Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

modestobulldog

Game Thread: Impeachment Trial

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Prosecutors recommend prosecution or they don’t. At the end of the investigation, he didn’t. Same difference.

He said he couldn't recommend charges if he wanted to because the DOJ says the president is immune from prosecution and the only remedy is impeachment.  Now we know,  however,  that this is not a remedy either.  Stop the Trumpian lying or willful ignorance. 

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bob said:

Didn't read. But no other facts are relevant. 

They got their aid on 9/11/2019 which was before 9/30/2019. No aid was withheld. 

Color me shocked... your hero doesn't read, so you don't bother reading either. 

If you had bothered to enlighten yourself, you'd know that there was still $35M of security assistance aid that wasn't disbursed as of 9/30/19, and as of December, $20M still hadn't been disbursed... and hasn't been to this day. 

Goddamn, why do you Trumpists insist on remaining willfully ignorant? I just don't get it. If your hero says it's true, then you take him at face value, no questions asked. You're the anti-intellectuals of our time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Akkula said:

He said he couldn't recommend charges if he wanted to because the DOJ says the president is immune from prosecution and the only remedy is impeachment.  Now we know,  however,  that this is not a remedy either.  Stop the Trumpian lying or willful ignorance. 

Which was wrong, and immediately contradictory of what he said regarding the Russian interference where he did recommend no charges. The DOJ rules say the AG can’t prosecute the President, it doesn’t say anything about not being able to recommend prosecution or not. Stop being willfully ignorant, as I know you aren’t lying because you’d have to understand this stuff in the first place in order to do so.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Which was wrong, and immediately contradictory of what he said regarding the Russian interference where he did recommend no charges. The DOJ rules say the AG can’t prosecute the President, it doesn’t say anything about not being able to recommend prosecution or not. Stop being willfully ignorant, as I know you aren’t lying because you’d have to understand this stuff in the first place in order to do so.

Why would he even recommend prosecution if prosecution is not possible in the eyes of the DOJ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Why would he even recommend prosecution if prosecution is not possible in the eyes of the DOJ? 

Because it’s his job and he believed they had solid evidence the President committed a crime. Why wouldn’t he recommend prosecution if he felt that way? The DOJ policy is the AG’s problem at the point, not Mueller’s.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Akkula said:

Only someone with a daddy like Trump's can eff up so bad they never pay taxes again.   The poor and middle class never get the opportunity to screw up so well they never pay taxes again. 

The poor don’t pay any taxes. In fact they often get more back in taxes then they pay in total taxes including social security, Medicare and sales taxes etc.  

As for never paying taxes again, that’s a willfully ignorant statement and shows you don’t understand how the tax code works.  It’s not hard to eliminate all of your income via depreciation, which is legit and not a “loophole” as it represents a cash outflow and you deduct it over the life of that asset.  If you never sell it then you probably won’t pay taxes on it.  If I buy a second home and rent it out I could easily rent it out nearly tax free for the entirety of the depreciable life of the property, which would be 27.5 years.  With depreciation and mortgage interest you can virtually eliminate all income from the property and have positive cash flow. Then you can refinance that property every few years pulling out the equity, tax free, while keeping your interest expense the same.  That tax planning tip is offered free of charge to all board members.  You’re welcome. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Because it’s his job and he believed they had solid evidence the President committed a crime. Why wouldn’t he recommend prosecution if he felt that way? The DOJ policy is the AG’s problem at the point, not Mueller’s.

He said he was operating under the "can't prosecute a sitting president opinion." 

You can't operate under that opinion and then recommend prosecution. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, toonkee said:

He said he was operating under the "can't prosecute a sitting president opinion." 

You can't operate under that opinion and then recommend prosecution. 

And a noble policy it is. Indeed, we do not want the government publishing evidence that would prejudice the public against suspects they don’t intend to charge. Also, here’s 400 pages written for public consumption, the first half of which we ignore the policy because there isn’t any evidence of a criminal conspiracy with Russia so we can “exonerate” the suspects.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, mugtang said:

The poor don’t pay any taxes. In fact they often get more back in taxes then they pay in total taxes including social security, Medicare and sales taxes etc.  

As for never paying taxes again, that’s a willfully ignorant statement and shows you don’t understand how the tax code works.  It’s not hard to eliminate all of your income via depreciation, which is legit and not a “loophole” as it represents a cash outflow and you deduct it over the life of that asset.  If you never sell it then you probably won’t pay taxes on it.  If I buy a second home and rent it out I could easily rent it out nearly tax free for the entirety of the depreciable life of the property, which would be 27.5 years.  With depreciation and mortgage interest you can virtually eliminate all income from the property and have positive cash flow. Then you can refinance that property every few years pulling out the equity, tax free, while keeping your interest expense the same.  That tax planning tip is offered free of charge to all board members.  You’re welcome. 

ALL HAIL MUGTANG!

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

And a noble policy it is. Indeed, we do not want the government publishing evidence that would prejudice the public against suspects they don’t intend to charge. Also, here’s 400 pages written for public consumption, the first half of which we ignore the policy because there isn’t any evidence of a criminal conspiracy with Russia so we can “exonerate” the suspects.

So your rationale is that since he wasn't logically inconsistent in some places he should have been logically inconsistent in all places? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, toonkee said:

So your rationale is that since he wasn't logically inconsistent in some places he should have been logically inconsistent in all places? 

No, my rationale is that his position is untenable and Mueller’s office knew it. It wasn’t an accident that Mueller’s Office was inconsistent in how it approached the conspiracy vs obstruction cases. They didn’t have the goods and knew once the DOJ lawyers started to scrutinize their legal theory of obstruction it would get shredded. Instead they opted to punt in order to get their work out to public and the congress. If the politicians and the voters wanted to make an impeachment case off of it, that’s up to them. But they couldn’t do that if they recommended prosecution because the lawyers would have shredded them for such a weak case and the public might never see the report as it was written. This was political wrangling, not legal inconsistency. When it was Rosenstein in charge they could bully him into doing whatever they wanted. When Barr came on the scene they got outplayed, culminating in Mueller’s sad testimony.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

Butt hurt much? You’re going to be one unhappy dude for five more years. 

BOTB said he will "gloat some more" about the result. Really? Gloat: "to observe or think about something with triumphant and often malicious satisfaction, gratification, or delight."

Like the Senate trial was some sort of Republican triumph? Since the result was a foregone conclusion, from the outset it was about nothing more than the Dems presenting evidence to refute Mr. Grumpy's weekly claims that the July 25 call had been "perfect." As even Lamar Alexander acknowledged and other Republican senators would have said if they similarly weren't up for reelection, the evidence showed the call was anything but perfect.

But I'll tell ya what. I'll admit that if Trump get reelected, THAT will justify gloating and if Bernie gets the nomination, Mr. Grumpy could win in a landslide. On the other hand, if Trump loses, I'll be shocked if even one of you true believers admits you were wrong about impeachment being political suicide for the Democrats.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mugtang said:

The poor don’t pay any taxes. In fact they often get more back in taxes then they pay in total taxes including social security, Medicare and sales taxes etc.  

As for never paying taxes again, that’s a willfully ignorant statement and shows you don’t understand how the tax code works.  It’s not hard to eliminate all of your income via depreciation, which is legit and not a “loophole” as it represents a cash outflow and you deduct it over the life of that asset.  If you never sell it then you probably won’t pay taxes on it.  If I buy a second home and rent it out I could easily rent it out nearly tax free for the entirety of the depreciable life of the property, which would be 27.5 years.  With depreciation and mortgage interest you can virtually eliminate all income from the property and have positive cash flow. Then you can refinance that property every few years pulling out the equity, tax free, while keeping your interest expense the same.  That tax planning tip is offered free of charge to all board members.  You’re welcome. 

If your AGI is below 100k you can even deduct the rental loss up to 25k against ordinary income. Generally rental income is passive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

No, my rationale is that his position is untenable and Mueller’s office knew it. It wasn’t an accident that Mueller’s Office was inconsistent in how it approached the conspiracy vs obstruction cases. They didn’t have the goods and knew once the DOJ lawyers started to scrutinize their legal theory of obstruction it would get shredded. Instead they opted to punt in order to get their work out to public and the congress. If the politicians and the voters wanted to make an impeachment case off of it, that’s up to them. But they couldn’t do that if they recommended prosecution because the lawyers would have shredded them for such a weak case and the public might never see the report as it was written. This was political wrangling, not legal inconsistency. When it was Rosenstein in charge they could bully him into doing whatever they wanted. When Barr came on the scene they got outplayed, culminating in Mueller’s sad testimony.

Okay. Still makes no sense to recommend charges on somebody you can't charge, so I'm not going to assign any relevance to the lack of charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mugtang said:

The poor don’t pay any taxes. In fact they often get more back in taxes then they pay in total taxes including social security, Medicare and sales taxes etc.  

As for never paying taxes again, that’s a willfully ignorant statement and shows you don’t understand how the tax code works.  It’s not hard to eliminate all of your income via depreciation, which is legit and not a “loophole” as it represents a cash outflow and you deduct it over the life of that asset.  If you never sell it then you probably won’t pay taxes on it.  If I buy a second home and rent it out I could easily rent it out nearly tax free for the entirety of the depreciable life of the property, which would be 27.5 years.  With depreciation and mortgage interest you can virtually eliminate all income from the property and have positive cash flow. Then you can refinance that property every few years pulling out the equity, tax free, while keeping your interest expense the same.  That tax planning tip is offered free of charge to all board members.  You’re welcome. 

If he just had depreciation expense he wouldnt be hiding his tax returns.  He has large net operating loss carryovers and capital loss carryovers or has committed fraud.  That is why he is hiding things.  Furthermore, having large depreciation expenses and the inability to generate positive cash flow doesnt indicate any more business genius then any of you least sophisticated clients with a rental.  

Even under the best scenario, the ability for a rich guy to take a huge pot of money and buy a ton of fixed assets to generate depreciation is no sign of genius...just another reminder of all the advantages he inherited that the average Joe taxpayer didnt get and who still has to pay income tax.

This is why he conceals.  He doesnt want to explain why a "genius" cant ever seem to generate a profitable business or investment.

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Okay. Still makes no sense to recommend charges on somebody you can't charge, so I'm not going to assign any relevance to the lack of charges.

He’s not protected by the Presidency forever. Once he’s out of office he could still be charged. If you have the requisite case it makes no sense not to recommend charges, otherwise why take the job?

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Akkula said:

If he just had depreciation expense he wouldnt be hiding his tax returns.  He has large net operating loss carryovers and capital loss carryovers or has committed fraud.  That is why he is hiding things.  Furthermore, having large depreciation expenses and the inability to generate positive cash flow doesnt indicate any more business genius then any of you least sophisticated clients with a rental.  

Even under the best scenario, the ability for a rich guy to take a huge pot of money and buy a ton of fixed assets to generate depreciation is no sign of genius...just another reminder of all the advantages he inherited that the average Joe taxpayer didnt get and who still has to pay income tax.

This is why he conceals.  He doesnt want to explain why a "genius" cant ever seem to generate a profitable business or investment.

You fool ! Capital loss carryovers , and NOL carryovers are not some evil scheme  devised only to help the rich. I’ve had small business owners that report on a schedule C use an NOL carryover. Lots of small home builders used them after the housing crash in 2009. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...