ACORN and Prostitution

[Treznor]

The evils of other organizations and men should give no excuse or alibis to ACORN and it's defenders. Two wrongs make a right?

We have yet to see anything they need to be excused for.

I would put it this way. I wouldn't want anyone of ACORN caliber around my home. I wouldn't want to have a drink with them, nor would I introduce them to my family. Everyone has their own standards I guess.

Just because you have a personal prejudice doesn't mean they've done anything worth prosecuting. The people who were all up in arms about this are the same ones who insist that investigations into torture, illegal wiretappings and politically motivated Justice Department firings are inappropriate, while investigations into Whitewater, the death of Vince Foster and the possibility that Clinton got a blowjob are critical to national security.

[Jocabia]

Just because you have a personal prejudice doesn't mean they've done anything worth prosecuting. The people who were all up in arms about this are the same ones who insist that investigations into torture, illegal wiretappings and politically motivated Justice Department firings are inappropriate, while investigations into Whitewater, the death of Vince Foster and the possibility that Clinton got a blowjob are critical to national security.

Oh, there's the word I was looking for.

[Kynchile]

I don't think they should be prosecuted unless the state finds their conduct illegal. I do want to see them fully defunded and deconstructed. It is corrupt to the core. We can do better then that.

[Jocabia]

I don't think they should be prosecuted unless the state finds their conduct illegal. I do want to see them fully defunded and deconstructed. It is corrupt to the core. We can do better then that.

And you base this assessment on?

[Dyakovo]

I don't think they should be prosecuted unless the state finds their conduct illegal. I do want to see them fully defunded and deconstructed. It is corrupt to the core. We can do better then that.

And you base this assessment on?

Probably nothing...

[Treznor]

I don't think they should be prosecuted unless the state finds their conduct illegal. I do want to see them fully defunded and deconstructed. It is corrupt to the core. We can do better then that.

And you base this assessment on?

The gospel testimony of Saints Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck.

[Jocabia]

I don't think they should be prosecuted unless the state finds their conduct illegal. I do want to see them fully defunded and deconstructed. It is corrupt to the core. We can do better then that.

Could you mention, please, some of the other organizations you'd like to see "defunded and deconstructed"? Just for context.

[Jocabia]

You guys are funny, but you're not helping.

[JuNii]

Again, you're misunderstanding and it does not seem to accidental. There has to be evidence of a crime before they begin to treat a missing person as a crime. They cannot go into a private residence and start collecting evidence without some evidence that a crime has occurred. How do you propose the investigate ACORN without collecting some of their private materials? Stand outside and glare?

going into private residences? sorry, but 'Investigation' does not always include "going into private residences". ACORN Offices are not Private Residences. considering they are geting Government Money, that opens them up to offical investigations.

how to start? why not start with those videos. see if they have been doctored, the two 'investigators' claimed, on air so it's a matter of public record, that they gave the news agencies undoctored video tapes, that would be the first step. I'm sure seasoned investigators know how to start an investigation.

And now we're getting down to it. "Aiding and Abetting" is the crime you're claiming they did. A couple more posts and you'll have kind of sort of formed an actual argument.

and the fact that you didn't see it?

So now, did a crime occur for them to have "aided and abetted"? Actually, no. No crime actually occurred. Moreso, was ACORN as an entity aware of that crime or is there some evidence to suggest they were? Nope. In fact, the evidence actually suggests the opposite since they had to shop employees until they found someone will to even humor them.

oh, and you know that no crime occurred how exactly?

But, see, it's not actually possible to address the flaws in your claims until you intelligently and clearly make your claim. That requires more than just vagueries about how we need to investigate the bast... uh, I mean, valid community organization and more of a clear reason why and what should be investigated.

how about this.

THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR.

The attorney general's office will review the videos and investigate or refer the matter to the local district attorney if it is believed there is any wrongdoing, Brown spokesman Scott Gerber said.

that's all I've been asking for. an investigation to uncover the truth. as I said in my other posts, Investigation =|= guilty.

[The_pantless_hero]

Again, you're misunderstanding and it does not seem to accidental. There has to be evidence of a crime before they begin to treat a missing person as a crime. They cannot go into a private residence and start collecting evidence without some evidence that a crime has occurred. How do you propose the investigate ACORN without collecting some of their private materials? Stand outside and glare?

going into private residences? sorry, but 'Investigation' does not always include "going into private residences". ACORN Offices are not Private Residences. considering they are geting Government Money, that opens them up to offical investigations.

And they are not private residences how? They are not parks, courthouses, or any other government building. I do believe that makes them private residences. Or at least not public residences.
What does receiving government money have to do with opening them up for official investigation? Are you accusing them of defrauding the government? Misspending government funds?

So now, did a crime occur for them to have "aided and abetted"? Actually, no. No crime actually occurred. Moreso, was ACORN as an entity aware of that crime or is there some evidence to suggest they were? Nope. In fact, the evidence actually suggests the opposite since they had to shop employees until they found someone will to even humor them.

oh, and you know that no crime occurred how exactly?

And you know one did because a biased "investigator" dressed up like a very obvious pimp with a very obvious "ho" video taped some people saying some very obvious shit and got himself on the Glen Beck jackass hour?

[JuNii]

Again, you're misunderstanding and it does not seem to accidental. There has to be evidence of a crime before they begin to treat a missing person as a crime. They cannot go into a private residence and start collecting evidence without some evidence that a crime has occurred. How do you propose the investigate ACORN without collecting some of their private materials? Stand outside and glare?

going into private residences? sorry, but 'Investigation' does not always include "going into private residences". ACORN Offices are not Private Residences. considering they are geting Government Money, that opens them up to offical investigations.

And they are not private residences how? They are not parks, courthouses, or any other government building.

simple. it was an OFFICE. where people were allowed to walk in.

I do believe that makes them private residences. Or at least not public residences.

no, it doesn't make them RESIDENCES.

What does receiving government money have to do with opening them up for official investigation? Are you accusing them of defrauding the government? Misspending government funds?

I'm not accusing them of anything. but it seems like the video is pointing to aiding and abetting tax fraud.

So now, did a crime occur for them to have "aided and abetted"? Actually, no. No crime actually occurred. Moreso, was ACORN as an entity aware of that crime or is there some evidence to suggest they were? Nope. In fact, the evidence actually suggests the opposite since they had to shop employees until they found someone will to even humor them.

oh, and you know that no crime occurred how exactly?

And you know one did because a biased "investigator" dressed up like a very obvious pimp with a very obvious "ho" video taped some people saying some very obvious shit and got himself on the Glen Beck jackass hour?

no, that's why I'm asking for an investigation. because one does NOT know.

[The_pantless_hero]

I'm not accusing them of anything. but it seems like the video is pointing to aiding and abetting tax fraud.

Having not watched any of them, perhaps you can quote somethings you believe are evidence of aiding and abetting tax fraud.

[JuNii]

I'm not accusing them of anything. but it seems like the video is pointing to aiding and abetting tax fraud.

Having not watched any of them, perhaps you can quote somethings you believe are evidence of aiding and abetting tax fraud.

so... not watching any of them, you automatically assume they are biased and thus not worth investigating?

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I am quite upset by the news. Now, I hear that Federal Funding has been cut off after a vote from the house.

[Jocabia]

Again, you're misunderstanding and it does not seem to accidental. There has to be evidence of a crime before they begin to treat a missing person as a crime. They cannot go into a private residence and start collecting evidence without some evidence that a crime has occurred. How do you propose the investigate ACORN without collecting some of their private materials? Stand outside and glare?

going into private residences? sorry, but 'Investigation' does not always include "going into private residences". ACORN Offices are not Private Residences. considering they are geting Government Money, that opens them up to offical investigations.

how to start? why not start with those videos. see if they have been doctored, the two 'investigators' claimed, on air so it's a matter of public record, that they gave the news agencies undoctored video tapes, that would be the first step. I'm sure seasoned investigators know how to start an investigation.

And now we're getting down to it. "Aiding and Abetting" is the crime you're claiming they did. A couple more posts and you'll have kind of sort of formed an actual argument.

and the fact that you didn't see it?

So now, did a crime occur for them to have "aided and abetted"? Actually, no. No crime actually occurred. Moreso, was ACORN as an entity aware of that crime or is there some evidence to suggest they were? Nope. In fact, the evidence actually suggests the opposite since they had to shop employees until they found someone will to even humor them.

oh, and you know that no crime occurred how exactly?

But, see, it's not actually possible to address the flaws in your claims until you intelligently and clearly make your claim. That requires more than just vagueries about how we need to investigate the bast... uh, I mean, valid community organization and more of a clear reason why and what should be investigated.

how about this.

THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR.

The attorney general's office will review the videos and investigate or refer the matter to the local district attorney if it is believed there is any wrongdoing, Brown spokesman Scott Gerber said.

that's all I've been asking for. an investigation to uncover the truth. as I said in my other posts, Investigation =|= guilty.

You really, really don't know what you're talking about. First of all, that part of their organization is not getting public money. They go after certain types of grants. They go after certain proposals. So does my company. However, if the government showed up our door looking for evidence of a crime, they'd be met by our lawyers. That's how the law works.

You keep saying that a crime was committed. In order to "aide and abet" a crime has to have been committed. What crime was it? Come one, Ju, tell us the crime. You said tax fraud. What fraud? Did the journalist commit fraud? What evidence do you have that they did? Just admit you don't know what you're talking about this. This is just sad.

The attorney general is investigating the PUBLIC tape to look at the individuals. That's not ALL you've been asking for. What you're asking for is for them to investigate ACORN. That isn't what your link says.

[Jocabia]

Again, you're misunderstanding and it does not seem to accidental. There has to be evidence of a crime before they begin to treat a missing person as a crime. They cannot go into a private residence and start collecting evidence without some evidence that a crime has occurred. How do you propose the investigate ACORN without collecting some of their private materials? Stand outside and glare?

going into private residences? sorry, but 'Investigation' does not always include "going into private residences". ACORN Offices are not Private Residences. considering they are geting Government Money, that opens them up to offical investigations.

And they are not private residences how? They are not parks, courthouses, or any other government building.

simple. it was an OFFICE. where people were allowed to walk in.

I do believe that makes them private residences. Or at least not public residences.

no, it doesn't make them RESIDENCES.

What does receiving government money have to do with opening them up for official investigation? Are you accusing them of defrauding the government? Misspending government funds?

I'm not accusing them of anything. but it seems like the video is pointing to aiding and abetting tax fraud.

So now, did a crime occur for them to have "aided and abetted"? Actually, no. No crime actually occurred. Moreso, was ACORN as an entity aware of that crime or is there some evidence to suggest they were? Nope. In fact, the evidence actually suggests the opposite since they had to shop employees until they found someone will to even humor them.

oh, and you know that no crime occurred how exactly?

And you know one did because a biased "investigator" dressed up like a very obvious pimp with a very obvious "ho" video taped some people saying some very obvious shit and got himself on the Glen Beck jackass hour?

no, that's why I'm asking for an investigation. because one does NOT know.

Dude, seriously, if you don't know what you're talking about, just stop talking. Because people are allowed to "just walk in" doesn't make them public. I was using residences as an example, but it's very much private property. Any investigation into ACORN would require a warrant and the support of the attorney general's office. So far, NO evidence to support such an investigation has arisen.

You can squirm and shift in your chair all you like, but in order for "aiding and abetting tax fraud" to have occurred 'tax fraud" would have to occur. Who committed tax fraud?

[Jocabia]

Seriously, JuNii, please, please look up aiding and abetting. Please. I beg of you. Claiming aiding and abetting occurred requires a crime to have been committed. It's not a crime by itself.

[Farnhamia]

Again, you're misunderstanding and it does not seem to accidental. There has to be evidence of a crime before they begin to treat a missing person as a crime. They cannot go into a private residence and start collecting evidence without some evidence that a crime has occurred. How do you propose the investigate ACORN without collecting some of their private materials? Stand outside and glare?

going into private residences? sorry, but 'Investigation' does not always include "going into private residences". ACORN Offices are not Private Residences. considering they are geting Government Money, that opens them up to offical investigations.

how to start? why not start with those videos. see if they have been doctored, the two 'investigators' claimed, on air so it's a matter of public record, that they gave the news agencies undoctored video tapes, that would be the first step. I'm sure seasoned investigators know how to start an investigation.

And now we're getting down to it. "Aiding and Abetting" is the crime you're claiming they did. A couple more posts and you'll have kind of sort of formed an actual argument.

and the fact that you didn't see it?

So now, did a crime occur for them to have "aided and abetted"? Actually, no. No crime actually occurred. Moreso, was ACORN as an entity aware of that crime or is there some evidence to suggest they were? Nope. In fact, the evidence actually suggests the opposite since they had to shop employees until they found someone will to even humor them.

oh, and you know that no crime occurred how exactly?

But, see, it's not actually possible to address the flaws in your claims until you intelligently and clearly make your claim. That requires more than just vagueries about how we need to investigate the bast... uh, I mean, valid community organization and more of a clear reason why and what should be investigated.

how about this.

THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR.

The attorney general's office will review the videos and investigate or refer the matter to the local district attorney if it is believed there is any wrongdoing, Brown spokesman Scott Gerber said.

that's all I've been asking for. an investigation to uncover the truth. as I said in my other posts, Investigation =|= guilty.

You really, really don't know what you're talking about. First of all, that part of their organization is not getting public money. They go after certain types of grants. They go after certain proposals. However, if the government showed up our door looking for evidence of a crime, they'd be met by our lawyers. That's how the law works.

You keep saying that a crime was committed. In order to "aide and abet" a crime has to have been committed. What crime was it? Come one, Ju, tell us the crime. You said tax fraud. What fraud? Did the journalist commit fraud? What evidence do you have that they did? Just admit you don't know what you're talking about this. This is just sad.

The attorney general is investigating the PUBLIC tape to look at the individuals. That's not ALL you've been asking for. What you're asking for is for them to investigate ACORN. That isn't what your link says.

I have to agree. If the ACORN staffer had then gotten out some tax forms and helped them fill them out fraudulently and they were then submitted to the IRS that way, yes, that's tax fraud. Heck, I could tell you "Junii, you should buy a dog, give it a human name like "Chardonnay" and include it on your tax form next year when you file." Am I committing a crime by doing that?

[Fiduses and Diuses]

I am quite upset by the news. Now, I hear that Federal Funding has been cut off after a vote from the house.

Yep, I know its fox but
linky

[JuNii]

Seriously, JuNii, please, please look up aiding and abetting. Please. I beg of you. Claiming aiding and abetting occurred requires a crime to have been committed. It's not a crime by itself.

sure, jocabia, I'll look up aiding and abetting, you look up when investigations are necessary. deal?

[Jocabia]

I have to agree. If the ACORN staffer had then gotten out some tax forms and helped them fill them out fraudulently and they were then submitted to the IRS that way, yes, that's tax fraud. Heck, I could tell you "Junii, you should buy a dog, give it a human name like "Chardonnay" and include it on your tax form next year when you file." Am I committing a crime by doing that?

See, that's the thing. If no crime was ever committed on JuNii's part, then you're not aiding and abetting. You can't be. There was no crime that you aided and abetted. Now if he did commit a crime, that's when it gets complicated. Frankly, I'm not qualified to answer. I can tell you though, you can't have aided in the commission of a crime without a crime.

[Jocabia]

Seriously, JuNii, please, please look up aiding and abetting. Please. I beg of you. Claiming aiding and abetting occurred requires a crime to have been committed. It's not a crime by itself.

sure, jocabia, I'll look up aiding and abetting, you look up when investigations are necessary. deal?

Investigations are necessary when there is evidence of a crime. I asked you what crime. You said aiding and abetting. You don't see the problem here. You prove with every post that you don't know what you're talking about. Every single post. WHO committed the crime they aided and abetted? Go on. Who did?

I'll give you a hint, there is actually an intelligent answer that somewhat supports your point. That you don't know what it is, is evidence that you started with a position (that ACORN must be investigated) and then just made shit up till you thought it sounded like an argument.

[JuNii]

Investigations are necessary when there is evidence of a crime. I asked you what crime. You said aiding and abetting. You don't see the problem here. You prove with every post that you don't know what you're talking about. Every single post. WHO committed the crime they aided and abetted? Go on. Who did?

I'll give you a hint, there is actually an intelligent answer that somewhat supports your point. That you don't know what it is, is evidence that you started with a position (that ACORN must be investigated) and then just made shit up till you thought it sounded like an argument.

Ok, can you provide me with the legal definition that supports that an INVESTIGATION (not CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION) needs evidence of a crime.

[The_pantless_hero]

I'm not accusing them of anything. but it seems like the video is pointing to aiding and abetting tax fraud.

Having not watched any of them, perhaps you can quote somethings you believe are evidence of aiding and abetting tax fraud.

so... not watching any of them, you automatically assume they are biased and thus not worth investigating?

Having not watched any of them buy having seen the Halloween costumes the 'investigators' were wearing and the fact that Fox News is all over this like white on rice, then I am assuming is biased.
Also, you provided no evidence requested.

[JuNii]

I have to agree. If the ACORN staffer had then gotten out some tax forms and helped them fill them out fraudulently and they were then submitted to the IRS that way, yes, that's tax fraud. Heck, I could tell you "Junii, you should buy a dog, give it a human name like "Chardonnay" and include it on your tax form next year when you file." Am I committing a crime by doing that?

Are you giving this tax advice as a tax advisor or as a friend?

Remember, ACORN also helps people with setting up their taxes by giving advice. so it can be seen as their job.