I'm thinkin' we need someone in the W.H. who understands how the other side will try to manipulate him/her, and isn't all about "when they go low, I am so good and honorable, that I will stay way up here in the clouds, going high."
I'm not talking about juvenile name calling and such. I'm talking about street smarts. Understanding that the other side is playing by different rules. And use the power of the Presidency accordingly, to counter the "we have our own rules" set. The ones getting millions from Russia, the ones changing the rules of the Senate, once they're in power. The ones who refuse to do their job and confirm a S. Ct. Justice appointed by a Democratic President. The ones who have a secret ringer in the S.Ct., so that one who isn't planning on retiring suddenly retires, for a THIRD S.Ct. Justice appt (then the retiring Justice's relative, who has connections with the other side, goes on to be very very successful).
One who uses the powerful bully pulpit for all its worth. Who uses all the power of the W.H. to help the Democrats in the Senate and the House.
I'm not suggesting criminal acts or being slimy like Trump. But tough & rough & street smart, and willing and able to understand all the power the Presidency holds, and not be afraid to use it.
Do we have someone like that? S/he doesn't have to be loud. Sometimes the hardest people to deal with smile while softly saying, "No deal."
In honor of the two bills being passed by NEW YORK, requiring years of tax returns of statewide elected officials to be posted on a govt website, AND requiring the NY Commissioner of Taxation and Finance to cooperate with any investigations by certain committees of the United States Congress under certain circumstances.
Liza with a Z.
and business entities?
Why is it that higher income people have to pay an AMT, so that they don't end up paying too low an amount in taxes (even though their deductions & credits added up to that), but corporations and businesses like Exxon and Trump Org. can get away with paying zero in taxes, and say "Hey, it's not MY fault. That's the calculation, after adding up all my deductions and credits and exemptions."
Why IS that?
Exxon paid Zero in federal income taxes in recent years. So did GE a few years ago (before its financial trouble). Apparently so did Trump (Trump Org?).
There's something very wrong here, when someone earning $30,000 a year has to pay taxes, but some entity earning billions pays zero.
No, he told his followers during the campaign that he uses all the tax code to his advantage. "Who doesn't want not to pay taxes??!!!" The crowd roared! No, they foolishly think that's great! Screwing the IRS is great! Too bad they are so stupid that they didn't catch on that that is why the tax rate for the ultra-bracket needs to be sufficiently high, so that after all their losses, they would have to pay at least SOMETHING in taxes, instead of zero to a minute amount.
The tax rate for the ultra wealthy is almost meaningless, because they never PAY that rate. He's said "I love depreciation!" He has also said, "I love recessions! I can buy stuff for cheap."
Even though he has paid little to zero taxes over the years, they felt the need to "reform" the tax code, significantly lowering the rate for the top 1%, which benefits Trump, who is already paying less in taxes than "the little people."
Leona Helmsley: "Only the little people pay taxes." (A maid in her household said she heard Leona say that, altho Helmsley denied she said it.)
Watch Trump "explain" why he can't produce his tax returns, although he'd LOVE to! Although you can't tell about a person's wealth by their tax returns, but he'd LOVE to produce them...no one else gets audited every year but I do!...he files statements that say how wealthy he is...but he can't produce his tax returns because of auditing, although he would...he'd LOVE to!
For ALL of the Democratic Party candidates, I'm disregarding any and all allegations of sexual harassment, abuse, or assault. If the so-called accusers were not offended enough to file charges or report it or mention it to the press BEFORE the candidate entered a Presidential race, then I call out any allegations as being politically motivated, as far as I'm concerned.
Congress rarely holds people in contempt. But it has done so in the past to force witnesses to appear or produce documents.
The last time Congress used its inherent contempt powers was in 1934 when the Senate held William MacCracken, a former member of Herbert Hoover's administration, after he refused a subpoena. The Senate had nowhere to hold MacCracken so he was imprisoned at a hotel, according to the Washington Post.
But Congress has voted on contempt charges more recently, even discussing using it against members of the Trump administration last year after former White House adviser Steve Bannon refused to answer questions.
Other examples include in 2012 when the House voted to hold then-Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for declining to provide documents and in 2014 after IRS official Lois Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a congressional hearing. In both cases, the Justice Department declined to bring criminal cases.
So the Republicans DID file contempt charges against AG Holder and against Lois Lerner. Then there's THIS:
While a contempt charge normally moves through the criminal justice system and the courts, there's one final method that has gotten attention in recent days, given the president's reluctance to cooperate with congressional investigations.
Lawmakers can elect to pursue a contempt-of-Congress charge in an impeachment proceeding, which is a political process to remove the president from office that moves through Congress instead of the courts.
A contempt-of-Congress charge was one of the three articles of impeachment filed against President Richard Nixon in 1974 after he defied subpoenas for documents and information that Congress said it needed for an impeachment inquiry.
Contributing: Associated Press
In view of Pelosi saying to "own the center left mainstream," I thought it would be fun to find out where I might fall in the spectrum. I knew where I THOUGHT I placed in the full spectrum.
So here it is, for anyone who might find it interesting to take the quiz.
My results were the middle of the left (I forget what the quiz called it), but that can be deceiving, since that's an average of views on different topics. My view on one topic (like the environment) may be further left, but my view on another may be further right, averaging out to center left.
Anyway, have fun!
Heard a clip on Morning Joe of Biden saying that he like Dick Cheney, gets along with him, and he's a decent man.
I hope I heard wrong.
Cheney, who used 9/11 to invade Iraq, which he'd planned to do, regardless of 9/11? Cheney, who outed an undercover intel operative (Valerie Plame), ending her undercover career and putting her life in danger? Because of a personal vendetta against her husband.
Cheney, who met with energy company executives, for them to devise the energy policy and programs of the country?
Cheney, who gave non-bid multi-million contracts to his company Halliburton, in Iraq, with no oversight of them? A giveaway of massive amounts of money to his cronies. That Dick Cheney is a decent man?
Cheney, who never faced a bullet in war, pushing for torture and not recognizing the international crimes commission, so we wouldn't have to answer for the torture?
A democracy only works if the different factions work together and compromise. But getting along with the other party and being able to work with them, is different from thinking a man like Dick Cheney is "decent." That sort of rubberstamps Cheney's positions, which are abhorrent to a democracy, IMO.
UPDATE: I found the clip. It's from 2015.
According to the Mueller report, asking China to get Trump's tax returns is fine, since it's done out in the open. So she says, "China, if you're listening, if you can get Trump's tax returns, I'm sure our media would richly reward you." LOL!
She stressed, though, that the Russian interference is STILL a threat. That we COULD lose because of it. Then she goes into...both sides can benefit from foreign govt interference and hacking, depending on when and which country.
Profile InformationGender: Do not display
Member since: Sat Feb 10, 2007, 12:29 PM
Number of posts: 37,648