Guest viewing is limited

Donald Trump running for president

Dems being pussies:

Allowing Ken Starr to go on for 6 years and the BS indictments that came out of that.


Not prosecuting W for war crimes.

Turning the ACA into Romneycare 2.0 and then letting Cons control the narrative around the issues that arose.

Allowing Al Franken to be railroaded.

Etc, etc, etc.

Cons playing hardball:

Getting W into office despite him losing the election.

Denying Obama's supreme court pick.

Killing the filibusters.

Packing the courts with conservative judges.

Etc, etc, etc.


Cons are willing to throw low blows every time and Dems will cannibalize each other to be "fair" to the Cons. Mitch McConnell will kill EVERYTHING the Dems throw at the Senate and the when he cries "unprecedented obstruction" the Dems cower. As much as I hate to say it, it's lions vs lambs.
 
nostrum420 said:
Dems being pussies:

Not prosecuting W for war crimes.

Turning the ACA into Romneycare 2.0 and then letting Cons control the narrative around the issues that arose.

Allowing Al Franken to be railroaded.
Click to expand...

W for war crimes? That's not for the US government to even do. Plus how would they do that and continue to keep doing the same things under Obama. Guantanamo is still there and drone strikes kept on striking. Plus Clinton got a pass for war crimes in the Balkans. If one goes, they're all going.

The fact that the ACA happened at all and has survived over 60 attempts to repeal it (none of them successful) isn't an example of them being pussies. There were several points that they could have given up and say well at least they tried. They were ready to settle for a gutted bill and Pelosi and Obama fought fellow Democrats to keep it as is. And there's no controlling the narrative needed. There were significant issues with the rollout and you either agree with helping insure other people or you don't. Trying to sugarcoat that is simply lying to voters.

Are we going to pretend that Al Franken is the only person to resign from a government position because of pressure from his party? You're saying that's never happened to a Republican? Larry Craig? Tim Murphy? Pat Meehan?

Both parties are willing to stab their fellow party members in the back and let us get stuck in the middle while they focus on the one thing most (not always all) care about: getting reelected. Just because party tactics seem to differ to us outside observers, does't really mean it's lions and lambs.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
W for war crimes? That's not for the US government to even do. Plus how would they do that and continue to keep doing the same things under Obama. Guantanamo is still there and drone strikes kept on striking. Plus Clinton got a pass for war crimes in the Balkans. If one goes, they're all going.

The fact that the ACA happened at all and has survived over 60 attempts to repeal it (none of them successful) isn't an example of them being pussies. There were several points that they could have given up and say well at least they tried. They were ready to settle for a gutted bill and Pelosi and Obama fought fellow Democrats to keep it as is. And there's no controlling the narrative needed. There were significant issues with the rollout and you either agree with helping insure other people or you don't. Trying to sugarcoat that is simply lying to voters.

Are we going to pretend that Al Franken is the only person to resign from a government position because of pressure from his party? You're saying that's never happened to a Republican? Larry Craig? Tim Murphy? Pat Meehan?

Both parties are willing to stab their fellow party members in the back and let us get stuck in the middle while they focus on the one thing most (not always all) care about: getting reelected. Just because party tactics seem to differ to us outside observers, does't really mean it's lions and lambs.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree. Are there examples of Dems having a tiny bit of a spine on occasion? Sure. IME, overall Dems are like the nice, smart, kid that thinks they reason with the bully. I like them but I wish they'd throw a punch a little more often.
 
nostrum420 said:
We'll have to agree to disagree. Are there examples of Dems having a tiny bit of a spine on occasion? Sure. IME, overall Dems are like the nice, smart, kid that thinks they reason with the bully. I like them but I wish they'd throw a punch a little more often.
Click to expand...
That's fair. I see the Republicans less as the bully and more as the special ed kid with Tourette syndrome who yells random crap out, but is relatively harmless.
 
Gerald Celente is one of my favorite people in the world!

Invalid Link Removed
 
ax1 said:
Gerald Celente is one of my favorite people in the world!

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
Love it! And screw Pence and this religious persecution lie he hides behind. You don't get to be a religion that has persecuted every other religion and every person who doesn't fall into your made up rules and get to play the victim.
 
to be honest I think all the major religions are being persecuted. the world is becoming anti-GOD
 
thebigt said:
to be honest I think all the major religions are being persecuted. the world is becoming anti-GOD
Click to expand...

Presently and throughout history it's been one religion persecuting another. That's anti-your god and pro-my god, but not anti-god. I don't recall a war being started in the name of atheism. It's always been about which god is the "correct" one. Christianity in particular is the biggest example of playing the victim. The year that we all recognize is based on Christianity (although the math is off). Here in the US, God is everywhere including the official government money and Christian holidays are the only religious holidays that most people get the day off on. Yet, somebody says happy holidays or Starbucks makes a red cup and it's as if Christians are being beheaded in the streets. Making room for other religions and people who either don't believe or simply don't care if there is a God or not isn't anti-God.

If anything, I think the world is pushing back on religions that are not their own telling them what to do or how to live. Why should I have to live by the rules of a religion that I don't have faith in? Wasn't that a huge motivation in why the US was even started?
 
Let me clarify that I certainly don't mean all Christians. As with anything else, the worst offenders tend to be the loudest and give others a bad name. I know many Christians that are great people and actually follow the teachings of the Bible and don't try to dictate how others should live.
 
Invalid Link Removed

Written by Invalid Link Removed
Monday May 13, 2019

Invalid Link Removed

Last week the New York Times published some of President Trump’s 1980s and 1990s tax returns information. The information detailed President Trump’s financial difficulties during that time. While you would not know it from reading some media reports, this is old news. In fact, President Trump openly discussed his financial difficulties on his popular reality television show.

What should be of great concern is the possibility that the person who leaked the returns — who the paper says has legal access to President Trump’s tax records — is an IRS employee seeking to undermine the president. This would hardly be the first time an IRS employee has leaked confidential information because he disagreed with the taxpayer’s politics. In 2014 the agency had to pay the National Organization for Marriage 50,000 dollars after an IRS employee gave names of the group’s donors to the group’s opponents.

In 2014-2017, my Campaign for Liberty group was repeatedly threatened by the IRS because it refused to give the agency the names of and other information about its top supporters. Fortunately, the IRS rescinded the regulation forcing groups like Campaign for Liberty to violate supporters’ privacy or face legal penalties. However, campaign finance reform legislation that recently passed in the House of Representatives would require the IRS to resume collecting this information, and the New York attorney general is suing the IRS to force the agency to reinstate the regulation.

The right of groups like Campaign for Liberty to protect their supporters’ privacy was upheld by the Supreme Court in NAACP v. Alabama. As Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote, “Inviolability of privacy in group association may in many circumstances be indispensable to preservation of freedom of association, particularly where a group espouses dissident beliefs.”

Traditionally, presidents have used the IRS to harass their political opponents instead of presidents’ opponents using the IRS against them. Franklin Roosevelt audited people critical of the New Deal and supportive of the America First movement. Lyndon Johnson ordered audits of opponents, and John Kennedy shared tax return information with Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee.

During the Obama administration, the IRS targeted groups opposing Obamacare. The agency went after anti-Iraq War groups during the George W. Bush years.

If the Times did obtain Trump’s tax returns information from an IRS employee, that employee is not in the same category as whistleblowers like Edward Snowden or Chelsea Manning who exposed government wrongdoing. The leaker or leakers of President Trump’s information are releasing private tax information.

The IRS regularly violates the civil liberties of taxpayers generally. In fact, the income tax system forcing taxpayers to reveal potentially incriminating information on their tax returns violates the principles of a free society. Americans’ liberty and prosperity will never be secure until Congress repeals two great mistakes of 1913: the income tax and the Federal Reserve.
Copyright © 2019 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/may/13/losing-income-tax-privacy-is-a-real-danger/
Invalid Link Removed
 
I'd actually have to agree with Ron Paul on this one up to the point where he starts making unsupported claims. Trump saying he'll do something and not following through with it makes him a liar, but it's not illegal. However, it also hasn't been shown yet who exactly may have leaked anything. So it's extremely dangerous and unethical for Ron Paul to highly suggest that it was the IRS who did it.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I'd actually have to agree with Ron Paul on this one up to the point where he starts making unsupported claims. Trump saying he'll do something and not following through with it makes him a liar, but it's not illegal. However, it also hasn't been shown yet who exactly may have leaked anything. So it's extremely dangerous and unethical for Ron Paul to highly suggest that it was the IRS who did it.
Click to expand...

Is it unethical to suggest an unethical organization did something bad? lol

I would like to see more evidence myself before coming to conclusions. Could be from a hacker, who knows? I guess just because a group doesnt believe in human rights its not fair to jump to conclusions that they are guilty of a specific incident.
 
Last edited:
ax1 said:
Thats fine but why?
Click to expand...

Libertarians are supposed to be about limiting the power of Gov and traditionally that limitation has been very focused on making sure executive powers didn't expand into monarchy, dictatorship, fascism, etc.

The president attempting to exert executive privilege over his tax returns would normally be decried by libertarians as an executive overreach. Basically, if you or I can't deny Congress our taxes the president can't either.

As time goes on, it seems libertarianism is slipping away from small but nevertheless present form of Gov. and into anarchism.
 
nostrum420 said:
Libertarians are supposed to be about limiting the power of Gov and traditionally that limitation has been very focused on making sure executive powers didn't expand into monarchy, dictatorship, fascism, etc.

The president attempting to exert executive privilege over his tax returns would normally be decried by libertarians as an executive overreach. Basically, if you or I can't deny Congress our taxes the president can't either.

As time goes on, it seems libertarianism is slipping away from small but nevertheless present form of Gov. and into anarchism.
Click to expand...

You shouldnt be in the position to deny Congress your income taxes in the first place since we would want to repeal the 16th Amendment.

Everyone is different, Ron is Ron who happens to be Libertarian. I voted for Larry Sharpe for Governor who is a registered Libertarian and he has started a more modern movement of the Libertarian Party on a platform of not significantly abolishing government agencies overnight. Definitly not an Anarchist which is something I personally do not favor.

Personally, I say fuq the Libertarian party and all parties, the only party Im joining is the party of thyself! LOL A big part of the Libertarian Party has been hijacked and is infested and infiltrated with sulfer. I love my Ron Paul though, he's the man. His "L" logo is really meaningless to me. Party logo's and affiliations turn into blind stereotypes which Im unfortunately guilty of contributing to myself :(
 
nostrum420 said:
Libertarians are supposed to be about limiting the power of Gov and traditionally that limitation has been very focused on making sure executive powers didn't expand into monarchy, dictatorship, fascism, etc.

The president attempting to exert executive privilege over his tax returns would normally be decried by libertarians as an executive overreach. Basically, if you or I can't deny Congress our taxes the president can't either.

As time goes on, it seems libertarianism is slipping away from small but nevertheless present form of Gov. and into anarchism.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from and think executive privilege has gotten WAY out of hand (I suspect Trump is pushing it on purpose to go to the Supreme Court, although it was out of hand with Obama too). However, the Constitution protects all of us from unreasonable searches and seizures. If Congress can show a good reason for wanting the tax returns, fine, but most of them simple seem like they're searching for something to just embarrass Trump.
 
ax1 said:
Is it unethical to suggest an unethical organization did something bad? lol

I would like to see more evidence myself before coming to conclusions. Could be from a hacker, who knows? I guess just because a group doesnt believe in human rights its not fair to jump to conclusions that they are guilty of a specific incident.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is lol. It just makes it easier to discount somebody if they're using the same tricks. Honestly, at this point I wouldn't be shocked if Trump was the one who leaked the info. He needs a big distraction from this China trade thing and I have a feeling it's this made up "sabotage" crap with the Saudi tankers that pushes us closer to invading Iran.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I see where you're coming from and think executive privilege has gotten WAY out of hand (I suspect Trump is pushing it on purpose to go to the Supreme Court, although it was out of hand with Obama too). However, the Constitution protects all of us from unreasonable searches and seizures. If Congress can show a good reason for wanting the tax returns, fine, but most of them simple seem like they're searching for something to just embarrass Trump.
Click to expand...

I would simply move Dump and Obama to Guantanamo Bay simply for violating their oath of offices and abusing executive privileges, starting off with how both illegally have invaded sovereign nations and murdered or displaced countless innocent civilians and children. This is why I cant take the "tax" people seriously, where are they on real moral and Constitutional issues?

Why are most of the war mongering thugs and hooligans who dont believe in human nature in Congress still in power to try audit Dump anyways? They should mostly primarily be living in Rikers Island. LOL
 
There's more than sufficient probable cause, IMO. The investigative reporting that's come out over the last year or so is PLENTY.

If you're comparing this to a search or seizure, for us a warrant would have to approved by a judge. For the President the equivalent to the warrant is the congressional committee deciding to request them. It's not like the Sergeant at arms was ordered to go raid the IRS headquarters or anything.
 
nostrum420 said:
There's more than sufficient probable cause, IMO. The investigative reporting that's come out over the last year or so is PLENTY.

If you're comparing this to a search or seizure, for us a warrant would have to approved by a judge. For the President the equivalent to the warrant is the congressional committee deciding to request them. It's not like the Sergeant at arms was ordered to go raid the IRS headquarters or anything.
Click to expand...

I dont like Dump, he is a piece of trash and I would love to pull him out of power yesterday, but why doesnt Congress go after something that is easily an impeachable offense rather that some questionable tax records and "if's" such as his renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act violating his Oath of Office to protect the 4th Amendment?
 
Last edited:
Aleksandar37 said:
Yes, it is lol. It just makes it easier to discount somebody if they're using the same tricks. Honestly, at this point I wouldn't be shocked if Trump was the one who leaked the info. He needs a big distraction from this China trade thing and I have a feeling it's this made up "sabotage" crap with the Saudi tankers that pushes us closer to invading Iran.
Click to expand...

Good call, there is some strategic advantage there and Dump also needs to be a suspect.
 
ax1 said:
I dont like Dump, he is a peace of trash and I would love to pull him out of power yesterday, but why doesnt Congress go after something that is easily an impeachable offense rather that some questionable tax records and "if's" such as his renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act violating his Oath of Office to protect the 4th Amendment?
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree there were other grounds for impeachment proceedings to begin a while ago but if taxes are the flavor of the week, I think the Dems have every right to them. The law is fairly short and clearly written and seems obvious to me.
 
nostrum420 said:
Oh, I agree there were other grounds for impeachment proceedings to begin a while ago but if taxes are the flavor of the week, I think the Dems have every right to them. The law is fairly short and clearly written and seems obvious to me.
Click to expand...
Agreed, the law is clear, but it does conflict with the Constitution. That's why I imagine this will go to the Supreme Court.
 
nostrum420 said:
Oh, I agree there were other grounds for impeachment proceedings to begin a while ago but if taxes are the flavor of the week, I think the Dems have every right to them. The law is fairly short and clearly written and seems obvious to me.
Click to expand...

They have to pick and choose the week's flavors or else they would all go down with the sinking ship. Thats why it comes off so phony to me.

We need a movement to take them all down together, Dump and most of his opponents. Im not excactly optimistic though, lol
 
Heee'''ssss backkkkk! Former Congressman Carlos Danger is finally a free man! Invalid Link Removed

Does the US Constutition block level 1 sex offendors for running for President? Or does that just apply to those born in Kenya?

182844
 
McCain would finally be so proud of Dump to see all this “bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran” if he was here and not being poked with hot irons by Satan at his current residence.
 
Last edited:
Ok, so Dump appoints Bolton who advocated regime change in Iran prior and is a war mongering lunatic who will be McCain’s cell mate some day with Satan watching over them and then is surprised he is trying to launch another useless war other than to feed the Military Industrial Complex our tax dollars? RRRROOOFFFLLLLLL!!! Drain the swamp!!!!! My azzzzzzz!
 
ax1 said:
Ok, so Dump appoints Bolton who advocated regime change in Iran prior and is a war mongering lunatic who will be McCain’s cell mate some day with Satan watching over them and then is surprised he is trying to launch another useless war other than to feed the Military Industrial Complex our tax dollars? RRRROOOFFFLLLLLL!!! Drain the swamp!!!!! My azzzzzzz!
Click to expand...
I've got 50 cents says no war with iran, wanna bet?
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Depends how we're defining war ;) No US-backed military conflicts at all?
Click to expand...
advisors have got to be telling trump he will stand alone, and either overtly or covertly iran will have support from Russia and I am guessing the EU will stay neutral.

trump has put himself in a no win situation I am sad to say.
 
ax1 said:
I wouldn’t ever bet on a war but I’m supporting you win if you wager!
Click to expand...
this shyt with iran has been going on since my days in military....like a thorn in the mattress.
 
thebigt said:
advisors have got to be telling trump he will stand alone, and either overtly or covertly iran will have support from Russia and I am guessing the EU will stay neutral.

trump has put himself in a no win situation I am sad to say.
Click to expand...

I would hope so, but he also has Saudi Arabia and Israel telling him what to do.
 
Hopefully this doesn't backfire. The fact that NY hates him might be justification for the rest of the country to vote for him. Look what happened with Trump!
 
Aleksandar37 said:
Hopefully this doesn't backfire. The fact that NY hates him might be justification for the rest of the country to vote for him. Look what happened with Trump!
Click to expand...

That means this entire country is truly fuqqqeedd....Bush bought us Barry Soetoro, Barry bought us Dump and now Dump brings us Mayor DeFuqallusio

Now, for the most important news of the day....

RIP Grumpy the Cat!!!!!!!!

Invalid Link Removed
 
ax1 said:
That means this entire country is truly fuqqqeedd....Bush bought us Barry Soetoro, Barry bought us Dump and now Dump brings us Mayor DeFuqallusio

Now, for the most important news of the day....

RIP Grumpy the Cat!!!!!!!!

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
She would have made an excellent President.
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I would hope so, but he also has Saudi Arabia and Israel telling him what to do.
Click to expand...
been distracted, totally forgot about Saudi's and Israel.

I still don't think it will happen, like I said this shyt with iran has been going on since late 70's. when the hostage crisis was going on it was popular to say nuke em-they are still here.
 
The US has always been the aggressor towards Iran but war or any other provocation against Iran by the US would be foolish. There is no benefit for America or any American by engaging Iran.

I don’t see trump engaging them. Most likely posturing just like with NK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top