Originally posted by: bozack
Originally posted by: Thump553
Please provide some authority for your factual statement that the police unions set the $1,000,000 flat fee.
How about you provide some proof that says it wasn't the union???
Why wouldn't it be a flat round number for police detail services?...and again who would say no to paying the police for their services, seems pretty petty of the obama camp if they did.
So that I understand it correctly, you are relying on made up "facts" to suit your argument and then crying foul when someone calls you out it.
No one is disputing that the police should be (and almost certainly have been) paid. But the billing should be honest and accurate. My position is that this huge round figure would not pass muster in any semi-serious scrutiny or audit. One thing you may not realize is that the Obama campaign-like all political campaigns-is subject to very exacting and detailing election laws which essentially require them to verify all such billings. It is a crime for a campaign to distribute its funds improperly-in addition to being very callous towards the people who contributed the money. This is a major reason why the Palin family shopping trips were paid by the Republican National Committee (out of so-called soft funds) rather than being paid by the McCain campaign treasury.
So what we have is the Obama campaign is presented with a billing that on it's face appears to be BS, the major whines instead of dealing with the campaign to verifiy the bill and Obama haters jump all over it. When in fact this is evidence of careful and prudent oversight on funds-something I certainly hope has carried over into the Obama presidency.
Facebook
Twitter