Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge stops ACORN funding ban
The Hill ^

Posted on 12/11/2009 4:46:19 PM PST by Sub-Driver

Judge stops ACORN funding ban By Eric Zimmermann - 12/11/09 06:21 PM ET

A federal judge today issued an injunction preventing the implementation of a congressional ban on funding for ACORN.

Judge Nina Gershon concluded that the ban amounted to a "bill of attainder" that unfairly singled out ACORN.

"[The plaintiffs] have been singled out by Congress for punishment that directly and immediately affects their ability to continue to obtain federal funding, in the absence of any judicial, or even administrative, process of adjudicating guilt," Gershon wrote in her decision.

Gershon said ACORN had demonstrated "irreperable harm" from the ban, while "the potential harm to the government, in granting the injunction, is less."

The decision noted that the ban had already prevented ACORN from receiving payment from contracts awarded before the ban took effect.

"The public will not suffer harm by allowing the plaintiffs to continue work on contracts duly awarded by federal agencies, which was stopped solely by reason of [the ban]," Gershon wrote.

In defending the ban, the Obama administration argued it interpreted the bill narrowly enough to allow payment of existing contracts. But Gershon found the legislation too broad.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, issued a statement criticizing Gershon's decision and noting that she was appointed by Bill Clinton.

"This left-wing activist Judge is setting a dangerous precedent that left-wing political organizations plagued by criminal accusations have a constitutional entitlement to taxpayer dollars," Issa said. "The Obama Administration should immediately move to appeal this injunction.”


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: acorn; barackhusseinobama; bhojudges; december; federalspending; fundingtheleft; obama; pelosi; ruling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-110 next last
To: ErnBatavia
Lawyers run this country...always have, always will.

Lawyers only work as a "mouthpiece" for those who really run this country.

51 posted on 12/11/2009 6:17:48 PM PST by Kells
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
"the potential harm to the government, in granting the injunction, is less."

Well, THAT'S true.

But hell, what about the damn TAXPAYERS? Oh yeah! The TAXPAYERS! The people who actually FUND the damn government.

So what about THEM? What about US? What about the PEOPLE?

52 posted on 12/11/2009 6:32:44 PM PST by john in springfield (One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe such things.No ordinary man could be such a fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kells

Bullshit....check the creds of 90% of our politicians. You might be surprised to find an “LLD” in the mix.


53 posted on 12/11/2009 6:35:49 PM PST by ErnBatavia (Obama is a DIC....... Ditherer-in-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

This is part of the deal made behind the scenes with Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and ACORN. They had to strip funding to save public face, but the Dims knew that there was a judge that would restore funding out there, and directed ACORN to file suit there.


54 posted on 12/11/2009 7:42:40 PM PST by Thunder90 (Fighting for truth and the American way... http://citizensfortruthandtheamericanway.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia
Bullshit....check the creds of 90% of our politicians. You might be surprised to find an “LLD” in the mix.

You think most politicians are something other than paid front-men?

55 posted on 12/11/2009 8:12:13 PM PST by Kells
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: avacado

How in the world can a federal judge override Congress?
+++++++++++++++++

What??!


56 posted on 12/11/2009 8:23:32 PM PST by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Church, Country - Keep on Tea Partiers - party like it's 1773!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Yet another leftist judge on the take.


57 posted on 12/11/2009 9:31:34 PM PST by M. Espinola (Freedom is never "free")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Canedawg


"Yo, Congress ... gimme your stash!"


58 posted on 12/11/2009 10:56:01 PM PST by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
The World is upside down.

Here's an idea: Someone should create a website and formulate a plan for demonstrations. Oh wait, that plan hasn't yet stopped the growth of marxism. My bad.

59 posted on 12/11/2009 11:25:06 PM PST by A Navy Vet (An Oath Is Forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
It appears that we have every indication Nina Gershon is a f***ing idiot.

I think we should defund Gershon.

Guess what happens if congress tries to defund the EPA? Only Dems can refuse to fund.

60 posted on 12/12/2009 12:05:45 AM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Joe Wilson said "You lie!" in a room full of 500 politicians. Who was he talking about?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

So, the Government is not allowed to cancel contracts? The Government, once approving funding for an organization, can never stop funding it?

What idiocy is this?


61 posted on 12/12/2009 1:20:03 AM PST by Rocky (Obama's ego: The "I's" have it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90

winner winner chicken dinner.


62 posted on 12/12/2009 3:17:08 AM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Now ACORN is federally funded in perpetuity, by court order. We can never defund them. Because it would be unconstitutional. The words “absurd result” only begin to describe this scenario.


63 posted on 12/12/2009 6:43:43 AM PST by LikeLight (www.IsThereALawyerInTheChurch.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I’ve been waiting to see what happened with this. It is an interesting question, because it does potentially impact upon the obligation of contract, which used to be regarded with some sanctity. That I suppose must be weighed against the idea that Congress’ decision not to fund an organization constitutes punishment, which I frankly find hard to imagine. Cue the appeal.


64 posted on 12/12/2009 6:49:40 AM PST by americanophile (Merry Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: M. Espinola

Exactly. Not only do we have a chicago thug mobster as President of the United States but he is also a radical black theologian marxist long legged mack daddy.

As the SOB Obama acts all humble getting his prize he and Rahm, Axelrod and Clinton are laughing their arses off as slick willy appointed this leftist judge and Obama yet again usurps the rule of law.

So Obama continues to rule with ACORN allowing him to steal all future elections again.

I will await a republican response to this.

:::crickets:::


65 posted on 12/12/2009 6:51:47 AM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

There better be an appeal because federal taxpayer money going to a criminal organization=ACORN SHOULD trump any contract.


66 posted on 12/12/2009 6:54:18 AM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Could we begin defunding ACORN with bulldozers then?


67 posted on 12/12/2009 7:05:02 AM PST by struggle ((The struggle continues))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

100% Unconstitutional


68 posted on 12/12/2009 7:08:35 AM PST by My Favorite Headache
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojitojoe

Oh another hot liberal woman I see. They are all nasty skanks....each and every one of them. All ugly as hell inside and out.


69 posted on 12/12/2009 7:09:54 AM PST by My Favorite Headache
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
As someone else said on another thread...

This too shall be taken care of in the next REVOLUTION!

70 posted on 12/12/2009 7:39:24 AM PST by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

You wrote: “Entitlements are now a Constitutional Right.”
_________________________________________________________

No, but a property interest in entitlements (the “new property”) has been developed in case law, not surprisingly in the 1960s and 1970s. Welfare recipients can sue to keep their benefits, so ACORN can claim its right to funding on similar grounds. Sad, but true.


71 posted on 12/12/2009 7:50:08 AM PST by mrreaganaut (Sticks and stones may break my bones, but lawyer jokes are actionable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Where in the Constitution is that??

Pelosi would respond to that question by asking you if you were serious.

72 posted on 12/12/2009 7:51:23 AM PST by mainepatsfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

O don’t know why anybody is complaining about the Judges ruling; we all know that government funding is an absolute and undeniable right.


73 posted on 12/12/2009 7:54:25 AM PST by Libertarianize the GOP (Make all taxes truly voluntary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertarianize the GOP
The “judge” is a sycophantic ideologue appointed by clintoon. Thanks again Rinos for allowing clintoon to appoint for life so any liberal losers who are so confused that they think we should be like North Korea or some other tyrannical country.
74 posted on 12/12/2009 8:27:20 AM PST by hal ogen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

neither the Legislative branch, nor the Executive Branch of Government is REQUIRED to Abide by The Judicial Branch. They are separate but equal. The Legislative branch can decide for themselves what is Constitutional. Th Judicial Branch has NO ENFORCEMENT POWERS.

Furthermore if congress really wanted to, they would add the following to ANY legislation they want:
“The Judiciary shall remain silent on this issue”
as the Constitution ALLOWS.

Remember the Judicial Branch only has authority UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED by CONGRESS. Read the Constitution.


75 posted on 12/12/2009 8:36:54 AM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Excuse me, its SOLELY in the power of congress to write the checks. The Judiciary has no say in the matter if congress decides to STOP funding something. This is a separation of Powers issue and one that I don’t think will stand upon appeal.

Congress better stand up for itself or the judiciary is going to rule them.


76 posted on 12/12/2009 9:10:31 AM PST by Danae (No political party should pick candidates. That's the voters job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz; Landru

Ping to insanity.


77 posted on 12/12/2009 9:25:54 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops, and vote out the RINO's!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
There's more ways than one to skin these crooked nutjobs....with or without Ohaha/Holder colluding to undermine US laws.

BACKSTORY On October 24, 2009, Biggovernment.com revealed that the San Diego office of ACORN dumped thousands of documents into a dumpster in advance of an investigation into the organization's activities by California Attorney General Jerry Brown. After Biggovernment.com sorting, 20,000 documents were retained.....included sensitive personal information, financial records and documents outlining the internal and political workings of ACORN.

One of the documents obtained by Biggovernment.com shows that ACORN had business relationships with 28 major financial institutions for the purpose of assisting homeowners whose mortgages were in foreclosure.

ACORN – Citibank Flyer _Redacted_ – Citigroup was one of the 28 financial institutions with which ACORN had a business relationship. ACORN operated a Citi Outreach program where employees of ACORN were provided personal information for Citigroup’s customers and would make contact with borrowers who fell behind on their mortgage payments. The objective of the program was to get homeowners to contact ACORN Housing Corporation (AHC).

Testimony provided to members of two congressional committees, the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, revealed that ACORN used the Citi Outreach program, as well as a program operated on behalf of Bank of America, as a membership recruiting tool where homeowners where expected to pay monthly membership dues to ACORN prior to receiving assistance.

Testimony provided by Anita MonCrief, a former ACORN employee turned whistle-blower, sated that ACORN had quotas for membership recruitment. Documents provided to Biggovernment.com show that regardless of whether the homeowner was assisted or not, ACORN was paid by Citigroup as long as a current phone number was obtained. The document also shows that ACORN employees were well aware of the need to keep these documents and records private due to state and federal privacy laws. The document reads, “People on this list have their privacy protected. Keep the lists private.”

ACORN – Citibank Outreach _Redacted_ – The reason Wall Street lawyers and board rooms are concerned about ACORN beyond the current political and public relations drawbacks, ACORN’s actions of throwing sensitive private information into a public dumpster containing bank customer records begs the question, is a class action lawsuit in the offing?

One document obtained by Biggovernment.com shows Citibank customers names, addresses and mortgage loan numbers were illegally disclosed, not to mention the very fact that these individuals are on this list reveals their credit worthiness since they are in a default status with regards to paying their mortgage loans.

ACORN – Citibank Customer _Redacted_ – Wall Street certainly has enough to worry about with a weak U.S. economy and uncertainty in global financial markets. But thanks to ACORN, there is now more to worry about. Citibank’s cavalier treatment of its customers sensitive, personal and financial information is potentially a serious breach of state and federal law.

As the depth of the San Diego ACORN office data breach becomes more clear, Citigroup and possibly more banks, will have to prepare for the inevitable onslaught of low-income homeowners lining up to take advantage of what is truly to be a cash bonanza for the poor.

Be assured that there will be many law firms willing to help “spread the wealth” to these economically disadvantaged individuals whose personal information was treated with careless disregard. SOURCE http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/10/acorn-document-dump-citibank-jeopardizes-customers-for-acorn/

==========================================

REFERENCE

What was found in the San Diego ACORN document dump ?

>> the inner workings of ACORN in California,

>> sensitive personal information of ACORN employees, members, clients,

>> SS nos, driver’s license numbers, immigration records, and tax returns,

>> ACORN’s entire political agenda laid bare,

>> thousands upon thousands of documents revealing the depth of ACORN's corrupt political machine,

>> ACORN's disturbing ties to public employee labor unions, to radical leftist groups,

>> could expose those politicians in cahoots with ACORN.

Q. Are there laws governing how discards of personal info should be handled? ACORN dumped sensitive personal information on ACORN employees, members, clients---SS nos, driver’s license numbers, immigration records, and tax returns

A. California has had a personal information destruction law since January 1, 2001. Businesses must destroy, or arrange for destruction of, all records w/ personal information that they no longer wish to retain.

LINK TO LAW HERE http://www.taxnewsandtips.com/ab_2246_bill.pdf
More info here: http://www.calshredding.com/laws.php (BigGovernment.com blogger's post)

ACORN also trashed applications for public assistance. Could be they were engaged in govt fraud......making fraudulent applications for Food Stamps using different identities, then selling the food stamps on the street. San Ysidro supermarkets should account for who is using foodstamps.

ACORN's San Diego office is a border down. An applicant could live in Tijuana and have a PO Box across the Border in San Ysidro — 15 minutes south of San Diego. They could ride the US gravy train and collect Welfare, Food Stamps, SSI, Medicaid, Healthy Families subsidies, UI, Workman's Comp, SS# checks and EITC refunds under several identities.....and actually live in Tijuana, Mexico.

They could be (1) American Citizens living in Tijuana, (2) Mexican Citizens with a Green Card, or, (3) illegal aliens who get friends or relatives to pick up benefit checks and/or foodstamps. (BigGovernment.com blogger's post)

78 posted on 12/12/2009 9:41:56 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: All
January 7, 2009
EXCERPT----JUSTICE DEPARTMENT COMPLAINT (24pp)
IN RE: ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM NOW

The undersigned State Board delegates and National Board members of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (“ACORN”) file this criminal complaint against ACORN Staff and Executive Board members for fraud, embezzlement, conspiracy and concealment, and criminal civil rights violations. Additionally, since there has already been the public admission that a felony was committed, it is also possible that other federal offenses have also been committed including but not limited to;

Title 18 U.S.C. §1341, Mail Fraud,

18 U.S.C.§1001, Presenting a False Document to an Agent of the United States Government;

18 U.S.C.§1027 False statements and concealment of facts in relation to documents required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and other possible offenses including civiland/or criminal RICO violations.

18 U.S.C. §§1961-68 (RICO Act)

18 U.S.C. §1001 (False Statements to Agents of the U.S. Government),

18 U.S.C. §1341 (Mail Fraud),

18 U.S.C. §1027 (ERISA Violations),

18 U.S.C. §241 (Conspiracy Against Civil Rights).

Finally, the complainants contend that full investigations of a RICO conspiracy under 18U.S.C. §1962(c) are warranted because they assert that (1) the defendant persons (2) were employed by or associated with an enterprise (3) that engaged in or affected interstate commerce and that (4) the defendant persons operated or managed the enterprise (5) through a pattern (6) of racketeering activity, and (7) the complaints were injured in its business or property by reason of the pattern of racketeering activity.

Thus, the complainants feel that a formal RICO investigationis also warranted. 1. The Alleged Offense:The Complainants hereby allege a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §241 – Conspiracy Against Constitutional Rights – which prohibits in relevant part, “two or more persons (from conspiring) to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same . . .” See, 18 U.S.C. §241.

BACKGROUND ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, is acommunity-based advocacy organization founded in 1970. ACORN became part of the story of the 2008 presidential election as news reports and allegations surfaced against ACORN in a number of states. These complaints refer primarily to alleged irregularities with voter registrationdrives conducted by the organization. (National Review Online: Inside Obama's ACORN, May 29, 2008.) But also included significant embezzlement and concealment by Senior Staff and Executive Committee members.

ACORN registered as a non-profit corporation with the Secretary of State in Louisiana in 1977. Its Charter Organization ID is 04700320X. According to its corporate filings, ACORN's principle place of business is New Orleans, Louisiana, and approximately 294 related entitiesand related non-profits are also located at this place of business. ACORN is not registered as a tax-exempt organization.

ACORN's top three officers are President Maude Hurd of Dorchester, MA, Vice President Maria Polanco of Brooklyn, NY, and Secretary Maxine A. Nelson of Pine Bluff, AR. (Bertha Lewis recently became ACORN CEO) Maxine A. Nelson is also the director of Project Vote.

Citizen’s Consulting, Inc. (CCI) provides bookkeeping, human resource and financial management services exclusively for ACORN and related entities. All of CCI’s “clients” reside at ACORN office locations, utilize common management and staff. CCI is the financial “nerve center” for ACORN and it affiliated organizations which houses the corporate books and records for all ACORN entities.

ACORN Structure ACORN was founded by Wade Rathke, an activist on issues of labor unions and lowincome workers, and Gary Delgado, an activist on issues of race and social justice. It has national headquarters in New York, New Orleans and Washington, D.C. The organization describes itself as a non-profit, non-partisan social justice organization. In 2003,

ACORN opened operations in 20 new cities, including 5 state capitals. The group claims about 350,000 members across the country. (Wall Street Journal: Obama and ACORN, October 14, 2008).

Since 1970, ACORN has grown to more than 400,000 member families, organized in 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 citiesacross the U.S. and in cities in Canada, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Peru, Argentina and India.

ACORN Funding--Government grants: According to an October 8, 2008 article in the New York Post, 40% of ACORN'soperations are funded through grants it receives from various governmental entities. (New York Post: The Pro-Barack Vote-Fraud Drive, Michelle Malkin, Oct. 8, 2008)

Grants have been issued to ACORN by the Dept of Housing and Urban Development, which gave $8.2 million to ACORN in the years between 2003 and 2006, as well as $1.6 million to ACORN affiliates. The Environmental Protection Agency gave a $100,000 grant to ACORN in 2004 for a Louisiana Justice Project, which removed lead from the homes of low income families. The Justice Department also gave a grant to ACORN in 2005 for a juvenile delinquency program. (NPR: ACORN's Money Tree Has Many Branches, October 15, 2008). --

SNIP--24 pp

SOURCE http://www.acorn-8.net/PDFs/USAttComp.pdf

79 posted on 12/12/2009 9:44:19 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

Unbelievable.


80 posted on 12/12/2009 10:32:17 AM PST by Pride in the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight

You’re wrong. The judge made clear that they can be defunded ONLY IF they are found guilty of a crime. No court or review has found them guilty of a crime.


81 posted on 12/12/2009 10:48:30 AM PST by Dementio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Liz

A complaint is not enough. There has to be a verdict.


82 posted on 12/12/2009 10:49:47 AM PST by Dementio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: avacado

Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to work? If an Act of Congress believed to be unconstitutional, an interested party can bring suit to have it struck down. That was what happened here, and the judge ruled that the law forbidding ACORN from receiving funds WAS unconstitutional. It constitued a Bill of Attainder, which are specifically forbidden in the Constitution.
Now this decision can be appealed to the Supreme Court.

If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court’s decision, then the only recourse would be to pass a Constitutional amendment which permits such Congressional decisions which prohibit specific groups from receiving funding.


83 posted on 12/12/2009 10:51:42 AM PST by worst-case scenario (Striving to reach the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

ditto and I bet she didn’t get to pubbie campaign funds either

what a load of bull!


84 posted on 12/12/2009 10:52:08 AM PST by tutstar (Baptist Ping list - freepmail me to get on or off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rocky

Of course “government can cancel contracts.” The agewncies that award them can cancel them at any time, following th rules that are already estbalished to prevent fraud, waste and abuse.

What Congress CANNOT do is pass a “Bill of Attainder” - that is, a specific bill singling out a specific group or organization for punishment. Passing a bill that names one organization as ineligible to compete for the same funds that other groups may try for is considered a Bill of Attainder, which the Constitution specifically forbids.


85 posted on 12/12/2009 10:56:16 AM PST by worst-case scenario (Striving to reach the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

We must demand that any candidate who wants our support in 2010 must pledge to impeach this corrupt, hard-left judge!


86 posted on 12/12/2009 10:58:59 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

How? The congress is run by Democrats. The executive branch is run by Democrats.


87 posted on 12/12/2009 11:18:29 AM PST by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

If I still considered the courts guardians of justice and freedom, this might mean something.


88 posted on 12/12/2009 12:14:28 PM PST by RWB Patriot ("Need has never produced anything. It has only been an excuse to steal from those with ablity.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: worst-case scenario
If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court’s decision, then the only recourse would be to pass a Constitutional amendment which permits such Congressional decisions which prohibit specific groups from receiving funding.

Or congress could just remove, one by one, every bit of Acorn funding from the budget, without stating that they are not allowed to receive funding.

But that would be hard work, involving actually reading the bills they passed.

89 posted on 12/12/2009 12:43:46 PM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Nina Gershon:

Gina Gershon:

One little letter can make such a difference.

90 posted on 12/12/2009 12:49:15 PM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dementio

The charges are not made by just anybody-—these are ACORN insiders making the charges.

Moreover, the charges of massive wrongdoing. (even if not acted upon by Ohaha/Holder wimps) open the door to the ACORN snake pit.

From the charges mentioned, I can see about 100 single-spaced typed pages of crimes........one crime per line.


91 posted on 12/12/2009 1:33:06 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

So an organization is attainded if you DON’T give them contracts?! They are not being fined, they are not being imprisoned. Just not getting any new contracts. WTF


92 posted on 12/12/2009 1:52:28 PM PST by Eleutheria5 (www.publishedauthors.net/benmaxwell/index.html, http://sites.google.com/site/thevuzvuz/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dementio
The judge made clear that they can be defunded ONLY IF they are found guilty of a crime.

So Congress can't simply decide to defund anyone it chooses? It's our money. Congress represents us. If we don't want them to fund ACORN, then they need to stop. It's politics, not law. Judicial branch is attempting to improperly impose its will on legislative branch.

93 posted on 12/12/2009 1:53:49 PM PST by LikeLight (www.IsThereALawyerInTheChurch.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Nice to hear from you again EV.


94 posted on 12/12/2009 1:55:55 PM PST by Nuc1 (NUC1 Sub pusher SSN 668 (Liberals Aren't Patriots))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: dead

Are their any liberal women that are not dogs?


95 posted on 12/12/2009 2:04:55 PM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Article 1 Section 9-10.


96 posted on 12/12/2009 2:23:46 PM PST by UndauntedR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

read the comments at the bottom of the article here.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30504.html

There is one with Obama’s picture that is a liberal. The comment is so far off it must be a joke or a paid blogger from Holder’s basement.


97 posted on 12/12/2009 3:02:22 PM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead

The problem is that the money is specified as “ACORN funding.” It is normally money earmarked for some program like housing or rental assistance, and various organizations can apply for grants that are then disbursed to their clients.

The bills that have been declared unconstitutional are the ones that forbid ACORN from taking part in the application process, or that forbid them from receiving money even if they submit a qualifying application.

Of course, once ACORN is actually convicted of a crime in any court of law, then they can be precluded from receiving money. Since they haven’t been found guilty of anything yet, there is no recourse at the present time.


98 posted on 12/12/2009 3:19:01 PM PST by worst-case scenario (Striving to reach the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: NoObamaFightForConservatives

I’d wager most porn stars are liberal. Kind of goes with the territory.


99 posted on 12/12/2009 5:03:45 PM PST by Soothesayer9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

the judge is a big lib, from Chicago, mmmmmm

wonder if a call was made to her and how lucky were ACORN that this case was given to a very liberal judge.

ARF


100 posted on 12/12/2009 6:49:51 PM PST by manc (Marriage is between a man and a woman, end of. -end racism end affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-110 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson