Members banned from this thread: Nomad


Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 75

Thread: Dems' Tax Hypocrisy

  1. #46 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    11,869
    Thanks
    6,396
    Thanked 4,386 Times in 3,225 Posts
    Groans
    57
    Groaned 189 Times in 178 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NiftyNiblick View Post
    Trump can interfere with the IRS, but not with the State of New York.
    They've got Trump's state tax returns and will be only too happy to provide Committee Chairman Nadler with anything he wants.
    Blue America to the rescue once again.
    Wait I thought you were against helping communists! State of New York qualifies! Diblasio is your czar!

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Wolverine For This Post:

    Earl (04-11-2019)

  3. #47 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    11,869
    Thanks
    6,396
    Thanked 4,386 Times in 3,225 Posts
    Groans
    57
    Groaned 189 Times in 178 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NiftyNiblick View Post
    Abundant evidence exists that Trump has engaged in serious criminal activity--campaign finance violations, money laundering, fraud..the list goes on.
    Trump is even dirtier than most of the 63,000,000 turds who voted for him.
    There is plenty of probable cause to demand all of his financial records, tax returns included.

    The white trash that supports Trump will happily start stupid threads like this one, but anybody with any intelligence at all knows that they're just stupid crackers whose opinions are of no value whatsoever.

    Paying serious attention to you Trumpanzee clowns is as futile as paying serious attention to the orangutan himself.
    He's going down, and then you sycophants can all crawl back under your rocks.
    Bet?

  4. #48 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    23,532
    Thanks
    3,066
    Thanked 9,770 Times in 7,271 Posts
    Groans
    49
    Groaned 1,060 Times in 1,005 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolverine View Post
    Wait I thought you were against helping communists! State of New York qualifies! Diblasio is your czar!
    I've never said a thing about helping communists.
    Communists are irrelevant today, but not socialists (lower case s)and I'm a socialist myself.
    I'm a Social Democrat.
    Republicans are what I hate, not Communists.

    Trump's buddy Putin may have been a pretend-communist once but he's certainly a crooked capitalist oligarch now.
    I don't see his other buddy in North Korea yelling "Power to the people" either.

    Places like New York, Massachusetts, and California--especially Northern California-- are what's known as the "civilized world," rare in America, and sadly, I can't see you cutting it in a place like that.

    Also, DiBlasio is Mayor of New York City, not Governor of New York. Andy Cuomo, who's a Democrat well to the right of me, is Governor.
    Plus Communist Russia never had a czar, for whatever that's worth. They assassinated the entire Romanoff family as I recall.

  5. The Following User Groans At NiftyNiblick For This Awful Post:

    Earl (04-11-2019)

  6. #49 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Gone to the mattresses
    Posts
    22,458
    Thanks
    1,135
    Thanked 11,622 Times in 8,086 Posts
    Groans
    874
    Groaned 639 Times in 618 Posts

    Default

    The real hypocrisy is the democrat party crying over losing their SALT deduction loophole where blue states were having the rest of the country subsidize their low taxes.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to canceled.2021.2 For This Post:

    Earl (04-11-2019)

  8. #50 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    that's why they won't get the tax returns........they are only in charge of being a check against the IRS......
    Incorrect. They're charged to be a check against the Executive Branch, which includes the presidency.

  9. #51 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    lol.....pure bullshit.....
    If you were ignorant of this basic concept of law, then read up on it and get back to me when you're prepared to discuss it from a position other than abject ignorance.

  10. #52 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teflon Don View Post
    Has Congress done this with every President going back to the formation of the IRS? If not then you don't have a case.
    That doesn't follow. Congress doesn't have to do something in every instance to have the right to do something in a particular incident. What made you imagine that made sense?

  11. #53 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    Au contraire both the senate and house have rules about divulging classified information....
    Yes, and the point is those rules don't override the Constitution. Constitutionally, a House member can't be prosecuted for anything said on the House floor. Period. The House can, if it wants, censure a member for violating its rules, the same way it could censure someone for calling a colleague a jackass. But just as the first amendment means you can't be prosecuted for calling someone a jackass, you also can't be prosecuted for anything that falls under speech and debate. They can, perhaps, be expelled, but it's not going to happen in this scenario, since a Democratic majority isn't going to expel a Democrat for making good on Trump's promise that he'd disclose his tax returns after the election.

  12. #54 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    11,869
    Thanks
    6,396
    Thanked 4,386 Times in 3,225 Posts
    Groans
    57
    Groaned 189 Times in 178 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NiftyNiblick View Post
    I've never said a thing about helping communists.
    Communists are irrelevant today, but not socialists (lower case s)and I'm a socialist myself.
    I'm a Social Democrat.
    Republicans are what I hate, not Communists.

    Trump's buddy Putin may have been a pretend-communist once but he's certainly a crooked capitalist oligarch now.
    I don't see his other buddy in North Korea yelling "Power to the people" either.

    Places like New York, Massachusetts, and California--especially Northern California-- are what's known as the "civilized world," rare in America, and sadly, I can't see you cutting it in a place like that.

    Also, DiBlasio is Mayor of New York City, not Governor of New York. Andy Cuomo, who's a Democrat well to the right of me, is Governor.
    Plus Communist Russia never had a czar, for whatever that's worth. They assassinated the entire Romanoff family as I recall.
    So how much extra in Income taxes do you pay to the state, and federal government, and for that matter local Government?

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Wolverine For This Post:

    Earl (04-11-2019)

  14. #55 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,855
    Thanks
    13,247
    Thanked 40,787 Times in 32,153 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Incorrect. They're charged to be a check against the Executive Branch, which includes the presidency.
    sorry you don't understand how this works......perhaps when the SC explains it to you......

  15. #56 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,855
    Thanks
    13,247
    Thanked 40,787 Times in 32,153 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    If you were ignorant of this basic concept of law, then read up on it and get back to me when you're prepared to discuss it from a position other than abject ignorance.
    lol.....no idiot......I am not ignorant of ANY basic concepts of the law.......get back to me after the SC tells you that you are wrong......if you're still unclear I will spell it out for you with a crayon.......

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to PostmodernProphet For This Post:

    Earl (04-11-2019)

  17. #57 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Hooterville by the sea
    Posts
    23,264
    Thanks
    6,282
    Thanked 16,527 Times in 11,565 Posts
    Groans
    1,236
    Groaned 513 Times in 483 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Yes, and the point is those rules don't override the Constitution. Constitutionally, a House member can't be prosecuted for anything said on the House floor. Period. The House can, if it wants, censure a member for violating its rules, the same way it could censure someone for calling a colleague a jackass. But just as the first amendment means you can't be prosecuted for calling someone a jackass, you also can't be prosecuted for anything that falls under speech and debate. They can, perhaps, be expelled, but it's not going to happen in this scenario, since a Democratic majority isn't going to expel a Democrat for making good on Trump's promise that he'd disclose his tax returns after the election.
    Thanks for just rewording what I said.
    You made one major mistake. Democrats won't do anything to fellow Democrats no matter what the crime. That is sarcasm if you missed it.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Eagle_Eye For This Post:

    Earl (04-11-2019)

  19. #58 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    sorry you don't understand how this works......perhaps when the SC explains it to you......
    One reason the Democrats should force the issue is to get precedent. It's entirely possible the arch-conservatives on the Supreme Court will defy the intent of the Founders and clear interpretation of law, in order to protect Trump. But, by forcing them to commit that to paper, there will be a precedent that will likewise protect a future Democratic president (or, say, Secretary of State) from the usual wingnut witch-hunts. The correct interpretation of law is that Congress can compel this disclosure, but at least if the Republican activists on the high court interpret the law incorrectly, that becomes something that cuts both ways. And given the much greater historical eagerness of the Republican party to use investigations as a way to try to derail Democratic administrations, that new precedent actually would tend to help the left more than the right.

  20. #59 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
    Democrats won't do anything to fellow Democrats no matter what the crime.
    Based on the Democrats forcing out Al Franken based on essentially nothing, I'm not sure about that, but there's reason to hope they've learned from that mistake.

  21. #60 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Flyover Country
    Posts
    7,170
    Thanks
    4,088
    Thanked 3,986 Times in 2,762 Posts
    Groans
    316
    Groaned 178 Times in 173 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew the moron View Post
    I shouldn't post when I'm in a drunken stupor
    THEN STOP DOING IT!!!

Similar Threads

  1. More GOP Hypocrisy
    By ZappasGuitar in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-06-2017, 04:51 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-12-2017, 12:29 AM
  3. Hypocrisy...something to think about
    By NOVA in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-01-2010, 09:43 AM
  4. No hypocrisy here...NEVER
    By NOVA in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-30-2010, 08:39 AM
  5. Hypocrisy
    By Canceled.LTroll.27 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-03-2010, 04:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •