On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
2009/8/25 Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>rg>:
Occurring on the same day may imply
"related" but it does not, beyond a
reasonable doubt, equal "sold". If it did, we'd have a whole lot more
prostitution convictions.
As I've already said, whether or not it was sold is irrelevant, it
*looks* like it was sold, and that is a big problem.
"How can you have a Q&A on a topic like this that doesn't even address the
matter than you have sold a seat on the board?"
That's the comment I was referring to with my wife beating statement.
Anyway, I'd be much more concerned if the money had gone not to the
foundation, but to a board member's for-profit corporation. Even if it is
quid-pro-quo, so what? This ain't a community run foundation, people.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 5:59 PM,
Anthony<wikimail(a)inbox.org> wrote:
Occurring on the same day may imply
"related" but it does not, beyond a
reasonable doubt, equal "sold". If it did, we'd have a whole lot more
prostitution convictions.
... it could be reliably determined, but I don't think anyone is going
to give Kohs 2million dollars to spend on a seat.
You really think they'd give it to him?