Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Ted Cruz got his way and unlimited grift of campaign funds is now approved by the Supreme Court   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Stupid, Supreme Court of the United States, oral arguments, Supreme Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, campaign activities, candidate's loan, candidate's own pockets  
•       •       •

2483 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 May 2022 at 11:25 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



71 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-05-16 11:26:42 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-16 11:26:57 AM  
The best court money could buy.
 
2022-05-16 11:27:12 AM  
Man, we citizens really need to unite to stop stuff like this from getting worse.
 
2022-05-16 11:27:16 AM  
This supreme Court will be the death of all of us
 
2022-05-16 11:29:17 AM  
Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.
 
2022-05-16 11:30:29 AM  
A government by the people, for the people.

The definition of people is the problem here.
 
2022-05-16 11:30:51 AM  
Bribes keep getting more and more legal.
 
2022-05-16 11:31:23 AM  
How many congresspeople will be loaning they campaigns $20 at a 5000000000% interest rate now?
 
2022-05-16 11:31:47 AM  
You can't limit speech, in the form of money, with the intent of helping to stem a hypothetical societal harm like corruption.

You gotta limit speech to prevent *real* harm. Like the damage that comes to kids from hearing about CRT or finding out that gays exist.
 
2022-05-16 11:32:38 AM  
Wow, the SCOTUS no longer gives a farkkkkkkkkk
 
2022-05-16 11:32:53 AM  
Can we bring forth a case to SCOTUS that he is permanently ineligible for the Presidency on account of his Canadian birth?
 
2022-05-16 11:34:11 AM  

TheManofPA: Man, we citizens really need to unite to stop stuff like this from getting worse.


To those who will reply "Vote!" I hereby offer the following rebuttal: one has to vote with money, not votes
 
2022-05-16 11:34:27 AM  
Justice Amy Coney Barrett said that Cruz had emphasized that the after-election repayment scheme would simply replenish his coffers from money he had loaned. "This doesn't enrich him personally, because he's no better off than he was before," she said, adding, "It's paying a loan, not lining his pockets."

And Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that a candidate may feel reluctant to loan money before the campaign out of fear he would not be able to recoup it. "That seems to be," he said, "a chill on your ability to loan your campaign money."


LOL

"A candidate's loan to his campaign is an expenditure that may be used for expressive acts," the court said in an opinion written by DC Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Neomi Rao. She and DC District Court Judges Amit Mehta and Timothy Kelly ruled unanimously.

"Such expressive acts are burdened when a candidate is inhibited from making a personal loan, or incurring one, out of concern that she will be left holding the bag on any unpaid campaign debt," the ruling added.


Aahahahahahahaha like seriously what the fark? Investment comes with risk, someone deciding a loan is risky isn't chilling their speech. Make the loan, then eat shiat when you can't repay it like the rest of us.
 
2022-05-16 11:34:32 AM  

cocozilla: This supreme Court will be the death of all of us


That happened in 2000 when they handed the presidency to oilman Duhbya and flushed the planet down the heat death sewer.
 
2022-05-16 11:38:34 AM  
This is all Hillary's fault.  If she hadn't rigged the DNC primary so she'd win, then rigged the RNC primary so Trump would win, then rigged the general so she'd lose, this never would have happened.
 
2022-05-16 11:39:32 AM  
A day before he was reelected in 2018, Cruz loaned his campaign committee $260,000, $10,000 over the limit -- laying the foundation for his legal challenge to the cap. While he could have been repaid in full by campaign funds if the repayment occurred 20 days after the election. But Cruz let the 20-day deadline lapse so that he could establish grounds to bring the legal challenge.

Isn't there some legal principle that the Courts aren't supposed to hear cases that were engineered to test the law?

Like, if Cruz intentionally loaned his campaign $10k more than the limit set in the law just so that he could file a challenge, AND let the deadline lapse just so he could file a challenge - both of which are things he's admitted, right? (I seem to recall that he said he was trying to get this to SCOTUS to get the law struck) - shouldn't they tell him to go pound Albertan tar sands?

// oh, right - 6-3 conservative majority
 
2022-05-16 11:40:06 AM  
You can tell where the money is coming from by  the amount of time your politician spends in your state even if they're not wearing a Canadian flag in a foreign country.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-16 11:42:06 AM  
The opinion didn't cite a single 17th century British person who believed in witchcraft, so therefore it's utter BS.
 
2022-05-16 11:44:02 AM  

Bootleg: How many congresspeople will be loaning they campaigns $20 at a 5000000000% interest rate now?


You know we could all run for office with loans to ourselves and then donate to each other's campaigns right before interest payments are due and .  Hang on, gimmie a sec.  We can make this work.
 
2022-05-16 11:45:39 AM  
Good. Paying off a loan doesn't enrich you personally. Cruz was right to challenge the cap as violating free speech and the ruling say he's right.

"But I don't like him" isn't a valid argument.
 
2022-05-16 11:48:20 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-16 11:48:46 AM  
So now I can 'loan' my PAC 1$ at 5000% interest per day, and my buddy Koch will pay me back as long as I do what he says?

Cool. Cool cool cool. Definitely not corruption.

Also, what the fark is it with all these, "You didn't provide any examples of people doing the thing you made it illegal to do, so it must not be a problem?" arguments?
 
2022-05-16 11:49:11 AM  
This is corrupt AF.
 
2022-05-16 11:50:30 AM  
I never thought I would live to see the day when the United States Supreme Court has become a kangaroo court run by a bunch of farking idiots. They're basing their opinions on political ideology, not law. And now their opinions are becoming law for the land. This is a farking farce
 
2022-05-16 11:54:19 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


LOL this country is a worthless pile of garbage.
 
2022-05-16 11:56:02 AM  
There was also this POS ruling that was so egregious that Gorsuch noped out of it

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-16 11:56:31 AM  

serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.


The ruling sucks but why would it be income?
 
2022-05-16 12:00:53 PM  

dumbobruni: There was also this POS ruling that was so egregious that Gorsuch noped out of it

[Fark user image 425x423]


I read his dissent. It gets a bit deep into the weeds such that you do feel for why everyone hates lawyers, but he was right. Roberts' opinion reads like a child's compared to his dissent.
 
2022-05-16 12:05:04 PM  

dumbobruni: There was also this POS ruling that was so egregious that Gorsuch noped out of it

[Fark user image image 425x423]


What even the f*ck. How do you even come to this conclusion?

The Supreme Court needs to be eradicated. All of the conservatives need to be removed, by any means necessary.
 
2022-05-16 12:05:31 PM  
Democracy was killed today in the Supreme Court. 🤬
 
2022-05-16 12:05:43 PM  

shpritz: Bribes keep getting more and more legal.


By the time this court is done, it's going to be illegal to accuse a politician of taking a bribe.
 
2022-05-16 12:08:55 PM  

Dr Dreidel: ...

Isn't there some legal principle that the Courts aren't supposed to hear cases that were engineered to test the law?


IIRC That was brought up during oral arguments and Thomas argued how it was the same thing as a black man riding a bus in the '50s to protest segregation.  Sometimes you need to stand up to correct a wrong, be it racism against a class of people or a politician fighting a law to prevent their corruption.
 
2022-05-16 12:10:37 PM  

serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.


If you loaned someone money and they paid it back, would you put that on your tax return as 1099 income?
 
2022-05-16 12:12:54 PM  
TFG on the phone to get his Stormy Daniels payment reconsidered as a loan to his campaign
 
2022-05-16 12:23:53 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-16 12:24:39 PM  

mrmopar5287: serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.

If you loaned someone money and they paid it back, would you put that on your tax return as 1099 income?


Let's say Cruz values his time at $300/hour.  He appeared at 100 campaign stops but wasn't paid.  He loaned the money to the campaign.  Now after he is elected, he collects that $300000 from Phizer.  Actually, he also collects it from Monsanto because of interest.  And Amazon because his prep time was also billed but not paid.

Yes, it should be income.
And no one expects him to be beholden to the companies that paid him 1/4 million dollars directly.  (/s)
 
2022-05-16 12:27:35 PM  

mrmopar5287: serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.

If you loaned someone money and they paid it back, would you put that on your tax return as 1099 income?


Only if you got interest.
 
2022-05-16 12:29:27 PM  

rdalton: mrmopar5287: serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.

If you loaned someone money and they paid it back, would you put that on your tax return as 1099 income?

Let's say Cruz values his time at $300/hour.  He appeared at 100 campaign stops but wasn't paid.  He loaned the money to the campaign.  Now after he is elected, he collects that $300000 from Phizer.  Actually, he also collects it from Monsanto because of interest.  And Amazon because his prep time was also billed but not paid.

Yes, it should be income.
And no one expects him to be beholden to the companies that paid him 1/4 million dollars directly.  (/s)


Cruz is a bag of crap and this ruling is garbage but I don't think candidates get paid for their time. Lots of other people do.
 
2022-05-16 12:35:03 PM  
This court is what, 2 years away from implementing whatever the christian version of Sharia law would look like.

Actually, they'd probably look identical
 
2022-05-16 12:44:11 PM  
Pretty soon we're going to see campaigning go the way of the Russia Grift.

"75% for me, 25% for the actual campaign"

They'll be forced to try and keep in the public view like TFG did to make up the difference.

So, GOOD NEWS EVERYONE. More crazy politician speeches to try and stay in the news!
 
2022-05-16 12:45:18 PM  
I guess Ted Cruz must be on vacation again. Check out this picture of him enjoying some time in the pool...

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-16 12:47:14 PM  

Subtonic: The best court money could buy.


This is flagrant corruption plain and simple.  John Roberts apparently is unaware that people listen to stuff senators say, and Ted has 1/100th of the power of congress FFS.  How is repaying loans he deliberately maxed out during the campaign for the purpose of enriching himself later using donor money to pay them off not corruption, and how are limits to that stifling his 1st amendment rights?  It's stupid.
By enabling people like Ted to accept large six to nine figure bribes, it will encourage the worst people to run for and hold high office.  Much to the detriment of the general public.
Keep donating money to Teds campaigns morons.  He's already wealthy and over the hill, but his kids could still use a few million dollars a year each so they can do nothing with their lives!
 
2022-05-16 12:54:51 PM  
While I understand what the majority opinion was saying, and on some level I agree with it:

Bootleg: How many congresspeople will be loaning they campaigns $20 at a 5000000000% interest rate now?


...plus all the other ways this can be used as a loophole.

It really makes sense that this is coming from the same court (mostly) that gave us CU and other things where more money == more speech.
 
2022-05-16 12:55:37 PM  

Gubbo: This court is what, 2 years away from implementing whatever the christian version of Sharia law would look like.

Actually, they'd probably look identical


I would say, "but, it's a different God;" but it's not.

:-/
 
2022-05-16 12:57:17 PM  

Squik2: To those who will reply "Vote!" I hereby offer the following rebuttal: one has to vote with money, not votes


That's pretty much what this decision means. :/  And the one before it.  And the one before that, apparently.

geesh
 
2022-05-16 12:58:46 PM  

enry: rdalton: mrmopar5287: serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.

If you loaned someone money and they paid it back, would you put that on your tax return as 1099 income?

Let's say Cruz values his time at $300/hour.  He appeared at 100 campaign stops but wasn't paid.  He loaned the money to the campaign.  Now after he is elected, he collects that $300000 from Phizer.  Actually, he also collects it from Monsanto because of interest.  And Amazon because his prep time was also billed but not paid.

Yes, it should be income.
And no one expects him to be beholden to the companies that paid him 1/4 million dollars directly.  (/s)

Cruz is a bag of crap and this ruling is garbage but I don't think candidates get paid for their time. Lots of other people do.


He's doing promotional work for "Ted Cruz".  Why can't he bill for it?  Speakers at rally's are often paid.
 
2022-05-16 12:59:42 PM  

Gubbo: This court is what, 2 years away from implementing whatever the christian version of Sharia law would look like.

Actually, they'd probably look identical


It's not like the Bible and the Koran are all that different. It's just that Islam is at the Spanish Inquisition phase of a religion, which makes sense as it's about 600 years newer.
 
2022-05-16 1:08:18 PM  

rdalton: enry: rdalton: mrmopar5287: serfdood: Let me guess, he doesn't have to claim it as income, either.

If you loaned someone money and they paid it back, would you put that on your tax return as 1099 income?

Let's say Cruz values his time at $300/hour.  He appeared at 100 campaign stops but wasn't paid.  He loaned the money to the campaign.  Now after he is elected, he collects that $300000 from Phizer.  Actually, he also collects it from Monsanto because of interest.  And Amazon because his prep time was also billed but not paid.

Yes, it should be income.
And no one expects him to be beholden to the companies that paid him 1/4 million dollars directly.  (/s)

Cruz is a bag of crap and this ruling is garbage but I don't think candidates get paid for their time. Lots of other people do.

He's doing promotional work for "Ted Cruz".  Why can't he bill for it?  Speakers at rally's are often paid.


Here's the closest thing I can find.  Candidates may be paid a salary but it's not at a $300,000 rate and I can't see how Ted Cruz can simultaneously loan his campaign money while also drawing a salary for it.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/02/campaigns-offer-income-for-new-members-of-congress/
 
2022-05-16 1:14:12 PM  
The Supreme Court continues to expand rights for corporations while limiting rights for individuals.  It's time for everyone to incorporate.
 
2022-05-16 1:14:33 PM  

enry: Candidates may be paid a salary


Hmm....that could be another loophole this decision opens up.

* Candidate loans campaign $100k for salary.  Candidate:  -$100k
* Give $100k salary to yourself.  Candidate:  $0
* "Recoup" the loan after campaign.  Candidate:  +$100k.

/it was my understanding there would be no math
 
Displayed 50 of 71 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.