Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 28

[bruto]

Damn. As much vociferous complaint as my suggestion set off, I suspect some of you suddenly reflected upon your own tax history.

The funny part is, I never excused him for any potential wrongdoing. I just made the point, that even statistically, there has to be a lot of hypocrisy amongst those pointing fingers at Trump.

The funniest part was Bob implying that Trump is somehow more accountable to pay his taxes than a "regular" person or business. This really drives my point home.

I don't think it's unreasonable for someone who had voluntarily chosen the job of being chief executive of the United States to be held to a somewhat higher standard of conduct than just anyone off the street. He was not exactly thrust unwillingly into it.

 

[Stacyhs]

I don't think it's unreasonable for someone who had voluntarily chosen the job of being chief executive of the United States to be held to a somewhat higher standard of conduct than just anyone off the street. He was not exactly thrust unwillingly into it.

But, but, but, but........oh, never mind.

 

[Warp12]

I don't think it's unreasonable for someone who had voluntarily chosen the job of being chief executive of the United States to be held to a somewhat higher standard of conduct than just anyone off the street. He was not exactly thrust unwillingly into it.

Making an argument for hypocrisy doesn't exactly refute my assertion of it.

 

[Susheel]

Making an argument for hypocrisy doesn't exactly refute my assertion of it.

1. It wasn't an argument for hypocrisy.
2. Your assertion that it is so, does not make it so.
3. What bruto said is perfectly valid and it does refute your "assertion"

 

[Foster Zygote]

It would be awesome to see the results of tax audits on the typical person bitching about Trump's taxes. A large portion of those people are no doubt cheating like hell on theirs.

I mean, seriously - there's still kernels of corn in it for Chris'sake!

 

[Warp12]

1. It wasn't an argument for hypocrisy.
2. Your assertion that it is so, does not make it so.
3. What bruto said is perfectly valid and it does refute your "assertion"

Susheel has arrived to back up bruto's attempted justification of hypocrisy.

This is awesome to witness.

 

[bruto]

Making an argument for hypocrisy doesn't exactly refute my assertion of it.

That was not an argument for hypocrisy, since I do not believe the hypocrisy you allege is as widespread or as serious as you do. It was an argument about scrutiny and standards. It was an argument for the general principle that those who choose positions of high esteem and moral leadership should actually do something to warrant it.

By which, if I need to slice it finer, I mean that I do not think people who cheat on their taxes should get away with it. Sure, they should be prosecuted. What I do believe is that people who seek positions of high esteem and moral leadership should be expected, by default, not to do these things at all, and their sin is greater if they do.

 

[dirtywick]

The idea that the President shouldn't be held to a higher standard than anyone else when it comes to tax collection, an area that he is directly responsible for enforcing, really highlights the level of corruption they're comfortable with

 

[Warp12]

What I do believe is that people who seek positions of high esteem and moral leadership should be expected, by default, not to do these things at all, and their sin is greater if they do.

What I believe is that if you are violating laws, it is hypocritical to point the finger at others who might be violating such laws.

Again your argument reads like apologism for hypocritical behavior. "It's not as bad if we do it". It's like I made a point, and you and others are doing the heavy lifting to prove it.

This was entirely predictable, given the audience. And comical.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

All President's taxes are audited automatically - so Warp is just trolling as usual with no leg to stand on.

But as President, he went further and blocked the IRS from obeying the law and let Congress see why that auditing process is clearly not working.

So not only did Trump HAVE to get audited, he also criminally abused his power to sabotage said audit.

But I'm sure Warp thinks that everyone here did exactly the same.

 

[Warp12]

All President's taxes are audited automatically - so Warp is just trolling as usual with no leg to stand on.

But as President, he went further and blocked the IRS from obeying the law and let Congress see why that auditing process is clearly not working.

So not only did Trump HAVE to get audited, he also criminally abused his power to sabotage said audit.

But I'm sure Warp thinks that everyone here did exactly the same.

The funniest part is, you think I am excusing Trump from any wrongdoing he may be guilty of. He should be held accountable for any tax laws he is proven to have broken.

I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of some. And that always strikes a chord with liberals.

 

[Aridas]

What I believe is that if you are violating laws, it is hypocritical to point the finger at others who might be violating such laws.

I have no argument with this point.

Again your argument reads like apologism for hypocritical behavior. "It's not as bad if we do it". It's like I made a point, and you and others are doing the heavy lifting to prove it.

This was entirely predictable, given the audience. And comical.

This, on the other hand, reads more like deliberate obtuseness with intent to troll.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The funniest part is, you think I am excusing Trump from any wrongdoing he may be guilty of. He should be held accountable for any tax laws he is proven to have broken.

I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of some. And that always strikes a chord with liberals.

And we keep on proving that said hypocrisy is only in your head.
Trump isn't only objectively, but also relatively much worse than any example of whataboutisn you keep on trying to give.

But keep on trolling - it's all you can do it seems.

 

[dirtywick]

I think everyone is just being confused about why you think the hypothetical hypocrisy of possible unnamed liberals is a great point. i mean, yeah, it's predictable people think it's a stupid thing to say and I guess I don't know why you think predicting that people will think it's stupid is some kind of mind game.

the whole thing is a bit baffling tbh

 

[Warp12]

And we keep on proving that said hypocrisy is only in your head.
Trump isn't only objectively, but also relatively much worse than any example of whataboutism you keep on trying to give.

But keep on trolling - it's all you can do it seems.

Somehow people think that word erases evidence of hypocrisy and/or the endorsement of it. It doesn't. Neither does the word "trolling", I'm afraid. But hey, if you want to believe that nobody pointing a finger at Trump might be guilty of cheating on their taxes, despite stats that suggest you are very wrong, go right ahead.

The easy response was:

"Sure, a lot of people who condemn Trump over his tax filings probably cheat on their own taxes. That makes them complete hypocrites. But, it doesn't excuse Trump from any tax laws he may have violated."

But, no. Instead we have hand-wringing over the idea that such hypocrisy even exists. And somehow, even if it does, it is acceptable.

I wonder why that is?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Doubling down on the trolling I see.

 

[bruto]

What I believe is that if you are violating laws, it is hypocritical to point the finger at others who might be violating such laws.

Again your argument reads like apologism for hypocritical behavior. "It's not as bad if we do it". It's like I made a point, and you and others are doing the heavy lifting to prove it.

This was entirely predictable, given the audience. And comical.

Well, since I'm not violating any laws I guess it's all right if I point a finger. Thanks for that anyway. I didn't say it's not as bad if we do it either. I think that if we do a crime we should be punished for it. But I think a president should not only not do the crime, he should be expected and trusted not to do it, especially in the areas where he is expected to be the enforcer of the law, and disqualified if he does. That is, I think, a higher standard, and one that he, by seeking the position, imposes on himself.

 

[Aridas]

Somehow people think that word erases evidence of hypocrisy and/or the endorsement of it. It doesn't. Neither does the word "trolling", I'm afraid. But hey, if you want to believe that nobody pointing a finger at Trump might be guilty of cheating on their taxes, despite stats that suggest you are very wrong, go right ahead.

First, the stats that have been cited don't actually say that. Second, while it is quite plausible that there are a number of people who match your description, your arguments have been quite poor on that front.

The easy response was:

"Sure, a lot of people who condemn Trump over his tax filings probably cheat on their own taxes. That makes them complete hypocrites. But, it doesn't excuse Trump from any tax laws he may have violated."

Easy? If you like unevidenced and highly biased, sure! You've presented no reason to believe that there is any statistically significant percentage of the population that matches your description and your "a lot" is vague. 10 people? 1000 people? 20 million people? Those who condemn Trump for his actions while doing the same things they condemn are certainly hypocrites. You've given no good reason to agree with you that there are a lot, though, in any meaningful way. That's actually a bit sad, for that matter, because it really shouldn't be hard if true.

Going back to the start of this tangent, of course, makes things no better.

It would be awesome to see the results of tax audits on the typical person bitching about Trump's taxes. A large portion of those people are no doubt cheating like hell on theirs.

What's "a large portion" in this usage? 0.3%? 100%? The former would actually be quite plausible. Anything that would normally qualify as "a large portion" is likely to be extremely implausible.

But, no. Instead we have hand-wringing over the idea that such hypocrisy even exists. And somehow, even if it does, it is acceptable.

I wonder why that is?

Well, when one thoroughly misrepresents what others say, it's not hard to wonder about such things.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I know it's pure hypocrisy on my part, but let's feed the troll less.

 

[Warp12]

<snip>.

Yeah, sure.

There are 144 million taxpayers in the US, and with 1 out of 30 not even filing, that is 4.8 million people alone. That doesn't include all the people who file and cheat on deductions and such.

Maybe only a few of those people are critical of Trump.

Or, maybe all of them are die-hard Trump supporters.

Or, maybe there are plenty of hypocrites out there.