Politics

[Tanks]

at the end of the day the IRS leaked information that they had no legal right to leak... and they got sued for it..

Didn't they also leak a whole lot of other billionaire's tax returns? Does this mean Musk, Bezos et al can also sue IRS for billions?

 

[Brent in Az]

Didn't they also leak a whole lot of other billionaire's tax returns? Does this mean Musk, Bezos et al can also sue IRS for billions?

An IRS independent contractor did. He was the Democrats fall guy.
It earned him 5 years in prison.

 

[Big_Easy]

the problem is you are convuluting arguments and also misstating what has actually occured..

Trump filed a lawsuit (a civil case, not criminal) against the IRS for illegally leaking his tax returns (past tense) without his consent and was provided with a settlement in that case this week..

The DoJ, recognizing that the Biden Administration weaponized the IRS and that the courts were leaning in favor of Trump in this case, in preparation for numerous lawsuits, has rolled out a $1.77B fund in preparation of paying claims against the federal government for the misuse of power that the IRS and other government agencies exhibited in the prior administration..

As part of Trumps settlement he agreed to drop some additional charges against the FBI and other government agencies that he claims were also weaponized against him (again, past tense)..

In exchange, part of what the IRS put on the table was an agreement to not pursue anything further related to Trump's personal taxes or any of his companys taxes, again, past tense..

So.. If Trump settles, and doesnt completely kick the crap out of them in court and take the full $10B he sued them for.. the IRS will drop anything/everything remotely related to any tax filings that have been completed in the past..

Nowhere does it say Trump, his family, or his companies wont be investigated for any future possible crimes..

They are simply agreeing that the past matter is now dead.. the Biden Administration was wrong.. the IRS is settling the case because they dont want the issue to end up in front of a judge... and as part of the settlement theyre agreeing not to re-open the case later or open new cases on past taxes.. the specific language used was that the agreement encompasses “tax returns filed before the effective date” of the agreement..

Seems like a pretty good deal to me... they now dont pay $10B and multiple IRS officials dont face potential criminal charges after they lose a major civil case..

So why exactly should US Citizen take up arms against a tyrinous government, when the reality is the tyrinous government is no longer in place and the IRS just got its ass handed to it for weaponizing itselt against an individual and all parties involved have agreed to settle the civil suit?

The IRS was never going to have to pay Trump $10 billion dollars. You'd have to be high on meth to think that. No jury, even a south Florida one, was going to award that, and it's equally as likely he would have lost the suit.

"the IRS is settling the case because they don't want the issue to end up in front of a judge..." No, they are settling the case because Trump is both the defendant and the plaintiff so no sh!t he'll decide to settle the case to his liking.

 

[Big_Easy]

I hope Texas republicans are motivated to vote in November - or can be made to be motivated. I despise everything I know about Paxton. I don't believe I can think of a Texas politician who is more repulsive unless it was Tom Delay (aka the Bug Man). That said, I will drag myself to the booth, hold my nose tightly, and vote for him. But, I suspect there are a lot of good republicans who will simply be busy doing something else. A good democrat turnout, and I am confident there will be one, could easily send Talarico to Washington.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057132693058461704

"I suspect there are a lot of good republicans who will simply be busy doing something else"

Perhaps their ethics will prevent them from voting for a degenerate like Ken Paxton.

 

[mdwest]

Didn't they also leak a whole lot of other billionaire's tax returns? Does this mean Musk, Bezos et al can also sue IRS for billions?

I’d say a precedent has been set…

If a potus can sue the IRS, I don’t know why the richest man on earth can’t..

If through a settlement the IRS is exposing itself and acknowledging that it either thinks it can’t win or that the pain and exposure would be too great to defend… I think that’s likely blood in the water and the sharks are likely circling…

There’s a reason the DoJ set up that $1.8b dollar fund… and it isn’t to pay Trump…

 

[Brent in Az]

"I suspect there are a lot of good republicans who will simply be busy doing something else"

Perhaps their ethics will prevent them from voting for a degenerate like Ken Paxton.

Degenerates are on the Democrat side of the ballot. It's an exploding demographic.

 

[SaintPanzer]

Sarcasm being the lowest form of humor tends to be the place I wallow most comfortably.

Wait... I thought puns were the lowest form of humor?

 

[SaintPanzer]

I don't know who needs to hear this, but there is a significant difference between actually kicking someone's testicles (an actual assault) and hypothetically saying someone deserves to be kicked in the testicles.

It should also require no explanation that the humor of the statement is not based on a desire to assault but rather based on the fact that an actual woman has no testicles, whereas someone who has testicles is in truth not a woman at all.

Consider: yes, it is possible for a man to suffer from breast cancer, though I've never actually had a mammogram. However, I'm confident that I can put on a dress, grow my hair, insist others call me by a name not on my birth certificate, and otherwise try and pass myself off as being feminine, but there is 0% chance that I shall suffer from ovarian cancer, and it would absolutely be not in my best interest to skip screenings for prostate cancer and not worry about testicular cancer.

As far as free speech in the UK, one can be deliberately obtuse on the point of arresting a man for speaking of a hypothetical, but to ignore the fact that a man just died in handcuffs after being stabbed because he allegedly made a racist remark, while the actual "stabber" was not in handcuffs and the alleged murder weapon was removed from the scene and actually recovered at the "stabber's" mother's house... Well, let's just say I'm not as willing to vacation in the UK as I once was. And I do need some preventative maintenance parts for my Jaguar and Land Rover. So there is that.

And as far as saying someone is a gutter dweller who has relations with a parent or describing that person as "acting like said gutter dweller", this simple minded person considers that too clever by half.