Joe Biden Innocent or Not Guilty

BirdWatcher wrote:95% of Americans use software or CPA's to do their taxes.  99.5% of Americans couldn't understand a return longer than 2 pages.  We sure as hell don't trust Don Lemon to interpret a tax return for us...

What a crock of crap.

According to Trump, the reason why he isn't providing his tax returns is because they are under audit (although being under audit does not prohibit him from providing them), not because they are so complicated that we can't be trusted with interpreting them.

I don't trust Don Lemon to interpret them either.  Do you really think he would attempt to interpret them without seeking out an expert to do it for him?  No, he would do the same that Sean and Tucker and Laura and all those other Fox talking heads that Trump is on a first name basis with would do.  They all would bring on experts to do the interpreting.  

Trump has been dodging this question for more than FOUR YEARS, using the same tired and invalid excuse.  Not only that but, during that time, he has sought court protection to keep his taxes under wraps.  The more he dodges, and the greater the lengths he goes to to keep the American people from learning about his taxes, the more I and others are led to believe that he is hiding something that he knows would blow up in his face were it to be subject to scrutiny.

The more think about, the whole thing about the 25th Amendment has nothing to do with Trump, it's more able getting Biden out of office if he gets elected.

BirdWatcher wrote:

Teetime wrote:Trump not real transparent with his tax returns, I wonder why?

Because we've already seen the 24-news cycle when it was reported Trump paid $1500 over two years, when he actually wrote checks for $5.2 million... and let it ride against future taxes owed....

That is just a load of crap. The tax you pay is the tax that is shown on your tax return. The fact that Trump "prepaid" taxes that he didn't owe and had a right of refund means that he didn't pay those taxes.

If trump were to release his returns there would be lots of experts that would be able to decipher them for us. One of those would not be Don Lemon and one would not be whoever came up with that idea that Trump prepaying his taxes that he could have refunded (if he wanted) is just like you and I "paying our taxes".

tps wrote:

OSUBucks wrote:I won't be surprised if Biden expands the SCOTUS to 11. If he does I'll place the blame where it belongs, on Mitch McConnell. When Scalia died approximately 10 months before Obama left office he should have let Obama appoint a justice. If he had done so there wouldn't be the big stink about Trump appointing a replacement for RBG before leaving office.

It's arguable that the court would look very different today if harry reid would not have eliminated the 60 vote requirement.

There was a centuries-old tradition that either Senator from the state a justice candidate was from could veto the nomination. Moscow Mitch McConnell threw that out, along with any semblance of a real hearing process—also centuries old—along with the supermajority requirement if some senators objected—also centuries old. Along with refusing to even put a presidential nomination on the floor 10 months before an election, along with refusing to hold off on putting a nomination on a floor a few weeks before an election when just a few years ago the very same senators had said no SCOTUS nominations would be entertained in an election year.

And then Republicans clutch their pearls if Democrats talk about increasing the number of justices. I’m sure they would like Democrats to continue to bring padded gloves and the Marquis of Queensbury Rules to what the GOP has turned into a knife fight.

Other Democrats see the only principles the Republicans hew to is “Heads I win, tails you lose.” Well, along with the belief that God approves of lying to the infidel—i.e. Democrats. As shown by how Mitch McConnell smirks when asked about what he said when Obama nominated Judge Garland.

Teetime wrote:

tps wrote:

OSUBucks wrote:I won't be surprised if Biden expands the SCOTUS to 11. If he does I'll place the blame where it belongs, on Mitch McConnell. When Scalia died approximately 10 months before Obama left office he should have let Obama appoint a justice. If he had done so there wouldn't be the big stink about Trump appointing a replacement for RBG before leaving office.

It's arguable that the court would look very different today if harry reid would not have eliminated the 60 vote requirement.

There was a centuries-old tradition that either Senator from the state a justice candidate was from could veto the nomination. Moscow Mitch McConnell threw that out, along with any semblance of a real hearing process—also centuries old—along with the supermajority requirement if some senators objected—also centuries old. Along with refusing to even put a presidential nomination on the floor 10 months before an election, along with refusing to hold off on putting a nomination on a floor a few weeks before an election when just a few years ago the very same senators had said no SCOTUS nominations would be entertained in an election year.

And then Republicans clutch their pearls if Democrats talk about increasing the number of justices. I’m sure they would like Democrats to continue to bring padded gloves and the Marquis of Queensbury Rules to what the GOP has turned into a knife fight.

Other Democrats see the only principles the Republicans hew to is “Heads I win, tails you lose.” Well, along with the belief that God approves of lying to the infidel—i.e. Democrats. As shown by how Mitch McConnell smirks when asked about what he said when Obama nominated Judge Garland.

it sounds like you are describing 'honor' - it does not exist in politics. That includes both sides.

Teetime wrote:The fact that Trump "prepaid" taxes that he didn't owe and had a right of refund

The fact that the guy can prepay $5.2 million in taxes and let it sit -- earning no interest -- at the IRS disputes what Don Lemon tells me: that Trump is on the verge of foreclosure on his "risky" loans.

I'm more interested in how Senator(s) making $174,000 a year can be a multimillionaire than I am in a billionaire who loses half his Net Worth to be president.

Teetime wrote:There was a centuries-old tradition that either Senator from the state a justice candidate was from could veto the nomination.

A "centuries old" tradition.... that changed 8 times from 1917 til 2018....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_slip#:~:text=a%20revenue%20bill.-,Senate,to%20return%20a%20blue%20slip.

>> any semblance of a real hearing process

How many CSpans Hearing have you watched this year?  There have been 150+ in the Senate

>>along with the supermajority requirement

Thank Harry Reid.  Cocaine Mitch said he'd regret it.  And he does.

Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?.

Someone who grew fond of the media spotlight and fawning that accompanied her newfound persona of the Notorious RBG.

BirdWatcher wrote:

Teetime wrote:The fact that Trump "prepaid" taxes that he didn't owe and had a right of refund

The fact that the guy can prepay $5.2 million in taxes and let it sit -- earning no interest -- at the IRS disputes what Don Lemon tells me:  that Trump is on the verge of foreclosure on his "risky" loans.

I'm more interested in how Senator(s) making $174,000 a year can be a multimillionaire than I am in a billionaire who loses half his Net Worth to be president.

When you have $400,000,000 in debt coming due $5.2 million is the proverbial drop in the ocean.

What leaving $5.2 million as an interest free loan to the government tells me is that a Trump is a terrible businessman.

The republicans killed the filibuster on Supreme Court justices in order to confirm Gorsich.

Reid had ended the filibuster on non SC justices in 2013 when republicans wouldn’t confirm a single Obama nominee despite the fact that they had a minority in the senate. The republicans wouldn’t let the voters have a say.

There is nothing illegal or immoral with adding six more SC seats in 2021 and after getting screwed by the republicans in 2016 and 2020, they should just go ahead and add six thirty year old liberals.

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

Blame Ginsburg for what, dying? There is no term limit on Supreme Court Justices. Close to half have died while in office. Scalia was 79 when he died in 2016. Rehnquist was 80 when he died 15 years ago. Oliver Wendell Holmes was 90 when he died.

Unlike you, some folks need to keep working well into their 80s and some want to keep working. You should thank your lucky stars that you are in a position to enjoy your retirement on your terms. You should not expect that your reality is applicable to everyone.

ramblinman wrote:

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

Blame Ginsburg for what, dying?   There is no term limit on Supreme Court Justices.  Close to half have died while in office.  Scalia was 79 when he died in 2016.  Rehnquist was 80 when he died 15 years ago.  Oliver Wendell Holmes was 90 when he died.

Unlike you, some folks need to keep working well into their 80s and some want to keep working.  You should thank your lucky stars that you are in a position to enjoy your retirement on your terms.  You should not expect that your reality is applicable to everyone.

Scalia could have waited to die when Donald Trump was president, or he could have quit when he was 77 and Moscow Mitch could have held the seat open for three years instead of ten months. That would have gone over bigly with the remaining republican senators.

ramblinman wrote:

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

Blame Ginsburg for what, dying?   There is no term limit on Supreme Court Justices.  Close to half have died while in office.  Scalia was 79 when he died in 2016.  Rehnquist was 80 when he died 15 years ago.  Oliver Wendell Holmes was 90 when he died.

Unlike you, some folks need to keep working well into their 80s and some want to keep working.  You should thank your lucky stars that you are in a position to enjoy your retirement on your terms.  You should not expect that your reality is applicable to everyone.

Ya, she was barely scraping by-
https://publicintegrity.org/politics/supreme-court-a-millionaires-club

Head Idiot wrote:

ramblinman wrote:

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

Blame Ginsburg for what, dying?   There is no term limit on Supreme Court Justices.  Close to half have died while in office.  Scalia was 79 when he died in 2016.  Rehnquist was 80 when he died 15 years ago.  Oliver Wendell Holmes was 90 when he died.

Unlike you, some folks need to keep working well into their 80s and some want to keep working.  You should thank your lucky stars that you are in a position to enjoy your retirement on your terms.  You should not expect that your reality is applicable to everyone.

Ya, she was barely scraping by-
https://publicintegrity.org/politics/supreme-court-a-millionaires-club

Show me where I claimed that she was poor. Don't bother. You can't.

ramblinman wrote:

Head Idiot wrote:

ramblinman wrote:

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

Blame Ginsburg for what, dying?   There is no term limit on Supreme Court Justices.  Close to half have died while in office.  Scalia was 79 when he died in 2016.  Rehnquist was 80 when he died 15 years ago.  Oliver Wendell Holmes was 90 when he died.

Unlike you, some folks need to keep working well into their 80s and some want to keep working.  You should thank your lucky stars that you are in a position to enjoy your retirement on your terms.  You should not expect that your reality is applicable to everyone.

Ya, she was barely scraping by-
https://publicintegrity.org/politics/supreme-court-a-millionaires-club

Show me where I claimed that she was poor.  Don't bother.  You can't.

So, your diatribe about people "needing to work" was just for shits in giggles while responding to a comment about RBG? Or just to shame Bird for his success? Okay.

PS- there was no "lucky stars" in BW being able to enjoy his retirement. It's called hard work and planning.

Head Idiot wrote:

ramblinman wrote:

Head Idiot wrote:

ramblinman wrote:

BirdWatcher wrote:
Upset about Ginsburg's seat?  Blame Ginsburg.  She could have retired in 2010 at age 77.... really, who needs to keep working after age 77?  Even Trump's gonna retire in 2024 at age 78....

Blame Ginsburg for what, dying?   There is no term limit on Supreme Court Justices.  Close to half have died while in office.  Scalia was 79 when he died in 2016.  Rehnquist was 80 when he died 15 years ago.  Oliver Wendell Holmes was 90 when he died.

Unlike you, some folks need to keep working well into their 80s and some want to keep working.  You should thank your lucky stars that you are in a position to enjoy your retirement on your terms.  You should not expect that your reality is applicable to everyone.

Ya, she was barely scraping by-
https://publicintegrity.org/politics/supreme-court-a-millionaires-club

Show me where I claimed that she was poor.  Don't bother.  You can't.

So, your diatribe about people "needing to work" was just for shits in giggles while responding to a comment about RBG? Or just to shame Bird for his success? Okay.

PS- there was no "lucky stars" in BW being able to enjoy his retirement. It's called hard work and planning.

You conveniently ignored the entirety of my comment.  I said some people need to work and some want to work.   I didn't say that RBG needed to work, but that is what you chose to believe I said.  Try focusing on the other, and see if you get your knickers in a similar twist over that one as well.

As for BW's hard work and planning, good for him. I never claimed that he didn't work hard or plan well.  I would never shame someone for their success.

HOWEVER, he could have had some catastrophic illness or long term disability affect him or a family member, and all that hard work and planning wouldn't have allowed him to do what he is doing now.  He could have been fired by a boss who he rubbed the wrong way, and his career could have taken a completely different turn.  But, you're right.  No need to be thankful.  Good fortune (or the avoidance of misfortune) has nothing to do with it.  

Ah, the old liberal "everything depends on luck and good fortune". Nothing could ever be achieved by one's self or through perseverance.

So, who screwed you over in life?

There was literally no reason for you to bring up BW's life in that. None.

Head Idiot wrote:Ah, the old liberal "everything depends on luck and good fortune". Nothing could ever be achieved by one's self or through perseverance.

So, who screwed you over in life?

There was literally no reason for you to bring up BW's life in that. None.

Show me where I said that everything depends on good fortune or that nothing could be achieved through hard work and planning.  Don't bother.  You can't.

You have a real problem with reading comprehension and with putting words in other people's mouths.

Nobody screwed me over in life, and I thank my lucky stars for it.  Or is the fact that nobody has screwed me over due to my hard work and planning?

I had every reason to bring up BW's being retired.  He was the one who said, "really, who needs to keep working after age 77"  I knew that he is retired, and I felt that he was imposing his situation onto others.  I explained that some people can't afford to retire and that others don't want to retire. Nothing more, nothing less.

Sure thing peaches.

Today in Ohio Biden said that he was running for the US Senate. This is the 2nd time that I know of that he's said that. If he wins Kamala Harris will have her hands full.

OSUBucks wrote:Today in Ohio Biden said that he was running for the US Senate. This is the 2nd time that I know of that he's said that. If he wins Kamala Harris will have her hands full.

Well, in a "Harris administration... with Joe Biden as president" I doubt she cares.

Oh ya, that debacle was also where she was promising money for minority business owners. Not all small business owners, just minority ones-
https://nypost.com/2020/09/15/kamala-harris-accidentally-touts-plan-under-harris-administration/

Head Idiot wrote:Oh ya, that debacle was also where she was promising money for minority business owners. Not all small business owners, just minority ones-
https://nypost.com/2020/09/15/kamala-harris-accidentally-touts-plan-under-harris-administration/

I think there is a legitimate chance that she will be President and that she could be in less than 4 years.