Page 286 of 534

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 12:51 am
by Ben-Prime
Gregg wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:08 pm The Senate Committee did not Subpoena it last term because they didn't have the power to do so without Republican votes, the Senate Committees had equal numbers of members from each party (reason #492 why Warnock getting re-elected is important, so the Committees have majorities).
Is the 'request' spelled out in the law formally considered a subpoena, then? The law seems to use the word 'request', without further explication.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 4:10 am
by Gregg
jemcanada2 wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:50 pm
Gregg wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:29 pm
jemcanada2 wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:21 pm

Don’t forget the cheese curds to make it poutine! :lovestruck:

And mayo on hamburgers. :lovestruck:
Stop!

I may forget how to make Chili Spaghetti if you keep it up.
Pineapple on pizza? :batting: :batting:
Image

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:44 am
by noblepa
Ben-Prime wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 12:51 am
Gregg wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:08 pm The Senate Committee did not Subpoena it last term because they didn't have the power to do so without Republican votes, the Senate Committees had equal numbers of members from each party (reason #492 why Warnock getting re-elected is important, so the Committees have majorities).
Is the 'request' spelled out in the law formally considered a subpoena, then? The law seems to use the word 'request', without further explication.
IANAL, but the law says "Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request".

Note the word SHALL. So, I think that whether you call it a subpoena or something else, is a bit irrelevant. The Secretary of the Treasury and the IRS have no discretion, as I read the law, to decide whether or not to comply. On its face, it would appear that the law makes such a request just as binding as a full-fledged subpoena. A rose by any other name . . .

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:53 am
by johnpcapitalist
jemcanada2 wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:21 pm
much ado wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:24 pm And gravy on my french fries!
Don’t forget the cheese curds to make it poutine! :lovestruck:

And mayo on hamburgers. :lovestruck:
Serve the hamburgers with Kraft mac and cheese dinners, and I'm there!

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:12 am
by Tiredretiredlawyer
Please clarify "mayo". Our household, much to the chagrin of Firstborn Son, purchases Miracle Whip Salad Dressing and calls it "mayo".

ETA: See Hijack this Thread for more Arkansasisms.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:28 am
by Sam the Centipede
Requests/subpoenas: perhaps the drafter of the letter deliberately employed the specific word "request" so that it would be unarguable that this letter was such a "written request" in accordance with the law. Whereas if it had been a subpoena, perhaps there would be more avenues for contesting it?

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 1:09 pm
by Ben-Prime
noblepa wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:44 am
Ben-Prime wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 12:51 am
Gregg wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:08 pm The Senate Committee did not Subpoena it last term because they didn't have the power to do so without Republican votes, the Senate Committees had equal numbers of members from each party (reason #492 why Warnock getting re-elected is important, so the Committees have majorities).
Is the 'request' spelled out in the law formally considered a subpoena, then? The law seems to use the word 'request', without further explication.
IANAL, but the law says "Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request".

Note the word SHALL. So, I think that whether you call it a subpoena or something else, is a bit irrelevant. The Secretary of the Treasury and the IRS have no discretion, as I read the law, to decide whether or not to comply. On its face, it would appear that the law makes such a request just as binding as a full-fledged subpoena. A rose by any other name . . .
For my argument, I think it's actually relevant, since the my concern was more the notion that somehow the split Senate might prevent chairfolk from having *subpoena* power, but this isn't a subpoena, so how does a 50-50 split prevent this simple written not-a-subpoena request, yanno?

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 1:32 pm
by raison de arizona
It seems really simple, SHALL, but have we not spent the last three years fighting in court about this? Wonder what the next multi-year battle will be over.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 6:09 pm
by raison de arizona
If you have three Nazis and tfg sitting at a dinner table, ya got four Nazis.
https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status ... 4969852948
No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen @NoLieWithBTC wrote: Just days after Trump dined with Kanye West and neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes, West said this: “I like Hitler. The Holocaust is not what happened, let’s look at the facts of that. Hitler has a lot of redeeming qualities.”

Donald Trump dines with Nazis.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 9:54 pm
by Gregg
noblepa wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:44 am
Ben-Prime wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 12:51 am
Gregg wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:08 pm The Senate Committee did not Subpoena it last term because they didn't have the power to do so without Republican votes, the Senate Committees had equal numbers of members from each party (reason #492 why Warnock getting re-elected is important, so the Committees have majorities).
Is the 'request' spelled out in the law formally considered a subpoena, then? The law seems to use the word 'request', without further explication.
IANAL, but the law says "Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request".

Note the word SHALL. So, I think that whether you call it a subpoena or something else, is a bit irrelevant. The Secretary of the Treasury and the IRS have no discretion, as I read the law, to decide whether or not to comply. On its face, it would appear that the law makes such a request just as binding as a full-fledged subpoena. A rose by any other name . . .

The Committee cannot act without a resolution, which must be passed by a majority of the committee, which in an evenly divided Senate is comprised of an equal number or members from each party. The TL:DR is, the Chairman of the Senate Committee of XXX was not going to request anything. It's reason #492 why 51 Senators is better than 50 + the VP.

Also, too, even in the House where they had the majority and requested, it took almost 4 years. Trump has effectively destroyed Congressional Oversight because he has established the Legal Doctrine of "Fuck the Pope, how many tanks does he have?" or the current version of Stalin's famous reaction to Papal Oversight.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2022 9:59 pm
by Gregg
Sam the Centipede wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 10:28 am Requests/subpoenas: perhaps the drafter of the letter deliberately employed the specific word "request" so that it would be unarguable that this letter was such a "written request" in accordance with the law. Whereas if it had been a subpoena, perhaps there would be more avenues for contesting it?
If they had wanted to require a subpoena they wouldn't have written request. The House I don't think ever did subpoena them, it just requested them and when Mnuchin said "no" they took him to court.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2022 9:50 am
by Kendra
Trump issues a special address to J6 defendants: “Our country is going communist .. People are imprisoned right now. People are being tormented. Can’t let it happen. We’re going to stop it, and we’re going to win.”

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2022 11:49 am
by RTH10260
old man waffling about his perception of a banana republic :cantlook: :brickwallsmall:


(though in a quiet corner :rotflmao: )

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:10 pm
by Ben-Prime
Or ... "Old Man Yells At The Cloud."

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:17 pm
by raison de arizona
Kendra wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 9:50 am https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/stat ... 9781600260
Trump issues a special address to J6 defendants: “Our country is going communist .. People are imprisoned right now. People are being tormented. Can’t let it happen. We’re going to stop it, and we’re going to win.”
If tfg stops it, the terrorists win.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2022 5:35 pm
by Kendra

A guy last night showed Trump his Championship Belt, so Trump decided to show him his Alpha Male boxing skills, which I put in slow-mo so you can appreciate his power and athletic prowess.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 12:38 am
by raison de arizona
F4105C41-42C6-40B9-B0C1-E58AC393CCEA.png
F4105C41-42C6-40B9-B0C1-E58AC393CCEA.png (307.9 KiB) Viewed 943 times

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 12:48 am
by RTH10260
:?: :?: :?: :confuzzled: :confuzzled: :confuzzled: :brickwallsmall: :brickwallsmall: :brickwallsmall: :cantlook: :cantlook: :cantlook: :sick:

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 12:50 am
by RTH10260
as mentioned in tweet upthread
Trump expresses solidarity with Jan. 6 rioters who stormed the Capitol

By John Wagner
December 2, 2022 at 7:02 a.m. EST

Former president Donald Trump expressed solidarity with the mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, sending a video of support to a fundraising event Thursday night hosted by a group called the Patriot Freedom Project that is supporting families of those being prosecuted by the government.

“People have been treated unconstitutionally, in my opinion, and very, very unfairly, and we’re going to get to the bottom of it,” he said in the video, which appeared to have been shot at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla. “It’s the weaponization of the Department of Justice, and we can’t let this happen in our country.”

Trump, who last month announced a 2024 White House bid, pledged that in coming months, he would take a close look at what he characterized as “a very unfair situation.”

The Patriot Freedom Project advertises itself as “a non-profit organization providing legal, financial, mental-health, and spiritual support for individuals and their families — including young children — who are suffering at the hands of a weaponized justice system.”

Trump repeatedly has made clear that he stands with the mob that stormed the Capitol to stop Congress from counting the electoral votes for Joe Biden’s win in the 2020 presidential election.

In September, Trump said he would issue full pardons and a government apology to the rioters, some of whom violently attacked law enforcement to stop the democratic transfer of power.

“I mean full pardons with an apology to many,” he told conservative radio host Wendy Bell. Such a move would be contingent on whether Trump wins the 2024 presidential election.




https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... s-capitol/

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 1:11 am
by Gregg
Am I the only one mildly alarmed that apparently a man who was once the real President doesn't know what the term "Communist" means?

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 5:32 am
by Kriselda Gray
Gregg wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 4:10 am Image
I'm starting to feel a bit warm... did someone turn up the heat?

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:01 am
by pipistrelle
Gregg wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 1:11 am Am I the only one mildly alarmed that apparently a man who was once the real President doesn't know what the term "Communist" means?
I saw this in the wee hours on Twitter, I think, but he wants
Edit: a new election reinstatement
and openly said screw the Constitution.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:11 am
by Suranis
Well, remember in 2012 he demanded that the Republican party not have a Primary and just give him the nomination. He seems to have always regard elections as both an unnecessary inconvenience, and just something that gives him endless opportunities to talk about the most important subjects in the world - himself and how mean everyone is to himself.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:23 am
by pipistrelle
Gregg wrote: Sat Dec 03, 2022 1:11 am Am I the only one mildly alarmed that apparently a man who was once the real President doesn't know what the term "Communist" means?
More alarmed that he was once the real president.

trump (the former guy)

Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 9:32 am
by Greatgrey
He’s having a normal Saturday morning…