Defense rests in trial of Minneapolis officer Noor

[Ghost]

…….$2 Million to fight gun violence! .......What is the logic here?

Sadly, it's for lining the pockets of their political allies.

And I’m sure their own also

[Rip Van Winkle]

…….$2 Million to fight gun violence! .......What is the logic here?

Sadly, it's for lining the pockets of their political allies.

And I’m sure their own also

What goes around, comes around.

[crbutler]

The irony is that Betsy Hodges is likely to work for a group that gets this money, so indirectly her incompetence will result in her rice bowl being filled.

Penalties should go only to the person’s harmed, and then they should have to write a check to the lawyers and whoever else they feel like- with full income tax paid.

[rtk]

The irony is that Betsy Hodges is likely to work for a group that gets this money, so indirectly her incompetence will result in her rice bowl being filled.

Penalties should go only to the person’s harmed, and then they should have to write a check to the lawyers and whoever else they feel like- with full income tax paid.

+1

[smurfman]

So $20 Million. $6M for the attorneys so at least they will not starve. and...... wait for it …….$2 Million to fight gun violence!

So the tax payers get to pay to get their guns taken away because the person who used a gun was of the privileged few who should be able to have a gun. What is the logic here? If we take guns away from law abiding Minnesotan's then poorly trained cops will feel less threatened on the streets?

Its an ingenious way to fund a program from a pot of insurance money that has very strict rules on how it can be used. No need to raise taxes, yet, and the optics of it look and sound good. Expect this type of "donation" to happen more often with these types of funds.

[Ghost]

So $20 Million. $6M for the attorneys so at least they will not starve. and...... wait for it …….$2 Million to fight gun violence!

So the tax payers get to pay to get their guns taken away because the person who used a gun was of the privileged few who should be able to have a gun. What is the logic here? If we take guns away from law abiding Minnesotan's then poorly trained cops will feel less threatened on the streets?

Its an ingenious way to fund a program from a pot of insurance money that has very strict rules on how it can be used. No need to raise taxes, yet, and the optics of it look and sound good. Expect this type of "donation" to happen more often with these types of funds.

I don’t believe they have insurance

[Rip Van Winkle]

Its an ingenious way to fund a program from a pot of insurance money that has very strict rules on how it can be used. No need to raise taxes, yet, and the optics of it look and sound good. Expect this type of "donation" to happen more often with these types of funds.

This happened a lot under the Obama administration. Federal regulators would shake down corporations with the threat of large fines for non-compliance. Fines were then reduced to donations to liberal NGO's.

[Holland&Holland]

So $20 Million. $6M for the attorneys so at least they will not starve. and...... wait for it …….$2 Million to fight gun violence!

So the tax payers get to pay to get their guns taken away because the person who used a gun was of the privileged few who should be able to have a gun. What is the logic here? If we take guns away from law abiding Minnesotan's then poorly trained cops will feel less threatened on the streets?

Its an ingenious way to fund a program from a pot of insurance money that has very strict rules on how it can be used. No need to raise taxes, yet, and the optics of it look and sound good. Expect this type of "donation" to happen more often with these types of funds.

No insurance. It is called taxpayer money.

[yukonjasper]

Its an ingenious way to fund a program from a pot of insurance money that has very strict rules on how it can be used. No need to raise taxes, yet, and the optics of it look and sound good. Expect this type of "donation" to happen more often with these types of funds.

This happened a lot under the Obama administration. Federal regulators would shake down corporations with the threat of large fines for non-compliance. Fines were then reduced to donations to liberal NGO's.

That sounds horrible but I'd need some evidence to support that statement.

[Rip Van Winkle]

That sounds horrible but I'd need some evidence to support that statement.

The best example I can find on short notice.

8/27/2014
Extortion: Radical Democrat activist groups stand to collect millions from Attorney General Eric Holder's record $17 billion deal to settle alleged mortgage abuse charges against Bank of America.

Buried in the fine print of the deal, which includes $7 billion in soft-dollar consumer relief, are a raft of political payoffs to Obama constituency groups. In effect, the government has ordered the nation's largest bank to create a massive slush fund for Democrat special interests.
https://www.investors.com/holders-bank-of-america-settlement-includes-payoffs-to-democrat-groups/#ixzz3wJzMbEUj

And an article about the Obama Justice Dept. getting slapped down.

Should individuals be allowed to turn criminal fines into donations for their favorite charities?

U.S. District Judge Janet Arterton recently faced this question and correctly said no. But scholars have raised the question before in response to prosecutors’ use of settlement funds reached in criminal prosecutions of major companies—some totaling billions of dollars—as checks to their favored organizations instead of payments into the general treasury.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/01/19/court-ruling-undermines-justice-departments-use-of-fines-as-slush-funds/

[rtk]

So $20 Million. $6M for the attorneys so at least they will not starve. and...... wait for it …….$2 Million to fight gun violence!

So the tax payers get to pay to get their guns taken away because the person who used a gun was of the privileged few who should be able to have a gun. What is the logic here? If we take guns away from law abiding Minnesotan's then poorly trained cops will feel less threatened on the streets?

Its an ingenious way to fund a program from a pot of insurance money that has very strict rules on how it can be used. No need to raise taxes, yet, and the optics of it look and sound good. Expect this type of "donation" to happen more often with these types of funds.

I don’t believe they have insurance

League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. Yes, there is insurance but I don’t know how far the coverage goes.

[Sorcerer]

I thought I had herd that Mpls was not part of that pool.

[Holland&Holland]

I thought I had herd that Mpls was not part of that pool.

That is what I heard as well. It was reported that there was not coverage for this. The news stated what fund it was coming from.

[yukonjasper]

That sounds horrible but I'd need some evidence to support that statement.

The best example I can find on short notice.

8/27/2014
Extortion: Radical Democrat activist groups stand to collect millions from Attorney General Eric Holder's record $17 billion deal to settle alleged mortgage abuse charges against Bank of America.

Buried in the fine print of the deal, which includes $7 billion in soft-dollar consumer relief, are a raft of political payoffs to Obama constituency groups. In effect, the government has ordered the nation's largest bank to create a massive slush fund for Democrat special interests.
https://www.investors.com/holders-bank-of-america-settlement-includes-payoffs-to-democrat-groups/#ixzz3wJzMbEUj

And an article about the Obama Justice Dept. getting slapped down.

Should individuals be allowed to turn criminal fines into donations for their favorite charities?

U.S. District Judge Janet Arterton recently faced this question and correctly said no. But scholars have raised the question before in response to prosecutors’ use of settlement funds reached in criminal prosecutions of major companies—some totaling billions of dollars—as checks to their favored organizations instead of payments into the general treasury.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/01/19/court-ruling-undermines-justice-departments-use-of-fines-as-slush-funds/

Holey Swamp Rat Batman! That is insidious. I guess I should not be surprised, the corruption grows thebigger the money involved is .

[Ghost]

Insidious = politicians

Synonyms: treacherous, crafty