I have a serious question for the Trump haters on this board?

[Warren Zevon]

9 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I am glad we agree- liberals have street parties and other dense gatherings during a pandemic while conservatives do not.

 

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

That was a lot to read, but it was well written. Here’s what it has always come down to for me: I don’t care about my President’s style. I care about peace abroad and prosperity at home. While Trump is definitely crass (he’s from NYC) I believe his intentions and results for both of the above stated metrics are excellent! In his heart, I believe Trump sees himself as a champion of the people, and unfortunately in today’s Washington DC you have to bust some balls to break through the ever deepening swamp waters. 

I agree with the concepts of peace and prosperity.  And presidents on both sides of the aisle have been better or worse at those.  But my biggest concern right now is the future of our democracy and the concepts of a three part system of government as established by the framers.  I think an objective look at what's going on indicates that Trump wants to be a dictator more than president.  I feel that is dangerous to the survival of the republic.  

[Chef Jim]

7 hours ago, Warcodered said:

If we're just eliminating the more criminal possibilities I'd say the most likely candidate would be that he's nowhere near as rich as he pretends to be it's something so closely tied to his ego and how he sees himself that I could believe that he wouldn't let that out at all costs.

And there it is. Example number one that people have NO clue what goes on a tax return. 
 

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

I think Trump himself said in 2016 that he pays no income taxes. “Because I’m smart!” Was the explanation, if I recall correctly. 

Yes he did. My point with the Baby was he said he doesn’t pay any taxes as in none...never....ever.  Words have meaning. 

[BillStime]

7 hours ago, Warcodered said:

If we're just eliminating the more criminal possibilities I'd say the most likely candidate would be that he's nowhere near as rich as he pretends to be it's something so closely tied to his ego and how he sees himself that I could believe that he wouldn't let that out at all costs.

Exactly - how dare we question Trump? Why does he deserve the benefit of doubt?

 

And Trumpholes wonder why we don’t trust him or fall for his BS like his loyal sheep.

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

I agree with the concepts of peace and prosperity.  And presidents on both sides of the aisle have been better or worse at those.  But my biggest concern right now is the future of our democracy and the concepts of a three part system of government as established by the framers.  I think an objective look at what's going on indicates that Trump wants to be a dictator more than president.  I feel that is dangerous to the survival of the republic.  

I think you need to go back and read up a bit more. The intent of the government is that the congress pass broad laws and appropriate funds. The executive branch then spends those funds and administrates policies without stepping outside those broad parameters. The Congress has an oversight role for sure, but they are NOT the President’s boss. This is essentially the same structure as your local School Superintendent and your School Board. The problems we’re having are not caused by presidential overreach. It’s been caused by a congressional (House of Representatives) temper tantrum. The Democrats have refused to deal with the reality that the president is hired by the people, not by them, and that his contract will either be extended or terminated by those same people....not by them.

[Chef Jim]

48 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Good call. IRS Schedule XRayNiner-Bingo-7-Alpha-Oscar EGO FMV (*Fair Market Value) will be very enlightening indeed.  
 

Ha!  Good one!!  ?

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I think you need to go back and read up a bit more. The intent of the government is that the congress pass broad laws and appropriate funds. The executive branch then spends those funds and administrates policies without stepping outside those broad parameters. The Congress has an oversight role for sure, but they are NOT the President’s boss. This is essentially the same structure as your local School Superintendent and your School Board. The problems we’re having are not caused by presidential overreach. It’s been caused by a congressional (House of Representatives) temper tantrum. The Democrats have refused to deal with the reality that the president is hired by the people, not by them, and that his contract will either be extended or terminated by those same people....not by them.

I disagree.  I point to the inspectors general issue and whistleblower issues.  There is supposed to be oversight by Congress.  When it is ignored or violated that is a problem.  And the fact that you have some more true republicans in my view, such as Grassley and Romney, saying that gives it credence.

 

When Congress oversteps its boundaries it should be reined in.  But so should the Executive branch.  Trump to my mind does not want to be reined in whatsoever, and that is dangerous.  

[Chef Jim]

13 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Exactly - how dare we question Trump? Why does he deserve the benefit of doubt?

 

And Trumpholes wonder why we don’t trust him or fall for his BS like his loyal sheep.

 

 

Please explain which schedule/line item on his return will show how “rich” he is. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

35 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

So if I understand it now we’re upset because the President isn’t a billionaire? I thought we hated billionaires!
 

Or are now we upset because the President tries to pay as little taxes as the law allows? Isn’t that what the other 300 million of us are doing?

Excellent point. Turns out Donald Trump is actually a Bernie Bro, supporting changes to the tax code to put more money in the hands of the middle class.  

 

 

 

 

[BillStime]

5 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Please explain which schedule/line item on his return will show how “rich” he is. 

 

Go back and read my friend. I already said we don't have to see his taxes. We already know he is full of SCHITT.

[Taro T]

17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree with the concepts of peace and prosperity.  And presidents on both sides of the aisle have been better or worse at those.  But my biggest concern right now is the future of our democracy and the concepts of a three part system of government as established by the framers. I think an objective look at what's going on indicates that Trump wants to be a dictator more than president. I feel that is dangerous to the survival of the republic.  

 

Have heard / read this a lot from anti-Trumpers.  What has he actually DONE that indicates he wants to be a dictator.  What executive orders (other than a couple dealing with defense appropriation act for this current crisis) has he signed expanding executive powers?  Where are the executive orders limiting states rights?  Aren't most of the criticisms of his handling the current crisis complaining that he hasn't usurped state authority & only issued guidelines to states rather than directed the individual governor's actions?

 

Where are all the additional wars that dictators tend to get their subjects into happening?  Where are the escalations of Iraq & Afghanistan (& Lybia & Syria & Qatar for that matter too)?

 

Where was the firing of Mueller?  Where is the jailing of dissidents?  Don't dictators usually do these things?  Why hasn't this one?

[US Egg]

So many are obsessed with hating wether or not it's merited.

 

Trump is an easy target for those who have no one else to target for their miserable existence.

[BillStime]

BINGO:

 

Mark Cuban reveals what ‘really bothers’ him about Trump: ‘Always plays the victim card’

 

And so do his people...

[Reality Check]

6 minutes ago, BillStime said:

BINGO:

 

Mark Cuban reveals what ‘really bothers’ him about Trump: ‘Always plays the victim card’

 

And so do his people...

 

[oldmanfan]

11 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Have heard / read this a lot from anti-Trumpers.  What has he actually DONE that indicates he wants to be a dictator.  What executive orders (other than a couple dealing with defense appropriation act for this current crisis) has he signed expanding executive powers?  Where are the executive orders limiting states rights?  Aren't most of the criticisms of his handling the current crisis complaining that he hasn't usurped state authority & only issued guidelines to states rather than directed the individual governor's actions?

 

Where are all the additional wars that dictators tend to get their subjects into happening?  Where are the escalations of Iraq & Afghanistan (& Lybia & Syria & Qatar for that matter too)?

 

Where was the firing of Mueller?  Where is the jailing of dissidents?  Don't dictators usually do these things?  Why hasn't this one?

Inspectors general being fired.  Not allowing executive branch members to testify in front of congressional committees charged with oversightz

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Inspectors general being fired.  Not allowing executive branch members to testify in front of congressional committees charged with oversightz

Wrong. Once again you apparently don’t understand how our government is structured. The staff members you cite are employed by the President and he can fire them if he wishes to. Oversight is the function of Congress but they cannot fire an executive branch employee. They can ‘only’ hold hearings to shed light onto things. The problem we’re currently having is that the House wants to ONLY hold hearings and conduct oversight. They’re doing way too little of their primary function, which is to work across the aisle and craft legislation that is both acceptable and a product of systemic compromise. This didn’t start with Trump however. You’ll recall Obama having this same problem, causing his infamous ‘pen and phone’ commentary. 

[plenzmd1]

50 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

That’s it. It will likely show he makes a lot less than he says.  Those hoping they show he’s worth less than what he says he is have no idea what a tax return shows.  
 

The only issue would be if he has a very low effective tax rate. Nothing nefarious there. However people could point and say “see!!  Rich people pay little taxes. CHANGE IT!!!”

No doubt he has a very very low tax rate. As all my rich friends do, especially those that own businesses and properties. And I agree, needs to change. But that’s another thread. 
 

I will have to research but some not have the time today, tax returns I think might prove he fraudulently obtained  loans based on an inflation of income on loan documents. and that is a crime. 
 

also, I seem to remember an issue with a golf course and tax breaks and I just can’t quite remember. 
 

but there are at least two valid reasons to see his returns Defoe criminality sake. 
 

 

[Taro T]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Inspectors general being fired.  Not allowing executive branch members to testify in front of congressional committees charged with oversightz

 

So, doing things that every single president does makes him a dictator?  Interesting.

 

Pretty sure all presidents that have had IGs have changed out IGs during their tenure.  The last 1 fired at least 1 and left at least 1 vacancy open for over 4 years.  Didn't hear outcry over either.  Absolutely, the reasons for removing IGs should be investigated, but simply removing them doesn't mean there was anything nefarious.  Especially when a fair amount of holdovers from the previous regime want to "resist" at all costs, there can absolutely be reasons for them to be removed for cause.

 

Also, there have been members of the executive branch testify before both Congress and the SCO.  The president hasn't allowed every Congressional request be honored.  That falls under separation of powers.  It may be justified, it might not.  Congress has a remedy when they believe their request is justified - they can ask the court to decide whether the executive must honor their subpoena.  On several of these cases (particularly during the impeachment procedings) they didn't refer the matter to the 3rd branch.  Why might that be?

 

Really am having a hard time considering actions that the executive can legally take as being proof of his being a dictator.

[Tiberius]

40 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I disagree.  I point to the inspectors general issue and whistleblower issues.  There is supposed to be oversight by Congress.  When it is ignored or violated that is a problem.  And the fact that you have some more true republicans in my view, such as Grassley and Romney, saying that gives it credence.

 

When Congress oversteps its boundaries it should be reined in.  But so should the Executive branch.  Trump to my mind does not want to be reined in whatsoever, and that is dangerous.  

It's the basic way our government is suppose to operate and Trump just acts like the Founding Fathers were anti-Trumpers, which, I mean, they sort of were. They created a system to keep someone like him in check. 

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

So, doing things that every single president does makes him a dictator?  Interesting.

 

Pretty sure all presidents that have had IGs have changed out IGs during their tenure.  The last 1 fired at least 1 and left at least 1 vacancy open for over 4 years.  Didn't hear outcry over either.  Absolutely, the reasons for removing IGs should be investigated, but simply removing them doesn't mean there was anything nefarious.  Especially when a fair amount of holdovers from the previous regime want to "resist" at all costs, there can absolutely be reasons for them to be removed for cause.

 

Also, there have been members of the executive branch testify before both Congress and the SCO.  The president hasn't allowed every Congressional request be honored.  That falls under separation of powers.  It may be justified, it might not.  Congress has a remedy when they believe their request is justified - they can ask the court to decide whether the executive must honor their subpoena.  On several of these cases (particularly during the impeachment procedings) they didn't refer the matter to the 3rd branch.  Why might that be?

 

Really am having a hard time considering actions that the executive can legally take as being proof of his being a dictator.

Do you have an example of another president removing IGs because they were doing investigations of wrong doing? 

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

It's the basic way our government is suppose to operate and Trump just acts like the Founding Fathers were anti-Trumpers, which, I mean, they sort of were. They created a system to keep someone like him in check. 

Do you have an example of another president removing IGs because they were doing investigations of wrong doing? 

 

You don't have a 1st example.