John, you're squeaking.

Thanks Aaron! Tin man me!

Nope, you demonstrated just how daft you are with your murder analogies and now this.

Im tired of babysitting and squeaking.

That's all folks. Nothin' to see here. Move along. Self ban.

There comes a point in time where you realize that someone just argues cuz they like to argue, which is fine i guess, as long as the debates are intelligent and stimulating.

Besides, if 2+2 lets convicted felons post their conspiracy theories here... LOL

The reality is that Christine never paid a penny to the ICGPA players or to the ACR. She kept those funds as a loan and that is what she refused to pay. As for the 5K all clubs where to pay for advertising and lobbyig. No club ever paid a dime of that money either.

You daffy folks that think I did this for money clearly do not have a clue. There is good reason the Court literally did nothing to punish me. Even after a week long trial and conviction on three felony counts (with a max of 18 years prison sentance available) the Court sentenced me to one year unsupervised probation and no fine.

The Court is fully aware that I should not have been there in the first place. He knows better than most how the State wasted his time; He also knows that the state could have issued an injunction at any time during the five years when I was conducting business.

However, prosecutors knew they would likely not prevail in civil court. It will not prevail on appeal either. Poker players are the only citizens group on record to have ever utilized a direct petition to challenge the law and force the police to stop misapplying the gambling statute improperly to Poker.

While it may be unprecedented, it remains a protected right pursuant to First Amendment. The direct petition is a sound alternative to civil disobedience. It is unlikely the appeals court will let the state abuse its power in this manner.

The sport of Poker is now recognized around the World as a bona fide business and, the defense claim that poker has a statutory exemption will prevail against the social gamblng proviso of the law. The trial Judge in the case conceded that the "bona fide business" exemption under the law is expansive one and not restrictive in nature.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

And yet, a jury convicts you in (the required) unanimous fashion.

The people have spoken.

You said that if Lee gets off on appeal, then the law is changed.

Does that mean Murder is legal if a killer gets off on appeal?

Your logic is awful.

Please let it be true.

If we are gonna go ahead and nit the title of this thread, let's at least be fair and accurate 2+2... Lee went from "indicted" to "convicted" to "appealing".

The same for you and your inane analogies. Your logic is awefuller. Lee explains how winning on appeal is more significant than winning in the first court of record, where everything is limined to the point of being silly.

I won't waste time or space explaining to you how a murderer getting free on appeal is a little different than Lee getting off on appeal because the State violates his -- and every poker player's -- civil rights by voluntarily electing to regulate (and participate in/benefit from) card games for one select class or race of citizens, and attempts to protect a civil agreement (Poker Memorandum of Understanding and subsequent Appendiz F2 Jackpot Poker of the State-Tribal Gaming Compact). It is criminal for the State to use coercive threats of criminal prosecutions and intimidation techniques to force not unlawful cardrooms to close, and scare players from exercising their civil rights to play in the US and not in some other nation-state where nobody knowsr really how much money Arizonans give away, tax free, to our Indian citizens on BIA reservations.

Sounds like money being made illegally, taxes not being paid on illegal income.

You can sing your Memorandum of Understanding song all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that he's a criminal because, ultimately, a jury of his peers agreed - beyond a reasonable doubt - that he was a felon.

Remember that. He didn't get found guilty by a jury of Poker Memorandum of Understandings, now did he...

Lee has to pretend that the next fight is the big one. That's how he keeps people like you following his silly piper's song. He's nuts. The state sure thinks so. They tested him. Sadly for him, he's only a little nuts -- not quite nutty enough to not have to stand trial -- just nuts enough to believe his own sad tale.

It does indeed! And that is exactly what the ADG told the Indian poker rooms: "Your non-banked card games are generating illegal income thru increased sales proceeds from food and beverage." Note: the poker wasn't illegal, the BENEFIT was.

"regular" citizens like "judge" Lee, mike andreani, the harry glazer, mike orlando and ron curcio, and lets not forget johnny ray and donna rodgers... Do they get a cease and desist they can ignore for 5 years?

No. Just the Indian citizens of this State get that kinda deal. Reward the Indian defiance with a Poker Memorandum of Understanding in which the State rewards the BIA casinos with an exclusive monopoly on poker for benefit.

As for The Palimax and his same old sing song and dance...

The Indians were right in their argument that the IGRA defined poker as a non -banked card game and as such, isnt subject to state laws or regulation.

Which means nothing until you convince an administrative law judge that the ADG's opinions regarding poker are wrong or outright change the law so that the ADG has nothing to interpret.

Until then, everything else is just wishful thinking.

matt, arguing with you is like arguing with a woman. Please stay on point and don't twist the issues back to one of your three stalwart defenses. First is "Lee is a felon". Second is "ADG SPSs RULE". Third is "Constitution schmonstitution, apparently."

We are not debating whether Lee is a felon or not. The MoU does in fact give the appellate court the opportunity to rule on the legality of such favoritism as the Poker Memorandum obviously provides a tribal card room versus the Lees of the world.

And that dovetails nicely into a full circle closer: the MoU on appeal provides Lee the chance to change law by exposing what he might be prone to call the government conspiracy and civil if not criminal violations that wound up with him in appeals court.

The Murderer, in your smug little retort, isnt justified by a similar MoU making murder ok for Indian citizens but not you.

What part of the Constitution don't you agree with Matt?

> Lee has to pretend that the next fight is the big one. That's how he keeps people like you following his silly piper's song.

or maybe its the other way around... The conductors are telling the pipers how to play and what songs.

Some people don't need a song to see the light of day and realize that the State NEEDS to regulate standalone cardrooms, and if not, they need to allow municipalies and counties the right to do so. Its that simple.

Until then, not-for-profit cardrooms will prevail, and prosecutions will continue. I actually think the State in Lee's case didn't really care if they lost. It may be their only way out of the poison pill clause for poker.

Hook... Line... And sinker.

Do you know that phrase?

What opinions do we disagree on with the ADG SPSs Matt? (song and dance stalwart fall back option #2 invoked and duly noted)

None that i can see.

Or do you attempt to contest that Poker is not, as the federal government defined, through Congressional Act, a class ii, non-banked cars game for indians on tribal lands and as such, is not subject to State laws or regulations?

Because if so, I am all ears.

My opinion of the ADG's SPSs don't matter. My agreeing or disagreeing with the ADG is irrelevant. ...much as I continue to remind you that YOU agreeing or disagreeing with them in similarly irrelevant.

The only thing that is relevant is if you can get an ALJ to disagree with the ADG.

You're living in the same fantasy world as people who think the 14th amendment means they don't have to pay income taxes. Heck, the 14th amendment might make the whole IRS illegal... ...now all you've got to do is convince the judge not to seize your house when you stop paying taxes.

Um... Wishful thinking like wishing the ADG actually published any substantive policies that we could find in the administrative code?

For your relevant solution to work Matty, first things first, we would need the ADG to codify some rules for us... Ya know, so we actually had something we could challenge before your beloved ALJ.

Or wishful thinking like the reality of the 28 standalone storefront cardrooms operating in Maricopa county alone? Jeez man... Three or four of these rooms have been openly operating since 2006. That's six years of wishful thinking.

Or is that wishful thinking as in "i wish the Arizona Constitution held more weight than those pesky phantom ADG policy statements"?

Ok here's the challenge... I quote here the AZ Constitution Article 2:

36. Preferential treatment or discrimination prohibited; exceptions; definition
Section 36. A. This state shall not grant preferential treatment to or discriminate against any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.
B. This section does not:
1. Prohibit bona fide qualifications based on sex that are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education or public contracting.
2. Prohibit action that must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, if ineligibility would result in a loss of federal monies to this state.
3. Invalidate any court order or consent decree that is in force as of the effective date of this section.
C. The remedies available for a violation of this section are the same, regardless of the injured party's race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin, as are otherwise available for a violation of the existing antidiscrimination laws of this state.
D. This section applies only to actions that are taken after the effective date of this section.
E. This section is self-executing.
F. For the purposes of this section, "state" includes this state, a city, town or county, a public university, including the university of Arizona, Arizona state university and northern Arizona university, a community college district, a school district, a special district or any other political subdivision in this state.


Now your part of the challenge, if accepted, is to provide the ADG or State codified laws, rules or SPSs that override this Constitutional right we, as professional cardroom operators and players, contend we have by virtue of the State voluntarily regulating and thereby legitimizing Jackpot Poker, a non-banked card game, for Indian Citizens.

I'm dead serious Matt. Accept the challenge or please sit down, class is over.

Sure, go ahead and and search the IGRA or NiGC SPSs too. You wont find this kind of unconstitutional authority anywhere because... Oh ya, cuz it is ILLEGAL. But like a good Taft's Buttplug (do the Google), it aint gonna go away and it aint gonna changr any time soon.

Those blood-soaked BIA lands and the blight ob American history that is still allowed to continue today.

Matt, do you think the Indians today are as helpless and clueless as they where 200 years ago?

Why are they still enslaved to the BIA? Is it because they like the protection of the BIA or are they helplessly and hopelessly ensnared and enslaved as our bookies?

Oops. Pass the KoolAid...

Then go to court and challenge it. What's stopping you? ...other than it being a fool's errand, of course.

But it's still a straw-man argument, because it wouldn't make what you're doing any less in violation of ARS 13-33xx, which your pal Judge Lee and his buddies already got convicted under.

Get it through your heads. Proving the tribal casinos "wrong" doesn't make your illegal enterprise any more legal. The best you can do is make a PDF full of stolen corporate logos where you tell your customers that poker is governed by laws of contracts (HA!) and wait until you're the next room to get closed.

> Then go to court and challenge it.

Back on point... Challenge what? An SPS we can't seem to find in the Administrative Code. Matt, can you help us find it?

> What's stopping you?

See above. Challenge what? And then there is the fact that not all clubs are are unlawful.

>...other than it being a fool's errand, of course.

It *would* be a fool's errand to spend money on lawyers and court fees just try and challenge some phantom SPS. There is also the glaring roadblock that makes this errand you would set us on even more silly because some clubs aren't lining an owner's pocket, as was the case in your felon pal "Judge" Lee et al.

> But it's still a straw-man argument, because it wouldn't make what you're doing any less in violation of ARS 13-33xx.

What am i doing, and is this not a personal attack??

>Get it through your heads. Proving the tribal casinos "wrong" doesn't make your illegal enterprise any more legal.

OmG! Is this not libel? Personal attack?

Matt, what do you know about the 28 cardrooms operating in Maricopa County? I know you havent been to all the clubs. Do you even know of any that are breaking the law? If so, i encourage you call the appropriate authorities and register a formal complaint. But i can't believe how you can be so bold as to make such false statements and blatant lies about someone and something you know absolutely nothing about.

Maybe you just wanna get another thread closed. Idk. Makes no sense. Are you drunk?

Codified SPSs we can challenge please.... Still Waiting.

Matt, there is no beef with tribal casino poker rooms. If anything, the state has no business being involved in the class ii poker room operations on BIA reservations.

Nor is the argument that the compacts or cardrooms are illegal. Judge Lee will tell us they are. That's a stretch. I have sipped the KoolAid, but the issue doesn't pertain here. You confuse the issue with the introduction of this nonsense.

There is a complaint lodged by the ICGPA that the state regulates poker - voluntarily - for the tribes and their "for benefit" cardrooms and criminally prosecutes other classes and races of Arizona citizens for the same activity.

> The best you can do is make a PDF

Matt, please do not confuse Thomas Jackson's PDFs with the PDFs posing as Administrative Code you apparently believe are legitimate SPSs.

http://www.azsos.gov/

This is where one heads to find substantive policies, rules, and all the stuff Matt champions.

Title 19 section 4... Department of Gaming....huh.
Help Matt!

This link may be better... Going to the sos site, finding the link to this page isn't readily apparent.

http://www.azsos.gov/public_services...f_contents.htm

Not to worry, TP... I have already contacted SOS Mr. Bennett to ask "what gives" with 19-4 of the admin code? I'm as anxious as you to get to the bottom of this. Mayhaps your ALJ friend can help us find some codified SPSs the ADG has published -- ya know, not just some PDFs -- that you feel we should challenge.

Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on finding some codified rules or policies for the ADG. I will probably be waiting a few weeks to hear back from Ken.

So, uh, why's Lee a felon again?

And why do you need to lie to your customers, telling them that:

"We are also excepted from illegal gambling under A.R.S. 13-3301(1)(d)(iii) and 13-3311 “Amusement Gambling”..."

So, poker is amusement gambling now?

So, uh, why's Lee a felon again? You can benefit from amusement gambling, right?

Thanks once again Matt, for staying on point.

Good thing I still come here. This just in: "all tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent". -- Thomas Jefferson

So i take it by your avoidance that you didn't find any codified ADG SPSs either?