If we're going to go down this path, I most surely want PRESIDENTS Obama's and Clinton's taxes investigated. This would (no doubt in my mind) lead to every candidate considering a run for the office to be required to submit their tax data for life. Can't be too careful ya know. Having gone that far, let's look at every elected official at the federal level and let's not forget SCOTUS.
Apparently, some don't believe the IRS is doing it's job. Or, could this be for political reasons? Surely not.
I really wonder if Left leaders (those pushing for this) realize the Pandora's Box they are trying to open. Doesn't matter to me but, what's good for the Goose is definately good for the Gander. Can't wait to see how Speaker Pelosi got rich.....
quote
WASHINGTON — Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee asked the new Democratic chairman to drop the quest to obtain President Donald Trump's tax returns from the Treasury Department.
In a letter to Massachusetts Rep. Richard Neal, who is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, on Thursday, Republican Reps. Kevin Brady and Mike Kelly pleaded with the chairman to not pursue Trump's tax returns, citing privacy concerns and what they characterized as an abuse of authority.
Run it! Audit all the people. A "fresh slate" approach. Those that are truly paying their fair share get extra points. Those not paying their fair share loose privileges.
I really wonder if Left leaders (those pushing for this) realize the Pandora's Box they are trying to open.
They don't.
The left always ignores and then suffers from the law of unintended consequences from their own acts.
In November 2013, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments, but not for the Supreme Court. In April 2017, Senate Republicans led by Mitch McConnell extended the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominations in order to end debate on the nomination of Neil Gorsuch.
The vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh also benefitted from the left's short sightedness and violation of the rule of unintended consequences.
I remain optimistic that another new Supreme Court Justice to replace RBG will also soon benefit.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 02-08-2019).]
I remain optimistic that another new Supreme Court Justice to replace RBG will also soon benefit.
So does at least half the nation. The thought of RBG leaving the court one way or another scares the hell out of the left and is greatly welcomed by the right. Some don't care how she leaves, they just want her gone. I may or may not fall into that group.....
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-08-2019).]
Is that just an impression, or is it based on some poll numbers?
Seriously. I am "researching" about online discussion forums and how the messages are created. I mean, it's a serious question. The "researching"... not so serious.
I say that less than 20% of the nation is mucking this up for the remaining 80%. I STRONGLY believe that the majority of my friends, neighbors, and customers are hard working good people. Even those left leaning.
Not sure about you, but I pay mine. I pay it all without a thought otherwise. A bit few of you here feel that my diligence is a disease. Well, there is no pizz on my toilets. None.
Shame on those milking the system.
Having said that, Stacy Abrams is a perfect example of a leader gone wrong. Her finances are horrendous, yet here she is? The same with AOC. "Debt forgiveness" is ridiculous. Why should lenders be punished for the bad decisions of their debtors?
But the question that I addressed to blackrams remains open. I think his remark was most likely not based on any poll numbers.
I don't think that I have seen any polls about Supreme Court justices, or about RBG, specifically. But I haven't actively searched for any.
An assumption on my part. Approximately half the nation voted for Candidate Trump, those same citizens would love to see RBG off the court one way or another. I may be wrong, we'll see when the celebrations take place. I no longer trust pollsters.
I also don't support political hacks that aren't smart enough to look at both sides of a coin. Some only want to see the side that supports their agenda. Every candidate that ran during the election cycle completed the required forms. There is no provision, rule or regulation requiring any candidate to provide their income tax returns. Trump chose not to. His right.
Half the voting nation (approximately) did not care enough about this issue to cause them to switch to Clinton. Anyone who thinks these tactics won't come back to haunt the Dems is foolish and lacking in foresight. Dirty Harry changed the rules for judges and was warned not to do it. That decision came back to bite him on the ass. Will they ever learn?
I say this and I am not a Trump fan. Generally speaking I agree with the direction he is trying to take this country but personally, I am not a fan of his. He was my only choice to avoid another Clinton in the Oval Office.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-08-2019).]
They equate 'liking' a candidate's personality with ability to accomplish. They equate the Office of the President with the country's Moral Center. They have no knowledge about our form of government, and how it is designed to work.
The best bosses I ever worked for were in the SOB category. They got things done, pushed to get more done, and had little tolerance for ineptitude. If there is a 'separation of Church and State' (as now interpreted), how can morality and elected office be sanctioned?
It seems like there could be an obvious case that if the President and Vice President were to be legally obligated to disclose their IRS or tax filings, it should also be required for the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate. And perhaps even beyond that.
The president is subject to the Constitution and it's protections, just as are the rest of us. Absent of evidence of a specific crime, the request is contrary to the protection guaranteed in the fourth amendment.
Now, re read the last sentence and think about Ol' Bob Mueller.
The IRS has its proper scope and concerns about every individual's tax declarations and documents or filings.
The House Intelligence committee and other members and committees of the House and Senate could legitimately pursue lines of inquiry that are beyond the scope of the IRS.
Originally posted by olejoedad: It is evident that the Democrat party has no faith in the ability of the IRS to perform their appointed task.
Unless it is to censor Tea Party/Patriot/ Republican/Conservative groups from the tax benefits they are entitled to
Me thinks the government union lackies have already leaked Trump's tax info, yet the recipients fear exposing the IRS to another controversy so soon after the Lerner debacle.
It seems like there could be an obvious case that if the President and Vice President were to be legally obligated to disclose their IRS or tax filings, it should also be required for the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate. And perhaps even beyond that.
I yield the floor.
While I tend to agree in theory, I still have a problem with violating that right to privacy thing. The IRS sees every tax return and unless an American is charged with tax evasion, every legal, tax paying American has a right of privacy.
But, if the Dems wish to go down this path, they should be prepared to accept the same kind of scrutiny when it's their turn. Yeah, I'd love for Speaker Pelosi to be required to show us how she and her husband made all their fortunes. Just how did Pelosi's husband manage to get all those sweet government contracts?
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-09-2019).]
The left always ignores and then suffers from the law of unintended consequences from their own acts.
In November 2013, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments, but not for the Supreme Court. In April 2017, Senate Republicans led by Mitch McConnell extended the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominations in order to end debate on the nomination of Neil Gorsuch.
The vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh also benefitted from the left's short sightedness and violation of the rule of unintended consequences.
I remain optimistic that another new Supreme Court Justice to replace RBG will also soon benefit.
I agree Blackrams.
The democrats/liberals, have long established they have no ability for individual brain function. They only know how to blindly follow those few leaders they have that have their own agendas. They cant have any idea of whether something they do can also affect themselves.
It seems like there could be an obvious case that if the President and Vice President were to be legally obligated to disclose their IRS or tax filings, it should also be required for the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate. And perhaps even beyond that.
I yield the floor.
I agree. And of course, the one person who doesn't want her tax filings to be disclosed is Pelosi. She and her husband are so entrenched in China, that there is almost zero chance that they aren't hiding illegally made money.
An assumption on my part. Approximately half the nation voted for Candidate Trump, those same citizens would love to see RBG off the court one way or another. I may be wrong, we'll see when the celebrations take place.
I no longer trust pollsters.
I find the cognitive dissonance of leftists interesting where it applies to opinion polls.
The left was assured over and over by polls published by the media of Granny Clinton's absolutely assured win in 2016 only to discover to their horror how wildly wrong that information was.
It seems as though they haven't learned anything from that experience.
Here we are over 2 years later and, as even shown in this thread, leftists STILL immediately look to POLLS as a source of authority on almost every topic.
This odd behavior likely has a lot to do with leftists inherent disability with facts vs. opinions and their almost slavish devotion to media propaganda.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 02-10-2019).]
