The Liberals on this board have disappeared...........

[hamster]

George Papadopolous is approaching national treasure status though.

Is he? I consider him a witness to a crime. That will be his legacy..........other than a board game answer.

 

[oneforthebus]

No dummy, it's DOJ policy not to indict a sitting president. It's Congress' job to take the findings of the Mueller report and begin impeachment proceedings.

I know the media and people like you would love to have us believe that the DOJ policy is the ONLY reason Trump wasn't indicted. Of course they ignore many other complicated legal questions that Mueller brought up but did not want to come to a conclusion on.

The reason it is so difficult to prove obstruction when there is no underlying crime is because you have to prove corrupt intent. That means you have to have proof...not just your opinion, but proof...that Trump's motivation in in wanting to fire Comey or Mueller was to hide something or protect himself from something. If there's even a doubt that he just believed Mueller was the wrong guy for the job, or that the investigation itself was bogus and baseless (and it turns out it was) or was negatively impacting his presidency and he wanted that to end, or that Comey's refusal to say publicly what he was willing to say privately was hurting his presidency...if any of THOSE were his motivations, that is NOT corrupt intent. The justice department reports to the White House, and a president has broad power in hiring and firing decisions. I highly doubt obstruction could ever be proved in a court of law for these reasons, even if you could indict a sitting president. Obstruction will be highly debated and certainly not proved in any impeachment hearing, the vote will go strictly "Trump Haters vs. Non-Trump Haters" and Dems will lose in the Senate. Trump will come out smelling even more like a rose. Pelosi knows this.


You say there were underlying crimes, indictments and convictions, and there were, but NONE of them involved Trump himself. Not a one. None of them had anything to do with conspiring with Russia to influence the election. Not a one.

 

[oneforthebus]

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton DESTROYED 30,000 emails WHILE she was being investigated by the FBI, but we are supposed to laugh that off and can't possibly consider that obstruction of justice

What a bizarro world we live in.

 

[Sarge]

Don’t forget, they also destroyed phones and computers, and members of Hillary’s inner circle were granted immunity before ever being questioned. Nah, no conspiracy there.

 

[JMM]

Must be nice to own the media, entertainment and educational system. Only thing left holding this place together are Americans who work for a living and experience how the Dem policies have adversely affected their lives, states, counties, cities, etc.

 

[Spike]

chip chip chipping away



Judge says Deutsche Bank, Capital One can give Trump financial records to House Democrats

A federal judge in New York City on Wednesday said Deutsche Bank and Capitol One can turn over financial documents related to President Donald Trump and his businesses in response to subpoenas from House Democrats.

Judge Edgardo Ramos’s ruling came after a hearing at which lawyers for Trump, his three older children, and the Trump Organization argued that the subpoenas to the two banks should be quashed.

His decision came two days after another federal judge, in Washington, D.C., said Trump’s accountants at the firm Mazars LLP had to comply with a congressional subpoena for his financial records.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/22/jud...pshare|com.apple.UIKit.activity.PostToTwitter

 

[Steelr4evr]

Must be nice to own the media, entertainment and educational system. Only thing left holding this place together are Americans who work for a living and experience how the Dem policies have adversely affected their lives, states, counties, cities, etc.

That's pretty much it. The commiecrats seem dedicated to completing dismantling the foundation and everything this country was built on. You know for a more advanced type of society they have complete rule over. I forget the name of it. It's cutting edge.

 

[Steel Ballin]

Ugh! You just had to kick the nest did ya?

 

[TDX27]

It truly is disgusting how the Demonrats are hell bent on destroying this country for politics. This **** has gone beyond too far. If a Demonrat gets into office in 2020, they will finish the job Odumma did in his attempt at destroying the US as a super power and the greatest country on earth.

 

[DBS1970]

Worst “Cover Up” ever. The AG published everything that’s being covered up in its entirety.

 

[deljzc]

The bullshit charges of financial improprieties works when you go after a murderer like Al Capone. The American people are like "well, that's okay because Capone was a really bad guy". But when our government railroads normal Americans (albeit rich, egotistical ones like Trump) for political gain using legal tricks, it doesn't go over very well.

We have talked on this board since before Trump was elected that many here that voted for him are fully aware and fully believe that Trump's private business dealings prior to (let's say) 2015 weren't always on the up-and-up. Many of us talked long about how, as a real estate tycoon in New York City, you deal with very shady characters - Union bosses, political bribes, payoffs to regulatory agencies, selling very expensive property to foreign wealth that was likely ill gotten gains (Russia, Saudi Arabia, China).

For ANY American to not expect some degree of illegality in that "world" of business is naive.

Tibs and I talked many times during the Mueller investigation (and at one point he actually agreed with me) that even IF "Russian collusion" was disproved, the Never-Trumpers would likely grasp at illegalities in Trump's business dealings that go back decades and which I think were (and are) outside the scope limit of the investigation in the first place.

That's why I was against the independent investigation in the first place. We all knew it didn't "end" with Russian collusion. It just opened up an unlimited investigation into a sitting President with very little and plausible initial evidence other than political avarice. And that type of precedent is very dangerous to our republic. The ability of Congress to initiate an open-ended investigation (always claiming "evidence" leads to further reason to investigate) is dangerous power to be placed in the legislative branch of government. It is fine (and probably Constitutional) for Congress to begin an investigation narrow in scope against a President if facts support it (which I'm not even sure the initial investigation of collusion rose to), but to turn that investigation into a cookie crumb leading cloud over the entire administration is wrong.

The truth is Tibs (and his ilk) didn't "accept" the Mueller report when it disproved Russian collusion. It is all the other stuff it uncovered that now is the "crime" and the use of the evidence gains to DISPROVE collusion for other crimes and misdemeanors.

I don't think this works in the court of public opinion. Sure, for those that already think Trump is as bad as Capone, any loopholes in the law used to put him away are perfectly acceptable. But for those people that believe that, you are IN THE MINORITY and the precedent you are setting for political gain is dangerous and you know it.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Steeltime]

So the (D)ims obsess over a billionaire who became a politician ... me? I distrust politicians who became millionaires by earning about $180,000 per year while living in some of the most expensive areas in the world.

Wife and I work hard and do pretty well for ourselves. Funny how I can't afford a gated mansion and a helicopter. Pelosi? Schumer? Yep, gated mansions and helicopters.

 

[IndySteel]

So the (D)ims obsess over a billionaire who became a politician ... me? I distrust politicians who became millionaires by earning about $180,000 per year while living in some of the most expensive areas in the world.

Wife and I work hard and do pretty well for ourselves. Funny how I can't afford a gated mansion and a helicopter. Pelosi? Schumer? Yep, gated mansions and helicopters.

The best way to bring honesty to Washington would be to enact term limits and make it illegal for them to accept payments from lobbyists. Their voting decisions should be in line with what they campaigned on to get elected, not based on who pays them the most money. That would instantly transform the swamp into the Maldives.

 

[83fan]

They lost. Bigly.

LOL - but you're correct, the country lost bigly in 2016. But good to see this forum is still the same lol.

 

[IndySteel]

LOL - but you're correct, the country lost bigly in 2016. But good to see this forum is still the same lol.

Care to explain how we are doing worse now than under Obama? In any aspect, except for libtard butthurt.

 

[83fan]

Care to explain how we are doing worse now than under Obama? In any aspect, except for libtard butthurt.

Nope Indy, not at all. You don't care about my views, and I ain't fighting. Oh but I will tell you this...for the first time since 2008 I owe the IRS $2,500. Not an awful amount, but until I see the man in charge pays his taxes, then the IRS won't see a cent of this. I got no worries until then. Or maybe I'll just call barr to work his magic for me, so many options. So sorry to disappoint, no libtard butthurt here, just don't care enough.

 

[Confluence]

Nope Indy, not at all. You don't care about my views, and I ain't fighting. Oh but I will tell you this...for the first time since 2008 I owe the IRS $2,500. Not an awful amount, but until I see the man in charge pays his taxes, then the IRS won't see a cent of this. I got no worries until then. Or maybe I'll just call barr to work his magic for me, so many options. So sorry to disappoint, no libtard butthurt here, just don't care enough.

Did you have same income, same withholding? Perhaps your HR folks just didnt withhold enough?

Sent from my SM-N950W using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[ZonaBurgh]

The best way to bring honesty to Washington would be to enact term limits and make it illegal for them to accept payments from lobbyists. Their voting decisions should be in line with what they campaigned on to get elected, not based on who pays them the most money. That would instantly transform the swamp into the Maldives.

Wouldn't that be a great question to pose to them first in any debate?

 

[ZonaBurgh]

Did you have same income, same withholding? Perhaps your HR folks just didnt withhold enough?

Sent from my SM-N950W using Steeler Nation mobile app

There's your answer in the majority of cases where people are bitching that they didn't get a refund this year. Better question would be, did you pay more in federal taxes in 2018 than in 2017 with the same income.

 

[ark steel]

The bullshit charges of financial improprieties works when you go after a murderer like Al Capone. The American people are like "well, that's okay because Capone was a really bad guy". But when our government railroads normal Americans (albeit rich, egotistical ones like Trump) for political gain using legal tricks, it doesn't go over very well.

We have talked on this board since before Trump was elected that many here that voted for him are fully aware and fully believe that Trump's private business dealings prior to (let's say) 2015 weren't always on the up-and-up. Many of us talked long about how, as a real estate tycoon in New York City, you deal with very shady characters - Union bosses, political bribes, payoffs to regulatory agencies, selling very expensive property to foreign wealth that was likely ill gotten gains (Russia, Saudi Arabia, China).

For ANY American to not expect some degree of illegality in that "world" of business is naive.

Tibs and I talked many times during the Mueller investigation (and at one point he actually agreed with me) that even IF "Russian collusion" was disproved, the Never-Trumpers would likely grasp at illegalities in Trump's business dealings that go back decades and which I think were (and are) outside the scope limit of the investigation in the first place.

That's why I was against the independent investigation in the first place. We all knew it didn't "end" with Russian collusion. It just opened up an unlimited investigation into a sitting President with very little and plausible initial evidence other than political avarice. And that type of precedent is very dangerous to our republic. The ability of Congress to initiate an open-ended investigation (always claiming "evidence" leads to further reason to investigate) is dangerous power to be placed in the legislative branch of government. It is fine (and probably Constitutional) for Congress to begin an investigation narrow in scope against a President if facts support it (which I'm not even sure the initial investigation of collusion rose to), but to turn that investigation into a cookie crumb leading cloud over the entire administration is wrong.

The truth is Tibs (and his ilk) didn't "accept" the Mueller report when it disproved Russian collusion. It is all the other stuff it uncovered that now is the "crime" and the use of the evidence gains to DISPROVE collusion for other crimes and misdemeanors.

I don't think this works in the court of public opinion. Sure, for those that already think Trump is as bad as Capone, any loopholes in the law used to put him away are perfectly acceptable. But for those people that believe that, you are IN THE MINORITY and the precedent you are setting for political gain is dangerous and you know it.

Be careful what you wish for.

With the arcane tax laws you could get just about anyone who isn't a straight up one w2 employee on some tax issue, if you, really tried.

For ***** sake we had a treasury secretary who fu ked up his taxes using turbo tax. It tells you everything y9u need to do.

They will **** bricks when the shoe is on the other foot.

 

[oneforthebus]

There's your answer in the majority of cases where people are bitching that they didn't get a refund this year. Better question would be, did you pay more in federal taxes in 2018 than in 2017 with the same income.

The MSM told them they;re supposed to be upset because their refund was smaller or they owed. Even if they paid less in taxes overall. Yes, they're mad that the government didn't hold on to their money for a year. This is how far the concept of personal freedom and responsibility has fallen.

The facts are that 65% of Americans paid less in taxes last year. Only 6% paid more. Most of those who paid more are higher income people who live in expensive homes in high state and local tax places. This issue is just a perfect example of how many stupid people in this country believe whatever the MSM wants them to believe.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/14/business/economy/income-tax-cut.html

 

[DBS1970]

Nope Indy, not at all. You don't care about my views, and I ain't fighting. Oh but I will tell you this...for the first time since 2008 I owe the IRS $2,500. Not an awful amount, but until I see the man in charge pays his taxes, then the IRS won't see a cent of this. I got no worries until then. Or maybe I'll just call barr to work his magic for me, so many options. So sorry to disappoint, no libtard butthurt here, just don't care enough.

I wouldn’t **** around with that if I were you. The IRS doesn’t **** around. I got a much bigger refund this year because of the bigger standard deduction. Perhaps you weren’t paying your fair share before?

 

[83fan]

I wouldn’t **** around with that if I were you. The IRS doesn’t **** around. I got a much bigger refund this year because of the bigger standard deduction. Perhaps you weren’t paying your fair share before?

Yeah I don't believe that at the present time. I owed in 2008, they were fine to work with. They put you on a payment plan, if needed, which I did then since my husband lost his job at that time. I'm not worried. I don't care either, it's only $2,500. My accountant told me what I have to do with HR so I'm fine. With my adjustments I should break even next year. And no, the MSM didn't tell me to be upset about this. In fact I'm not upset at all, not shocked either. Just.Don't.Care.

 

[Steeltime]

Nope Indy, not at all. You don't care about my views, and I ain't fighting. Oh but I will tell you this...for the first time since 2008 I owe the IRS $2,500.

Probably because you earned more. See, the way you guys want it, the more you earn - i.e., the harder you work - the more you pay. Trust me, not my idea. So maybe you should tell the (D)'s to fix the escalating tax system.

Not an awful amount, but until I see the man in charge pays his taxes, then the IRS won't see a cent of this.

So your theory is that unless somebody else shows his tax returns, you can ignore your own tax obligation?

 

[Booted]

...