Billionaire Oilers owner Katz gave $430,000 to Alberta PCs - Page 4 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Rerun · 10-25-2012, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by First Lady

Someone on Twitter has pointed out that none of these donations show up on the list PC's released on April 22

http://www.votepc.ca/public/data/doc...l202012pdf.pdf

Donations can be accepted up to 2 months post election.

However, in my experience most large donors tend to do it before E-day so the receiver can get maximum use out of it.

Upon looking at the list, it appears that Cecil donated something between the range of $10,001-$30,000 to the PC party.

First Lady · 10-25-2012, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

And yet you didn't make a thread about that. Interesting.

Both are linked in my initial post.

My subsequent responses have been in reply to what others picked up on.

crazy_eoj · 10-25-2012, 02:33 PM

Well it seems he didn't get much help with the arena or with the drug laws, so I wonder exactly what Mr. Katz bought for his smooth half million....

Bertuzzied · 10-25-2012, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Well it seems he didn't get much help with the arena or with the drug laws, so I wonder exactly what Mr. Katz bought for his smooth half million....

Face time on a CP thread!

First Lady · 10-25-2012, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Well it seems he didn't get much help with the arena or with the drug laws, so I wonder exactly what Mr. Katz bought for his smooth half million....

I can't take credit for this, just struck me as comical.

Source: https://twitter.com/dancartr/status/...141760/photo/1

Slava · 10-25-2012, 03:32 PM

Did the PCs run a deficit though, or just spend more than they brought in during the campaign period? In other words did they have a bank account with $3M in it and they dipped into that to fund their (winning) campaign?

To me there is a huge difference.

GirlySports · 10-25-2012, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

What is this purple business?

Black is boring, we have 40 colour options on this forum

nik- · 10-25-2012, 03:33 PM

Herp derp.

Jacks · 10-25-2012, 03:37 PM

He should have only given Alison $429,975.00 then he could have afforded a haircut.

valo403 · 10-25-2012, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by First Lady

Both are linked in my initial post.

My subsequent responses have been in reply to what others picked up on.

And the title is just a coincidence, right? If you thought the decline was the bigger story you would have made a thread about that. The fact is you wanted to do some mudslinging. That's fair, this is politics, but don't try to pretend otherwise.

First Lady · 10-25-2012, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slava

Did the PCs run a deficit though, or just spend more than they brought in during the campaign period? In other words did they have a bank account with $3M in it and they dipped into that to fund their (winning) campaign?

To me there is a huge difference.

Hard to say. They had 1.3 M in bank (cash) at end of 2011.

We don't know their income between Jan. 1 - Mar 23, 2012.

Plus they do have over 2 M in bonds.

First Lady · 10-25-2012, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

And the title is just a coincidence, right? If you thought the decline was the bigger story you would have made a thread about that. The fact is you wanted to do some mudslinging. That's fair, this is politics, but don't try to pretend otherwise.

Where have I slung mud??

undercoverbrother · 10-25-2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Black is boring, we have 40 colour options on this forum

Don't forget the fonts

valo403 · 10-25-2012, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by First Lady

Where have I slung mud??

The whole thread is an attempt to paint a legal action as some sort of controversy. If the bigger story is what you claim it to be why not lead with that and throw your controversy in as an aside?

C'mon, don't play dumb, you knew exactly what you were doing.

You Need a Thneed · 10-25-2012, 03:43 PM

If Katz gave this money to other people to donate to the PC party, would they not have to pay income tax on the money (offset by the donation amount)?

All in all shouldn't each one of these people have to pay income tax on ~$16,000 more of income?

longsuffering · 10-25-2012, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by First Lady

Could be husband/wife or sibling situation.

Where are the 10+ as in the Katz case?

What's the difference?

And since you are an accountant or book-keeper, please spare us the naïve act. As you well know, it is very possible the WRA list contains duplicates that we are not seeing because donors donated as individuals and then again as one (or more) Corporation(s). It's not like the numbered companies are transparent in the least.

It's another partisan attack disguised as moral indignation.

Slava · 10-25-2012, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by First Lady

Hard to say. They had 1.3 M in bank (cash) at end of 2011.

We don't know their income between Jan. 1 - Mar 23, 2012.

Plus they do have over 2 M in bonds.

In other words this is a pretty transparent attempt for the Wildrose to try to paint themselves as more responsible fiscally. I suppose we should bring up how much money the Wildrose spent to elect each MLA though, and that tells an entirely different story.

I don't like the Katz donation, but it doesn't sound like it was against the law? In that respect, the whole thing just sounds like sour grapes.

First Lady · 10-25-2012, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

The whole thread is an attempt to paint a legal action as some sort of controversy. If the bigger story is what you claim it to be why not lead with that and throw your controversy in as an aside?

C'mon, don't play dumb, you knew exactly what you were doing.

Actually I think I've been pretty clear that there are two possible outcomes here one is legal, the other questionable depending on what Elections Alberta might find. (If they investigate).

Beyond that, I'm sorry if you don't like my posting style.

nik- · 10-25-2012, 03:53 PM

It's ok to have an agenda. It's also ok to admit you have an agenda.

Muta · 10-25-2012, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

The whole thread is an attempt to paint a legal action as some sort of controversy. If the bigger story is what you claim it to be why not lead with that and throw your controversy in as an aside?

C'mon, don't play dumb, you knew exactly what you were doing.

valo403 - she's done this before several times on this forum. Watch her deflect and never give a straight answer! If you get her to admit to mudslinging (I've tried before), I'll figuratively salute you, good sir.