Impending Regulations/Reality Check
 

With the pending regulations (which I understand are supposed to be out within a couple weeks) I need to know what is going to happen to ePassporte. I have been freaking out for the last 6 months or so in anticipation of this and it looks like it is finally going to happen.

Very simple question: Will I be able to continue to make withdrawals to ePassporte from my poker site (Full Tilt) and then hit the ATM and get my money AFTER the regulations are out?

My current financial and employment situations depend heavily on the answer to that question. I would appreciate any intelligent answers... I know there are a lot of intelligent ppl on here. Sorry if this is an old or boring topic... I cant think of a better place to ask this question.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check
 

Being an online pro for the last four years this is a big concern for me also. But having studied this a lot i will give you my take on what i know about this issue.

First off Epassporte is slightly better positioned than the other payment processors in one way being that they dont take "gambling" transactions, only poker transactions.

They are in a tough position with regard to the regulations because as i understand it they are based here in the US of A. In other words if the regulations strictly prohibit ePassporte, they will likely have to close shop to us.

That being said, im not sure anybody has any idea what the regulations have in store for us at this point. They are over a month late now and frankly could be just about anything. From my understanding of the way this is going to work the worst case scenerio will look something like this.

The regulations come out next week
Epassporte immediately closes up shop
We have to rely on checks during the comment period
The 90 day comment period ends and the poker sites decide they can no longer stay in the market because of the harshness of the regulations

However what i think will happen is somewhere in between what we have now and the above scenerio.

I see the regulations coming out sometime in August.
During the 90 day comment period it will be the status quo.
After the comment period when they go into effect we will be down to basically checks and a few minor processors.
Epassporte surviving is possible due to the non handling of sportsbetting and casino gambling.
Possibly one or two of the major sites will close to the US.

Personally i hope we maintain the status quo after the regulations, but i think there will be at least minor damage. I do think it will stop short of total shutdown though. There is going to be too little money and attention spent on this by the federal govt, and too much demand by US citizens to compeltely close this market.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

"Epassporte surviving is possible due to the non handling of sportsbetting and casino gambling.
Possibly one or two of the major sites will close to the US.'

Fair analysis generally, except that the likelihood of BOTH your above sentences coming about bare close to zero.

IF ePassporte were to get a "pass" under the Regs., about a 1% chance, and the "pass" was due to a poker only status, then it would be Christmas in August. However, that is NOT going to happen.

Epassporte MAY get a pass, functionally, if it is exempted as an EFT/wallet provider from offshore. I'd say about a 3% chance.

As for one or more major rooms closing to US players, I'd say about a 80% chance, even if the Regs are beatable thru an offshore EFT/wallet provider.

On the bright side, I think you are wrong about the market being underserved. Anyone who is a "pro" will be motivared enough to find the way to play and there will be venues online to play. IF players want to play, there will be one or more sites available, with both US and foreign players .... The problem has always been the accessibility of sites to US casual players and the heavy dependence of "favorite" poker sites on the US market. THAT segment may die.

In three years, the drought will be over and the US market will again be accessible to the casual player, with US approved brands.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

If any regulation bans Epassporte, then I predict that they will initiate litigation challenging the regulation. The owners of Epassporte have experience in challenging the DOJ because they serve adult porn sites.
I actually think that if the regs ever come out, then they will be more general in nature. They won't give online poker an exemption or declare it legal, but they won't specifically target online poker or any type of online gambling.
I doubt that the regs will greatly change the present situation.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

Here is a website with one guys take. Not a bad little site he put together. luckychancer posted this in the internet forum and didn't get any response.

http://www.compatiblepoker.com/usa.php#usapokerupdates

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check
 

I think epassporte is watching closely. I guess I read some hope for it into the UB/Absolute ultimatum they gave out over BJ. I am planning on full time AC play around Christmas anyways and the 90 days gets me there. We should know more WTO-wise by then. I think the scale of sanctions will let us know how the arbitration panels would rule on renegotiated committments. If Antigua gets anywhere near 3.4bn, then look for the US to start some serious negotiations. Sept 4th is the hearing for iMega, and if they arent laughed out of court we may see some angles for epass to use to shoot in court. And if Frank gets anything done, it will be late in the session on a last minute bill that if Bush vetoed would spell major problems.
Bottom line is, we are still watching and waiting, powerless. I wish I could know something before November, but I doubt it.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

I've seen this website.
On August 2nd he wrote "According to a reliable source and someone who works on Capital Hill the UIGEA regulations are just about done and should come out within 1-2 weeks. This of course is a rumor but it's from people in DC so it's better than someone winging it"

Who knew his source was 2+2, this was one day after Berge reported the exact same thing.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check
 

JimmyH,

You are constraining the question too much by specifying not only the general means of withdrawal (epass), but also the specific means (ATM cash withdrawals). The question you should be asking is whether there will be sites to play on from which you can somehow withdraw your money, even if it is more of a hassle/takes longer, than you experienced previously. I believe the answer to that question will be yes. At the very least, the sports books who have poker sites affiliated with them, will stay in the market because they already are illegal, and because they have an incentive to work around the regs, even if that means creating new bank accounts every month or having you use "Jose Doe in Santiago" as a go-between.

Ewallets are the most likely to be affected effectively by the regs (but epass *should* be less so), and checks are the least likely given a willingness by the sites to constantly adapt.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]

Who knew his source was 2+2, this was one day after Berge reported the exact same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find Berge quite a reliable source don't you? In a lot of the posts I give props to twoplustwo members pointing out or emailing me info.

In regards to the op, Wichita and Milton summed things up pretty well. Also, I think you'll see a lot more mergers & selling of US player databases but I don't see any of the big sites going anywhere.

As far as epassporte, I think they will do everything in their power to stay in business although it doesnt look good. Their business quadrupled over night because of poker sites pushing them...I'm sure their legal team is ready and well paid.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

The real question here regarding ewallets or offshore banks, is what legal basis does the gov't have to have to blacklist such an entity. To be sure, the IUGEA indemnified the US banks for wrongfully taking actions to block transactions. But if challenged in court, what legal justification does the DoJ have to show to justify a listing? Can they just blacklist any overseas corp which then has to prove it doesn't, or agree not to in the future, faciliate poker and/or other gaming transactions (i.e. guilty until the accused proves itself innocent or pledges to be innocent in the future)? Perhaps Milton or other attorneys could comment on this.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
To be sure, the IUGEA ....

[/ QUOTE ]
It's called UIGEA.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

disleckseuh

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
The real question here regarding ewallets or offshore banks, is what legal basis does the gov't have to have to blacklist such an entity. To be sure, the IUGEA indemnified the US banks for wrongfully taking actions to block transactions. But if challenged in court, what legal justification does the DoJ have to show to justify a listing? Can they just blacklist any overseas corp which then has to prove it doesn't, or agree not to in the future, faciliate poker and/or other gaming transactions (i.e. guilty until the accused proves itself innocent or pledges to be innocent in the future)? Perhaps Milton or other attorneys could comment on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the question that litigation will have to resolve. If, that is, the regulations really require banks to blacklist ewallets or foreign banks dealing with online gambling sites, especially online poker sites.
I think that the DOJ wants to avoid litigation over the legality of online poker because if they lose then their campaign of intimidation by prosecuting sportsbetting is gone. Thus, I think that regs, if any and I am not holding my breath, will be more general, like don't knowingly deal with unlawful online gambling site or business, whatever that means; rather than don't deal with Epassporte, PokerStars or their foreign banks.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
In three years, the drought will be over and the US market will again be accessible to the casual player, with US approved brands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anyone NOT see this happening? Unless the Republicans win back the House and Senate (good luck with that) I think it's just a matter of time until we have legal online poker in the US.

Any thoughts?

By the way, great site CompatiblePoker. I check it every night after work to keep up to date. Thanks for the hard work!

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

Regarding epassporte and the impending regulation, would it (epassporte) disappear overnight for U.S. customers or would you think it would continue to opperate during the "public comment period" of the regulations? Obviously the reason I ask this is to determine if i should pull a large portion of my funds off the sites and out of epassporte this week prior to the release of the regulations. Thanks in advance for your thought out opinion on this subject as I'm sure it is a concern a number of 2p2ers are having. I'd especially like to hear the opinions of Milton, Skillgram, Berge, Bluff, Engineer and others who are a little more knowledgeable on the subject than others who like myself are pretty much totally in the dark. For example, my opinion on this would be rank speculation and not worth acting on.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

Personally i think epassporte will stick out the comment period unless the regs specifically prohibit them from serving the us poker market.

I think this is because they will not yet be in effect (read enforceable) and as i understand it the comment period is the time that affected parties have to try and change the regs themselves. IE the first set of regs that come out if they ever do, may not be the final version that gets implemented 90 days from then...

Again i am simply an online pro who has been watching this closely, and i may be completely off base

PS - The chances of ePassporte running with your money is very small. They are based here and have other sources of revenue thru porn that makes it almost 100% unlikely you wouldnt see your money from them.

Also the previous poster who stated that ePass may be willing to litigate over this may be very correct. The fact they are being judicious about who they associate with bodes well for the fact that they are in for the long run, rather than just trying to gobble up as much money as they can before the regs come out. If they were in it for the short term i would think they would be proccessing any and all payments knowing that they would simply exit the market when the regs came to pass.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

I use epass because thats about all thats left thats portable site to site. But, I do not trust them. Look in the zoo, you can see some horror stories, and more I'm sure that arent publicized. I think if they saw it ending, they would just refuse to pay. But, I think they would fight first. On the other hand, I thought Lefebvre would fight for Neteller. The bad thing is Bush is headed into severe lame duckery, and won't give a thought to helping his party retain any seats or win an election. He has sold his soul to Dobson and his 20% and shrinking part of America. If persecuting us to the fullest is asked, he will give DoJ carte blanche.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

I use Epassporte and have had very good service from them. I don't especially trust Internet horror stories such as X poker site stole my money without reason (numerous in Zoo) or Epassporte horror stories. It takes some time for them to process EFT's, but they are processed.
I have read some articles (don't remember where)about their founder and his role in the adult porn 1st amendment cases. These articles and their only poker site stance suggest to me that they have had legal advice on the UIGEA and intend to fight if their business is contested.
The problem may be that the regs scare the banks from dealing with Epassporte without any specific prohibition. This makes establishing standing more difficult. The iMEGA case will provide good information on this matter.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

JP, I think your last line regarding the scaring of the banks is my major concern. Could the regs conceivablely come out this week and specifically single out Epassporte since they are one of the main providors of funding for the Big 2 poker sites? Then in turn the banks might be scared from dealing with Epassporte and overnight not accept transfers from Epassporte or allow the usage of the Epassporte card at their ATM machines. Thus "trapping", if you will, my money at Epassporte. Remember overreation by Party Poker and Neteller was unexpected by most of the 2p2 community last year.

I know the easy answer is hey Redbeard if you are that worried just get your money off of there. But if I do that I'm basically down as far as poker playing goes for a while until I can get onto the sites. And that may be some time off as the regulations could conceiveable not come out for a month or more. (Though I trust Berge greatly and would tend to lean toward any comments he has had and those indicated last week that the regs could easily be out in the next week to ten days.)

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

can someone please explain to me, since i dont have vast knowledge in this subject, how PAPER CHECKS and things like Western Union and MONEYGRAM will be affected by the regs. because from what i have heard PAPER CHECKS are not addressed and the way the WESTERN UNIONS of the world operate, it seems near to impossible to trace....i kind of feel like the worst was over from 6-9 mos. ago when the likes of NETELLER and FIREPAY left the market.....like i said i am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but i really fervently feel the worst is behind us....

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

if the bank stops dealing with epass make a deposit to a poker site and request a paper check.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
can someone please explain to me, since i dont have vast knowledge in this subject, how PAPER CHECKS and things like Western Union and MONEYGRAM will be affected by the regs. because from what i have heard PAPER CHECKS are not addressed and the way the WESTERN UNIONS of the world operate, it seems near to impossible to trace....i kind of feel like the worst was over from 6-9 mos. ago when the likes of NETELLER and FIREPAY left the market.....like i said i am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but i really fervently feel the worst is behind us....

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody KNOWS. we will KNOW a lot MORE when the ACTUAL REGULATIONS come OUT.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
can someone please explain to me, since i dont have vast knowledge in this subject, how PAPER CHECKS and things like Western Union and MONEYGRAM will be affected by the regs. because from what i have heard PAPER CHECKS are not addressed and the way the WESTERN UNIONS of the world operate, it seems near to impossible to trace....i kind of feel like the worst was over from 6-9 mos. ago when the likes of NETELLER and FIREPAY left the market.....like i said i am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but i really fervently feel the worst is behind us....

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody KNOWS. we will KNOW a lot MORE when the ACTUAL REGULATIONS come OUT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well i think what he means is that paper checks were specifically excluded in the language of the original bill. that is as long as there is a us facing site, we at the very worst can still withdraw paper checks...

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

We have a hint at what the regs may be and in a way the trouble drafting them.
This is a quote from the Federal Reserve Board Report to Congress earlier this year for 2006:
[ QUOTE ]
The act generally
defines “unlawful Internet gambling” as
transmitting a bet by any means that
involves the use, at least in part, of the
Internet and where such bet or wager is
unlawful under any applicable federal or
state law in the state or tribal lands in
which the bet or wager is initiated, received,
or otherwise made.

[/ QUOTE ]

It can be read in full on page 146-147 of the report @
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boardd...06/pdf/fro.pdf

Three things we have going for us:
1. Two federal courts have ruled casinos are not covered by the 1961 Wire Act
2. Only 11 states have specific Internet prohibitions
3. Since there is real debate and assorted rulings of skill v luck and 'Skill' sites are not covered by the UIGEA.

As Sen. Kyl put it in a press release concerning the Wexler / Frank bills 'If you want poker considered a game of skill (such as solitaire, hearts, spades, et al) go to court.....

The () is mine not his words but those games are considered 'Skill" and may be played online. See MSN, YAHOO! and AOL Games, Skill / Cash Compititions.

obg

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
JP, I think your last line regarding the scaring of the banks is my major concern. Could the regs conceivablely come out this week and specifically single out Epassporte since they are one of the main providors of funding for the Big 2 poker sites? Then in turn the banks might be scared from dealing with Epassporte and overnight not accept transfers from Epassporte or allow the usage of the Epassporte card at their ATM machines. Thus "trapping", if you will, my money at Epassporte. Remember overreation by Party Poker and Neteller was unexpected by most of the 2p2 community last year.

I know the easy answer is hey Redbeard if you are that worried just get your money off of there. But if I do that I'm basically down as far as poker playing goes for a while until I can get onto the sites. And that may be some time off as the regulations could conceiveable not come out for a month or more. (Though I trust Berge greatly and would tend to lean toward any comments he has had and those indicated last week that the regs could easily be out in the next week to ten days.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Redbeard, you will have some time between when the regulations are issued for comment and when the official regulations become law.
Actually, I am less worried about regulations that specifically target online poker or Epassporte, etc. These regulations can be challenged in court as too broad under the UIGEA or the constitution. Also, specific regulations provide clear standing for those firms directly mentioned or affected.
It's the more general regulation like don't deal with any unlawful gambling site or unlawful ewallet. The term unlawful is undefined and might scare banks into not dealing with lawful firms like Epassporte because of the uncertainity over what is lawful. It is harder to challenge such a regulation. Because such general regulations do not specifically affect firms such as Epassporte, it makes it harder for such firms to show standing to challenge them. It is harder to challenge general regulations as too broad under the UIGEA or under the constitution because they are vague. They allow the DOJ to claim that the general regs mean something that they may not without providing an easy means to challenge them in court.

The present situation reflects this problem. The DOJ has targeted the online sportsbetting industry and ewallets, including Neteller, that serviced them. The DOJ states that all online gambling is unlawful despite clear case law that has ruled otherwise. Numerous online poker sites have still left the US market out of fear, despite the lack of any prosecutions against online poker, because of the DOJ statements and the UIGEA.

Right now, unless the DOJ actually prosecutes or threatens some firm in the online poker industry it is hard to challenge the UIGEA in court because it is hard to show standing. The general nature of the UIGEA is going to present standing, and other, problems for iMEGA in its litigation against Gonzalez et. al.

I think and hope that Epassporte will not be so easily intimidated unlike Party Poker etc. which were easily intimidated.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

I cant add much to what JP has said and I generally agree with his analysis. The regs will probably avoid the real issues (this is typical of government), and those issues will ultimately be the subject of court proceedings.

The real concern for players is just how much the banks and ACH processors will panic - I also dont see ePassporte panicking (they seem to be setting up their litigation strategy already) and expect we will see other "poker only" money transfer companies. There is too much money in online poker for NO ONE to take the court challenge (iMEGA notwithstanding, I just doubt they have procedurally got themselves in the right place - and they are not making poker specific arguments).

Skallagrim

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I am less worried about regulations that specifically target online poker or Epassporte, etc. These regulations can be challenged in court as too broad under the UIGEA or the constitution. Also, specific regulations provide clear standing for those firms directly mentioned or affected.
It's the more general regulation like don't deal with any unlawful gambling site

[/ QUOTE ]

Since UIGEA is about prohibiting funds going to unlawful gambling businesses, my speculation is that the regs will name a fairly large number of these businesses as ones that shouldn't be sent funds. You can't ask a financial business to block something and not give them names, etc. The list may even be state specific. There will likely be a lot of other things in the regs, but a list of unlawful businesses is highly possible.

It would pleasantly surprise me if no poker dealing sites make the list. I doubt financial companies will be named unless they are also running/owning unlawful gambling.

If this list is given, does it give an unlawful business standing for a court challenge of UIGEA; and what would that look like?

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

Still depends on the specific regulations permafrost.

If the regulations tell my bank it is now "illegal" for them to send my money to ePassporte then both ePass and myself have standing to challenge those regulations in court (and I, for one, will definitely do so - online poker is NOT illegal under NH law in my professional legal opinion). Same is true for FTP.

The DOJ knows that, I believe, and therefore will not likely specify "banned" sites. Or maybe they will only specify sportsbetting sites (a great result for us). Or maybe they will exempt states like NH (though online casino games are possibly illegal in NH, offline certainly are...I have said before it gets complex). We shall see.

Skallagrim

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

what about moneygram? where does this stand when the regs come out?

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

I hope that the DOJ and FRS fall into the trap of naming specific firms, even games etc. If they don't name anyone that only deals with online poker then we have our de facto exemption. If they do name any firm in the online poker business, and not sportsbetting, then we have our definitive litigation.
Somehow I doubt that even the federal government and the Bush administration is that foolish. I fear that the regulations will always be right around the corner but never quite make it to publication or be so general that they do not change the status quo.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

my fairly informed guess is that nobody is naming company names in the proposed comment period of the regs, for the basic reason that these are proposed regulations and not a criminal/civil probe.

in other words, when the regs come out, they will have steps for banks to take and steps for e-wallets to take but will not have anything about "epassporte", "Citibank" or "WSEX" in the text. nor should they.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Still depends on the specific regulations permafrost.

If the regulations tell my bank it is now "illegal" for them to send my money to ePassporte then both ePass and myself have standing to challenge those regulations in court (and I, for one, will definitely do so - online poker is NOT illegal under NH law in my professional legal opinion). Same is true for FTP.

The DOJ knows that, I believe, and therefore will not likely specify "banned" sites. Or maybe they will only specify sportsbetting sites (a great result for us). Or maybe they will exempt states like NH (though online casino games are possibly illegal in NH, offline certainly are...I have said before it gets complex). We shall see.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

But why would epassporte be on an "illegal" list due to UIGEA if they weren't into unlawful internet gambling, which I assume they are not? Yes, if they were blacklisted per UIGEA for no reason, go to court.

My point is epassporte, moneygram, etc. will be some of the group of financial businesses expected to prevent restricted transactions to the listed sites. A financial only business won't make the list for any reason that is apparent.

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

JP I can make one comment, it is certain they will be a mixed up mess like the UIGEA.

I was just reading the new cafeteria plan regs published today by the IRS / DoJ and wow, I am amazed it takes so many pages and so many codes to define what is and is not a plan and who may / may not participate and how employees are to be taxed on it.

If that simple task take all that, oh no.......

For a good laugh at government efficiency take a look:
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main

obg

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

If my bank is not told to block ACH transfers to Epass, and Epass continues to work at FTP, then I am quite happy.

If Epass is told not to transfer to FTP, or is blacklisted because it does business with FTP, I am unhappy and will go to court.

Thats as simple as I can put it perma.

Skallagrim

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
If my bank is not told to block ACH transfers to Epass, and Epass continues to work at FTP, then I am quite happy.

If Epass is told not to transfer to FTP, or is blacklisted because it does business with FTP, I am unhappy and will go to court.

Thats as simple as I can put it perma.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Skall, what about all the other online poker sites that serve the US market?

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

JP

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Skall

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

[ QUOTE ]
can someone please explain to me, since i dont have vast knowledge in this subject, how PAPER CHECKS and things like Western Union and MONEYGRAM will be affected by the regs. because from what i have heard PAPER CHECKS are not addressed and the way the WESTERN UNIONS of the world operate, it seems near to impossible to trace....i kind of feel like the worst was over from 6-9 mos. ago when the likes of NETELLER and FIREPAY left the market.....like i said i am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but i really fervently feel the worst is behind us....

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm no expert but i did get caught up in the sportsbook cashout fiasco a few months back so learned first hand what can happen. Basically the check processors dropped sportsbook so we had no way to cashout for about 3 months, they eventually found new ones, but it seems they can also easily be dropped. For instance when they originally got the check cashout back up and running, within a few weeks the processor that handled checks over 2.5k stop doing business with them, so only cashouts under 2.5k were getting processed. It sucked pretty hard but after months of waiting i eventually got all my money by 2.5k check increments. ( sbr sportsbook)

Re: Impending Regulations/Reality Check,
 

Thanks, glad it's simple to you, because it is hard to some of the rest of us.

[ QUOTE ]
If Epass is told not to transfer to FTP, or is blacklisted because it does business with FTP, I am unhappy and will go to court.


[/ QUOTE ]

If epassporte is told not to send funds to FTP under UIGEA, it seems logical that someone is really sure that FTP is an unlawful internet gambling site per a specific law. Your court complaint or epassporte's complaint would be with the specific law that makes FTP unlawful, right?

Reality Check, Permafrost ... you do not know how the world works
 

" If epassporte is told not to send funds to FTP under UIGEA,it seems logical that someone is really sure that FTP is an unlawful internet gambling site per a specific law. "

Sorry, I do not see what "logic" of yours leads you to dismiss the possibility of a political decision to bring an unwarranted blacklisting of FTP for political gain*.

Just remember ALL 8 US Attorneys fired by DOJ last year were Good Republicans, backed by their senior Republican Senator in most cases. If DOJ would slaughter its own, for perceived political advantage; what makes you conclude "logically" that the same Department would be above an unwarranted prosecution or blacklisting or two, if it suited a political end rather than a legal one ?

(* FWIW, I do not think a "site list" will be part of the Regs, that would be foolish as it would draw a clear line, ... not something DOJ wants to do or give up as to poker.)

Re: Reality Check, Permafrost ... you do not know how the world works
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I do not see what "logic" of yours leads you to dismiss the possibility of a political decision to bring an unwarranted blacklisting of FTP for political gain*.



[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, I just plain forgot we were dealing with reality. Political gain is no doubt a fine reason for FTP to be put on a list. Someone would have a great gain by adding FTP, for sure.

This will mean an extensive blacklist people. Got to get plenty of political gain while they can. I wonder why they are delaying these huge political gains instead of springing the list many months ago? Are they savoring our agony before finishing us in one bloody, power mad finale?