Support




Contact
Powered by
Movable Type

National Journal Picks Up Story, Weakly

Weakly, weakly.

Unless I missed it, the National Journal article does not mention that the Address Verification System is standard and basic and needs to be deliberately crippled in order to permit this.

I see no pressing questions for Barack Obama, demanding to know what possible reason they might have to deliberately cripple the most basic form of credit card security.

I cannot stress enough: AVS is default. It is not an arcane option you can choose. It is the default. To turn it off requires deliberate, intentional action.

And Barack Obama cannot offer any plausible legitimate reason for doing so.

Why does Barack Obama has less security on his credit card donations than my local cheesesteak shop?

And the Records Have Been Purged: Jerry writes--

One thing they did get, though, is important: an Obama spokesperson confirming that they do not keep credit card numbers.

This confirms that with AVS also turned off, there is no way for the Obama campaign to know how many times someone has donated, and how much, even if a donor uses the same credit card each time.

That's of moderate importance, because I've seen comments on other sites claiming that this isn't a big deal, the Obama campaign will still know if someone goes over the limit because they have the card number. If the quotes in the NJ article are correct, they don't have the card number. All they have is a bunch of names and addresses that are made up and can change with each submission.

Biff: on media priorities:

What makes this lack of reporting all the more remarkable, is when one pauses to consider all of the other lame hit pieces that has occupied the headlines over the last few weeks, not the least of which was.......gulp......Palin wearing nice clothes.

Reporting on the 'scandal' of Palin wearing nice clothes,

ignoring the intentional systematization of donation fraud.

This'll be one for the history books.

Something like $63 million has poured into Obama's coffers from foreign sources -- the tip there is that the donations end in pennies, like $43.36, which indicates they've been converted from foreign currency. Hence the odd amount of the donation.

Until very recently, Barack Obama did not even require overseas donors to prove their citizenship (as McCain and Hillary have always done) via a passport number or some other measure.

He did this deliberately. He only began asking for passport numbers when our sleepy-headed press roused itself enough to write an article on his deliberate law-breaking.

Where the fuck are the quotes from Obama's camp?

Camp Obama almost certainly offered "no comment," a damning statement in this context.

Where is that quote?

Why is National Journal playing this as a problem with "the system" rather than a deliberate subversion of the system by The One?

Hillary Clinton and John McCain had no problem keeping AVS turned on. Why is it Obama and Obama alone deliberately turned off the basic, standard system for verifying that credit card donations are being made by people legally entitled to donate?


Posted by: Ace at 04:40 PM



Comments

1

Tapper picked up on the Biden interview story, and, predictably, did not even mention any Biden answer, just listed the questions and agreed with Obama's move to pullout from future interviews because of the mean questions.

Unbelievable.

I'm mixing it up in the comments section best i can, feel free to join in.

Posted by: geoff at October 25, 2008 04:42 PM (zEGWh)

2 Oh, come now, Ace.  You and I both know that the cheesesteak is the absolute pinnacle of Western civilization.  If the terrorists got ahold of them...well, I shudder to think at what would become of us.

Posted by: Chris at October 25, 2008 04:45 PM (b7ds2)

3 If lack of access to Obama's campaign hurts that TV station perhaps they'll consider some interviews with Palin...who tends to attract significant audiences.

Posted by: Popcorn at October 25, 2008 04:46 PM (Tha0W)

4 Wow.  That was a supra-weak takedown by NJ.

Posted by: Blacksheep at October 25, 2008 04:47 PM (4VCIX)

5

It is amazing how this story is still being ignored.

 

Posted by: geoff at October 25, 2008 04:47 PM (zEGWh)

6 The hot air is interesting - if the credit card companies are involved in massive in kind too (Biden been berry berry good to the credit card companies)

I just realized something (it’s been awhile since I wrote credit card code); I don’t believe any standard automated service would accept simply the unverified credit card number. They either are doing it in collusion with a credit card processor willing to accept a high rate of fraud, or they are manually re-entering the card number and amount as you would do in your neighborhood sandwich shop. Either way, there is extra work that actually has gone on to perpetrate the fraud.

The other issue to understand in this is the vendor’s involvement, because that is a very suspicious arrangement. They very likely are taking in excessive number of bogus charges. They have to make good on the ones on which a customer complains, but the question is; is the company getting reimbursed from the Obama campaign or essentially making a multi-million dollar illegal contribution by eating it and serving as a money launderer for one of Obama’s billionare friends? And bogus ones not caught by the credit card holders, or reported (or addressed after the election) don’t enter into the picture. One wonders how clear is the charge showing up on the bills; Many internet purchases end up as pretty arcane entries on statements. Lots of questions, very few answers, and very little time to find them.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 04:50 PM (eQwUw)

7 topsecret--

I don't understand what you mean about complaints.  If both Obama and his donors are in on the fraud, who exactly is there to complain?


Posted by: ace at October 25, 2008 04:53 PM (1WR4H)

8 these contributions are illegal --- but voluntary.

There's no one to lodge a complaint because the Gazans and Saudi princes want to donate.


Posted by: ace at October 25, 2008 04:54 PM (1WR4H)

9 Doing a story and doing it without mentioning the most critical damning element is worse than no story at all.

One is ignoring, the other is actively diffusing.

Not reporting on the deactivation is like reporting on the "tragic" death of a woman as if it was an accident, while omitting the fact that the husband was found standing over her corpse with a gun, and that she had been shot.

Posted by: biff at October 25, 2008 04:54 PM (6X2az)

10 It is amazing how this story is still being ignored,

yeah, it is especially when the campaign was caught with shenanigans hiding payments to an ACORN front for "lighting and sound"

Even the actual payment amounts to ACORN are weird and not passing the smell test:

"Our contracts were relatively small for Obama," he said, declining to specify amounts because of "proprietary" rights of CSI's clients. The largest project for Obama was during the Ohio primary, he said.

"That was a very short-term contract for one week of work. In Ohio, they asked us to do canvasses in five cities statewide," Robinson said.

The Ohio primary was March 4. According to FEC records, the Obama campaign paid Citizens Services Inc. $832,598.29, from Feb. 25 to May 17.

A Trib analysis of campaign finance reports showed Obama paid CSI for services that stood out as unusual. For example, CSI received payments of $63,000 and $75,000 for advance work. Excluding the large payments to CSI, the average amount the Obama campaign spent with other organizations was $558.82 per check on more than 1,200 entries classified as advance work.


http://tinyurl.com/664yr2

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 04:57 PM (eQwUw)

11 One thing they did get, though, is important: an Obama spokesperson confirming that they do not keep credit card numbers.

This confirms that with AVS also turned off, there is no way for the Obama campaign to know how many times someone has donated, and how much, even if a donor uses the same credit card each time.

That's of moderate importance, because I've seen comments on other sites claiming that this isn't a big deal, the Obama campaign will still know if someone goes over the limit because they have the card number. If the quotes in the NJ article are correct, they don't have the card number. All they have is a bunch of names and addresses that are made up and can change with each submission.

Posted by: Jerry at October 25, 2008 04:57 PM (7Ahkq)

12 What makes this lack of reporting all the more remarkable, is when one pauses to consider all of the other lame hit pieces that has occupied the headlines over the last  few weeks, not the least of which was.......gulp......Palin wearing nice clothes.

Reporting on the 'scandal' of Palin wearing nice clothes,

ignoring the intentional systematization of donation fraud.

This'll be one for the history books.

Posted by: biff at October 25, 2008 04:58 PM (6X2az)

13 Why does Barack Obama has less security on his credit card donations than my local cheesesteak shop?

Because it enables him to commit fraud with impunity?

Posted by: Milesdei at October 25, 2008 04:58 PM (ACHxk)

14
There's a word for all this.

Putsch.

There's a precedent.

1933.

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at October 25, 2008 05:01 PM (kZ9L/)

15 ace

paragraph 3 and 4 isn't me, but I take that to mean, he's saying that there may be people being dinged unknowingly (since charges come up in arcane hidden ways on statements) and if a card holder says "hey, what's this 25 dollars to Citizen Services? and complain to the CCompany, is the company getting reimbursed or are they eating the cost)

but I agree it hasn't been established.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:03 PM (eQwUw)

16 If they don't keep credit card numbers, how do they refund the money when a donation is determined to be bogus?

Posted by: myiq2xu at October 25, 2008 05:03 PM (twWym)

17 Hello?

Justice Department?  FEC?  ICC?  Anyone?  Anyone home?  Anyone at all?

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at October 25, 2008 05:04 PM (kZ9L/)

18 so when do we start going through the donations? when will we have access to all of the donations? and how do we go about it?

Posted by: Kaptain Amerika at October 25, 2008 05:05 PM (UHPcb)

19 #12... the history books will miss it too, since our schools will become more of an automated indoctrination factory of political conformity under the "chosen one". They already have pieces from Obama's musings in some texts, just wait a few more years. This is just another example of our freedoms disappearing.

Posted by: Sean at October 25, 2008 05:05 PM (vZzYJ)

20 f they don't keep credit card numbers, how do they refund the money when a donation is determined to be bogus?

Excellent question, because they say the do refund.

Hmmmm.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:05 PM (eQwUw)

21

Suppose that credit card numbers are being guessed.

Without verification, who pays?

Is Team Obama spending potentially non-existant money? 

They rack up millions of dollars of fraudulent conations, then spend the resulting credit.  The various employees. consultants, contractors, material vendors are owed money (and some have spent money), but if the donations are fraudulent, then the money doesn't exist.  Who pays to setle the debts of the workers and vendors?

Even if the intent is in fact to reimburse unwilling / unwitting charges, does Obama have the money?  What if they don't?  How will they reimburse everyone? 

Doubtless there are more than a few people (old, single mothers, etc.) who cannot fight bogus charges.

There are very many credit card users. Guessing a credit card number is easy, but getting the rest of the information is tough.  Unless, of course, no other information is needed.

How then do the credit card companied differentiate between a legitimate charge, and a fraudulent one?

Didn't we just see and experience something very much like this?

Posted by: Arbalest at October 25, 2008 05:06 PM (AgBuQ)

22 They "don't keep credit card numbers?"  What horseshit.  Any time anyone enters any information on a web site, that info is retained in perpetuity somewhere.  So, I don't know what they mean by this statement.  Their system for damn sure "keeps" the credit card numbers.  They would also be on the funding reports from the credit card companies.  This is complete and utter nonsense.

And, the funny thing is, the fraudulent bastard is going to lose anyway! 


Posted by: CB at October 25, 2008 05:07 PM (9Wv2j)

23 Credit card processing systems have to keep the card number to handle charge backs and bank reconciliations. It may be encrypted. However, the encrypted strings could be compared for multiple donations.

If they were interested in being legal, they could be.

Posted by: SJPHOTO at October 25, 2008 05:08 PM (RyCFu)

24

You know, the whole -gate suffix is used much too often, but when you think about it, all it takes is one investigative journalist supported by one editor not in the tank to really delve into this.

Doesn't have to be the NY Times or Wash Post doing it like a generation ago. A paper out in Iowa or Tennessee or Texas could take the lead on this just as well.

The Obama pattern is really living up the thugocracy that Michel Barone named it, and the parallels between this and Watergate may soon begin to pile up.

Why was the verification switch turned off? Who authorized it? Was there a monetary incentive provided by the campaign to the vendor to turn off standard authorizing procedures? What did Obama know, and when did he know it?

Talk about the possibilities. 

Posted by: Lee at October 25, 2008 05:09 PM (TxTIh)

25 >>>paragraph 3 and 4 isn't me, but I take that to mean, he's saying that there may be people being dinged unknowingly (since charges come up in arcane hidden ways on statements) and if a card holder says "hey, what's this 25 dollars to Citizen Services? and complain to the CCompany, is the company getting reimbursed or are they eating the cost)

This is a tiny problem.  The main problem is the deliberate facilitation of contributions from those who donate voluntarily, but illegally.

Posted by: ace at October 25, 2008 05:10 PM (1WR4H)

26 So, will the U.N. election observers be sent in now?

Posted by: cheshirecat at October 25, 2008 05:11 PM (oCkjB)

27

"Why is it Obama and Obama alone deliberately turned off the basic, standard system for verifying that credit card donations are being made by people legally entitled to donate?"

Um, because he's a fifth columnist Communist scumbag?

But, Bush had a DUI!!!!!!!!!

PSY OPS!!!!

Posted by: Senator Rev. Dr. E Buzz Miller at October 25, 2008 05:13 PM (vFeQi)

28 The ad for this is very simple:

Barack Obama signed an agreement saying he would accept public financing, blah, blah, blah...

But he backed out of that agreement...

(Evidence of deliberate online CC donation fraud)

Now we know why.

Posted by: Editor at October 25, 2008 05:13 PM (p4YSL)

29 I think that since others were able to accomplish the same task with Senate/House Dems, there seems to be some type of concerted effort here.

Can someone put together a youtube video at least, similar to the fannie/freddie ones, that shows how AVS works, the legal ramifications (like FEC regulations for donation tracking along with the NJ quote Jerry caught) and how turning off the extra check could lead to massive fraud efforts?

Posted by: Sean at October 25, 2008 05:14 PM (vZzYJ)

30

Not keeping the credit card numbers? That seems like it needs more investigating because I don't see how they can refund, and they are doing lots of chargebacks; if you look at any list of contributors you can see the chargebacks. Also, why not store the credit card information? Most e-commerce sites have an option for people to save their credit card information and on the backend there are ways to scramble that data so unscrupulous people don't use it. Though in this case the whole lot of them are unscrupulous so that less than matters.

I don't know, I may be seeing shadows where there aren't any, but that just seems fishy to me. And for what purpose are vast numbers of their donors using gift cards to donate anyway? I don't get it, shouldn't that be an issue? I mean I get why in the sense of money laundering, but I don't get the thinking on the stupid media's part about why this is no big deal.

But, I am FURIOUS that the gist of the National Journal article is that McCain has these problems too. That's just not true as has been proven over and over again.

OT rant. The other day when Palin was nailing Biden on his "generated crisis" gaffe I was on CNN.com for some inexplicable reason and saw the headline "Palin apologizes." Knowing that currently her top talking point was Biden's gaffe I groaned and was upset she'd apologized for it. Then I clicked the article and it was about the "parts of the country that are patriotic" thing. It was so misleading. The media is purposefully wording their headlines to deceive, knowing a lot of people just scan them without delving further. Fuckers.

Posted by: ParanoidInSeattle at October 25, 2008 05:14 PM (AJ4xq)

31 when are we going to get proof that the messiah is a u.s. citizen?

Posted by: RD at October 25, 2008 05:14 PM (zlGlY)

32 If they don't keep credit card numbers, how do they refund the money when a donation is determined to be bogus?

You know this is a really good question because not only dod they say they do refund, but HOW do they keep track of legal limits if all they have is fake names and addresses?




Fake names/addresses on donation fields = illegal donations for Obama


BUT

Fake names/addresses on registration cards DO NOT = voter fraud

so sayeth the left

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:15 PM (eQwUw)

33 yikes, didn't mean to bold the whole thing.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:16 PM (eQwUw)

34 McCain wont fight with this story....sadly, he wants to be a honorable Senator not a fighting President.......

Posted by: geoff at October 25, 2008 05:17 PM (zEGWh)

35 Man, if someone could do some sleuth work on this, it would be huge and make watergate look like a Melrose Place episode.

Posted by: CDR M at October 25, 2008 05:17 PM (TJoU6)

36 If they do not keep credit card records, how are they refunding people's money then?  Another lie here.

Posted by: Kaitian at October 25, 2008 05:18 PM (d14cR)

37 Damn I've been beaten like a redheaded stepchild regarding the refund.

Posted by: Kaitian at October 25, 2008 05:19 PM (d14cR)

38 Ace, I know it's tiny and also in the weeds of a bigger more in the face issue.

-------

Seriously though, how do they keep track of people exceeding the legal limit ($2600?) if they do not keep cc numbers?

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:20 PM (eQwUw)

39

RE: Obama campaign not keeping CC records

Wouldn't the bank which processes the transactions and receives the funds keep records?

Posted by: James OK at October 25, 2008 05:21 PM (/qqDa)

40

The behavior of the press at this point is criminal imo. In their silence, they're abetting what may be the greatest systematic fraud in modern political history. Christ, Obama's entire campaign bill could be put on Bin Laden's Discover card and they wouldn't care. Gotta get their guy in there, even if he is dirty and corrupt and hellbent on turning this country into a socialist cesspool.

Once upon a time, I worked as a journalist. Now, I'd sooner take a job as a street walker. At least they have standards.

Posted by: TiredWench at October 25, 2008 05:22 PM (Kx1hM)

41

That's the only thing that will stop OBama, CDR.

One enterprising young journalist will decide that risking shame and hate from his/her collegues is worth it and will take Obama down on this story and others.  The AVS default protection issue is there for the taking, as is the 60-80 million in foreign donations with non-rounded figures, like 45.77, because they are converted from foreign currency.  That 60-80 million is Obama's buffer over McCain during the general election, and will probably be a fairly strong proximate cause of his victory, along with the MSM attack dog role played against McCain.

It won't be 6 months before enterprising young journalists take Obama down, just on the stuff that's out there in the blogs right now.  Read Noquarter, read this blog, read Jawa, and its all there.

Sad but true.

Posted by: geoff at October 25, 2008 05:22 PM (zEGWh)

42

Wouldn't the bank which processes the transactions and receives the funds keep records?

As has been suggested here by others, Soros has his claws in a lot of banks.

Posted by: TiredWench at October 25, 2008 05:24 PM (Kx1hM)

43 If they don't keep credit card numbers, how do they refund the money when a donation is determined to be bogus?

Hello, Obama Campaign? You put a bogus charge for $1,000,123.79 on my credit card, and I demand that you issue me a credit immediately! Here's my number ...

Posted by: lmg at October 25, 2008 05:24 PM (A/vgC)

44

I heard an interesting comment from a woman (mom) at a baseball picnic today. She said "Americans have always been revolutionaries. It's in our blood".

Interesting how women are always the first to get it. Being the more vulnerable sex, they are more sensitive to threats to survival. It'll be women who spur their men on to be patriots.

Posted by: pc at October 25, 2008 05:25 PM (S7zPk)

45 PC, how 'bout some context? 

Posted by: Editor at October 25, 2008 05:27 PM (p4YSL)

46 Meanwhile:

Utah's chief federal judge apologized Friday for campaign contributions to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama that "caused an appearance of impropriety."

U.S. District Judge Tena Campbell donated a total of $300 to Obama in 2007 listing her job as "lawyer," her employer the "govtt" and her address as her federal court chambers.

It is against the Judicial Code of Conduct for a judge to donate or participate in a political campaign, as judges are expected to be apolitical.

But in a statement released by her clerk, Campbell said she was not familiar with that part of the code when she made her contributions.

Campbell would not say how she learned of her error or if she had donated to any other candidate since President Clinton appointed her to the federal bench in 1995.

Her clerk said the judge would not answer any questions or make any further statements.

The Obama campaign, when contacted by The Salt Lake Tribune, promised to return the donations.

The punishment for violating this part of the code is usually minimal. If someone does file a complaint to the chief circuit court judge, Campbell may receive a letter of reprimand

http://tinyurl.com/6jjtlf

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:29 PM (eQwUw)

47 BREAKING!!!!!  I just got a direct quote from an Obama spokesman:

"Hahahahahaha.  Suckers."

Posted by: Editor at October 25, 2008 05:35 PM (p4YSL)

48 and this is why it's not a story - McCain's transparency vs. Obama's deceit is allowing the Obama campaign and DNC file a complaint against McCain- so that's where the MSM is on the issue - unbelievable

"In a letter to the Federal Election Commission to be submitted Monday, the Democratic National Committee alleges McCain has received donations from 6,653 individuals who exceeded the legal $2,300 limit by at least $1,000 and 23 donation in excess of $50 from anonymous donors. The DNC cited one donor who appeared to have given more than $56,000.

The complaint is based in part on data that the McCain campaign provides on its Web site — an extra step of disclosure not required by election laws. The campaign of Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, does not disclose as much information about its donors as McCain does. Obama only reports the identities of donors who give $200 or more — the legal requirement.

The McCain campaign said Saturday that transactions on its Web site are only updated monthly and do not necessarily reflect corrections that the campaign routinely undertakes."

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 05:37 PM (eQwUw)

49 Why doesn't McCain make a nuclear issue out of it and threaten to rescind his public finance option? I guess he'd have to be prepared to return 85m but sheez - at least make a threat out of it to get it in the news. I'm sick of reading about Palin's wardrobe.

Posted by: ReginaldL at October 25, 2008 05:39 PM (AuXAX)

50

Seriously though, how do they keep track of people exceeding the legal limit ($2600?) if they do not keep cc numbers?

If you can use disposable credit cards, it's a complete joke. Online payments without verifying the name and address, gift cards, foreign donations without checking the citizenship of the giver.

All from a guy who said he'd accept public financing. If only media or an opponent could put together a coherent statement on the audacity of deceit.

Posted by: MamaAJ at October 25, 2008 05:41 PM (X6Zdh)

51
Odd that we can't buy cigarettes in the usa online using a credit card cause it might fund terrorists but terrorists can fund/rig a usa election using credit cards online ?

Posted by: politicalmuse at October 25, 2008 05:41 PM (kLKnf)

52

NOt that anyone gives a fuck, but check LGF- Ashley Todd, the "attacked" "McCain" volunteer is a Paulian, and not with the McCain campaign

 

Posted by: TMF at October 25, 2008 05:44 PM (/YM8H)

53 Just start submitting it to Drudge Report on the main page,  it worked for the blue dress.    MAKE THEM COVER THE STORY!!!!!

Posted by: Joe Dagostino at October 25, 2008 05:45 PM (FtFDe)

54

My late father was a Nigerian election official who processed over $60,000,000 in illegal campaign contributions to Barack Obama.  If you will send me your bank account numbers so that I can transfer this money to you, I will give you 1/3 of the total amount.

 

Posted by: Joints at October 25, 2008 05:45 PM (2a3WJ)

55

Without verification, who pays?

Is Team Obama spending potentially non-existant money? 

AOL got hammered with that sorta shit, with CC sniffers, and direct check sniffers and shit, in the early 90's which is what moved them to a fixed rate service, rather than a charged based on log time.

Then again AOL was playing some dirty fucking pool with their delayed logout shit back then.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at October 25, 2008 05:46 PM (ul7te)

56 Guess it's up to you ace.  We as readers can spread the word as much as possible but....damn, this is frustrating.

Posted by: brak at October 25, 2008 05:46 PM (CHiw8)

57 McCain should immediately turn off all security measures regarding credit card donations and stop listing donors under $200. The media might take notice.

Posted by: ricky at October 25, 2008 05:52 PM (muUqs)

58 Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.

Posted by: Lawrence Walsh at October 25, 2008 05:54 PM (Yw/4J)

59 Stomping up and down about media bias isn't going to do anything. Everyone should know that by now.

The thing to do is to work against *specific reporters by name* and by striking directly at their conceit, their weakest point: their claim to be journalists. Showing that they aren't journalists at all will have a great impact on their coverage.

One way to do that is by making them the center of attention in a post. In this case, I had to click through two pages in order to find out the name of the National Journal reporter. Put his name in the title of this post. Then, when the situation presents itself, go leave comments on his entries calling him a bad journalist.

Now, of course, in this case he might actually be on the right track so that might not apply in this case. But, if he's covering things up then try the above.

Posted by: The other plan at October 25, 2008 05:54 PM (ghGJT)

60

 

Posted by: Lee at October 25, 2008 05:56 PM (TxTIh)

61 Ace-since the Obama campaign is not keeping credit card numbers, would it be possible to have hundreds or thousands of contributors on one credit card number? I wonder how many credit card numbers someone like Soros has? Could he set up an operation and have a bunch of people at computers making up names and addresses and donating to the Obama campaign with his credit cards?

Posted by: Lori at October 25, 2008 05:58 PM (VVEAz)

62 If Sen. Obama gave up these fraudulent donations, his campaign would go broke.

So Sen. Obama destroyed the evidence of fraudulent donations.

EVERY SINGLE ATTACK AD Barack Obama buys between now and election day is paid for with dirty money.

EVERY SINGLE ONE.

Because if he gave them back, he'd be bankrupt.  He couldn't buy ANY ads.  That means EVERY SINGLE ONE is paid for with dirty money.

This is important.  Repeat it.  Tell your friends.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at October 25, 2008 05:59 PM (YvLui)

63 Posted by: lmg at October 25, 2008 05:24 PM (A/vgC)

you might be on to something.

Posted by: DCA at October 25, 2008 05:59 PM (80uXY)

64

D'oh. Sorry bout that.

I swear, though, I wondered why the Hillary supporters were acting the way they were towards the end of the primary run, but now I know.

It's one thing to lose. It's another to be cheated and lose. But what's truly irritating like sand in the swimtrunks is to be cheated in plain sight, lose, and then have the media willfully ignore their duty and any professional calling by intentionally avoiding to investigate the truth. 

Posted by: Lee at October 25, 2008 06:02 PM (TxTIh)

65 I keep thinking of Bident's being from Delaware, the credit card capital of America....

Posted by: goddessoftheclassroom at October 25, 2008 06:11 PM (Syrgw)

66

The records are NOT gone. The Obama campaign may certainly have purged its records; however, VISA/Mastercard certainly have not. They have records of every transaction they have processed on behalf of the Obama campaign. They'd have to in order to bill Obama for their percentage of each transaction and in order to charge the appropriate credit card for that transaction.

Posted by: Jim B at October 25, 2008 06:12 PM (0WHwz)

67 Hey all,

I saw this on some other thread and I think it's about the only thing left to do:  get the impeachment papers ready, just in case. 

Posted by: bullfrog at October 25, 2008 06:13 PM (AlOqU)

68

A month after Obama has stolen the election the blind masses will find mysterious fraudlent charges popping up on their statements.  It's like the tax hikes have already begun.

Posted by: robojadison at October 25, 2008 06:13 PM (9+esH)

69 Ace,

its not about AVS. Get off AVS. It's stupid.

It's about gift cards.

Untraceable. unverifiable. Completely legal - IE no credit card fraud.

It would allow someone, say Soros, to buy $300 million in gift cards and donate to Obama anonymously and if done in $200 or less increments, Obama wouldn't have to report it.

Get off AVS. That's not the right angle.

The scandal is the gift cards themselves.

Posted by: lorien1973 at October 25, 2008 06:19 PM (ddGv/)

70 So is my above scenario possible with gift cards instead of credit card numbers? Some one could probably set up a computer program to process it. You probably wouldn't have to put the info in manually.

Posted by: Lori at October 25, 2008 06:23 PM (VVEAz)

71 Not keeping credit card numbers is good security practice. A database of every credit card number would be a very attractive target for thieves. Refunds can be effected using a transaction ID (obviously, the banks involved would still have a record of the account numbers associated with the transaction, but the campaign doesn't need that information). But they should at least keep a hash of the credit card number (like Ace's IP address hash system) so they can find accounts that donated too much (over $2,300). Is that too arcane a point for a journalist to ask about?

Posted by: Jobius at October 25, 2008 06:29 PM (sCFiE)

72 33 yikes, didn't mean to bold the whole thing.\

It's OK Topsekret.  But did you ever answer a drunken Wicked's question about your...uh...situation? 

Posted by: Abusing himself in his mom's basement at October 25, 2008 06:36 PM (iooso)

73

And all stupid uncle Joe Plugs does is, sit there, flashing his big, fake, teeth, and squints? Then lies his ass off, because that's all he's ever known?. People here in Scranton (drink) hate his guts for his trying to pimp us out every time he runs for another failed try at National office. Hey Joe..Don't go nowhere Amtrak can't take ya! Uhkay

Posted by: hutch1200 at October 25, 2008 06:38 PM (PI2nP)

74 Tapper picked up on the Biden interview story, and, predictably, did not even mention any Biden answer, just listed the questions and agreed with Obama's move to pullout from future interviews because of the mean questions.

Mr.  MeetThePress?  Can't handle tough questions? 

Well, it's understandable, it's not like he's a Senator or he's running for Vice President or anything.

I have no problem with the meanest or stupidest questions, as long as the response is not edited.  Ask Sarah Palin whatever you want, don't distort her answers.

Posted by: AmishDude at October 25, 2008 06:47 PM (GlrN/)

75 In short, the Obama campaign has deliberately bypassed basic checks, and that could have no other reasonable explanation than to open the door to fraud.  Period.

They're the fucking Mafia.

Posted by: Stinky Esposito at October 25, 2008 06:47 PM (MMC8r)

76 69

If someone bought a huge amount of gift cards / prepaid cc's, that can be traced right?  It's hard to imagine someone paying cash for all those cc's.

Posted by: perineumpirate at October 25, 2008 07:05 PM (rKSJ1)

77 Thank God Politico is all over this story.
http://tinyurl.com/5ed9t7

Posted by: ricky at October 25, 2008 07:08 PM (muUqs)

78 I don't know if this is a stupid idea or not.  Maybe someone can write up a serious, legit-looking chain email thing that warns people to watch out for fraudulent transactions from the obama campaign on their credit card statements and unbilled transactions.  And have links to the screenshots of fraudulent donations that people have made and link to the stories of people that have already been victims of obama's donation fraud.

Posted by: perineumpirate at October 25, 2008 07:10 PM (rKSJ1)

79

It's about gift cards.

Untraceable. unverifiable. Completely legal - IE no credit card fraud.

It would allow someone, say Soros, to buy $300 million in gift cards and donate to Obama anonymously and if done in $200 or less increments, Obama wouldn't have to report it.

We have a winner.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 25, 2008 07:26 PM (VBon8)

80 Yeah, I think the gift cards angle should be worth pursuing too. What legitimate reason is there for a huge number of people to use gift cards to donate? There isn't one that I can think of.

Posted by: ParanoidInSeattle at October 25, 2008 07:48 PM (AJ4xq)

81 Ricky

I know, see up thread :

The complaint is based in part on data that the McCain campaign provides on its Web site — an extra step of disclosure not required by election laws. The campaign of Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, does not disclose as much information about its donors as McCain does. Obama only reports the identities of donors who give $200 or more — the legal requirement.

The McCain campaign said Saturday that transactions on its Web site are only updated monthly and do not necessarily reflect corrections that the campaign routinely undertakes."

 --- So basically, they are saying Obama hides his donor fraud, so that's OK, they are exploiting McCain's transparency. It's chutzpah.

Posted by: Topsecretk9 at October 25, 2008 07:49 PM (eQwUw)

82 Obama should be charged with campaign fundraising and other election fraud violations and in prison.

Posted by: Christoph at October 25, 2008 07:52 PM (hawOV)

83 Encourage MORE from the weak. Write to them. Thank them for a good start but ask for MORE.

"Please, sir; may I have more?" [Oliver Twist]

Posted by: maverick muse at October 25, 2008 08:19 PM (F1b/5)

84 Obama should be charged with campaign fundraising and other election fraud violations and in prison.
Posted by: Christoph

AT LEAST disqualify his campaign immediately!
To force prison time, take him to trial for the conviction.
But Obama has disqualified his own candidacy with his campaign of fraud.

Posted by: maverick muse at October 25, 2008 08:22 PM (F1b/5)

85 Sick.  He's trying to buy the election and no one's calling him on anything.  Somebody should be indicted.

Posted by: seguin at October 25, 2008 08:27 PM (Q8BJW)

86 If the chose one wins, I've already decided I'm going to the local Dem headquarters the day after the election and asking for my $1000 they promised. I know it's supposed to be in the form of a tax credit, but I figure they won't care if I get it a little early. I mean, they're taking it in however they want, why can't they give it out that way too?

Posted by: Sean at October 25, 2008 08:37 PM (vZzYJ)

87 Wow, deleting my comments just for being an unmitigated dickbag troll? And this site bashes "fascist Obama"?

Yes, now that I think about it, comparing editing a comment to illegally accepting foreign donation is pretty fucking retarded. Oh well. What do you expect? I'm a softheaded little pussy-assed lefty.

Posted by: Conserve at October 25, 2008 08:50 PM (lVlbp)

88 Obama's campaign recently said that they refunded money to illegal donors. How can they refund money if they don't keep the card numbers? Lie upon lie upon lie.

Obama lies to steal the election and subvert democracy.

Posted by: indga at October 25, 2008 08:51 PM (3NsFt)

89 indga: How can [Obama] refund money if they don't keep the card numbers?

Quoted for truth.

He destroyed the evidence on purpose.  When a corporation does that . . . well, actually, when a corporation does that, they usually move for summary judgment and win.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at October 25, 2008 09:04 PM (YvLui)

90 Wow, deleting my comments because of dissent? And this site bashes "fascist Obama"? The echo chamber is deafening.

Got any tax liens, bitch?

Posted by: Stinky Esposito at October 25, 2008 09:05 PM (MMC8r)

91 The echo chamber is deafening.

Shut up, liebot. We're not playing your Alinsky game any more.

Posted by: Dead Career Sketch at October 25, 2008 09:06 PM (JTN0y)

92 How can they refund money if they don't keep the card numbers?

By transaction numbers, and the credit card company takes it from there.

Posted by: Stinky Esposito at October 25, 2008 09:14 PM (MMC8r)

93 By transaction numbers, and the credit card company takes it from there. Yes, there are records for everything. Even if gift cards were used, there's a record of any purchase of that magnitude (if they were bought piecemeal by thousands of individuals -- well, some of them can be persuaded to talk).

Posted by: Dead Career Sketch at October 25, 2008 09:16 PM (JTN0y)

94 Note on the card numbers:  They are stored even if the campaign does not proactively keep them.  We get a report every day that shows the card numbers from that days transactions, and the credit card processor will have a record as well. 

Posted by: Chuck at October 25, 2008 09:20 PM (UX1OK)

95

Suppose that credit card numbers are being guessed.

Without verification, who pays?

When a credit card customer claims a charge is bogus  the credit card company simply voids the charges(on small amounts at least) and bills it back to the vendor (in this case the One's campaign)  That's why a smart vendor leaves the AVS on so he has the information to contest the chargeback.

Posted by: Bobo at October 25, 2008 09:33 PM (UX1OK)

96 bills it back to the vendor (in this case the One's campaign)

Plus a hefty chargeback fee in most cases.

Posted by: Dead Career Sketch at October 25, 2008 09:34 PM (JTN0y)

97 "This'll be one for the history books."

If it even makes it into the history books in the first place! 

Posted by: PJ at October 25, 2008 09:56 PM (GVdvM)

98 You won't believe this.

Posted by: koopy at October 25, 2008 10:39 PM (bL4cA)

99 Um...wow.  A quarter of the commenters here are extremely perceptive.  Half are well-intentioned, good people but astonishingly naive. 

51  Odd that we can't buy cigarettes in the usa online using a credit card cause it might fund terrorists, but terrorists can fund/rig a usa election using credit cards online.  -- politicalmuse

Certainly "odd" in the sense that it hardly seems reasonably/rational to have stronger regs against buying cigs than against rigging the presidential election.  But completely predictable and rational *if* one party and candidate have decided to win at any cost.  And I do mean any.

66  The records are NOT gone. The Obama campaign may have purged its records; however, VISA/Mastercard certainly have not. They have records of every transaction they have processed on behalf of the Obama campaign. They'd have to, in order to bill Obama for their percentage of each transaction and in order to charge the appropriate credit card for that transaction. -- Jim B

Jim makes a great point:  It's obvious that in order for a card to be billed for the donated amount, the CC companies must know which account to debit, eh?  So even if the Obama folks deliberately refuse to keep records (to maintain "plausible deniability"), *someone* could theoretically compel the CC companies to do the research and find how many millions were illegally donated to Obie's campaign.  But of course, that won't happen, and you all know that in your heart of hearts.  At the rarified levels Obama occupies, there is never any penalty for any lawbreaking.  That's for peons like you and me.

Understand that not only am I not condoning this, I hate it.  Unfortunately, it's a fact, and trying to deny it or ignore it accomplishes nothing.

67  I saw this on some other thread and I think it's about the only thing left to do:  get the impeachment papers ready, just in case.  -- bullfrog

A noble sentiment, and if it could be done it would be a great remedy.  Unfortunately, both impeachment and removal from office depend on a majority vote of the two houses of congress.  And I know of only one Democrat who would vote against his party's president. Which makes impeachment impossible.
But I like the sentiment behind it.

75  In short, the Obama campaign has deliberately bypassed basic checks, and that could have no other reasonable explanation than to open the door to fraud.  Period.  They're the fucking Mafia.
-- Stinky Esposito

Stinky gets it.  And the"deliberately bypassed" part is the entre--the hook, if you will--to get this story out:  Because if reports are accurate, the Obama campaign *deliberately* disabled the safeguards devised by the credit-card companies to prevent fraud.  By all reports, this could not have happened by accident.

For all honest people, that should be prima facie evidence.  Smoking gun.  Case closed.

But for every move there's a counter-move, and this is no exception.  The hard evidence will never be subpoenaed--because the courts will rule that no individual or private organization has the legal standing to sue to enforce FEC rules on contributions.  Note that the soundness of this opinion matters not a bit.  Once the courts have thrown in with one party, the notion of legal remedies is...how to put it?  Ludicrous.  Foolish to the point of ridicule.  Yet there will be many nominal conservatives who say, well, hey, we followed the rules to the letter and exhausted all legal remedies, so we are compelled to abide by the decision of the courts (or whatever corrupt entity has issued its august "ruling")

To summarize:  The justly-revered system of free elections embodied in our system by the Founders depended on one of two things: either honest politicians, or an honest system of courts to prosecute obvious fraud.  Lacking either today, this system was easy-pickins for the Obots.

Specifically, once Obama & company determined not to bother with playing by the rules, it was child's play to figure out how to game the system.  And I'm pretty sure it doesn't involve charging donations to randomly-selected cc numbers--too much risk.  Rather, as many have written, foreign donors (totally safe from prosecution) make scores of contributions to Obama on each card.  With the courts de-clawed there is absolutely no risk.  And if Obie is elected, it wouldn't matter if sworn depositions surfaced after the election attesting to the fraud--because no one will prosecute.


So *if*, as expected, Obama's fraud results in a win, what should a principled person do?  For my part, I will oppose an Obama administration in every way I can devise.  By their eager complicity in two frauds--both the contributions and the hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registrations by ACORN -- it should be self-evident that they have forfeited the protection of our laws.

It's said that those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind.  Those bent on destroying this country have always relied on the idea that the rest of us would  honor the majority vote even if it required sacrificing our most fundamental beliefs and goals.  They count on this being true even if they steal the election by fraud.

What rational person would obey laws put forth by a party that "won" by means of such huge and obvious fraud?

Posted by: sf at October 25, 2008 10:54 PM (EsQly)

100 Dumb fucking question, cause I know all of shit about campaign finance.  If Obama takes in X amount on fraudulent donations, throws them in a bank account, gets caught about a month later, gives it back,  would he keep any interest?

moron question I know, but I wonder


Posted by: micheal at October 26, 2008 12:30 AM (RvRj+)

101
sf,
have you read The End of Democracy??
It was originally a symposium in First Things magazine, later published as a book. The same question was raised, albeit from a different angle. Does the increasing insanity of our courts--their rejection of reason, natural law, and the very principles that make democracy possible--destroy the courts' legitimacy, and if so, then the legitimacy of our whole political system--hence, are we justified in revolting?

Thank you for your excellent commentary. It is not that half of us are naive, it is that the idea of America that most of us grew up with dies really hard. For myself, growing up during the Cold War, with the Soviet Union as the locus of evil--and it being located very, very far away--it is extremely hard to BELIEVE that such things really are happening here, in my own beloved America.

And yet, it is precisely because we remember some things about the Soviet Union that we do have a paradigm for understanding what's happening here and now. For example, remember Pravda and Tass? I often think of them when I look at our news media. I remember, back in the day, hearing about how Soviet citizens would figure out what was really happening in the world by reading Pravda and assuming that the reality was the opposite of however Pravda was presenting things!

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at October 26, 2008 12:31 AM (kZ9L/)

102
.....and that is why I don't worry at all if the media report that McCain is lagging in the opinion polls!

Call it "the Pravda principle." Assume that everything coming over an AP wire is total bullshit--at best, a distortion of the truth, and at worst, its complete opposite!

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at October 26, 2008 12:35 AM (kZ9L/)

103

AVS does detect anonymous cards.  It returns a code indicating that the cardholder does not have an address on file with the issuing bank.

IIRC, the McCain website rejects such cards.

Posted by: Gideon7 at October 26, 2008 05:33 AM (eWnjT)

104

Visa/MC acceptance rules require that the merchant keep all pertinent transaction information for at least 60 days to allow for processing of chargeback disputes.

Often the merchant will keep a transaction ID number in lieu of the actual card number for security reasons.  (The card number is usually stored by the merchant's computer in masked form, ****1234.)   Mastercard for example requires the merchant to produce, on demand, a receipt showing the masked card number.

The merchant is supposed to keep the full  "tape": the complete response data stream from the processor.  This includes the timestamp, amount, authorization number, AVS response code, and the transaction ID.

The transaction ID number is used for issuing any refund; the full original card number is not necessary.  The processor's computer has the information that connects the transaction ID numbers back to the original card numbers.  That way if the merchant's website is hacked all the card numbers aren't exposed.

Posted by: Gideon7 at October 26, 2008 05:44 AM (eWnjT)

105 And if they steal this thing, and we lose all legal recourse, what do we do then?

Posted by: SGT Dan at October 26, 2008 06:05 AM (Q6BTe)

106 "would he keep any interest?"

Of course, he is THE ONE.

Posted by: Kaitian at October 26, 2008 06:12 AM (d14cR)

107 balance of shoes nike shoes shoes.com adidas shoes puma shoes womens shoes dress shoes. casual shoes wholesale shoes sport shoes nike shoes shoes boots sandal shoes basketball shoes slippers shoes . replica rolex watches rolex watch replica watches- cartier watches- cartier watches swiss watch automatic watch chronograph watch. mens watch watch com men's watch the watch womens shoes leather shoes dress shoes running shoes . adidas shoes tote bag golf bag plastic bag purses bag briefcase bag steve madden shoes gold watch rockport shoes repairs watches best replica watches youtube watch youtube watch rolex watch rolex watches casio watches watches online timex watches tag watches. nike jordan shoes ladies watch leather bag replica handbag replica handbags wearing fashions clothes jorand shoes . oyster rolex dive watches replica watches- watches for men- timex watches buy watch rolex mens chrono watch elgin watch. automatic watch ladies watch mens watches new shoes steve madden shoes sneakers shoes sneaker shoes jorand shoes . rolex replica belts bag diaper bags travel bag laptop bag shoulder bag wears art glass urban wear fendi bag briefcase bag nike shoes men shoes fashion shoes women's shoes shoe store nike shoes best replica watches nike shoes men shoes fashion shoes women's watches cracked- medieval times- cidreq cidreq mens health ukraine 2009 calendar. chopper leipzig madsen donald duck isis king ncaa mens soccer cuny portal croazia . pasolini safari e-buddy espace pub rugby henderson waves jewelry ring wrist watches rolex watches replica watches fine watches casio watches watches online quartz watch. nike shoes ladies watch men's watch nike shoes running shoes Tiffany Bracelet basketball shoes jorand shoes . replica rolex watches rolex watch replica watches- fine watches- rolex datejust rolex mens watch repair oyster rolex watch. air flight ladies watch men's watch rolex submariner running shoes Tiffany Bracelet rolex replica jorand shoes . rolex replica watches rolex replica nike shoes rolex replica rolex replica fake rolex replica rolex replica watches rolex replica rolex replica rolex replica watches rolex replica best replica watches watches diamond watches replica watches rolex watches casio watches watches online timex watches tag watches. nike jordan shoes ladies watch luxury rolex watch nike shoes running shoes Tiffany Bracelet basketball shoes jorand shoes . oyster rolex dive watches replica watches- watches for men- rolex datejust buy watch rolex mens watch repair oyster rolex watch. air flight ladies watch seagull watches rolex submariner running shoes Tiffany Bracelet rolex replica jorand shoes . rolex replica watches rolex replica nike shoes rolex replica rolex replica fake rolex replica rolex replica watches rolex replica rolex replica shoe store nike shoes best replica watches nike shoes men shoes fashion shoes women's shoes shoe store nike shoes best replica watches nike shoes men shoes fashion shoes women's watches

Posted by: dressshoes at November 21, 2008 06:48 AM (bYVeT)

Posted by: baidu at July 21, 2009 04:37 AM (pXYcm)

109 Excuse me. The reason why worry kills more people than work is that more people worry than work. Help me! I can not find sites on the: Vehicle insurance ontario. I found only this - free vehicle insurance. State, rv insurance professionals represents the leading us providers of recreational vehicle insurance for motorhomes, whether you buy from us or not, it. Vehicle insurance is the insurance that covers the damage to your vehicle. Best regards , Kasib from Zimbabwe.

Posted by: Kasib at August 01, 2009 03:14 PM (VofJu)

110 Nowadays it is hard to find a man or a woman who does not wish to look different and to show the unique style. so replica Watches today become one of the most popular object of attention.
chanel watches,rolex watches,omega watches and other brand watches that We offer FREE express door to door world wide shipping.

Posted by: replica watches at August 27, 2009 02:46 AM (3a5X9)

Posted by: fdsfds at October 27, 2009 07:19 PM (8kvkz)

Posted by: airforceoneshop at November 03, 2009 08:17 PM (LHCCE)

113 Come to our website for shopping with high quality and best service! There have new products,MBT M. Walk
and MBT Lami,Welcome everybody to buy it.

Posted by: mbt shoes at November 08, 2009 02:43 PM (QhfLM)

Posted by: ugg boots at November 12, 2009 09:32 AM (IeIJx)

115 buy [url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-coquette-casual-shoes-c-22]ugg rainier[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]buy ugg[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg usa[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]discount ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-short-c-1]ugg 5825[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-sundance-c-5]ugg sundance[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]cheap ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-tall-c-3]ugg 5815[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg sale[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg uk[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-knightsbridge-c-27]ugg knightsbridge[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]womens ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg boots[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/]ugg australia[/url]
[url=http://www.reviewups.com/ugg-classic-cardy-c-2]ugg 5819[/url]from usa

Posted by: cheap at November 14, 2009 10:45 AM (s7MB5)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 06:28 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 08:02 AM (xpuiO)

Posted by: replica watches at November 17, 2009 11:41 PM (C/zDM)

Posted by: replica watches at November 18, 2009 04:34 AM (C/zDM)

Posted by: mbtshoesbuy at November 23, 2009 01:21 PM (bNNim)

121 The proper function of man is to live, but not to exist.ugg classic cardyConquer fear of death and you are put into possession of your life. ugg classic tallThere is a time to speak and a time to be silent. ugg knightsbridgefree shippingmbt cheap
mbt sale
mbt uk
mbt shoes cheap
MBT M.Walk

Posted by: reviewups at November 27, 2009 12:02 PM (xUZwC)

122 hot news for brand shoes online store ,do you want to win more discount ?and popular for younger,and nike air maxwith top quality A ,come on all air max shoes with lowest price for highest quality !

Posted by: nike air max at December 01, 2009 11:59 PM (OKj2x)

Posted by: replica watches at December 04, 2009 09:02 AM (bsW/x)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 06, 2009 11:53 PM (1dySH)

Posted by: Lacoste shoes at December 13, 2009 02:40 PM (/3s/N)

Posted by: rolex watches at December 17, 2009 09:45 AM (EGD2i)

Posted by: wholesale jewelry at December 20, 2009 09:42 AM (1dySH)

Posted by: salinna at December 24, 2009 03:08 AM (+yPUE)

129 Un total de once comunidades autnomas estn este jueves en alerta naranja Christmas gift ugg tall boots (riesgo importante) por nevadas y bajan las temperaturas en toda Espa09a, segn la Agencia Estatal de Meteorologa (AEMET). En concreto, se Christmas gift ugg napoule sandal trata de Aragn, Cantabria, Castilla-La Mancha, Catalu09a, Christmas gift timberland classic boots Madrid, Navarra, Comunidad Valenciana, Galicia, Pas Vasco, Asturias y Murcia. La cota de nieve bajar a menos de 200 metros en el CantbricoLa Pennsula Ibrica est bajo dos borrascas y un anticicln que crearn un pasillo que permitir el paso de una corriente de aire muy fro, como la que est provocando un temporal de fro glaciar en Europa, aunque es esperan que el fro que suframos no sea tan intenso como en otros pases. An as, se espera que las bajas temperaturas se mantengan hasta el domingo. La cota de nieve baja en el Cantbrico a menos de 200 metros

Posted by: El temporal de fr¨ªo y nieve pone en alerta a once comunidades aut¨®nomas ugg boots|ugg uk|timberlan at January 10, 2010 07:34 AM (tWrEP)

130

Swiss replica watches Now while replica watches you can buy a good digital replica watches and pocket watch you might need to see what features are present on your new purchase. This is important as you should know and understand the quickest way to set any of the watch brands. You will also need to familiarize yourself with how to know when you will need to change the batteries on your digital watch.The key to finding your perfect watch is mainly replica watches keeping your options open. There are flea markets where you should be able to find replica watch stalls. You can see if you will come across any great antique watch brands in auction houses. These places will sometimes have fantastic looking antique pocket watches that will grace the hand of any owner.These facts may seem to be quite daunting but if you have ever owned a watch of any kind then you will replica watches know that you just how replica watches easy wristwatch these devices can make your life. The many different styles and features that you can find on an average watch will make choosing the right watch brands an exciting experience.

Posted by: replica watches at January 29, 2010 10:04 PM (ihruD)

131 Certainly watches are Replica Watches used to help people record rolex Watches time, but rolex watches nowadays its functions have enlarged. Replica watches are now tag heuer Watches not only objects that tag heuer watches can tell you what time it is, they are also a status symbol. You should not feel strange when you find someone wearing a watch on his wrist, but use the cell phone to tell time. In that situation, the watch is just showing its luxurious function cartier watches. It is normal and cartier watches perhaps also happens to you. .If asked that among the watches of various brands, which one can suit your taste? There is no doubt that most people will choose Rolex. Whichever social class you are in, it is naturally Rolex was known breitling Watches and cherished breitling watches for a long time. However, the elements do not usually enter the market alone, always come with the price tag up to the hand. For this reason, many people, especially men, their dreams of luxury Rolex watches are buried in omega Watches his heart omega watches. What should I do? Rolex watches are simply stunning worn by the rich and famous, right? No, this world is not the world's richest men, is the world of each. All are equal before the search of luxury and be men's watches respected. Within men's watches, the law, when consumers are in the market, women's watches they should women's watches receive the same treatment. This is the real reason why replica Rolex watches are ladies watches ladies watches more welcome than Rolex. Because in this world are not difficult to understand that the rich are much less than people with low income, you agree with me? You are forced to nod and say with certainty that is the reality. These low-income people do not have enough money to save every month. They can not afford such luxury Rolex watches

Posted by: replica watches at February 05, 2010 06:58 AM (TUJDt)

132 Factors Replica Watches About The Rolex replica watches Oyster The Oyster is so closely get in touch with Rolex, and it is inevitably that some people think these are the only Replica watches Rolex manufacture. Others suppose that there is a single Oyster watch. But as a matter of fact, the name Oyster does not actually meant for a rolex Watches particular watch you can buy rolex watches or even to a series but to a type of case that available in some of the Rolex ranges. History The Oyster case was first released in 1926. The objective was to protect the workings of the watch from dust and moisture. Early watches were far from waterproof. The Oyster tag heuer Watchescase was an tag heuer watches innovative design to eliminate these problems. It had a new double locking crown that screwed into place. It has been compared to the hatch on a submarine. Like a submarine, the Oyster case was waterproof. In 1927 Mercedes Gleitze swam the English breitling Watches Channel breitling watches . Before she set off she was presented with a Rolex Oyster. When she arrived, the watch was still working perfectly. The resulting publicity gave the new case a massive boost. Why is it called Oyster? Legend has it that Hans cartier Watches Wilsdorf cartier watches, who invented the Oyster, chose the name because the new case reminded him of the difficulty he had experienced prising open oysters at dinner. Since then the Oyster has further, particularly advanced. Many Oyster watches today are omega Watches perpetual-self-winding, in other omega watches words, it does not require to expose the mechanism to the outside world in order to wind it. The Osyter Perpetual is one of the toughest, most durable, most reliable watches (under truly adverse conditions). It is probably the best mechanical watch money can buy.

Posted by: replica watches at February 08, 2010 06:45 AM (TUJDt)






Processing 0.07, elapsed 0.0648 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0106 seconds, 141 records returned.
Page size 145 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat