim, or by way of terminating a matter in dispute. So what happened to her again? Fucking idiots.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:02:01 Show me your article that says Palin was *FINED.*
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:02:37 Are you denying she was ordered to return the money?
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:03:08 It's like you can't read. Or the words are too difficult for you to compute inside your feeble mind.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:03:10 I showed you my article where there is absolutely no mention of the word *FINE.*
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:05:14 >-It's like you can't read. I can read fine. Show me an article to read that states she was *FINED* over the defense fund. I will be happy to read it.
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:07:07 Are you arguing against the word FINE? Are you pulling a Bill Clinton saying "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." Definitions were presented. Are you denying she was ordered to return the money?
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:08:47 I want to see an article that states she was *FINED* over the defense fund.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:09:54 "Definitions were presented." "The Collaborative International Dictionary of English (CIDE) was derived from the 1913 Webster's Dictionary..."
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:10:07 Are you, as in HOT ROD, denying that she was ordered, by the state, to return the money. Are you disputing the dictionary term FINE and its meaning among other terms mentioned?
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:10:34 I want you to add these words to your vocabulary: FUND: a supply of money or pecuniary resources, as for some purpose. (For example Palins legal defense) DONATION: an act or instance of presenting something as a gift, grant, or contribution. (which eludes to the fact that it, it being money, does not, will not, shall not be returned to the donors) Now let's say that that you have an independent counsel investigating matters that pertains to the states ethic act and they happend to find Palin, who had a fund, which there were donations, guilty for violating (which constitutes a penalty) such acts and is ordered to give back the FREE MONEY she was given to the donors that was in the amount of approximately 400k. (Where some individual actually took over for her and paid it back instead of her, how nice of the private citizen) So the FREE MONEY she was given is now ordered to give it back because it violated the states ethic act. You know FREE MONEY when means you get to keep and never give back because it was donated to you. But now you are ordered to give it back because you violated some states ethic law. So in lieu of being penalized by the state, it would appear she was penalized in a fashion of returning the money back to the donors. Which still falls under those pesky words; FINE and PENALTY. FINE: A sum of money paid as the settlement of a claim, or by way of terminating a matter in dispute. So what happened to her again?
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:11:17 "Definitions were presented." Yes they were: WordNet: Noun * S: (n) fine, mulct, amercement (money extracted as a penalty) Verb * S: (v) ticket, fine (issue a ticket or a fine to as a penalty) "I was fined for parking on the wrong side of the street"; "Move your car or else you will be ticketed!"
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 01:13:38 Dickhead, you need to change your tag. You are not that smart, you are nothing but a phony. You are PWNED TO THE MAX.
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:14:02 Which enforces my point Hot Rod. Money extracted as a penalty. Ya know, that approximate 400k she was ORDERED to pay.
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:15:12 It's okay, it must be nice to live in the world of denial.
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 01:15:31 Here it is again; Try reading the words, SLOWLY. I want you to add these words to your vocabulary: FUND: a supply of money or pecuniary resources, as for some purpose. (For example Palins legal defense) DONATION: an act or instance of presenting something as a gift, grant, or contribution. (which eludes to the fact that it, it being money, does not, will not, shall not be returned to the donors) Now let's say that that you have an independent counsel investigating matters that pertains to the states ethic act and they happend to find Palin, who had a fund, which there were donations, guilty for violating (which constitutes a penalty) such acts and is ordered to give back the FREE MONEY she was given to the donors that was in the amount of approximately 400k. (Where some individual actually took over for her and paid it back instead of her, how nice of the private citizen) So the FREE MONEY she was given is now ordered to give it back because it violated the states ethic act. You know FREE MONEY when means you get to keep and never give back because it was donated to you. But now you are ordered to give it back because you violated some states ethic law. So in lieu of being penalized by the state, it would appear she was penalized in a fashion of returning the money back to the donors. Which still falls under those pesky words; FINE and PENALTY. FINE: A sum of money paid as the settlement of a claim, or by way of terminating a matter in dispute. So what happened to her again?
Who Shot H.R. Member	Tue Jul 20 01:21:17 This is a gem of a thread I do say so myself. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65O0AG20100625 "It is the responsibility of every public official to make sure they are personally compliant with the (Alaska Ethics) Act," he said. The deal requires Palin's fund to give back to donors $386,856 collected while she was in office. A further $33,546 collected after she resigned will not be affected by the deal. The DEAL requires, so it appears that instead of paying the state any money, she returned the money. Now all of you stir in your own puke.
Who Shot H.R. Member	Tue Jul 20 01:22:16 Oh! And HR, you're a pedophile that needs to die. Not to mention that you are retarded.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Jul 20 01:59:50 rofl...Hot Rod PWND TO THE MAX though that is par for the course
Hot Rod Member	Tue Jul 20 06:10:54 Who Shot H.R. , Thank you for your article. It fully supports the article I posted Mon Jul 19 23:53:17. SARAH PALIN WAS NOT FINED.
Adolf Hitler Member	Tue Jul 20 06:14:17 shut up sicko
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 08:40:04 She was fine, falls under the definition Rod. Your precious girlfriend Palin there had to fork out some money because she was ordered, oh look what I wrote; So in lieu of being penalized by the state, it would appear she was penalized in a fashion of returning the money back to the donors. Which still falls under those pesky words; FINE and PENALTY. GG. Really, GG.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Member	Tue Jul 20 10:54:23 Just because Hot Rod is an idiot and I don't want him to feel all secure like he won something... I have all you to refer to the law in Alaska. Article 05. ENFORCEMENT; REMEDIES Sec. 39.52.410. Violations; penalties for misconduct. ( (a) If the personnel board determines that a public employee has violated this chapter, it (2) may order divestiture, establishment of a blind trust, restitution, or forfeiture. (c) If the personnel board determines that a former public officer has violated this chapter, it shall (2) request the attorney general to exercise all legal and equitable remedies available to the state to seek whatever relief is appropriate. Yeah...
Dickhead UPer Member	Tue Jul 20 10:58:56 Didn't I mention a GG many posts back? I think I did. I, surely did.
Who Shot H.R. Member	Tue Jul 20 11:05:58 "Who Shot H.R. , Thank you for your article. It fully supports the article I posted Mon Jul 19 23:53:17. SARAH PALIN WAS NOT FINED. " Cum guzzling, pedophile, suck fuckhead Rod. It's not in support of your article, its a continuance as to what has already been said. She was in violation of the law, due to that finding and what Stalker posted it would appear that she was in fact penalized. Because she had to return the money, because that was the agreement apparently. And following the language with all that is said, and once again Stalker posted. It's still a form of a penalty. Your idiocy knows no bounds.
Who Shot H.R. Member	Tue Jul 20 11:06:41 Oh and didn't realize it, but 100. Because I'm an asshole.
	show deleted posts