johnnybangkok

4 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

No...try to follow the logic. The records may be fake but you engaged in a conspiracy to obtain them and believed them to be genuine when you accepted them. The crime of obtaining them isn't absolved if they later turn out to be fake.

The long and short of it is he can clear all this up by doing what he’s been promising to do for the last 4 years and release his tax returns. The fact he hasn’t so far (with increasing levels of obviously false excuses) draws the conclusion that he is hiding something. YOUR President might be a tax fraud or beholding to foreign powers yet rather than want to get it all cleared up, you are falling into usual Trump supporter mode and shooting the messenger and/or equating his actions to an ordinary citizen. He’s not. He’s POTUS, he has an obligation to be whiter than white and none of your deflections will ever change that fact. 

5 hours ago, RoadWarrior371 said:

This concept  is lost on the masses, who have a very low level understanding of basic tax or business knowledge.  Imagine trying to explain this concept to a rioting mob, it would be futile.  Makes for good headlines to stir up the minimum wage crowd.   LOL  ????

You are always very quick to denigrate the 'masses' with your self-imposed superiority whilst failing to understand most of the posters on here (myself included) absolutely understand 'basic tax or business knowledge'. 

Trumps tax liabilities can of course be offset with losses (just proving what we all know which is he can't run a profitable business) but his personal income is still subject to federal income tax so paying only $750 in 2017 and 2018 means his personal wealth is no where near what he claims OR there is tax avoidance/fraud to a massive scale. There is a dispute over a house he has claimed as business (when it's a family home) and paying his daughter 'consultancy fees' whilst also employing her. There's also things like the ridiculous $70,000 ($5,833 per month $1,346 per week) for hairdressing as well as many, many other matters that are highly questionable.

The revelations may show no illegal activities but if there is none then it just shows he is nowhere near the success he makes out to be and if your whole brand is built on being the great businessman who can save the USA, this could be more damaging than any nefarious activities.      

8 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

It will be once again humourous to see all the posters come out and uncritically treat this news as "truth."  Is this another hit piece in the vein of Trump calling vets losers and suckers or the Russians paying the Taliban a bounty to kill U.S. troops?  Seems all of these unfounded accusations experience shorter and shorter shelf lives.

 

Let's see how long the "veracity" of this hit piece lasts.

Oh I absolutely agree with you. I'm sure it's absolutely nothing and will be easily rectified when he shares his tax returns...........you know, the ones he's been promising to share for the last 4 years but for some unknown reason hasn't quite managed to do yet. 

Now where's that sarcasm font? 

22 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

As I understand separation, it is to protect the practice of religion, not restrict it. 

No it's not. It does cover religeous freedom but it is also about the idea that religios beliefs should not play a part in how laws are inteprested and should certailny not govern law. 

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I assume you would use the same argument against allowing any Christion on the court, yes? 

Yes if it meant their personal religious bias formed an opinion against the idea of separation of Chiricahua and state. 
Stop being so basic in your argument and understand there is grey inbetween black and white. 

23 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I'm sorry, but when you said " ...more conservative bias on legal matters and enshrines the constitution as being above reproach thus meaning no changes to any of the constitution and especially the 1st and 2nd amendments." it sounded like you thought the court should be changing the constitution. 

 

What you want is judges that know when it need to be circumvented.

 

How would you define military style weapons, scary looking rifles? 

 

 

There’s a reason they are called amendments. You don’t need wholesale change to constitute an amendment or, more importantly, the presidents that accompany all legal matters. 
The Supreme Court has the power to interpret. Once interpreted they then set president. The president then guides all other thoughts on the subject. However I would argue that there does need to be changes to the constitution and someone like ACB does not believe there should. It’s a big thing when you see the GOP harp back to fundamentals. It makes all the difference. 

1 hour ago, plentyofnuttin said:

Among other things, Judge Barrett is Trump's gift to the Biden campaign. She sharply criticized John Roberts crucial fifth vote that upheld Obamacare:

"Regarding a 2012 ruling upholding the law’s individual mandate by a 5-to-4 margin, Barrett also criticized Chief Justice John Roberts, saying he had “pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/trump-scotus-pick-amy-coney-barrett-s-past-critiques-obamacare-n1241191

And it's not only Trump who will suffer for it. GOP senators up for reelection have been running away from their support for repealing Obamacare. When questioned by journalists, they consistently refuse to comment. Most have removed their support for repeal from their campaign literature. But now they can't run away from it.

 

Great post. 
Not wanting to be one sided but this is the kind of argument the insult throwing, jingoistic Trump fans would struggle to ever understand. 

13 minutes ago, plentyofnuttin said:

Originalism is actually pretty much a bogus doctrine. Here is a link to an article that shows its essential falsity

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/2/27/14747562/originalism-gorsuch-scalia-brown-supreme-court

 

Thanks for that. Long read but enlightening. 

11 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

It's your position that it is the duty of the court do change the Constitution? It is my understanding that members of the court must swear to uphold the Constitution. 

 

There is a process in place for changing the Constitution, and I don't think it involves leftist judges. Circumventing the Constitution requires leftist judges.

No one is talking about changing anything. It’s all about interpretation and adapting the words of hundreds of years ago to a modern environment. For example, the idea of militias was a valid concept in its time, not so much now. But how do you enact laws that stops masses of left/right crowds to go at each other with the benefit of military style weapons?
We can all understand the feelings and thoughts behind the Constitution; it’s about interpreting it to a modern society. 
 

11 minutes ago, rkidlad said:

Yes, but you’re replying to my post. My post is about the culpability of China. Which is also what the thread is about. It’s exactly what all my posts have been about. It gets quite tiring having people tell me how much they hate Trump because they’ve erroneously conflated my condemnation of the CCP with an admiration for Donald.  
 

Imagine a thread about the wonders that are dogs. Now imagine someone saying they prefer cats. That doesn’t mean that person hates dogs. People often struggle with having two separate thoughts in their head at the same time. 

Fair enough but I really don’t think you should take it so personally. Threads flow with the thought and if all we have to do is concern ourself with your individual thoughts then nothing flows. 
Anyway. Yes, China has responsibility but Trumps deflections are too obvious and don’t mitigate his handling of the pandemic. 
See. It’s possible to cover two things at once. 

6 hours ago, MaxYakov said:

No, voter fraud isn't a myth: 10 cases where it is all too real [link] - Washington Times article dated Oct 17, 2016

 

Do I think there is the possibility of fraudulent voting with mail-in votes via the U.S.P.S? I've had or friends of mine have had three bad experiences with the U.S.P.S. I had a vehicle license renewal sticker stolen right out of the DMV-mailed envelope. My ex lost an entire large shipment of Christmas presents that were stolen. A GF's father worked for U.S.P.S and, instead of delivering the mail, he was hoarding it in his garage. He was found out and fired. The stories of mail being discarded instead of being delivered is not uncommon.

 

Imagine if enough money to bribe postal workers to fiddle with these mail-in ballots is provided as incentive AND the method of fraud is perfected. Isn't it common knowledge that Democrat-run administrations in several states are scrambling to change the ballot rules or am I imagining these reports.

 

If that's not enough here's another source of voter fraud reports (an entire database):

 

A Sampling of Recent Election Fraud Cases from Across the United States [link] - The Heritage Foundation

 

"The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database presents a sampling of recent proven instances of election fraud from across the country. This database is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list. It does not capture all cases and certainly does not capture reported instances that are not investigated or prosecuted. It is intended to demonstrate the vulnerabilities in the election system and the many ways in which fraud is committed. In addition to diluting the votes of legitimate voters, fraud can have an impact in close elections, and we have many close elections in this country. Preventing, deterring, and prosecuting election fraud is essential to protecting the integrity of our voting process. Reforms intended to ensure such integrity do not disenfranchise voters and, in fact, protect their right to vote. Winning elections leads to political power and the incentives to take advantage of security vulnerabilities are great, so it is important that we take reasonable steps to make it hard to cheat, while making it easy for legitimate voters to vote."

 

To me it's not a matter of "if" there is election fraud; it's a matter of how much "is/will" be going on for this important election. Enough to throw key/critical states' electoral votes to one candidate or the other? I know the Democrats and the MSM will go to extreme lengths [these are well-documented] to unseat him or forbid Trump a second term. They've already demonstrated this over the past four years of ridiculous activity to attempt to knock him out of office. They've demonstrated to me and any Americans that aren't sound asleep at the switch that they will stop at nothing.

 

Well I think your “my next door neighbors cats second cousin had a bad experience “ anecdote only goes to prove your myopic view of what everyone else is pointing out to you.  You would need literally 10,s of thousands of fraudulent votes in any one jurisdiction to have any meaningful influence on an election and that just isn’t happening. 
I much more likely explanation for the talk of voter fraud is Trumps belief in every crack pot conspiracy theory going and his need/necessity to give himself a literal get out of jail free card. 

Facts matter. Try them sometimes.  

16 hours ago, rkidlad said:

So there’s no reason to be 100% open and honest. Be transparent. That way we can save lives. 
 

Do you think a regime that will lock you up or have you disappeared for criticizing them have your best interests at heart? 

Although China isn't exactly known for it's human rights and it's well reported that disenting scientists 'disappeared', the WHO timeline for Covid tells you there was still plenty of warning given to countries about the forthcoming pandemic. The WHO declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (their highest warning) on 30th January https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/27-04-2020-who-timeline---covid-19, giving countries plenty of time to initiate trusted proticols in preventing the spread. The problem was this was widely ignored for many crucial weeks and even though the US declared a public health emergency on the 31st January,  Trump kept on downplaying, deflecting and blaming everyone else other than himself throughout February. He has continued to do this with a lack of federal co-ordination and the debacle over wearing masks (why is this even a thing?) . But when asked, Trump gives himself an A+ for his handling of the pandemic.

If China is to blame for not divulging things sooner (some say it appeared in early December), then Trump is equally to blame for politicising and downplaying the pandemic to the point where we see 200,000 Americans dead from the disease now. There's no question he has made things worse and his continual blaming of China for all of Americas problems is just seen as further deflection in an ill advised attempt to keep the heat off himself.      

17 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Wow.  Just wow.  I'm pretty good at expressing my thoughts but your first paragraph leaves me speechless.  I'll leave you to indulge in your own thoughts on that topic.  But . . . wow.

 

 

....and you call us snowflakes!

19 minutes ago, riclag said:

IMOP if your President doesn't beat biden  its still a win win !

Just think of all those  lifetime judges he and Mitch helped to vote in the senate ! 

The most importantant one is coming soon ,the third one! Even the  conservative  constitutionalist never trumpers  couldn't in their wildest dreams predict this!

America ,USA,1776

So exactly what are you hoping will happen with a conservative majority SC? What laws do you want overturned and what new laws would you like to see introduced?