Both Sides Deserve To Lose

Posted in the Utica Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#2 Jun 11, 2014
What is the basis for the campaign finance complaint???

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#4 Jun 11, 2014
Don't these laws have to do with political campaigns for public office. Spending money to protect your business interests have nothing to do with election law. Who did the make the contributions to? Who did they transfer money to? What fraud or misrepresentation regarding the media? I think you are grasping at straws. Maybe I'm missing something.

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#6 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
BAD,
As usual, you're missing a lot.
Once you advocate for or against an office holder, the ad does, then you are subject to campaign finance law. By the way, the proper way, in fact the way people who follow the law do it, to protect your business is with a PAC. Independent expenditures which cannot be tracked are illegal.
Buying media to influence before a public body is lobbying. In order to do that you have to register first.
Tim and Anjela said they were buying an ad when the money came from Nice N Easy. Concerned Citizens of Utica has never been registered as anything anywhere.
In other places in the United States, these laws are followed. Not surprisingly, those folks enjoy better government. You say you want better government than accuse those of trying to bring it to you of grasping at straws. You continually bitch about nothing getting done and then run your mouth when someone does something.
Make a decision: get on the train or get out of the way and shutup.
You quite simply be the most ignorant crackhead in the world.

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#7 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
BAD,
As usual, you're missing a lot.
Once you advocate for or against an office holder, the ad does, then you are subject to campaign finance law. By the way, the proper way, in fact the way people who follow the law do it, to protect your business is with a PAC. Independent expenditures which cannot be tracked are illegal.
Buying media to influence before a public body is lobbying. In order to do that you have to register first.
Tim and Anjela said they were buying an ad when the money came from Nice N Easy. Concerned Citizens of Utica has never been registered as anything anywhere.
In other places in the United States, these laws are followed. Not surprisingly, those folks enjoy better government. You say you want better government than accuse those of trying to bring it to you of grasping at straws. You continually bitch about nothing getting done and then run your mouth when someone does something.
Make a decision: get on the train or get out of the way and shutup.
And as usual, you insult anyone who questions you. I have done a little research myself and I think you are totally wrong on this. Campaign finance laws concern campaign financing. Whatever and whoever is funding this movement (and I am against them) is not financing anyone but themselves. They have every right to express their opinion, buy media ads, purchase signs, etc… to express their views. Unless they are bribing politicians or government employees to sway their votes, they are doing nothing wrong. They are not soliciting donations or accepting money under false pretenses. Please site case law where “independent expenditures” by individuals or businesses to express personal or political opinions are illegal. If I decide to post a sign on my property expressing my opinion that is my right. If I pay for signs and ask my neighbors to post them that is our right to do. If I want to buy media time to advocate for something I believe that is also my right. The First Amendment protects my right to express my views. If it happens to be a political view, so be it.

I have expressed my views on this matter. I am 100% in favor of Stewarts building in East Utica. I think the objections of a few neighbors should not deter this plan. In my opinion, Stewarts has made multiple attempts to get these people on board. Progress in Utica has suffered for years due to the insane fear of change expressed by its citizens.
Da Law

Ilion, NY

#9 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
1. Contribution made by non-confirming entity engaging in advocacy
Issue advocacy is constitutionally protected and has nothing to do with campaign financing. Google up "right to petition" if you're not familiar with the concept.
2. Illegal transfer of funds to a non registered entity for the purposes of lobbying
There are no reporting requirements for issue advocacy, hence there can be no "illegal transfer of funds" to support same.
3. Lack of reporting
New York has no reporting requirements for issue advocacy.
4. Fraud and misrepresentation regarding a media buy (Both Tim Trent and Anjela are allegedly guilty of that one)
You're tossing around accusations of fraud pretty freely. What's your evidence? More importantly, how can you have any legal interest in a private transaction, the aforementioned media buy?
Da Law

Ilion, NY

#10 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
Tim and Anjela said they were buying an ad when the money came from Nice N Easy. Concerned Citizens of Utica has never been registered as anything anywhere.
Now you might actually have something. You're looking at a potential violation of the Lobbying Act, not any kind of campaign finance violation.
YOU ARE

Rome, NY

#11 Jun 11, 2014
Utica Lies and Riggies wrote:
<quoted text>
You quite simply be the most ignorant crackhead in the world.
Retarted... What here is ignorant? He knows what he's talking about. Maybe hardly anyone else really knows, or even cares, and just because everyone doesn't or hasn't gotten in trouble for this doesn't make it any less valid. STFU LOSER!
YOU ARE

Rome, NY

#12 Jun 11, 2014
Da Law wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you might actually have something. You're looking at a potential violation of the Lobbying Act, not any kind of campaign finance violation.
This is also true
ABC

Utica, NY

#13 Jun 11, 2014
JusticeDefiled13501 wrote:
<quoted text>
And as usual, you insult anyone who questions you. I have done a little research myself and I think you are totally wrong on this. Campaign finance laws concern campaign financing. Whatever and whoever is funding this movement (and I am against them) is not financing anyone but themselves. They have every right to express their opinion, buy media ads, purchase signs, etc… to express their views. Unless they are bribing politicians or government employees to sway their votes, they are doing nothing wrong. They are not soliciting donations or accepting money under false pretenses. Please site case law where “independent expenditures” by individuals or businesses to express personal or political opinions are illegal. If I decide to post a sign on my property expressing my opinion that is my right. If I pay for signs and ask my neighbors to post them that is our right to do. If I want to buy media time to advocate for something I believe that is also my right. The First Amendment protects my right to express my views. If it happens to be a political view, so be it.
I have expressed my views on this matter. I am 100% in favor of Stewarts building in East Utica. I think the objections of a few neighbors should not deter this plan. In my opinion, Stewarts has made multiple attempts to get these people on board. Progress in Utica has suffered for years due to the insane fear of change expressed by its citizens.
I agree 100% with you and I hope to see you tonight express you feelings.
WellSaid

Rome, NY

#16 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
Da Law,
Let me help you:
From the state website:
What is a Contributor?
A contributor may be an individual, a corporation, another candidate's political committee, an unincorporated union or trade organization, a PAC or any other entity such as a League or association, etc.
The moment you "advocate" for or against an office holder, you have made a contribution whether or not the person is running or the person has an opponent. The ad directly mentions the Mayor. Hence, we have candidate advocacy.
As to filing, this applies because:
Yes, you still have to file. All candidates and/or registered committees are required to file January and July periodic reports until termination. Primary, General and Special Election filing requirements are triggered by candidate/committee activity. If the candidate/committee has had no activity,(i.e., receipts and/or expenditures, such as interest, dividends and bank charges) during any required reporting period, the candidate/committee is still required to file, in this instance a No-Activity Report. This report can be filed on the NYSBOE website using their Filer ID# and PIN or on paper using the Termination or Resignation Request Form/No-Activity Report Form CF-18.
The buying of the signs way back when represents activity.
Upon further review, it looks like they violated the max limit as well:
Here's the formula:
Total number of enrolled voters in the candidate's party in the district, excluding voters in inactive status, multiplied by $0.05, but at least $1,000, and no more than $50,000.
You can do the math at home.
Not only that, but Nice N Easy's contributions may be considered in aggregate creating yet another violation.
Ballot issue advocacy is wide open. This isn't that.
When 2 people buy an ad, wrongly attribute the ad, and all the while are using money from a 3rd Party, every voter, fundraiser and organizer has an interest in what is happening. Further, since the ad wrongly attributed, there is a Federal Tax implication.
Lastly, the FCC has its set of rules regarding attribution that were violated.
Other communities follow a much stricter set of rules and as a result have much better government. Your question about "legal interest" is borderline insulting.
Good reply post. Good info.

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#17 Jun 11, 2014
But this isn't an election and they aren't advocating for anyone but themselves. There are no contributions to claim because they haven't contributed to anyone. They aren't advocating for any candidates because there are no elections, hence no candidates. They don't have to file anything because there is no candidate or committee. They haven't violated any campaign contribution limits because they haven't given to any candidate or PAC.

You are really stretching to make your argument. You may not like what they are doing (as I don't) but that doesn't make it illegal.
taxpayer

Utica, NY

#18 Jun 11, 2014
JusticeDefiled13501 wrote:
But this isn't an election and they aren't advocating for anyone but themselves. There are no contributions to claim because they haven't contributed to anyone. They aren't advocating for any candidates because there are no elections, hence no candidates. They don't have to file anything because there is no candidate or committee. They haven't violated any campaign contribution limits because they haven't given to any candidate or PAC.
You are really stretching to make your argument. You may not like what they are doing (as I don't) but that doesn't make it illegal.
We will file the complaint and let the proper authorities decide. I am behind you 100 % and intend to make this a class action suit.
taxpayer

Utica, NY

#19 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
Da Law,
Let me help you:
From the state website:
What is a Contributor?
A contributor may be an individual, a corporation, another candidate's political committee, an unincorporated union or trade organization, a PAC or any other entity such as a League or association, etc.
The moment you "advocate" for or against an office holder, you have made a contribution whether or not the person is running or the person has an opponent. The ad directly mentions the Mayor. Hence, we have candidate advocacy.
As to filing, this applies because:
Yes, you still have to file. All candidates and/or registered committees are required to file January and July periodic reports until termination. Primary, General and Special Election filing requirements are triggered by candidate/committee activity. If the candidate/committee has had no activity,(i.e., receipts and/or expenditures, such as interest, dividends and bank charges) during any required reporting period, the candidate/committee is still required to file, in this instance a No-Activity Report. This report can be filed on the NYSBOE website using their Filer ID# and PIN or on paper using the Termination or Resignation Request Form/No-Activity Report Form CF-18.
The buying of the signs way back when represents activity.
Upon further review, it looks like they violated the max limit as well:
Here's the formula:
Total number of enrolled voters in the candidate's party in the district, excluding voters in inactive status, multiplied by $0.05, but at least $1,000, and no more than $50,000.
You can do the math at home.
Not only that, but Nice N Easy's contributions may be considered in aggregate creating yet another violation.
Ballot issue advocacy is wide open. This isn't that.
When 2 people buy an ad, wrongly attribute the ad, and all the while are using money from a 3rd Party, every voter, fundraiser and organizer has an interest in what is happening. Further, since the ad wrongly attributed, there is a Federal Tax implication.
Lastly, the FCC has its set of rules regarding attribution that were violated.
Other communities follow a much stricter set of rules and as a result have much better government. Your question about "legal interest" is borderline insulting.
This man I trying to bring some transparency , some clarity , some sanity , some legality and some intelligence into the political shenanigans that goes on here. He deserves our respect and our support. I hope many people can understand what he is trying to do and stand up with him. Power to the People! Thank you Bobby O!!

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#21 Jun 11, 2014
I'm all for good government but making up violations that aren't there is no better than what is going on at city hall. I'm not in favor of the way Nice-N-Easy is handling this situation but I am not going to chastise them for something they have every right to do. Two wrongs don't make a right. If you feel as strongly as you do, file the complaint and let the chips fall where they may. One thing I would ask of you though, when you get an answer on this complaint, let me know so I can say "I told you so".

Have a great day Bobby and keep up the good fight. Although we may not agree often and I disagree with your methods, I do respect your intent. We both have the same goal, we just disagree with the path to that goal.
Right

Rome, NY

#22 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
BAD,
It would be nice if any of the smokescreen you just put up mattered.
Sadly, for you, it doesn't.
They advocated against the Mayor - no friend of mine. However, rules are rules.
You tell us how you support "good government". Then, in the next breath, you come out against transparency. Which one is it??
He sounds like a tried and true politican! Hmmm....

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#23 Jun 11, 2014
YOU ARE wrote:
<quoted text>Retarted... What here is ignorant? He knows what he's talking about. Maybe hardly anyone else really knows, or even cares, and just because everyone doesn't or hasn't gotten in trouble for this doesn't make it any less valid. STFU LOSER!
What is retarded? Every law he ever states he makes up. For over a year I keep reading how he's going to do this...he's going to do that...he's not going to do anything. He's a whacked out, cracked out druggie who thinks he's smarter than he is and found the Internet.
Da Law

Ilion, NY

#24 Jun 11, 2014
BobbyO1967 wrote:
Da Law,
Let me help you:
From the state website:
What is a Contributor?
A contributor may be an individual, a corporation, another candidate's political committee, an unincorporated union or trade organization, a PAC or any other entity such as a League or association, etc.
Er..okay.
The moment you "advocate" for or against an office holder, you have made a contribution whether or not the person is running or the person has an opponent. The ad directly mentions the Mayor. Hence, we have candidate advocacy.
How, specifically, does this ad mention him? "Vote for Palmieri" is campaigning. "Tell the Mayor to make kittens illegal" is issue advocacy, or, possibly, lobbying.
The moment you "advocate" for or against an office holder, you have made a contribution whether or not the person is running or the person has an opponent.
Vote for Da Law. Are you saying I just made a reportable campaign contribution?
The ad directly mentions the Mayor. Hence, we have candidate advocacy.
Mentions have nothing to do with it. You have to actually, you know, campaign.
The buying of the signs way back when represents activity.
Only if the signs actually engage in political campaigning, not issue advocacy.
Ballot issue advocacy is wide open. This isn't that.
It would probably help if you actually provided some of the evidence you're basing your legal opinions on. What is the specific wording used in these signs and this mysterious ad?

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#25 Jun 11, 2014
Da Law wrote:
<quoted text>
Er..okay.
<quoted text>
How, specifically, does this ad mention him? "Vote for Palmieri" is campaigning. "Tell the Mayor to make kittens illegal" is issue advocacy, or, possibly, lobbying.
<quoted text>
Vote for Da Law. Are you saying I just made a reportable campaign contribution?
<quoted text>
Mentions have nothing to do with it. You have to actually, you know, campaign.
<quoted text>
Only if the signs actually engage in political campaigning, not issue advocacy.
<quoted text>
It would probably help if you actually provided some of the evidence you're basing your legal opinions on. What is the specific wording used in these signs and this mysterious ad?
It's Crackhead a Bobby O. He knows everything. He owns 141 timeshares and leases a property on mary st in utica. He doesn't need logic.
booby

Utica, NY

#26 Jun 11, 2014
Do not dish on my boy booby, he is Da Man!

P.S. Hey Booby want to yank one off later?

Since: May 14

Clifton Park, NY

#27 Jun 11, 2014
booby wrote:
Do not dish on my boy booby, he is Da Man!
P.S. Hey Booby want to yank one off later?
He does that only for crack.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
i miss you john biagini jr (Oct '12) 13 min Dirt People 15
Palmieri: This is you and all before. 18 min OOOtica Famuss 7
utica dpw illegal dumping 41 min Glad 4
Déjà vu Is 1 hr Rosie the riveter 1
Amidon medical 2 hr LeMec 1
News New candidate announces run for Utica mayor 3 hr Ouch 14
People that Invite U 2 Lunch & Talk on Their Ph... 3 hr Marie 6
WKTV-Smith 13 hr Muncher 16
Carbone auto group 19 hr Carboneya 21
How Much Does H & R Block charge To Do Your Taxes (Jan '09) Sat Janet 632
More from around the web

Utica People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]