PDA

View Full Version : Legal FBI basically shuts down online poker in the US


suzzer99
04-15-2011, 03:49 PM
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/04/three-largest-online-poker-sites-indicted-and-shut-down-by-fbi.html

Three largest online poker sites indicted and shut down by FBI

April 15, 2011 | 12:32 pm

The founders of the three largest online poker sites were indicted by the FBI on Friday in what could serve as a death blow to the thriving industry.

Eleven executives at PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, Absolute Poker and a number of their affiliates were charged with bank fraud and money laundering in an indictment unsealed in a Manhattan court. Two of the defendants were arrested on Friday morning in Utah and Nevada. Federal agents are searching for the others.

Prosecutors are seeking to immediately shut down the sites and to eventually send the executives to jail and to recover $3 billion from the companies. By Friday afternoon Full Tilt Poker’s site displayed a message explaining that “this domain name has been seized by the F.B.I. pursuant to an Arrest Warrant.”

The online gambling industry has taken off over the last decade, drawing an estimated 15 million Americans to bet online.

In 2006 Congress passed a law prohibiting online gambling. Most of the leading sites found ways to work around the law, but prosecutors allege that in doing so they broke the law.

“These defendants concocted an elaborate criminal fraud scheme, alternately tricking some U.S. banks and effectively bribing others to assure the continued flow of billions in illegal gambling profits,” Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said in a statement.

Poker fans took to Twitter in droves, worried about the money in their online gaming accounts, fretting that online poker's days were at an end.

"Well the good news is I think I only had about $300 left on the online poker sites overall," tweeted Jimi Schindler of Madison, Wis. "Maybe I'll see that money?!!?"

Pants
04-15-2011, 03:51 PM
lolololololol

suzzer99
04-15-2011, 03:52 PM
twoplustwo.com is basically crashed from all the traffic. I know a lot of people on that site who play full time for a living - some with a lot of money on the sites. They are freaking out right now. No one can say they didn't know there was a very real chance of this happening though. Govt gotta get their tax dollars. In 5 years or so Harrahs will probably open a US-only site that will server whatever states want to allow it.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 04:38 PM
eh, I think I might lose $30. (Deposited long, long, long ago before Bush signed the ban, never bothered to withdraw, just played every once in a while)

You'd have to be completely nuts to have big money stored on those sites knowing the US could grab the domain name at any time.

Obviously this is an outrageous infringement of our rights in a stupid attempt to "protect the children", and an issue which the republican party completely botched.

Brock
04-15-2011, 04:39 PM
Our government is a piece of shit.

Chocolate Hog
04-15-2011, 04:42 PM
Our government is a piece of shit.

But the economy is improving!

BWillie
04-15-2011, 04:44 PM
twoplustwo.com is basically crashed from all the traffic. I know a lot of people on that site who play full time for a living - some with a lot of money on the sites. They are freaking out right now. No one can say they didn't know there was a very real chance of this happening though. Govt gotta get their tax dollars. In 5 years or so Harrahs will probably open a US-only site that will server whatever states want to allow it.

Yeah me too. I post alot on that site. A well renowned poster over there is currently staking me and coaching me as well. Over the last six months I have improved my game well enough to make about $15 an hour playing online at the .25/.50 and .5/1 tables. In another year I was planning on going pro if everything kept going well. Now my 5K+ roll is down the crapper. I am so pissed right now. Why does the government give a s*** about online poker? Really don't they have better things to do.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 04:57 PM
Yeah me too. I post alot on that site. A well renowned poster over there is currently staking me and coaching me as well. Over the last six months I have improved my game well enough to make about $15 an hour playing online at the .25/.50 and .5/1 tables. In another year I was planning on going pro if everything kept going well. Now my 5K+ roll is down the crapper. I am so pissed right now. Why does the government give a s*** about online poker? Really don't they have better things to do.

Apparently congress didn't care enough to get the votes to change it last year, and there are a lot of dumbass holy roller socially-annoying (aka socially-conservative aka aggressively religious) republicans in the house who like the ban because OMG think of the children!

Poker players need to stop being apathetic and start making themselves heard. Otherwise, this wont end.

BWillie
04-15-2011, 04:59 PM
Apparently congress didn't care enough to get the votes to change it last year, and there are a lot of dumbass holy roller socially-annoying (aka socially-conservative aka aggressively religious) republicans in the house who like the ban because OMG think of the children!

Poker players need to stop being apathetic and start making themselves heard. Otherwise, this wont end.

I like how I can go spend my money on hookers in Vegas, booze and strippers but I can't do it at a low limit table online? If ANYTHING, online is much safer for people than regular casinos. You can play 0.01/0.02 blind tables, you won't see anything in the casino's less than 1/2. But gamblin' is da debbill!!!

suzzer99
04-15-2011, 05:02 PM
Apparently congress didn't care enough to get the votes to change it last year, and there are a lot of dumbass holy roller socially-annoying (aka socially-conservative aka aggressively religious) republicans in the house who like the ban because OMG think of the children!

Poker players need to stop being apathetic and start making themselves heard. Otherwise, this wont end.

The plan last year involved something like a 20-month "cooling-off" period where any site who eventually wanted to be licensed in the US had to stay out of the US. This was basically to allow harrahs.com and other US-based sites to catch up. Also I'm pretty sure the bill only allowed for playing against other US players. Which blows because Euros are about 2 years behind the US in their poker boom and there's a lot more dead money coming from them. Although they're getting caught up obviously.

Many poker players were against the bill for those reasons. But I'm pretty sure now they'd take it.

BWillie
04-15-2011, 05:04 PM
The plan last year involved something like a 20-month "cooling-off" period where any site who eventually wanted to be licensed in the US had to stay out of the US. This was basically to allow harrahs.com and other US-based sites to catch up. Also I'm pretty sure the bill only allowed for playing against other US players. Which blows because Euros are about 2 years behind the US in their poker boom and there's a lot more dead money coming from them. Although they're getting caught up obviously.

Many poker players were against the bill for those reasons. But I'm pretty sure now they'd take it.

Yeah I was one of those against it and most pros were too because they would have to move to Canada or something for 2 years and the fish pool would significantly dry up after that cooling time. Under that plan you have to put in your social security # and all of that and you will be taxed. Do fish want to be taxed when they play poker? Hell no. And if I understand right you are taxed based on per session. So if you play 50 sessions and you win 25 of those, but you end up being down like $20,000, you still have to pay taxes on your "winnings". How stupid is that?

I'm going to go up to Harrahs tonight and ask for a 1099 form when I cash out, see what they say. Our govt are f****** savages.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 05:05 PM
FYI, if you are irritated about it and are wondering if there's anything you can do, any political group to join, money to donate, etc, the Poker Player's Alliance is the largest and most credible lobbying group in the US.

Poker Players Alliance (https://theppa.org/)

Go there, or write your congressman, or do both if you want to do your little part.

suzzer99
04-15-2011, 05:24 PM
Imagine what the local casinos are going to be like for a while. All predators and no prey.

healthpellets
04-15-2011, 05:34 PM
tor?

stonedstooge
04-15-2011, 05:37 PM
You can bet on it

BigRichard
04-15-2011, 06:02 PM
Fucking morality police. It just fucking pisses me off to no end. I hope they all get some new form of herpes that makes their dicks fall off.

Von Dumbass
04-15-2011, 06:14 PM
Thank God I cashed out $2,500 bucks from Pokerstars a few months ago. I still have 460 bucks on Full Tilt Poker though. :(

Von Dumbass
04-15-2011, 06:20 PM
Just tried playing on Pokerstars and it says that "due to government regulations, playing real money ring games is not allowed in your area"

PunkinDrublic
04-15-2011, 06:23 PM
Wouldn't be suprised if the legal gaming industry in the states was lobbying to have this happen.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 06:27 PM
Wouldn't be suprised if the legal gaming industry in the states was lobbying to have this happen.

ummm, no. the gaming industry was lobbying for the opposite, wanting to cash in on online gaming.

It really is as simple as it seems: stupid religious holy roller republicans finally accomplished what they set out to do in 2006.

teedubya
04-15-2011, 06:40 PM
Our government is a piece of shit.

No way, man. Land of the free, home of the brave. America isn't corrupt, at all.

notorious
04-15-2011, 06:55 PM
There is nothing wrong with one group of people imposing their will upon another group.


It's the American way!

Saul Good
04-15-2011, 07:01 PM
There is nothing wrong with one group of people imposing their will upon another group.


It's the American way!

That's exactly what a democracy is.

notorious
04-15-2011, 07:06 PM
That's exactly what a democracy is.

Thank God we are a Republic (supposedly).

Saul Good
04-15-2011, 07:14 PM
Thank God we are a Republic (supposedly).

True, but every form of government is the same in this regard.

NewChief
04-15-2011, 07:15 PM
ummm, no. the gaming industry was lobbying for the opposite, wanting to cash in on online gaming.

It really is as simple as it seems: stupid religious holy roller republicans finally accomplished what they set out to do in 2006.

What about the Vegas/Indian Casinos/etc.. lobby? I can imagine that they'd prefer people travel to destinations to play than be able to play from home. Or is that not how it works? (I know little about how online poker works).

Saul Good
04-15-2011, 07:15 PM
I've got a grand or so at Sportsbook. com. Should I pull that money out?

Saul Good
04-15-2011, 07:16 PM
What about the Vegas/Indian Casinos/etc.. lobby? I can imagine that they'd prefer people travel to destinations to play than be able to play from home. Or is that not how it works? (I know little about how online poker works).

Hell no they wouldn't. They'd rather you be able to play 24/7 from anywhere in the world as long as it's on their site. The food and entertainment is there to get you into the casino, not the other way around.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 07:22 PM
What about the Vegas/Indian Casinos/etc.. lobby? I can imagine that they'd prefer people travel to destinations to play than be able to play from home. Or is that not how it works? (I know little about how online poker works).

yes, it is true that Indian casinos are opposed, and other mainstream casinos used to be ignorantly opposed, but those mainstream casinos were coming around last year.

We have some idiotic moral "I know better how you should live your life than you do, because its the best for the children" dumbass aggressively christian republicans who will block online gaming at all costs until they start losing some elections.

Lumpy
04-15-2011, 07:57 PM
I've participated in the PPA petitions, so I saw this coming from a mile away. I just didn't figure it would have happened so soon. But today, when my boss tried to join a real money tourney, reality kicked in. Needless to say he was pissed, (as was I, even though I don't play that often anymore)! I'm just glad that I only have $2 in my bankroll on PokerStars. lol

Edit: Has anyone attempted to cash out yet?

NewChief
04-15-2011, 08:20 PM
Hell no they wouldn't. They'd rather you be able to play 24/7 from anywhere in the world as long as it's on their site. The food and entertainment is there to get you into the casino, not the other way around.

I just imagined that the online sites weren't necessarily affiliated with the mainstream gambling organizations/casinos. I could just imagine the battle as one between the new upstart online gambling organization and the old-school, connected gambling interests with the old-school now choosing to pull out their political ties to regain their market.

But maybe it's just a moral thing. I'm almost always inclined to follow the money trail with politics instead of the overt, stated reason.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 08:20 PM
I've participated in the PPA petitions, so I saw this coming from a mile away. I just didn't figure it would have happened so soon. But today, when my boss tried to join a real money tourney, reality kicked in. Needless to say he was pissed, (as was I, even though I don't play that often anymore)! I'm just glad that I only have $2 in my bankroll on PokerStars. lol

Edit: Has anyone attempted to cash out yet?

You may be out your $2, but this simply CANT stand. A lot of poker players may have been apathetically satisfied when it was sort of illegal but not really, but at this point I have to believe the PPA will suddenly find some new funding and influence. I'm definitely sending them some money to yell at the stupid congress. I'm almost (not quite, but almost) ready to vote against the GOP just on this issue alone.

alnorth
04-15-2011, 08:23 PM
I just imagined that the online sites weren't necessarily affiliated with the mainstream gambling organizations/casinos. I could just imagine the battle as one between the new upstart online gambling organization and the old-school, connected gambling interests with the old-school now choosing to pull out their political ties to regain their market.

But maybe it's just a moral thing. I'm almost always inclined to follow the money trail with politics instead of the overt, stated reason.

pokerstars recently reached an agreement with Wynn. Reid inexplicably flipped from a longtime online poker opponent to a supporter. The pressure is there.

If the GOP isn't completely retarded, they will repeal this stupid moral superiority legislation before it needlessly costs them votes right before the 2012 presidential election.

Saul Good
04-15-2011, 08:24 PM
I just imagined that the online sites weren't necessarily affiliated with the mainstream gambling organizations/casinos. I could just imagine the battle as one between the new upstart online gambling organization and the old-school, connected gambling interests with the old-school now choosing to pull out their political ties to regain their market.

But maybe it's just a moral thing. I'm almost always inclined to follow the money trail with politics instead of the overt, stated reason.

That's the thing. They would like to see it legalized so they could cash in on it. They can't run an "illegal" online site, or they would get their physical casinos shut down.

Saul Good
04-15-2011, 08:25 PM
pokerstars recently reached an agreement with Wynn. Reid inexplicably flipped from a longtime online poker opponent to a supporter. The pressure is there.

If the GOP isn't completely retarded, they repeal this stupid moral superiorioty legislation before it needlessly costs them votes right before the 2012 presidential election.

Is it really that much of a Democrat vs. Republican division?

Lumpy
04-15-2011, 08:38 PM
You may be out your $2, but this simply CANT stand. A lot of poker players may have been apathetically satisfied when it was sort of illegal but not really, but at this point I have to believe the PPA will suddenly find some new funding and influence. I'm definitely sending them some money to yell at the stupid congress. I'm almost (not quite, but almost) ready to vote against the GOP just on this issue alone.

Yeah, I suppose I was one of the lucky ones that got hit by so many donke ys lately on PS, that my bankroll dwindled to $2. ;)

I do find it to be a bit ironic that the feds took action against online gaming on tax day, of all days. :hmmm: Interesting, huh?

When the day comes and I'm forced to affix a symbol on my lapel, you had better believe my ass will be hiding in the attic!

alnorth
04-15-2011, 09:38 PM
-

alnorth
04-15-2011, 09:40 PM
Is it really that much of a Democrat vs. Republican division?

given that the vast majority of the opposition has come from the republican party, specifically the GOP's religious social conservative wing, yes. Yes, it is.

If it means anything, Barney freaking Frank is the undisputed champion for the cause of legalizing online poker. It is embarassing that he's the standard bearer for individual freedom on this issue.

Jaric
04-15-2011, 10:05 PM
So I just got back from buying my state sponsored lottery ticket. What did I miss?

alnorth
04-15-2011, 11:03 PM
So I just got back from buying my state sponsored lottery ticket. What did I miss?

Many politicians in the republican party who voted against online poker in 2006, yet also somehow claimed to be a supporter of individual liberty, are liers.

ROYC75
04-15-2011, 11:21 PM
Well, it's a good thing we don't use real money here. :D

Bewbies
04-15-2011, 11:21 PM
How is this a Republican issue? The Republicans did an end around and run the FBI today? Did they snooker Obama?

I see this as a gov't money grab, more than morality police...

BWillie
04-16-2011, 12:37 AM
Boom, there it goes. Full Tilt poker now won't let me sit at a table, transfer, or cash out...just like at Stars. fk me. $5175 down the toilet.

KC native
04-16-2011, 12:55 AM
Just read through this. My friend.is going to be pissed. He is a poker addict which is actually good because he used to be a sports book addict and with poker he could limit his losses. Now i'm kind of worried for him. Goddamn moral minority

KC native
04-16-2011, 12:59 AM
And before my fan club jumps on my posts, I don't gamble except for $50 outins at the boat when i'm in KC. Sports gambling makes me take games too serious and I don't play poker

BWillie
04-16-2011, 01:07 AM
And before my fan club jumps on my posts, I don't gamble except for $50 outins at the boat when i'm in KC. Sports gambling makes me take games too serious and I don't play poker

You should be able to still play poker at Bodog and Sportsbook (apparently). Although I wouldn't trust those sites w/ your money and their software are completely terrible.

teedubya
04-16-2011, 01:33 AM
So let me get this straight... we can't go to a strip club and look at naked women? We can't sit at home and play online poker for money. We will soon have an internet ID card... we get aggressively pat-down at airports... we spend more than 50% of all tax dollars on war. We drink water with fluoride in it, "because it helps our teeth". We bail out the fucking banks and the govt is about to shut down... and there is plutonium radiation flowing into the jetstream. Perfect.

America, Fuck Yeah.

Taco John
04-16-2011, 02:51 AM
Obviously this is an outrageous infringement of our rights in a stupid attempt to "protect the children", and an issue which the republican party completely botched.

This has nothing to do with protecting the children. This is just about government wanting their cut. They'll shut it down overseas, and then make a deal with the gambling lobby that secures their cut.

teedubya
04-16-2011, 03:02 AM
Meet The Boy Genius Who Just Took Down The Online Poker Industry
Dashiell Bennett

The internet is still coming to grips with the huge online gambling bust that just took down the U.S.'s three biggest online poker sites.
But Australia's Courier-Mail newspaper already has the scoop on the one man who may have single-handedly built the online industry ... then handed it to the U.S. government on a platter.

According to this story, Daniel Tzvetkoff was a young Australian entrepreneur who set up the payment processing schemes used by the biggest poker sites to handle their (mostly illegal) transactions.
He is described by those who know him as a "boy wonder" and "genius" who started his first company at 13 and knew all the intricacies of e-commerce.

He made Full Tilt Poker and Poker Stars millions of dollars — and made as much as $150,000 a day for himself — but then got even more greedy and started taking their. They sued him, accusing Tzvetkoff of taking more than $100 million of their money.

Then last April, Tzvetkoff was arrested in Las Vegas and charged with the same crimes those sites' founders were charged with today: money laundering, bank fraud, wire fraud. As an Australian citizen with a lot of cash, he was considered a flight risk and denied bail.

Then after a "secret" meeting with prosecutors last August, he was suddenly out on bail. And now his former colleagues are the ones facing serious prison time.

Daniel Tzvetkoff knows the operations of these poker sites inside and out. It was knowledge of the financial industry that allowed them to operate. He's the one man positioned to give the U.S. Attorneys everything they needed to take down their businesses.

And it looks like that's exactly what he did, cooperating with the authorities to avoid his own lengthy jail sentence.

All the major gambling prosecutions in the U.S. since Tzvetkoff's arrest have been run out of the office of Arlo Devlin-Brown, the Manhattan Asst. U.S. Attorney who is Tzvetkoff's "handler."

According to a source, Tzvetkoff "knows how to reverse-engineer transactions to determine its original source," making him very valuable to investigators.

And the biggest irony of all? It's been rumored that the only reason the FBI got their hands on him is because Full Tilt or Poker Stars (the companies he used to work for and stole from) tipped off the FBI that he was going to be traveling to the United States last year.

They ratted him out ... and he turned the tables. No honor among thieves. And as the Courier Mail put it, if this were still the old days, he'd buried in the Las Vegas desert right now.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/boy-genius-online-poker-scandal-2011-4#ixzz1JfuDUnIs

Ericgoodchief
04-16-2011, 03:06 AM
As long as it's lotto money with the funds going to the state then it's alright.

The federal government thinks we are wards of the state. They want that money for themselves.

Iowanian
04-16-2011, 08:44 AM
I like how I can go spend my money on hookers in Vegas, booze and strippers but I can't do it at a low limit table online? If ANYTHING, online is much safer for people than regular casinos. You can play 0.01/0.02 blind tables, you won't see anything in the casino's less than 1/2. But gamblin' is da debbill!!!


I've never been playing against bots at a live casino...

Dave Lane
04-16-2011, 08:58 AM
Apparently congress didn't care enough to get the votes to change it last year, and there are a lot of dumbass holy roller socially-annoying (aka socially-conservative aka aggressively religious) republicans in the house who like the ban because OMG think of the children!

Poker players need to stop being apathetic and start making themselves heard. Otherwise, this wont end.

Another victim-less crime stopped by the moral police. I for the life of me don't understand why these people care about gambling, prostitution, pot and othe morality issue. You can legislate morality. I don't get it.

RNR
04-16-2011, 09:07 AM
Another victim-less crime stopped by the moral police. I for the life of me don't understand why these people care about gambling, prostitution, pot and othe morality issue. You can legislate morality. I don't get it.

I think as has already been mentioned they are more interested in their cut~

BWillie
04-16-2011, 09:41 AM
I've never been playing against bots at a live casino...

Lol here we go.

BWillie
04-16-2011, 10:28 AM
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/quadjacks-black-friday#

Interesting stream w/ alot of people in the online poker community

Jaric
04-16-2011, 10:48 AM
Many politicians in the republican party who voted against online poker in 2006, yet also somehow claimed to be a supporter of individual liberty, are liers.

You've been beating that drum pretty hard in this thread, but I tend to agree with what some others posted in that this is not a morality issue, but rather the Federalis are simply pissed they aren't allowed to wet their beaks from all the poker money.

Greed is a far more motivating factor than moral righteousness. At least when our wonderful politicians are involved.

alnorth
04-17-2011, 06:53 PM
You've been beating that drum pretty hard in this thread, but I tend to agree with what some others posted in that this is not a morality issue, but rather the Federalis are simply pissed they aren't allowed to wet their beaks from all the poker money.

This is "the cool thing to say", but it is completely implausible. If the feds wanted to tax it, they could simply offer a license. Poker sites would jump at the chance.

Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt the children.

Silock
04-17-2011, 07:26 PM
Boom, there it goes. Full Tilt poker now won't let me sit at a table, transfer, or cash out...just like at Stars. fk me. $5175 down the toilet.

At least you don't have to worry about that computer setup any longer.

BWillie
04-17-2011, 08:58 PM
This is "the cool thing to say", but it is completely implausible. If the feds wanted to tax it, they could simply offer a license. Poker sites would jump at the chance.

Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt the children.

This is true. Both of these poker sites would have no problem being licensed in the US and would pay taxes if it meant having legal access to the US market. Poker Star's is actually licensed in the UK I believe. But I think you will see a HarrahsPoker.com and MGMpoker.com...stuff like that. This may or may not have to do with that.

suzzer99
04-17-2011, 10:26 PM
This is "the cool thing to say", but it is completely implausible. If the feds wanted to tax it, they could simply offer a license. Poker sites would jump at the chance.

Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt the children.

The problem for the feds is that they can't just say "pay a license or we'll make you illegal" to a foreign entity that wasn't to sell a good or a service inside the US - since this is exactly what we get the WTO to pressure other countries into not doing with our goods and services. So it has to be this typical govt ham-fisted convoluted process of making it a moral issue/ state-based issue - like lotteries, horse racing, fantasy football, indian casios etc. etc.

Btw the WTO has ruled against the US and in favor of Antigua in a test case on exactly this issue. US doesn't give a shit obviously.

suzzer99
04-17-2011, 10:27 PM
At least you don't have to worry about that computer setup any longer.

http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/8390/img01870833298.jpg

And I won't be needing this any longer. Sick set up for browsing the internet huh?

Silock
04-18-2011, 12:07 AM
You could go into a porn coma with all of that monitor space.

Ericgoodchief
04-18-2011, 12:42 AM
It's offshore. How can they touch them?

Gop wants it crushed for moral reasons. Dems want the money.

Taco John
04-18-2011, 12:55 AM
Gop wants it crushed for moral reasons.


People really believe this stuff?

Taco John
04-18-2011, 12:57 AM
This is "the cool thing to say", but it is completely implausible. If the feds wanted to tax it, they could simply offer a license. Poker sites would jump at the chance.

What motivation would they have to jump at the chance? I mean, prior to this unprecedented action.


Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt the children.

Nonsense. That's nothing more than window dressing.

Saulbadguy
04-18-2011, 06:50 AM
So let me get this straight... we can't go to a strip club and look at naked women? We can't sit at home and play online poker for money. We will soon have an internet ID card... we get aggressively pat-down at airports... we spend more than 50% of all tax dollars on war. We drink water with fluoride in it, "because it helps our teeth". We bail out the fucking banks and the govt is about to shut down... and there is plutonium radiation flowing into the jetstream. Perfect.

America, Fuck Yeah.

:LOL:

alnorth
04-18-2011, 06:56 AM
The problem for the feds is that they can't just say "pay a license or we'll make you illegal" to a foreign entity that wasn't to sell a good or a service inside the US - since this is exactly what we get the WTO to pressure other countries into not doing with our goods and services. So it has to be this typical govt ham-fisted convoluted process of making it a moral issue/ state-based issue - like lotteries, horse racing, fantasy football, indian casios etc. etc.

Btw the WTO has ruled against the US and in favor of Antigua in a test case on exactly this issue. US doesn't give a shit obviously.

If all companies, foreign and domestic, had to pay a license, there's no WTO unfair trade issue. We're not talking about a protective tariff.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 06:57 AM
What motivation would they have to jump at the chance? I mean, prior to this unprecedented action.

You answered your own question, and it sure as hell wasn't unprecedented ($105MM PartyPoker settlement with the Feds in exchange for not prosecuting). Access to the US market, obviously.

It is a stupid moral issue. Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt children.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 07:18 AM
And I won't be needing this any longer. Sick set up for browsing the internet huh?

Don't put it away yet. Online poker didn't disappear after PartyPoker was chased out, and the void will be filled again.

There are a lot of nations who aren't going to be all that enthusiastic about extradition for this. If you are a foreign entrepreneur and you aren't all that concerned about never being able to set foot in the US, you could set up shop, cash in for a few years, and by the time the feds shut you down you and your employees are rich.

The US is powerless to prevent online poker, all they are doing is ensuring that this is not regulated.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 08:05 AM
There wont be a viable Sit N Go US site again until it's legal (you need about 100k players online to load a set of SNGs at the level I play). And those other sites are probably living on borrowed time. Every cashout will be a nailbiter. The US may not be able to prevent playing, but they can make it harder and harder to deposit from, or cash out to, a US bank.

If Cake or Bodog do prove reliable enough, they'll still be flooded with out of work US cash pros. So the games might not even be profitable. The same with live poker right now I imagine. Basically in the US right now you've got a situation where some disaster has wiped out most of the prey, and the predators are going hungry. It means the eco-system is going to be out of balance until a bunch of predators starve to death.

I know guys that are in their late 20s who have never held a real job. I think many of them are going to try to move to Canada or Thailand or something.

Otter
04-18-2011, 08:10 AM
Disgusting

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 08:17 AM
If all companies, foreign and domestic, had to pay a license, there's no WTO unfair trade issue. We're not talking about a protective tariff.

It's not a license the US wants. It's 35-50% of their profits off US players, which is kind of hard to split out since people from all over the world are playing against each other. France and Italy have already shut their players off from the rest of the world for the same reason - govt wants control and a big cut.

If the US is going to go that route they want to also give US companies a head start or at least a chance to catch up. That's what the recent Reid bill was trying to do. It called for a 20-month "cooling off" period where the major sites had to stay out of the US market if they eventually wanted to be licensed in it. This was so sites like harrahs.com, which threw a lot of money behind the bill, could get caught up. That may be exactly how this plays out. Funny how things work out.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 08:22 AM
You answered your own question, and it sure as hell wasn't unprecedented ($105MM PartyPoker settlement with the Feds in exchange for not prosecuting). Access to the US market, obviously.

It is a stupid moral issue. Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt children.

So PartyPoker gave the feds 105mil not to prosecute them and you still think this is a moral issue?

It's a government shakedown. No different than a mafia boss shaking down petty theives. They just want to "wet their beak."

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 08:29 AM
The US govt's position on gambling is that it's generally a state issue (which they can wet their beak on if they want). Also by all accounts I've heard, this prosecutor from the southern district of NY, who launched this thing, is in it for the glory as much as anything else.

mnchiefsguy
04-18-2011, 08:41 AM
UIGEA, which started the decline of online poker, was a moral issue. Bill Frist pushed it and was backed by Focus on the Family, among others. Frist wanted to be President and thought a tough moral stand would help him. It did not, but once the bill was in place, it becomes much tougher to work around. Ask former congressman Jim Leach and current Senator John Kyl if this is a moral issue. It might not be a moral issue completely to each congressman, but the diehard leaders of the anti-online gambling movement are in in for moral reasons, and they cannot be reasoned with.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 08:46 AM
I would agree with that on the leaders of the movement. But if there weren't a lot of money involved it never would have gone this far. Convenient how that works out.

Garcia Bronco
04-18-2011, 08:58 AM
You answered your own question, and it sure as hell wasn't unprecedented ($105MM PartyPoker settlement with the Feds in exchange for not prosecuting). Access to the US market, obviously.

It is a stupid moral issue. Online poker is illegal because gambling is evil and could hurt children.

What makes you so sure it's a moral issue? Sounds like a money issue to me.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 09:10 AM
So PartyPoker gave the feds 105mil not to prosecute them and you still think this is a moral issue?

It's a government shakedown. No different than a mafia boss shaking down petty theives. They just want to "wet their beak."

Yes, it is a moral issue. The thought that online poker is illegal because the US wants money doesn't even pass the giggle test with me.

If the US wants money, they would allow the online poker sites to operate, and tax/license them. What they are doing now is trying to completely destroy the US online poker market. You don't do that if you want money.

Garcia Bronco
04-18-2011, 09:10 AM
Yes, it is a moral issue. The thought that online poker is illegal because the US wants money doesn't even pass the giggle test with me.

If the US wants money, they would allow the online poker sites to operate, and tax/license them. What they are doing now is trying to completely destroy the US online poker market. You don't do that if you want money.

The companies aren't on US soil and the US Government have no way to track it. Try again.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 09:11 AM
What makes you so sure it's a moral issue? Sounds like a money issue to me.

How do you make money, long-term, if you successfully destroy online poker? This is not about money. Online gambling is evil and could hurt children.

It really is as simple as that, and the GOP is completely stupid on this particular issue.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 09:13 AM
The companies aren't on US soil and the US Government have no way to track it. Try again.

Don't be dumb. This isn't some impossibility here, other countries have no problem whatsoever with licensing offshore gambling.

The US absolutely can offer a license for a fee.

Another reason why the "US just wants money" argument doesn't even pass the giggle test is because domestic online sites are also illegal.

chiefsnorth
04-18-2011, 09:20 AM
ummm, no. the gaming industry was lobbying for the opposite, wanting to cash in on online gaming.

It really is as simple as it seems: stupid religious holy roller republicans finally accomplished what they set out to do in 2006.

Yeah, I constantly see crazy Christians ranting about online gambling :rolleyes:

This is happening because people are gambling in a way the government can't tax, and in a way the politically powerful domestic gambling industry can't dominate.

But don't let facts obscure the bigotry objectives...

Jaric
04-18-2011, 09:28 AM
Yes, it is a moral issue. The thought that online poker is illegal because the US wants money doesn't even pass the giggle test with me.

If the US wants money, they would allow the online poker sites to operate, and tax/license them. What they are doing now is trying to completely destroy the US online poker market. You don't do that if you want money.

What doesn't pass the giggle test is claiming this is republicans bible thumbing when damn near every state in the Union is finding ways to legalize gambling to stimulate the economy in cities that have felt the loss of manufacturing jobs.

This is about money. Anyone talking about "the children!" is throwing out red herrings.

Uncle Sam does not take kindly when people make money without him getting his cut. The issue is they can't find a way to tax this money because it's online and not in a casino.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 10:14 AM
I get it. When "your team" (GOP, conservatives, tea party, whoever) is obviously wrong on one minor issue, the natural instinct is to rationalize it away. Its tough to confront the fact that someone you may have voted for is stupid on a particular issue.

Fine, I'm hitting a brick wall, so we'll drop it. (though I still don't get why you cant see the obvious: The federal government, just like governments all over the world, absolutely can force offshore sites to pay a fee in exchange for not being blocked or prosecuted, as long as they aren't being treated unfairly compared to onshore sites. This isn't impossible. They could have, but they didn't. The feds didn't allow legal online poker because they weren't interested in the money. Online gambling is the devil)

Garcia Bronco
04-18-2011, 10:21 AM
How do you make money, long-term, if you successfully destroy online poker? This is not about money. Online gambling is evil and could hurt children.

It really is as simple as that, and the GOP is completely stupid on this particular issue.

I think you'll see legalized online gambling as soon as they figure a way to track it and tax and keep it on American soil.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 10:21 AM
Here's an issue that I think is more interesting and which is not getting nearly the press it should: these poker sites could actually win in court.

This is a legal fight they did not seek out because the consequences of losing are high, but now that the feds have shut them down, took their money, and are threatening jail and billions in fines, they have nothing to lose. The fight will now turn to a simple question: is poker gambling, or is it a game of skill? If a court finds that poker is predominantly a game of skill, then UIGEA does not apply to online poker, and instantly overnight online poker and bank transactions to those sites becomes legal.

This isn't ridiculous either, because courts are split on this issue. The question hasn't been raised often (usually in state court when some guy gets busted for a small-time poker tournament), but different courts have come down in different decisions. Poker was recently declared to be a legal game of skill in Pennsylvania. Poker was recently declared to be illegal gambling in Colorado. What will the federal court decide?

Garcia Bronco
04-18-2011, 10:23 AM
Don't be dumb. This isn't some impossibility here, other countries have no problem whatsoever with licensing offshore gambling.

The US absolutely can offer a license for a fee.

Another reason why the "US just wants money" argument doesn't even pass the giggle test is because domestic online sites are also illegal.

No. they can't. I don't need the US governemnt to run a gambling site of shore. I can do it right under their ****ing nose. But the issue is unreported earnings. You have to give Uncle his due and proper.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 10:27 AM
I get it. When "your team" (GOP, conservatives, tea party, whoever) is obviously wrong on one minor issue, the natural instinct is to rationalize it away. Its tough to confront the fact that someone you may have voted for is stupid on a particular issue.

Fine, I'm hitting a brick wall, so we'll drop it. (though I still don't get why you cant see the obvious: The federal government, just like governments all over the world, absolutely can force offshore sites to pay a fee in exchange for not being blocked or prosecuted, as long as they aren't being treated unfairly compared to onshore sites. This isn't impossible. They could have, but they didn't. The feds didn't allow legal online poker because they weren't interested in the money. Online gambling is the devil)

ROFLROFLROFL

Right. Our federal government isn't interested in money

ROFLROFLROFL

Oh and btw, I haven't seen a single person say the feds are right on this. We just believe the motivation is greed not moral indignation.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 10:28 AM
ROFLROFLROFL

Right. Our federal government isn't interested in money

ROFLROFLROFL

Oh and btw, I haven't seen a single person say the feds are right on this. We just believe the motivation is greed not moral indignation.

I forgot to mention that the US settled the WTO complaint by Antigua and the EU with a massive settlement and trade concessions.

But your right, clearly the US banned online poker because of money.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 10:29 AM
But your right, clearly the US banned online poker because of money.

Thank you. See that wasn't so hard now was it?

alnorth
04-18-2011, 10:31 AM
Thank you. See that wasn't so hard now was it?

Yep, it wasn't hard at all to demonstrate sarcasm. Glad you appreciate the subtle humor.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 10:36 AM
Yep, it wasn't hard at all to demonstrate sarcasm. Glad you appreciate the subtle humor.

I just find it hard to believe that our current group of elected officials would do something that doesn't benifit them in the slightest based on principle. Especially considering all the legalized state sponsered gambling that goes on (which I alluded to in my first post)

You keep believing they are doing this out of moral outrage though. I don't believe that Republicans give a flying fuck about the children, at least aside from how they can steal as much of their money as possible.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 10:51 AM
Legislative history
The Act was passed on the last day before Congress adjourned for the 2006 elections. Though a bill with the gambling wording was previously debated and passed by the House of Representatives,[6][7][8] the SAFE Port Act (H.R. 4954) as passed by the House on May 4th (by a vote of 421-2) and the United States Senate on September 14th (98-0),[9] bore no traces of the Unlawful Internet Gambling and Enforcement Act that was included in the SAFE Port Act signed into law by George W. Bush on October 13th, 2006.[10] The UIGEA was added in Conference Report 109-711 (submitted at 9:29pm on September 29, 2006), which was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 409-2 and by the Senate by unanimous consent on September 30, 2006. Due to H.RES.1064, the reading of this conference report was waived.So according to wikipedia, out of the house and the senate only TWO congressmen voted against the bill.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 10:55 AM
So according to wikipedia, out of the house and the senate only TWO congressmen voted against the bill.

It was attached to a huge must-pass bill that had nothing to do with internet gambling at the last second. We have no idea if it would have passed alone.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 10:57 AM
It was attached to a huge must-pass bill that had nothing to do with internet gambling at the last second. We have no idea if it would have passed alone.
Irrelevant. Both democrats and republicans voted for it.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 11:16 AM
alnorth, like I said the leaders of the movement might conveniently be true believers. But there is no way the assault on online poker gains this kind of traction and attention if there wasn't also a multi-billion $$ industry involved. One that the US govt sees as siphoning off a decent-sized chunk of the US recreation dollar, while returning nothing in tax or license revenues.

For the feds to license and tax this thing themselves would be an unprecedented step afaik. Gambling regulation and revenues are almost always left up to states. But the states need the fed to crack down before that can happen.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 11:18 AM
Yeah, I constantly see crazy Christians ranting about online gambling :rolleyes:

This is happening because people are gambling in a way the government can't tax, and in a way the politically powerful domestic gambling industry can't dominate.

But don't let facts obscure the bigotry objectives...

Exactly. A few of my aunts and uncles are as bible-thumpery as you can get. Some of them even speak in tongues at church. If they have a problem with online gambling, it's way way down on their list past abortion, flag burning, hip hop music and a few hundred other evils plaguing society.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 11:35 AM
Here's an issue that I think is more interesting and which is not getting nearly the press it should: these poker sites could actually win in court.

This is a legal fight they did not seek out because the consequences of losing are high, but now that the feds have shut them down, took their money, and are threatening jail and billions in fines, they have nothing to lose. The fight will now turn to a simple question: is poker gambling, or is it a game of skill? If a court finds that poker is predominantly a game of skill, then UIGEA does not apply to online poker, and instantly overnight online poker and bank transactions to those sites becomes legal.

This isn't ridiculous either, because courts are split on this issue. The question hasn't been raised often (usually in state court when some guy gets busted for a small-time poker tournament), but different courts have come down in different decisions. Poker was recently declared to be a legal game of skill in Pennsylvania. Poker was recently declared to be illegal gambling in Colorado. What will the federal court decide?

There is a very real chance they would win in court on the "is poker gambling?" argument. From everything I've heard they're pretty much screwed on the money laundering and fraud charges though.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 11:37 AM
So according to wikipedia, out of the house and the senate only TWO congressmen voted against the bill.

That's because the UIGEA was attached to a Port Security bill at literally the last possible hour on the last day of the Republican (soon to be) lame duck congress in 2006. Most of the agreements of the port security bill had already been hashed out and agreed on by both sides. Supposedly many of them didn't even know this was attached. And in either case no one wanted to seem to be against defending America's ports by taking a stand for online gambling.

What does internet gambling have to do with port security? Absolutely nothing. But apparently that doesn't matter. They tried this bill as a standalone, but realized it wouldn't have the votes to pass the senate. So they snuck it onto the port security bill at the last minute. This whole odyssey has been an incredible civics lesson for us poker players. It's one thing to realize in theory that how the govt *actually* works is a far cry from how it's *supposed* work. But it's another to actually see it in action.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 11:43 AM
There is a very real chance they would win in court on the "is poker gambling?" argument. From everything I've heard they're pretty much screwed on the money laundering and fraud charges though.

If the money laundering and fraud charges are related to a legal activity, would it cease to be money laundering and fraud? I'm not a lawyer, but I'd think everything falls on the gambling vs skill question.

edit: Actually, I'm starting to read up more on this from legal experts, and there's very little question about it: Pokerstars and FTP are completely screwed on the laundering and fraud charges, the fact that online poker may be found to be legal is not relevant. You cant bribe bank officials and mislabel transactions for any reason.

But, they still have no choice but to try to argue that online poker is legal to salvage something out of it, and if they win, then every poker site in the world will be able to take advantage. There would be no need to hide anything from the bank, if UIGEA doesn't apply, the feds cant stop the bank from sending money to poker sites.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 12:01 PM
One of the few lawyers I could find who thinks FT and PS will be cleared on everything, not just on whether online poker is legal.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=26064814&postcount=39

Bump
04-18-2011, 12:15 PM
How is everybody doing on scratch tickets lately and the powerball? Why isn't the fucking lottery illegal? Also, why do they fucking advertise so much for it? It's a damn outrage and it's FUCKING STUPID,. I had my roll up to over $500, which isn't a helluva lot but it still pisses me off. Poker is a god damn game of skill, not as much online, but it still is.

They need to also shut down the fucking lottery if they think online poker is the fucking devil. Stupid fucking cunts.

Brock
04-18-2011, 12:20 PM
How is everybody doing on scratch tickets lately and the powerball? Why isn't the fucking lottery illegal? Also, why do they fucking advertise so much for it? It's a damn outrage and it's FUCKING STUPID,. I had my roll up to over $500, which isn't a helluva lot but it still pisses me off. Poker is a god damn game of skill, not as much online, but it still is.

They need to also shut down the fucking lottery if they think online poker is the fucking devil. Stupid fucking cunts.

The government runs the lottery and draws revenue from it. That's what this is all about.

I don't think the justice department under Obama cares about whether it's immoral or not, it's just another revenue stream they want to control.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 12:27 PM
One of the few lawyers I could find who thinks FT and PS will be cleared on everything, not just on whether online poker is legal.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=26064814&postcount=39

He's a lawyer representing one of the sites. Of course he's going to say that. (Not that I disagree with him or wasn't glad to hear his take on it.)

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 12:30 PM
If the money laundering and fraud charges are related to a legal activity, would it cease to be money laundering and fraud? I'm not a lawyer, but I'd think everything falls on the gambling vs skill question.

edit: Actually, I'm starting to read up more on this from legal experts, and there's very little question about it: Pokerstars and FTP are completely screwed on the laundering and fraud charges, the fact that online poker may be found to be legal is not relevant. You cant bribe bank officials and mislabel transactions for any reason.

But, they still have no choice but to try to argue that online poker is legal to salvage something out of it, and if they win, then every poker site in the world will be able to take advantage. There would be no need to hide anything from the bank, if UIGEA doesn't apply, the feds cant stop the bank from sending money to poker sites.

The sites will probably end up settling for some gigantic fine and promising to stay out of the us - in exchange for their billionaire owners not being international fugitives in the eyes of the US - and the promise of possibly re-entering the US market someday.

Btw I talked to Isai (the pokerstars owner implicated) for an hour on the phone last year. I had no idea he was the owner. Probably the only time in my life I'll ever have a conversation with a billionaire.

Jaric
04-18-2011, 12:44 PM
That's because the UIGEA was attached to a Port Security bill at literally the last possible hour on the last day of the Republican (soon to be) lame duck congress in 2006. Most of the agreements of the port security bill had already been hashed out and agreed on by both sides. Supposedly many of them didn't even know this was attached. And in either case no one wanted to seem to be against defending America's ports by taking a stand for online gambling.

What does internet gambling have to do with port security? Absolutely nothing. But apparently that doesn't matter. They tried this bill as a standalone, but realized it wouldn't have the votes to pass the senate. So they snuck it onto the port security bill at the last minute. This whole odyssey has been an incredible civics lesson for us poker players. It's one thing to realize in theory that how the govt *actually* works is a far cry from how it's *supposed* work. But it's another to actually see it in action.
I have to be honest, I don't care anymore. I'm tired of excuses, if you voted for it (well not you obviously) you have to own it. Attaching riders to bills is nothing new and both sides do it when it suits their purposes.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 01:09 PM
Here's something else to consider: if this was really about morality, and not money, why did the govt let all of the major sites advertise on ESPN and other channels right up until Friday? The govt could have put a stop to that at any time if their main objective was really to save people from the evils of online poker. But the truth is is they were more than happy to let ESPN take the site's money, even it meant more people might be drawn to online poker.

Garcia Bronco
04-18-2011, 01:16 PM
Another thing Ollie...you have the religious/republican/whatever you are blaming this on too much credit. It's a money grab...pure and simple.

mnchiefsguy
04-18-2011, 07:52 PM
Yeah, I constantly see crazy Christians ranting about online gambling :rolleyes:

This is happening because people are gambling in a way the government can't tax, and in a way the politically powerful domestic gambling industry can't dominate.

But don't let facts obscure the bigotry objectives...

Check out the Focus on the Family website and get back to me. There are those out there that take online gambling as a serious moral issue.

mnchiefsguy
04-18-2011, 08:01 PM
And I will say this, while for most members of Congress, this is a money issue...the ones in Congress that are driving the bus are the ones with the moral problem. Most of Congress would be okay with some form of online gaming if the government were to get its cut. But the ones with the moral objections will not compromise on any part of this issue. And some of them, like John Kyl, and Bill Frist when he was in the Senate, are very tenured and powerful.

BWillie
04-18-2011, 08:19 PM
Here's something else to consider: if this was really about morality, and not money, why did the govt let all of the major sites advertise on ESPN and other channels right up until Friday? The govt could have put a stop to that at any time if their main objective was really to save people from the evils of online poker. But the truth is is they were more than happy to let ESPN take the site's money, even it meant more people might be drawn to online poker.

I think they were able to do that because they advertised the free site ie www.fulltiltpoker.net and the real money site is .com. You always hear them say come play for free bla,bla but we all know what they really want you to do.

To weigh in on this issue, I think its both a moral issue and a $ issue depending on which congressman you ask if they were actually to answer honestly

mnchiefsguy
04-18-2011, 08:24 PM
I think they were able to do that because they advertised the free site ie www.fulltiltpoker.net and the real money site is .com. You always hear them say come play for free bla,bla but we all know what they really want you to do.

To weigh in on this issue, I think its both a moral issue and a $ issue depending on which congressman you ask if they were actually to answer honestly

I agree with this, and the ones who have it as $ issue are willing to work on a solution, while the moral ones want no gambling at all of any type.

Both parties are to blame too. The Repubs started it, but it is Obama's justice department that is enforcing it.

suzzer99
04-18-2011, 09:01 PM
I think they were able to do that because they advertised the free site ie www.fulltiltpoker.net and the real money site is .com. You always hear them say come play for free bla,bla but we all know what they really want you to do.

Exactly why the govt could have shut those ads down any time they wanted to. The US govt isn't very big on companies thumbing their nose at them on a technicality.

mnchiefsguy
04-18-2011, 09:07 PM
It is a further erosion of our freedoms to be sure. They tried prohibition with alcohol and it failed miserably. Not sure why they think that it will work with gambling. One could argue that gambling is not nearly as destructive to children and families as drinking is.

alnorth
04-18-2011, 10:00 PM
I have to be honest, I don't care anymore. I'm tired of excuses, if you voted for it (well not you obviously) you have to own it. Attaching riders to bills is nothing new and both sides do it when it suits their purposes.

Seriously though, this was not some pre-planned conspiracy where congressmen were out to get online poker for money. Bill Frist wanted to curry favor at the last moment with the right-wing religious crazies back when he still thought he could be president, so he attached it to a must-pass cant-vote-against bill, a lot of congressmen weren't aware of it, those that were, were basically "seriously? This is crap. OK fine, its not a big issue and I cant vote no"

Really, its as simple as that. Frist wanted to make some stupid holy rollers happy. It was not some big secret smoke-filled room conspiracy where congress decided they wanted money by.... instead of taxing poker.... banning it...? (how does that work?)

Anyway, yes it was stupid republicans trying to gain favor with the moral holy rollers. It was NOT about money.

Now, you might say "I dont care", but the reason was ignorance, apathy, and moral nonsense. NOT because of money, thats just silly. The US could make more money by taxing it. (seriously, its not hard, force these sites to partner up with a land-based casino like party poker was thinking about doing with Wynn, then tax them. If its banned, you get no money)

BIG_DADDY
04-18-2011, 10:28 PM
Your tax dollars hard at work protecting you from yourself and funding those big ass Federal employee pensions. Awesome.

suzzer99
04-19-2011, 10:04 AM
Seriously though, this was not some pre-planned conspiracy where congressmen were out to get online poker for money. Bill Frist wanted to curry favor at the last moment with the right-wing religious crazies back when he still thought he could be president, so he attached it to a must-pass cant-vote-against bill, a lot of congressmen weren't aware of it, those that were, were basically "seriously? This is crap. OK fine, its not a big issue and I cant vote no"

Really, its as simple as that. Frist wanted to make some stupid holy rollers happy. It was not some big secret smoke-filled room conspiracy where congress decided they wanted money by.... instead of taxing poker.... banning it...? (how does that work?)

Anyway, yes it was stupid republicans trying to gain favor with the moral holy rollers. It was NOT about money.

Now, you might say "I dont care", but the reason was ignorance, apathy, and moral nonsense. NOT because of money, thats just silly. The US could make more money by taxing it. (seriously, its not hard, force these sites to partner up with a land-based casino like party poker was thinking about doing with Wynn, then tax them. If its banned, you get no money)

We don't disagree that that was the genesis of the UIGEA. But this action is a self-aggrandizing media whore prosecutor from the SDNY named Preet Bharara. And money for the states eventually.

chiefsnorth
04-19-2011, 10:52 AM
Check out the Focus on the Family website and get back to me. There are those out there that take online gambling as a serious moral issue.

I think gambling is a serious social issue, but in no way do I advocate banning it.

If someone wants to flush money because they suck at math I don't care. I wish it were going to another industry but that's not my choice.

Perhaps the religious right would answer a survey question "yes I think gambling should be illegal" but they have not done this. It's extremely low priority for them. It's the government trying to get it's hands in a pot of honey that caused this.

Same as the noises you see Dick Durbin making about taxing sales on the Internet. He says online retailers have an unfair advantage, but what he really means is that there is a lot of tax revenue at stake and Durbin loves spending money like Joanie loves Chachi. I'm sure he loves the gambling industry's campaign dollars even more than the tax dollars.

mnchiefsguy
04-19-2011, 05:06 PM
I think gambling is a serious social issue, but in no way do I advocate banning it.

If someone wants to flush money because they suck at math I don't care. I wish it were going to another industry but that's not my choice.

Perhaps the religious right would answer a survey question "yes I think gambling should be illegal" but they have not done this. It's extremely low priority for them. It's the government trying to get it's hands in a pot of honey that caused this.

Same as the noises you see Dick Durbin making about taxing sales on the Internet. He says online retailers have an unfair advantage, but what he really means is that there is a lot of tax revenue at stake and Durbin loves spending money like Joanie loves Chachi. I'm sure he loves the gambling industry's campaign dollars even more than the tax dollars.

They have answered the survey with "yes they think gambling should be illegal"--a politician with presidential aspirations backdoored a bill through Congress based on support from them. It does not get the same press or coverage as, the abortion issue, for instance, but it is not a low priority for them as you think. Gambling is an issue where I veer off of the moral conservative path, I see no problem with it, and people should be held accountable for their actions. Many of the social conservatives I know consider all gambling to be a sin, and would even advocate that the lottery and your local NCAA betting pool illegal.

It is this underestimating of how important the gambling issue is to moral conservatives that put online poker in this position to begin with. When UIGEA was just a rumor, many were saying it would never happen in a million years. The opposition to gambling is committed, well funded, and well-organized...and right now they kicking the crap out of poker players, sport bettors, and anyone else who enjoys a friendly wager.

I totally agree with you on Dick Durbin...he does spend more than Chachi. :thumb:

Over-Head
04-19-2011, 05:16 PM
Our government is a piece of shit. Trade ya?

BWillie
04-19-2011, 05:44 PM
Carbon Poker accepting new US players. 100% deposit up to like 2K and 35% rake back! Time to build this site up, until it all comes crashing down eventually.

ClevelandBronco
04-20-2011, 09:05 AM
Hey, guys. I just heard on the radio that these sites are coming back up temporarily to allow players to withdraw their funds. I'll look for details, but if I don't find anything you're on your own.

Simplex3
04-20-2011, 01:35 PM
http://www.sportsgrid.com/media/espn-drops-poker-coverage/

mnchiefsguy
04-20-2011, 04:44 PM
Hey, guys. I just heard on the radio that these sites are coming back up temporarily to allow players to withdraw their funds. I'll look for details, but if I don't find anything you're on your own.

Just checked on my Full Tilt, it says they are not taking real money deposits or processing withdrawals at this time. Thanks for the tip though, I had not tried to log in since this happened.

BWillie
04-20-2011, 05:19 PM
Hey, guys. I just heard on the radio that these sites are coming back up temporarily to allow players to withdraw their funds. I'll look for details, but if I don't find anything you're on your own.

Party Poker paid, no reason these companies shouldn't. Poker Stars to my knowledge is already allowing players to start withdrawals there, apparently. Full Tilt, not so much right now. My roll is in Full Tilt, I have nothing in Poker Stars, blah. Be nice to get that fat check, but I was really just planning on leaving it in there and making a run for the mid-stakes.

mnchiefsguy
04-20-2011, 08:19 PM
Party Poker paid, no reason these companies shouldn't. Poker Stars to my knowledge is already allowing players to start withdrawals there, apparently. Full Tilt, not so much right now. My roll is in Full Tilt, I have nothing in Poker Stars, blah. Be nice to get that fat check, but I was really just planning on leaving it in there and making a run for the mid-stakes.

The cashier in Poker Stars is not allowing cash outs at the moment. Someone on 2+2 posted an email they got from Stars saying they would be allowing cashouts soon, that they were preparing for the heavy traffic of everyone cashing out.

HemiEd
04-22-2011, 03:43 PM
Is it really that much of a Democrat vs. Republican division?

He sure thinks it is. In my short lifetime on this planet, I have experienced more Democrats telling me how to live my life than Republicans. But then again, what the fuck do I know.

Ericgoodchief
04-24-2011, 03:13 AM
guardian.co . uk/business/2008/dec/16/anurag-dikshit-profile

Interesting people behind these websites. Living on british isles of Man.