The Curious Case of Alvin Greene

[Sam Spade]

lol at the whole situation...

[Sam Spade]

What jerk removed my thread?

I didn't remove your thread, I just merged it with this one.

I don't want 50 SC Dem threads dominating this forum, as with 50 Rand Paul threads a couple of weeks ago.

King's is the next to go here.

[Sam Spade]

Is this all a function of uber low information primary day voters? I mean the suggestion that there was massive ballot tampering in SC just doesn't seem very believable.

Massive ballot tampering is ridiculous conspiracy nonsense.

The SC GOP planting candidates is much more believable, but alas, not illegal without more information than what we've got.  Amusing that Dem primary voters fell for it, but this is certainly not without precedent in either party in many states.

 In general Greene performed stronger in the black dominated areas than his statewide average (or where blacks would dominate the Dem primaries), but there were a couple of oddities, and he still performed decently in the white areas outside the coast (Horry was a little strange, but whatever)

[Sam Spade]

The SC GOP planting candidates is much more believable, but alas, not illegal without more information than what we've got.  Amusing that Dem primary voters fell for it, but this is certainly not without precedent in either party in many states.

The $10,000 that Greene spent may have been illegal.  Obviously for a federal race, the maximum contribution is a notch about $2k.

Torie, I'm not saying they rigged the counting.  At worst, the shady things involved independent expenditures to target black voters.   Which may be illegal campaign expenditures, depending on the source of the money.

All the "may be" reasons you're saying why this "may be illegal" is why I'm saying - "not illegal without further information than what we've got."

Become a lawyer - it helps with the thought process. 

[Sam Spade]

Honestly, interfering in the other side's primary is done all the time.  Hell, I may have done it.  But there is a big difference between legal and illegal.    

Of course. 

But show me the federal statute that says said action is illegal.  What are the elements?  What is the standard of proof?  What are the parties who can be implicated in such actions and what are the circumstances that catches them within the meaning of the statute?  Build me a case, because otherwise accusations of illegality are baseless.

Oh and btw, lawyers struggle for their money.  Anyone who actually works and take responsibility struggles for the money which is why folks around here have such a positive view of government jobs.

[Sam Spade]

Lunar's is the only theory worth paying attention to (not the voter fraud crap), imo, but the facts present to us right now fail to provide the connection that he suspects is going on.

[Sam Spade]

Lunar's is the only theory worth paying attention to (not the voter fraud crap), imo, but the facts present to us right now fail to provide the connection that he suspects is going on.

Something that may be interesting though, is that $10,000 is, I believe, the exact amount that someone can write you a check for that causes the bank to automatically red flag the transaction and pass it along to the government for inspection.

It's how Eliot was caught.  So if an AG's office were to inspect, they might not have to even subpoena very far, depending on how well the tracks were covered

If they were stupid enough to transfer the $10K at once, they deserve to get caught.  Heck, if they gave it to him via anything other than cash, in small amounts, they deserve to get caught.  We'll see.

[Sam Spade]

Greene probe closed, no wrongdoing found.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39556.html