Skip to comments.So evading government scrutiny is a crime. Why?
Posted on 06/03/2015 11:41:01 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
“A government employee or elected official with clearance do not have a right to hide being blackmailed”
Forget, for a minute, that he was a government official being blackmailed (since they didn’t charge him with a crime related to that). Would he have a right to hide legitimate, legal financial transactions from government scrutiny?
Is it a crime to drive 65 mph because you’re avoiding breaking a 70 mph limit?
Yeah, if that $10,000 had kept up with inflation, it would be $50,000 now. Or something like that...
Wait’ll $10,000 is your typical monthly rent. That’ll be fun. :-)
RE: Is it a crime to drive 65 mph because youre avoiding breaking a 70 mph limit?
I dunno, here in NY State, the speed limit in many highways is still 55 MPH and ALMOST NO ONE I know drives below that.
There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. ― Ayn Rand
Nice article but I think the hidden news here is this is vindictive prosecution. Punishment for something.
Thing is, the fedgov clearly DOES track <$10k transactions. Otherwise, they would not know that he broke the rule!
I still use cash for a lot. But I’m a stubborn SOB...
I think there more to this story than is being reported. I suspect that the “hush money” story is a facade for other financial misdeeds. Why would a former House Speaker who has been out of government for years pay $3M in hush money over something that happened more than 30 years ago before he was even in government?
We need to repeal bad laws, and “structuring” laws should join “civil asset forfeiture” laws and all federal firearms laws in being repealed as soon as possible.
Post of the day imho.
“Post of the day”
I’m honored. Thank you.
Care to expand on this interesting anecdote?
How the heck would the polices know about the transaction?
Because we are no longer a truly Free People.
When we reach the point, which we have, that some in the Media and out Fellow Citizens advocate limits in Free Speech with no blowback, we are doomed.
Farmers in the 70’s and 80’s would often carry 10-15 thousand on them in E.Tennessee.
You never knew when a deal would come along.
They also carried guns with narry a permit.
Privileges? Silly me, I thought it was a Right to privacy...
The dealership called the cops. The manager told him that they couldn’t take cash, and that it put him in danger of getting the whole thing seized. The cops were outside before he was through.
He was lucky. They knew of him, and didn’t take the cash. He could have lost it to asset forfeiture, and never seen it again
And close to 300,000 gun owners in the state of Connecticut are defying the new laws requiring registration.
Mass defiance in Connecticut against assault weapon registration law
by Rick Moran
As J.D. Tuccille points out in this Hit and Run article on non-compliance with the new Connecticut assault weapons registration law, the morons who wrote it evidently knew nothing of history.
A bit of miltary wisdom has it that you should never give an order you know won’t be obeyed. Issuing such an order accomplishes nothing except to undermine your authority and expose the extent to which, no matter what enforcement mechanisms are in place, you rely upon voluntary compliance. But now that Connecticut’s resident class of politically employed cretins has awoken to the fact that, in their state, like everywhere else, people overwhelmingly disobey orders to register their weapons, they’re acting like this is a shocking revelation. They’re also promising to make those who tried to comply, but missed the deadline regret the effort (proving the point of the openly defiant). And the politicians’ enablers in the press are screaming for the prosecution of “scores of thousands” of state residents who, quite predictably, flipped the bird at the government.
Hopefully, word about the dealership's snitching tendencies got out on the street, and impacted their bottom line.
Really?..then why didn't Hillery have the right to have a private email server?....Why did the government....and the public... have the right to see her email?...
one private citizen doesn't have the right to see another private citizens emails
so how the hell if you're treating Hillary is a private citizen do you have the right to demand to see your email?..
you have the right because she's not acting as a private citizen she's acting as Secretary of State...and it the same reason Haster can not hide hush money payments
Haven't your noticed the press and the left being surprisingly surprisingly sympathetic to Haster a Republican...why???.... get a clue they want your to be hypocritical....
good God you trying to say Haster a government official had the right to hide he was paying hush money for this ...great you win that battle an established that precedent...then how the hell do you later argue Hilary didn't have the right to hide email correspondence
You're being set up for the left in government to establish the precedent to hide all sorts of things from public scrutiny
..government officials are not private citizens, quit treating them as such, otherwise they will walk all over the public and hide all sorts of dirty tricks
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.