Illinois Senate votes to keep Trump off of 2020 ballots unless he releases his taxes

originally posted by: ShadowLink

originally posted by: Puppylove
I would love for him to release his taxes just before the election. and have it turn out he did everything right. That would a hilarious coudegrah.

Agreed!

Only down side is for 2 years after we will hear non stop how it's faked or Russia edited his returns or some equally ridiculous crap.

He should release them and have someone forge "Vladimir Putin" as the preparer on them...

THAT would be a God-Level troll.

originally posted by: Puppylove
I would love for him to release his taxes just before the election. and have it turn out he did everything right. That would a hilarious coudegrah.

It has nothing to do with wrongdoing. They want to politicize them and look for political ammunition, not illegal activity. That's why they will never be released, the left can't be trusted to do their job.

Trump tells all of his Illinois supporters to do a write-in campaign. Problem solved.

originally posted by: panoz77
a reply to: Assassin82

Who cares, he won't win Illinois anyways, LOL. NY and Cali should as well.

Maybe 77 has a good idea. All those Red States that Hillary lost should remove All the Democratic candidates on their ballots.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

originally posted by: panoz77
a reply to: Assassin82

Who cares, he won't win Illinois anyways, LOL. NY and Cali should as well.

Maybe 77 has a good idea. All those Red States that Hillary lost should remove All the Democratic candidates on their ballots.

President Trump can send more federal dollars to states who do that, as a REWARD!

Perhaps when Dems are voted off any ballots they might have a change off heart. Ya think? Naw. They'll freak the EFF out and scream how its not fair and illegal. Idiots.

So...how does a federal election where each state only allows the candidates they choose to be voted for work?

It seems like that would cause some issues in actually electing someone...

originally posted by: dug88
So...how does a federal election where each state only allows the candidates they choose to be voted for work?

It seems like that would cause some issues in actually electing someone...

True. Does that state then not recognize the president if he/she isn’t on their ballot?

Trump should just have the guy that faked Obamas birth certificate clean up his tax returns.

All he would have to do is remove the section that Trump is embarrassed about - you know, the part that shows he donated a million dollars to the Clinton Foundation.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Assassin82

Let's just keep any candidates that the state legislatures don't like off the ballots. That would be awesome for Ohio which is Republican controlled. We can keep all the Democrats off the ballots. I mean fair is fair?

I mean, that’s the precedent they’re setting right? Ohio would be tough because it’s a 50/50 split for the most part. But it seems like a soft line in the sand towards state separation from the union. There’s not much behind it, but it’s one of those tit for tat kind of maneuvers that could lead towards such a result.

(Btw, how do you like this new gas tax?)

a reply to: Assassin82

It's not like Illinois has any important things to worry about, oh, you know like their massive pension crisis,
their huge population loss, their crime and a zillion other silly things.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Assassin82

It appears Maryland has already gone through with this.

The senators voted 28-17 on Monday, largely along party lines, to require presidential candidates to file copies of their tax returns with the state board of elections two months ahead of Election Day, so the filings can be made public. Failure to comply would result in the candidate’s removal from the state ballot that November.

Just a random Source I found while figuring out if infact a state can do this. And I guess it can.

State rights I guess.

Times ahead for the USA are looking rough, hasn't been this much division since basically Lincoln was elected to be honest. Once again, Democrats Vrs republicans, both can't seem to come to a compromise, so individual states are taking things into their own hands.

States can put forward and vote on any bill they like
Federal Election Laws don't give a rat's a__ about the insanity in that State's government .
They still apply.
Amounts to absolute zero.

a reply to: Assassin82

Another year and Illinois, California and new York won't have enough money for toilet paper, let alone ballots lol.

Cheers - Dave

People (including the Illinois Senate, apparently,) do not understand how the President is elected.

You have, almost certainly, never voted for President of the United States(*). When you vote "Trump" or "Clinton," you are not casting a vote for them, you are casting a vote for Electors, who have promised to vote for Trump or Clinton in the Electoral College. Some states (they used to do it in North Dakota, when I lived there) actually list the Electors that you are voting for, others hide it behind the scenes, but the process is the same.

So Illinois isn't banning President Trump from the ballot, it's banning people who are not him, not related to him, and only affiliated to him in an indirect manner -- they've been put up for election by the Republican or Democratic Party, so banning them is a clear violation of the Constitution. The parties have no control over whether someone releases their tax returns, so denying them representation, for reasons that they cannot control, is unconstitutional, a violation of the 14th Amendment.

(* -- If you have ever been an Elector, you've voted for President. Anyone else? One level removed, sorry.)

Illinois is a waste of space. I know, I live there. But, if the dems succeed in getting rid of the electoral college then every vote will matter, even in a state like Illinois.

the state wants to interfere in Federal politics, by keeping a candidate off the ballot because they don't like him? fine. the federal government should respond by immediately cutting off all federal monies going to such a state (and that would include things such as all welfare, and things like food stamps) . as well as to refuse to step in when Illinois (who everyone knows in pretty much bankrupt), or any other such state defaults. as well as not allowing said state(s) to participate in the federal election for President. in other words they get NO votes for anyone running.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

trust me I live here, this state I am done with. Disgusting, over taxed on EVERYTHING, I;m just glad I don't have children cuz I coulda killed them all at birth.. Honestly I'm about done with this country. red white and blue? psshhh I'll go to another and make them money.. sick of it.. I feel I work in a chinese slave shop.

a reply to: Assassin82

I have a feeling they may have bigger problems,like their state being underwater,and I don' know if another election in the cards

originally posted by: dug88
So...how does a federal election where each state only allows the candidates they choose to be voted for work?

It seems like that would cause some issues in actually electing someone...

Any means necessary, that's the liberal playbook, problems it causes be damned.

I just hear that The state is going to seperate itself from CHicago financially and polotically.