Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Annoyed]

Since when is reporting on facts attacking?

Oh, this was a routine human interest story, eh?

Then why the following paragraph?

Today, more than a generation later and a year out from the 2020 election, Trump in the White House is staring at a fundamentally similar scenario—the growing probability that his fate will be decided by a group of regulators, albeit of a different, more high-profile ilk but nonetheless obligated to determine whether he can remain in office long enough for voters to decide whether he deserves a second term. Just as there are people who are empowered to stop him now—members of Congress, in particular Republicans—there were people who could have stopped him then. And didn’t.

It's as clear as day that this is just another piece of wishful thinking; something to maybe use or that should have happened to keep Trump out of the White House, or maybe even something they can dig up.

That's not biased, right?

[Annoyed]

Well. I think we now know how honest Warren is being regarding paying for her pipe dreams.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/u...lionaires.html

Won't even define who she considers middle class. So I'm guessing they are targets.
Let's not even discuss happens when the wealthy start leaving.

[SoulReaver]

Let's not even discuss happens when the wealthy start leaving.

let them leave (personal freedoms etc)
keep their assets in the US
there u go

[Annoyed]

let them leave (personal freedoms etc)
keep their assets in the US
there u go

We had this discussion. They will take their assets with them, and there isn't a damn thing the govt. can do to stop them.

[jelgate]

We had this discussion. They will take their assets with them, and there isn't a damn thing the govt. can do to stop them.

That's naive of you

*eats hypocrisy bacon*

[SoulReaver]

We had this discussion. They will take their assets with them, and there isn't a damn thing the govt. can do to stop them.

and it was never resolved
why can't it stop them?

[Gatefan1976]

Oh, this was a routine human interest story, eh?

Nope.

Then why the following paragraph?



It's as clear as day that this is just another piece of wishful thinking; something to maybe use or that should have happened to keep Trump out of the White House, or maybe even something they can dig up.

That's not biased, right?

Hang on.
You think this is biased and bad, but asking a foreign government to dig up similar information is ok?
Herein lies the true TDS.

[Annoyed]

and it was never resolved
why can't it stop them?

Because doing so is unconstitutional.
The takings clause of the Constitution, specifically, the 5th amendment.

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

So, if the govt. decides to take X million dollars from George Soros or Bernie Sanders (He IS a milionaire) for example, it must pay him X million as just compensation.

And if you want to look at the 14th amendment....

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I believe you were looking at "due process" in your earlier argument. This would mean that Soros or Sanders or whoever would have to have broken an existing law, for which the defined penalty is forfeiture of assets.

It is not illegal to earn money in this country, nor is it illegal to accumulate a fortune. Or pass one to your kids. Without such a law, the govt. has no standing to confiscate property.

And the govt. cannot today pass a law that makes doing so illegal retroactively; there is a prohibition on ex-post-facto legislation.

There is no legal mechanism or "due process" to do what you want to do in place. If Warren, Sanders or someone else from the Kindergartner's wing of the party wins, and proposes laws to make it possible, your targets and their assets will be gone before the legislation is drafted, let alone passes both houses of congress and is signed into law.

[Annoyed]

Nope.

Hang on.
You think this is biased and bad, but asking a foreign government to dig up similar information is ok?
Herein lies the true TDS.

The argument can be made that since relations with foreign powers is the purview of the executive branch, investigating corruption involving a foreign power is part and parcel of the President's job duties.

The real issue is why was Biden using his influence to get his kid a cushy job. But of course, we can't look into that, can we? Too much of a chance of derailing the only candidate that the Dems have that has a chance of winning.

[Gatefan1976]

The argument can be made that since relations with foreign powers is the purview of the executive branch, investigating corruption involving a foreign power is part and parcel of the President's job duties.

The real issue is why was Biden using his influence to get his kid a cushy job. But of course, we can't look into that, can we? Too much of a chance of derailing the only candidate that the Dems have that has a chance of winning.

Of course it can be looked into -by the DOJ- and it was.
They found nothing.
Oh, and you just admitted a constitutional violation.
SAD.

[SoulReaver]

Because doing so is unconstitutional.
The takings clause of the Constitution, specifically, the 5th amendment.

good so the problem is the law

So, if the govt. decides to take X million dollars from George Soros or Bernie Sanders (He IS a milionaire) for example, it must pay him X million as just compensation. [/quote]it'd be unfair for Bernie who's only a millionaire not elite & with regards to Soros they should first take it from KOCH & Zuckerberg instead (way richer, you know)

besides courtesy of GOp there's several ways to bypass that amendment (civil assets forfeiture, eminent domain...) so how about using those against the elites for a change

[SoulReaver]

The real issue is why was Biden using his influence to get his kid a cushy job. But of course, we can't look into that, can we? Too much of a chance of derailing the only candidate that the Dems have that has a chance of winning.

Biden had no influence (except whatever influence people thought he had). King Don as president has REAL influence & is using it against a political rival there's the REAL crime

[Annoyed]

good so the problem is the law

So, if the govt. decides to take X million dollars from George Soros or Bernie Sanders (He IS a milionaire) for example, it must pay him X million as just compensation.

it'd be unfair for Bernie who's only a millionaire not elite & with regards to Soros they should first take it from KOCH & Zuckerberg instead (way richer, you know)

besides courtesy of GOp there's several ways to bypass that amendment (civil assets forfeiture, eminent domain...) so how about using those against the elites for a change[/QUOTE]

I discussed eminent domain; it's covered by the 5th amendment. Civil asset forfeiture can only come into play in regards to a criminal venture.

I know you would like to confiscate the assets of the rich to pay for leftist pipe dreams. But they can't. If they try, the targets of that taxation will leave, and take their assets with them. That has been demonstrated in real life in several high tax states.
So you want to simply steal their assets before they leave. I've explained several times now why that is not possible in this country.

I can't help it if you won't accept reality.

[SoulReaver]

came across this one yet another shining example of GOP hypocrisy :

https://iotwreport.com/meanwhile-in-...noncompliance/

so basically the neocons are like "guns are great!" but "gun-owning Dems are hippies!!"


add to this the fact that neocons have also shown themselves to be against free speech for political opponents (cf. Sam Waterston)

so yeah 1st & 2nd amendment but only for themselves & no constitution for the opposition

[SoulReaver]

So you want to simply steal their assets before they leave. I've explained several times now why that is not possible in this country.

I can't help it if you won't accept reality.

ah yes when Govt takes from the commonfolk then it's law but if they take from the elites then it's theft

more GOP double standards