Crack Down on Online Poker

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/16/te....html?_r=1&hpw

It was bad enough when this administration decided to fuck up healthcare -- but this is intolerable.

I don't ever want to hear another Liberal complain about the religious right -- these left wing assholes are much worse blue noses.

I don't ever want to hear another Liberal complain about the religious right -- these left wing assholes are much worse blue noses. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Oh please. Someone piss in your cereal today, PJ?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/16/te....html?_r=1&hpw

It was bad enough when this administration decided to fuck up healthcare -- but this is intolerable.

I don't ever want to hear another Liberal complain about the religious right -- these left wing assholes are much worse blue noses. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Because law enforcement is such a partisan endeavor. Come on P.J.! We know all elected officials, regardless of affiliation, pander to the lobbies crusading against sin.

Because law enforcement is such a partisan endeavor. Come on P.J.! We know all elected officials, regardless of affiliation, pander to the lobbies crusading against sin. Originally Posted by Black Sedan

And who controlled Congress and the White House when the law was passed, PJ?

I said it was a dumb law when it was passed. I don't give a damn who passed the law -- it is an overreach and intrusive. My point is, the DOJ has discretion as to what cases it pursues (Exhibit A is the Black Panther party in Philadelphia) and it chose to push this. So yes Black Sedan, law enforcement at this level is a partisan endeavor.

Maybe its a good thing. Take it to the courts and get it thrown out.

I think Eric Holder has dirt on Obama or he wouldn't still have this position.

I don't give a damn who passed the law Originally Posted by pjorourke

And why should you, when you can ignore facts and just blame liberals?

it is an overreach and intrusive.

Maybe, maybe not. But ranting on liberals is an overreach.

My point is, the DOJ has discretion as to what cases it pursues (Exhibit A is the Black Panther party in Philadelphia) and it chose to push this.

Mental note: PJ says Presidents can pick and choose which laws they wish to enforce.

So yes Black Sedan, law enforcement at this level is a partisan endeavor.

Yeah, partisan, as if the only groups/people who support the law are liberals and online poker players are made up strictly of conservatives. And i'm a doofus?

I think Eric Holder has dirt on Obama or he wouldn't still have this position. Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

Is that helmet in your avatar made out of tinfoil?

I'm certainly not basing my statement on this poker stuff alone.
I think he's unqualified for the job.

I'm certainly not basing my statement on this poker stuff alone.
I think he's unqualified for the job. Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

Now, MA, you know that there are only 3 qualifications for the job:

1. Hold a license to practice law
2. Be nominated by the President
3. Be confirmed by the Senate

He has those qualifications to hold the job.

True dat.

I don't ever want to hear another Liberal complain about the religious right -- these left wing assholes are much worse blue noses. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Didn't you figure this out during the whole "I smoked but never inhaled" debacle? Seriously, the Socialist Dems settle for so little. They chuckled to themselves to the inside joke while during the Clinton years, arrests and jailings for weed jumped....I guess as long as the checks keep comin'. Then they bitch about state rights but let CA try to legalize it. Just keep the stoned masses voting D.

Both my bros are dealers in Vegas at the top casinos. They're down from making $300-400 a day in tips to $60. Word is Steve Wynn is pushing the crackdown along with getting the Feds to legalize it and issue licenses. Current sites will not get licenses. Who is Senate Majority leader and where is he from?

I said it was a dumb law when it was passed. I don't give a damn who passed the law -- it is an overreach and intrusive.

So yes Black Sedan, law enforcement at this level is a partisan endeavor. Originally Posted by pjorourke

I'm of the opinion any DOJ would prosecute this, once they opened a case and investigated to realize the techniques being used, which are designed to trick banks into processing banned transactions.

If you look back at recent history, the DOJ has been after online gambling well into the Bush administration.

HOWEVER

The domain seizure is obscene. Such action should only be possible with due process, and as a lawfully found criminal penalty. The same goes for any government seizure of property, whether it be a bank account, a car, or a bundle of cash.

Circa 2002 (back when it was the wild west & anything went) I had my 1st online gambling run.

After hitting the bar (GWI/Gambling While Intoxicated/what the hell, that's what I do at the bricks & mortar casino) I signed up. Got a match play bonus. I think I paid $250 on a credit card and got $500 in play. I put $100 a piece on a couple of football games for the next day and with about $300 left I went over to the blackjack table. Sure I was skeptical. Let me win a few hands....then they'll screw me overWell half an hour later I'm up $6k. I went to bed. Woke up the next morning not sure if it was real or notIt was

So decided to request $5K of the 6ish. I figured I'll believe it when I see it. A minute later I get an email with a FedEx tracking number. Two days later I got a check for $5K (that didn't bounce)

Didn't win either of the football plays...oh well not bad for an hour's work, even for an HDH

After that I probably gave back a grand or so. I quit betting with them after my credit card company caught on to them and started charging me cash advance fees with them. With a casino, at the time, 30 minutes away, the cash advance fees pissed me off. For a couple of years they still sent me birthday gifts, x-mas gifts, it's thursday gifts...some of it was nice stuff...set of poker chips, luggage, golf balls...

The best solution I've found if you aren't worried about short term cash flow particularly if you travel to London once or twice a year, is to fund an account while there, wager on line and then whenyou go back add or subtract from the account as necessary (hopefully subtract!!!). I assume something similar can be done by having a trusted friend there (or anywhere gambling is legal) that can facilitate your account, although I haven't tried that.

From what I can tell the US is just going after the places in Banana Republics and leaving the European places alone as long as they play by the rules (not sending proceeds directly to the US)

As an aside, I've always stayed away from Poker. Too vulerable to scams (e.g. players colluding) even if the casino is legit.

I'm of the opinion any DOJ would prosecute this, once they opened a case and investigated to realize the techniques being used, which are designed to trick banks into processing banned transactions.

If you look back at recent history, the DOJ has been after online gambling well into the Bush administration. Originally Posted by Black Sedan

Yeah, I think with bureaucracies, once the boulder starts rolling downhill, it is unstoppable. When the investigation started, no matter under whose administration, we are going to eventually wind up at this point. To do otherwise would risk the kind of charge that has taken down many a politician...obstruction of justice.

You all (y'all) are missing the real and VERY important issue:

PJ read The New York Times!!! The Apocalypse is here.

Craps is my downfall. It is the most fun way to lose money. BT,DT.