• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

No president above the law bill

Riders

Riders

Well-Known Member
Dems passed a bill where Presidents are not above the law/ There is also an article on Dems subpoenaing those who know about Trumps tax records, Trumps fighting back but they are determined ti get tax records.

Does anyone know who the No President is above the law bill will work?

https://whatthe****justhappenedtoday.com/
 
Last edited:
Mindmaster

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
There is no law saying that anyone must release their taxes, so there is no law to be above. :D

Anyway, the President has a limited scope of power and is always at the mercy of Supreme Court decisions -- it's not like his office has ever had "free reign".

I find it amusing though that this suddenly becomes a problem when a Republican sits in the oval, but no one gives a damn when the Dems have the seat. Irony. :D
 
Riders

Riders

Well-Known Member
Mindmaster said:
There is no law saying that anyone must release their taxes, so there is no law to be above. :D

Anyway, the President has a limited scope of power and is always at the mercy of Supreme Court decisions -- it's not like his office has ever had "free reign".

I find it amusing though that this suddenly becomes a problem when a Republican sits in the oval, but no one gives a damn when the Dems have the seat. Irony. :D
Click to expand...

I didnt say anything about a law about taxes. They are subpoenaing certain people to court to testify about the taxes and his other financial reports.
 
Riders

Riders

Well-Known Member
Mindmaster said:
There is no law saying that anyone must release their taxes, so there is no law to be above. :D

Anyway, the President has a limited scope of power and is always at the mercy of Supreme Court decisions -- it's not like his office has ever had "free reign".

I find it amusing though that this suddenly becomes a problem when a Republican sits in the oval, but no one gives a damn when the Dems have the seat. Irony. :D
Click to expand...

But sense your laughing your A off I think its strange sense the President is mad about it and fighting it, why the fight if theres nothing to it and its a big laugh?
 
Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Riders said:
Dems passed a bill where Presidents are not above the law/ There is also an article on Dems subpoenaing those who know about Trumps tax records, Trumps fighting back but they are determined ti get tax records.

Does anyone know who the No President is above the law bill will work?

https://whatthe****justhappenedtoday.com/
Click to expand...
Attempted Democrat Socialist takeover bill of something that is clearly not illegal in the first place.
 
Riders

Riders

Well-Known Member
FragrantGrace said:
The Democrats in D.C. are really pandering to their base with this one. First, banking on the hope that base doesn't recall this of 6 years ago.
Their proposal now requires a 2/3rds vote to amend the constitution.


Senator Rand Paul: A long-needed constitutional amendment
Click to expand...

Oh so you too are saying its posturing the Democrats are pretending and lying? There is a huge fight going on in the courts over this now, there would not be a big fight going on if Democrats were not capable of pushing this threw. Here's a new video and article that explains it well.

House Ways and Means committee issues subpoenas for Trump's tax returns - CNNPolitics
 
FragrantGrace

FragrantGrace

If winning isn't everything why do they keep score
Riders said:
Oh so you too are saying its posturing the Democrats are pretending and lying?
Click to expand...
You bought it. You're who they're pandering to. All Democrats and anyone who hates Trump.

There is a huge fight going on in the courts over this now, there would not be a big fight going on if Democrats were not capable of pushing this threw. Here's a new video and article that explains it well.

House Ways and Means committee issues subpoenas for Trump's tax returns - CNNPolitics
Click to expand...

Yes, it is political posturing. Or, the House Democrats are dumber than originally thought.
Firstly, their point for the alleged subpoena makes an issue of the separation of powers.
Furthermore, Trump has every right due to the scope of the subpoena, i.e. they want his tax returns, to claim Executive Privilege.
If the HWM bellyaches about that, as they likely will, it can go to SCOTUS. SCOTUS has to then review the scope of the subpoena , which would be Trump's private tax returns, and there the case of United States v. Nixon would come into review.
Which means, while the House can subpoena a ham sandwich if they choose, in the SCOTUS matter House Ways and Means would have to prove the returns are essential to the justice of the case, or, a valid legal purpose. Which they cannot do because there is no law that states a member of the Executive have to release their personal tax returns.

This effort is not essential to the justice of any case nor does it have any legal purpose.
The court cannot issue a decision on a fishing expedition. Which this is.
 
Riders

Riders

Well-Known Member
FragrantGrace said:
You bought it. You're who they're pandering to. All Democrats and anyone who hates Trump.



Yes, it is political posturing. Or, the House Democrats are dumber than originally thought.
Firstly, their point for the alleged subpoena makes an issue of the separation of powers.
Furthermore, Trump has every right due to the scope of the subpoena, i.e. they want his tax returns, to claim Executive Privilege.
If the HWM bellyaches about that, as they likely will, it can go to SCOTUS. SCOTUS has to then review the scope of the subpoena , which would be Trump's private tax returns, and there the case of United States v. Nixon would come into review.
Which means, while the House can subpoena a ham sandwich if they choose, in the SCOTUS matter House Ways and Means would have to prove the returns are essential to the justice of the case, or, a valid legal purpose. Which they cannot do because there is no law that states a member of the Executive have to release their personal tax returns.

This effort is not essential to the justice of any case nor does it have any legal purpose.
The court cannot issue a decision on a fishing expedition. Which this is.
Click to expand...

Well if that were all true your white house would not be sitting there fighting it instead theyd be sitting there laughing like you doing nothing,If they know it wont work why the fight?
 
Kenny

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Riders said:
Dems passed a bill where Presidents are not above the law/ There is also an article on Dems subpoenaing those who know about Trumps tax records, Trumps fighting back but they are determined ti get tax records.

Does anyone know who the No President is above the law bill will work?

https://whatthe****justhappenedtoday.com/
Click to expand...
How about a bill where no Congressman is above the law?
 
dianaiad

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
Riders said:
But sense your laughing your A off I think its strange sense the President is mad about it and fighting it, why the fight if theres nothing to it and its a big laugh?
Click to expand...


Y'know, this is the 'if you have nothing to hide, you'll let us.....(insert any and every bit of intrusive investigation there is...)

I've never bought that. Someone says that to me and my instant mental response is 'who died and made you God, that YOU get to invade my privacy to see if I have anything to hide?"

This 'no president is above the law" bill....how is it a 'no president above the law,' when nobody ELSE in the country would be required to disclose tax records for a witch hunt?
 
Stevicus

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Mindmaster said:
There is no law saying that anyone must release their taxes, so there is no law to be above. :D

Anyway, the President has a limited scope of power and is always at the mercy of Supreme Court decisions -- it's not like his office has ever had "free reign".

I find it amusing though that this suddenly becomes a problem when a Republican sits in the oval, but no one gives a damn when the Dems have the seat. Irony. :D
Click to expand...

Well, it goes back and forth. When the Dems have the office, the Republicans usually go on the attack, and vice versa, of course. For some reason, they gave Reagan a pass, making him the Teflon President. Trump is kind of the opposite (he could be the Flypaper President).
 
Enoch07

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
The Dems are so super cereal they declined to subpoena Mueller today. That's how super cereal they are.

Democrat Jerry Nadler says Robert Mueller will not testify next week, may require subpoena

“It won’t be next week, but we’re negotiating with [Mueller],” Nadler told reporters off the House floor. “We’re talking to him and the Justice Department.”

Funny how they threaten to subpoena him but they won't. Instead they are "negotiating" with him and the DoJ. Makes ya question why eh?:D
 
Mindmaster

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Riders said:
But sense your laughing your A off I think its strange sense the President is mad about it and fighting it, why the fight if theres nothing to it and its a big laugh?
Click to expand...

Does one have to be guilty to defend oneself? Hmm, logic there is strange on that.

I'd argue that you never have to justify defending yourself, it's your intrinsic right as an individual. But, hey, what do I know? :D Anyway, Trump doesn't have to make excuses for protecting himself as far as I am concerned. I also find it strange that other people find it indicative of guilt or that it suggests some sort of obstruction. Neither of course are true, at least, if you possess a sound enough judgement to fairly weigh in on the situation. You're not guilty because you're strengthening your position relative to your enemies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top