• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trump Presidency 14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trump Tweets

@SteveHiltonx “This is President Trump trying to deliver on his promises while the bureaucratic machine fights his agenda. He needs populist allies. These changes are not chaos, but rather progress. All this is President Trump at his absolute best.”

Thank you Steve!
 
Trump Tweets

Chinese Telecom Giant Huawei hires former Obama Cyber Security Official as a lobbyist. This is not good, or acceptable! @FoxNews @SteveHiltonx
 
Safe-Keeper said:
Didn't Washington state just make it impossible to run for POTUS/win that state for candidates who had not released their tax returns?
Click to expand...

Umm.. isn't that unconstitutional ? In effect, Washington State is interfering with the right of a voter to vote for their preferred candidate ? Or rather.. they are putting restrictions on the right of an American Citizen to stand for election ?

Can they DO that ?
 
Roofgardener said:
Umm.. isn't that unconstitutional ? In effect, Washington State is interfering with the right of a voter to vote for their preferred candidate ? Or rather.. they are putting restrictions on the right of an American Citizen to stand for election ?

Can they DO that ?
Click to expand...

I think they can, as individual States have their own rules. Voters can still vote for their preferred candidate. In fact, making the election based on popular vote gives more power to the voters and less to real-estate.
 
Last edited:
Roofgardener said:
Umm.. isn't that unconstitutional ? In effect, Washington State is interfering with the right of a voter to vote for their preferred candidate ? Or rather.. they are putting restrictions on the right of an American Citizen to stand for election ?

Can they DO that ?
Click to expand...

They probably can, IMO. You can still vote for whomever you like, they just won't have your name on the ballot if you don't release your taxes. You can still write in a vote for anyone that is not listed on the ballot.
 
Soooo... let me see if I understand this properly ?

The Chairman of the Ways and Means committee - a Democrat and hence political opponent of President Trump - wants to see the Presidents tax returns.

Why ?
This has never happened before. Doesn't this look a bit like political harassment ? We already know that there is nothing illegal in the Presidents tax returns, or the IRS would have intervened. So what is the PURPOSE for the WaM Committee to inspect his tax returns ?
 
thaiboxerken said:
I think they can, as individual States have their own rules. Voters can still vote for their preferred candidate. In fact, making the election based on popular vote gives more power to the voters and less to real-estate.
Click to expand...

Well.. yes.. but surely voting for a federal role (President, in this case) is subject to Federal law, not State law ?
 
Roofgardener said:
Well.. yes.. but surely voting for a federal role (President, in this case) is subject to Federal law, not State law ?
Click to expand...

I can't help but think that the Washington senate KNOW this, and know that their "law" will be struck down if challenged. They are just indulging in "virtue signalling".
 
Roofgardener said:
Soooo... let me see if I understand this properly ?

The Chairman of the Ways and Means committee - a Democrat and hence political opponent of President Trump - wants to see the Presidents tax returns.

Why ?
This has never happened before. Doesn't this look a bit like political harassment ? We already know that there is nothing illegal in the Presidents tax returns, or the IRS would have intervened. So what is the PURPOSE for the WaM Committee to inspect his tax returns ?
Click to expand...

No president has refused to release their tax returns. That is why this has never happened before. As far as "political harassment" goes, the Republicans have done far worse and only very flimsy grounds. With Trump, at least there is a basis for suspicion.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...s-President-Trump-Congress-also-investigated/
 
Trump Tweets

What do I know about branding, maybe nothing (but I did become President!), but if I were Boeing, I would FIX the Boeing 737 MAX, add some additional great features, & REBRAND the plane with a new name.
No product has suffered like this one. But again, what the hell do I know?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

What do I know about branding, maybe nothing (but I did become President!), but if I were Boeing, I would FIX the Boeing 737 MAX, add some additional great features, & REBRAND the plane with a new name.
No product has suffered like this one. But again, what the hell do I know?
Click to expand...

That is...kinda okay advice?
 
Roofgardener said:
Well.. yes.. but surely voting for a federal role (President, in this case) is subject to Federal law, not State law ?
Click to expand...


But that's exactly wrong. In fact, the complete lack of Federal standards for conducting elections is a big part of why US elections have been such **** shows these last 20 years or so (ever since the Hanging Chads debacle).
 
Horatius said:
But that's exactly wrong. In fact, the complete lack of Federal standards for conducting elections is a big part of why US elections have been such **** shows these last 20 years or so (ever since the Hanging Chads debacle).
Click to expand...

Why do you think the federal standards would be better than a bad state's? Why don't you think it wont make the other 49 worse?
 
For a very long time now it has been recognized how important it is to know about the tax history of politicians - which is why they usually publish their tax returns.
The only unusual thing that happened is that Trump lied about releasing his.
This alone is reason to be suspicious.
And what Trump's head of the Treasury said raises questions about how thorough the audit of his taxes is, given the obvious pressure the staff is being subjected to.
An investigation is something the Republicans should have done.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
For a very long time now it has been recognized how important it is to know about the tax history of politicians - which is why they usually publish their tax returns.
The only unusual thing that happened is that Trump lied about releasing his.
This alone is reason to be suspicious.
And what Trump's head of the Treasury said raises questions about how thorough the audit of his taxes is, given the obvious pressure the staff is being subjected to.
An investigation is something the Republicans should have done.
Click to expand...

A) what is the evidence that it has been seen as important to know the tax history is important? Just because they released them, doesnt mean it is important.

B) what is the obvious pressure the staff is under?

C) If it is about an audit, it sure doesn't look like it. Who is the committee going to use to conduct an audit? Since the committee to lacks the expertise to audit, what safeguards are they putting in place to ensure neither them or their staff view the returns?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom