The Republican Utopia

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

It doesn't work that way (unless they show he planned to kill someone and she know about it).

 

She sure knew he had the weapon illegally. She knew there were demonstrators and rioters there.

[Moiraine]

Just now, knapplc said:

She sure knew he had the weapon illegally. She knew there were demonstrators and rioters there.

 

 

Still don't think it works that way. Maybe an accessory to whatever the crime is of having the weapon illegally.

Anyhow, people, including relatives of mine, say he was acting in self defense. I say we are f#&%ed as a country even if Trump gets ousted in January. I don't think we can overcome that much dumb.

[DevoHusker]

2 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Still don't think it works that way. Maybe an accessory to whatever the crime is of having the weapon illegally.

Anyhow, people, including relatives of mine, say he was acting in self defense. I say we are f#&%ed as a country even if Trump gets ousted in January. I don't think we can overcome that much dumb.

I would say 50/50 for acquittal 

[Moiraine]

42 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

I would say 50/50 for acquittal 

 

 

Ya there's a chance, but that doesn't mean the attitudes should be the way they are. I also think the law should change. If you run into an unarmed crowd waving your gun around being threatening and an a$$h@!e (he previously punched a woman that day so there's no way I'm going to believe he was politely minding his own business), it's different than when someone is just attacking you for no reason. Especially when you consider the mass shootings we've had. How many of those mass shooters could have claimed self defense if someone had attacked them before they'd killed anyone else?

Also, if you're carrying an illegal fire arm or illegally have a fire arm that should be considered as well. If you aren't supposed to have a weapon, normal people are going to assume you are endangering them and others.

[DevoHusker]

36 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Ya there's a chance, but that doesn't mean the attitudes should be the way they are. I also think the law should change. If you run into an unarmed crowd waving your gun around being threatening and an a$$h@!e (he previously punched a woman that day so there's no way I'm going to believe he was politely minding his own business), it's different than when someone is just attacking you for no reason. Especially when you consider the mass shootings we've had. How many of those mass shooters could have claimed self defense if someone had attacked them before they'd killed anyone else?

Also, if you're carrying an illegal fire arm or illegally have a fire arm that should be considered as well. If you aren't supposed to have a weapon, normal people are going to assume you are endangering them and others.

Good points all

[mrandyk]

23 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Still don't think it works that way. Maybe an accessory to whatever the crime is of having the weapon illegally.

Anyhow, people, including relatives of mine, say he was acting in self defense. I say we are f#&%ed as a country even if Trump gets ousted in January. I don't think we can overcome that much dumb.

I never imagined that I'd consider moving to Canada, but these past 4 years have me thinking about it a lot. The next few years will be pivotal for me. I really hope what we've experienced has been this nation being pushed to the brink and not the status quo moving forward. If the current form of the Republican party is going to continue having this much influence then we are all f#&%ed. They either need to reform or die off. Otherwise we are only seeing the beginning of the decline.

[Moiraine]

40 minutes ago, mrandyk said:

I never imagined that I'd consider moving to Canada, but these past 4 years have me thinking about it a lot. The next few years will be pivotal for me. I really hope what we've experienced has been this nation being pushed to the brink and not the status quo moving forward. If the current form of the Republican party is going to continue having this much influence then we are all f#&%ed. They either need to reform or die off. Otherwise we are only seeing the beginning of the decline.

 

 

I've looked at job listings in Toronto, Edmonton, and Vancouver. Problem is I dunno how much Canada relies on the U.S. and Trump is petty.

[TGHusker]

19 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I've looked at job listings in Toronto, Edmonton, and Vancouver. Problem is I dunno how much Canada relies on the U.S. and Trump is petty.

We might have a reprieve - with all of the news on trump's finances, I hope it secures him 4 years in the jail house instead of the White House.  Then we don't need to move to Canada.  I've also heard Costa Rica or Belize is a good place to move to if one was so inclined.  

[BigRedBuster]

17 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

We might have a reprieve - with all of the news on trump's finances, I hope it secures him 4 years in the jail house instead of the White House.  Then we don't need to move to Canada.  I've also heard Costa Rica or Belize is a good place to move to if one was so inclined.  

Well, that all depends on how his worshipers react to his defeat.  It might get bad enough we still have to go to Canada.

[Mike Mcdee]

39 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

We might have a reprieve - with all of the news on trump's finances, I hope it secures him 4 years in the jail house instead of the White House.  Then we don't need to move to Canada.  I've also heard Costa Rica or Belize is a good place to move to if one was so inclined.  

If what is being revealed is fraudulent, why has the IRS not pursued before? I'm not trying to say it looks great for the president, but is anything in there actionable? 

[Guy Chamberlin]

44 minutes ago, Mike Mcdee said:

If what is being revealed is fraudulent, why has the IRS not pursued before? I'm not trying to say it looks great for the president, but is anything in there actionable? 

 

It doesn't really look great for the IRS, either. They are wildly inefficient at best.

 

Speculation is that the whistleblower comes from Trump's own accounting firm, someone who just got sick of this s#!t. 

[knapplc]

Trump appointed the head of the IRS. The dude has made more than $100k off Trump properties. 

[Omaha-Husker]

The IRS has seen their funding steadily decline over the past decade. This administration hasn't helped, but it has been a problem for a while now. They don't have the necessary resources to deal with people willing to spend a lot of money to find ways to skirt their tax liability. Giving the tax man more money isn't a sexy policy to sell on a 30 second TV spot, but the general public would benefit from a well funded IRS and they should have the resources needed to hire talented people away from the private sector and go after people attempting to avoid their responsibility to the country.

 

 

Audits being performed have tanked across all income levels as well, but earners over 200k seeing a sharper decline than what would be considered the middle and lower classes.

[BigRedBuster]

We are f#&%ed. 
 

 

[ZRod]

On 9/26/2020 at 8:39 PM, Moiraine said:

 

 

Ya there's a chance, but that doesn't mean the attitudes should be the way they are. I also think the law should change. If you run into an unarmed crowd waving your gun around being threatening and an a$$h@!e (he previously punched a woman that day so there's no way I'm going to believe he was politely minding his own business), it's different than when someone is just attacking you for no reason. Especially when you consider the mass shootings we've had. How many of those mass shooters could have claimed self defense if someone had attacked them before they'd killed anyone else?

Also, if you're carrying an illegal fire arm or illegally have a fire arm that should be considered as well. If you aren't supposed to have a weapon, normal people are going to assume you are endangering them and others.

He punched a woman that day?