Bloomberg holds anti-gun town hall in Aurora

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • BeoBill

    Crank in the Third Row
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 3, 2013
    27,060
    南馬里蘭州鮑伊
    i posted this on another thread but I will post it here as well. Bloomberg is genius at manipulating campaign laws. he is conducting an ingenious injection of $600 million to one billion into the general election under the guise of primary , just as he has subverted the laws by injecting half a billion of charitable, tax deductible money into politics.

    There is a very interesting theory that his "candidacy " for president is just a mechanism to generally give to Democrats at much much lower cost to him, and not a genuine candidacy.

    a) His "primary" campaign "advertisements" -- now at $100 million in one single month in pure anti -turmp ads -- allow him to run 100% anti-Trump advertisements, ie of long term benefit to any and every Democrat primary candidate, at lower primary advertising rates, and with less FEC scrutiny since instead of contributions to the DNC presidential effort (which is what in fact they function as) they can be claimed to be primary campaign costs.

    Seriously look at this: https://twitter.com/KDbyProxy/status/1196155022259740673?s=20

    In fact he is organizing "events for "his primary campaign" that include having on the stage and therefore helping Democrat legislature candidates. those are effectively spends in support of state and US congress candidates he likes -- while claiming the expense is for "his campaign" not theirs -- and not going to the FEC reporting as a donation

    b) He is also not allowing his news outlets to investigate or write negatively about his primary "opponents" because he is supposedly "in the race," while he is allowing them to investigate Trump. So that is his candidacy -- and his money and assets benefit ALL Democrat hopefuls while freely attacking Trump, which is effectively a contribution of another 100 million in media value to Democrat candidates without it even being a contribution from a legal standpoint.

    Bezos can do the same thing in four years. 1) Announce he is going to run in the primaries; 2) forbid the Washington Post which he owns from investigating or negatively reporting on his Democrat supposed "opponents" while allowing Washington Post to eviscerate the Republican candidate an in kind donation of free media to the DNC worth tens or hundred of millions of dollars yet not included in FEC filings; 3) get around media pricing rules differentiating cheaper primary advertising vs more expensive general election advertising; 4) get around other FEC rules.

    And since he's self financing, he'll take a tax writeoff if he loses.
     

    Kicken Wing

    Snakes and Sparklers
    Apr 5, 2014
    868
    WASH-CO
    is it really a "town hall" when all the people there are paid by the speaker??


    I mean, subtract the Moms Demanding another Paycheck, the hall would be empty

    You called it... according to this link that was posted in one of my other threads...

    http://www.gopusa.com/michael-bloomberg-rolls-out-long-list-of-gun-control-plans/

    "The 77-year-old New Yorker outlined his plan to combat gun violence before an invitation-only audience of about 40 victims of gun violence and gun control activists at a Christian center, near the movie theater in Aurora where a gunman killed 12 people and wounded nearly 60 others in 2012. The speaking lineup included Democratic state Rep. Tom Sullivan, whose son, Alex, was killed in the attack."
     

    Sirex

    Powered by natural gas
    Oct 30, 2010
    10,380
    Westminster, MD
    The wife had GMA on this morning while eating breakfast. They did a piece on him being a blantant sexist, which I thought was odd considering he is an anti Trump liberal. Kinda funny seeing them go after one of their own, but much welcomed. I guess the "establishment" doesn't want him.
     

    ChannelCat

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    I am watching this with my fists clenched.

    "We need to do something, It's the NRA's fault, Overhaul the background check system, close loophole problem....

    Well, in the 1930's a large, misguided country in central Europe with a totalitarian ruler kept repeating "We need to do something, It's the Jew's fault...", and we know where this led...
     

    rascal

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 15, 2013
    1,253
    No, his spending is not tax deductible.

    Chances are in fact, he paid a massive amount of capital gains tax or income tax on dividends from Bloomberg Corp.

    the vast majority of Bloomberg spending on gun control, which is his main profile, is a tax deduction for him, and it is mixed in as his shadow campaign. Keep in mind that his groups are mostly c3 charities, and c4 untaxed non-profits. His direct donations to candidates in Virginia for example are not tax deductable,m but his donation ot charity arms of Mom's and Everytown are tax deductable.

    If you think of his "campaign" as an alternate to much of the spending he already would have given in the 2020 presidential election, he is getting cheaper media rates, and less FEC limit -- and does not have to claim his new rules on not criticizing Democrat presidential candidates as the in-kind donation it certainly effectively is.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,087
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom