It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

California sends bill requiring presidential candidates' tax returns to governor's desk

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: ketsuko


I'm telling you that they could have been much less transparent than they have been.


I guess that excuses everything else, right?



Do we have Obama's college transcripts yet?




posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:27 PM
link   
If the liberal states try to steal the election there will be blood in the streets. These BS laws are another attempt at cheating the people of free choice on Election Day.

I don’t think Trump will back down.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: underwerks

FFS! Donald Trump has lived his entire life in the eyes of the camera for decades. He's a freakin' reality celeb. Why on earth do you think those so-called sex scandals didn't shake him?!


Because Hillary. Obama?

Am I close?



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Lumenari


Next time you drive buzzed, go find a cop and tell him.

Next time you have a little something recreational that isn't exactly legal, turn yourself in and confess.

Next time you speed, call it in!

Ever fudge your taxes, just a little bit?

The list can go on and on and on....

The actual reality of life is that we are faced with a set of rules.. a set of laws that we all live in.

EVERYONE breaks the rules at one time or another.


And those indiscretions should be public knowledge when it comes to politicians so we as voters can make a more informed choice.

I'm not talking about Bill down the street who has a plant in his pocket he was arrested for. I'm talking about the politicians who are supposed to represent us, yet really only represent the will of their donors.

I can't believe anyone would argue in support of less transparency when it comes to these people. Less transparency is a big part of what has led us to where we are now. Which is why the people who stand to lose because of it fight against it.


So again, an American politician to you should forfeit their rights as a citizen when they run for office.

You're only taking this side of the argument because of your TDS.

It's not looking too good on you.

But now we have gotten to the part of the conversation where you are no longer interesting...

So have a nice night sweety.



I think there should be different rules for the people who represent us, yes.

And as usual, take your ball and go home.



You are arguing for more governmental intrusion into people's lives because... Orange Man Bad.

And as usual do you mean like the last time we chatted in a thread and you had no response so fled?

No... what's happening here is that you are no longer interesting and I'm going to watch a movie, log back in tomorrow and see what the ATS court of public opinion thinks.

Spoiler... you lost.




posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: ketsuko


I'm telling you that they could have been much less transparent than they have been.


I guess that excuses everything else, right?



Do we have Obama's college transcripts yet?


We should. We should have his college transcripts, his high school transcripts, his medical records, and a psych evaluation done by an impartial physician. Not to mention his taxes and financial information. And anything legal pertaining to him.

We should have all that for Trump too. Though the psych evaluation would probably be the breaking point for him.


edit on 4-5-2019 by underwerks because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Not on this one.

OMG! Trump slept with Stormy Daniels. Yeah, so? You paid any attention to his life? I am shocked why again? This is a scandal why again?



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks


But be honest about who you are and what you've done so we can make our decision based on reality


If this were truly the standard, quite frankly there wouldn't be any standards -- if we're truly talking about 100% transparency. Everyone has skeletons in their closet, some even literally.

I'd actually be all for it. Nothing would shock me.

But can the rest of society handle it once you open that can of worms?

I doubt it.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Uh-huh. Where were you on that back then?

Oh yeah, it wasn't important then.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari


Spoiler... you lost.


Cool.




posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: DanDanDat

This applies to Democrats as well. So it isn't something selective that's only going to be an issue for Republicans.

It seems to me the only people angry about this would be the ones with a partisan bent that don't want to concede anything to the other side.


Nothing for either side to concede if simply following U.S. Constitution and its agreed upon method of Presidential election.

What this tells me is partisanship has taken over one side of the political spectrum due its inability to put forth a coherent platform that appeals to the majority and cannot field candidates that can win national elections. Pretty much proves ideas are bankrupt hence the need to make backdoor changes to method of Presidential elections.

Same issue with electoral college and popular vote crap - just proves bankruptcy of ideas.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: underwerks

Uh-huh. Where were you on that back then?

Oh yeah, it wasn't important then.


Saying the same exact thing. Wanting honesty from politicians isn't some new thing I came up with, believe it or not.

It's only now that you guys seem to be against it.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix


Nothing for either side to concede if simply following U.S. Constitution and its agreed upon method of Presidential election.


I'm not mad at any state that makes laws giving us more information about the people that are supposed to represent us.

Or should states not have the right to do that?



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:42 PM
link   
If a state won't let everybody run than their electoral college votes should not be allowed.
Is enough of the country tired of the games that our officials are playing with our country?



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: DanDanDat

This applies to Democrats as well. So it isn't something selective that's only going to be an issue for Republicans.

It seems to me the only people angry about this would be the ones with a partisan bent that don't want to concede anything to the other side.


Nothing for either side to concede if simply following U.S. Constitution and its agreed upon method of Presidential election.

What this tells me is partisanship has taken over one side of the political spectrum due its inability to put forth a coherent platform that appeals to the majority and cannot field candidates that can win national elections. Pretty much proves ideas are bankrupt hence the need to make backdoor changes to method of Presidential elections.

Same issue with electoral college and popular vote crap - just proves bankruptcy of ideas.



Exactly, they obviously realized that the National popular vote compact could backfire on them. The NPV plan is a state statute in the form of an interstate compact. It creates an agreement among states to award all of their electoral votes collectively to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote.

So obviously, the odds will be even better if Trump is just not included. It seems the Dems are not very confident, guess that is why they are not running on any real platform since they will win by any means necessary.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: underwerks


But be honest about who you are and what you've done so we can make our decision based on reality


If this were truly the standard, quite frankly there wouldn't be any standards -- if we're truly talking about 100% transparency. Everyone has skeletons in their closet, some even literally.

I'd actually be all for it. Nothing would shock me.

But can the rest of society handle it once you open that can of worms?

I doubt it.



If society can't handle that level of honesty from its leaders maybe it's time for a new society.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Phoenix


Nothing for either side to concede if simply following U.S. Constitution and its agreed upon method of Presidential election.


I'm not mad at any state that makes laws giving us more information about the people that are supposed to represent us.

Or should states not have the right to do that?


News Flash, this is about a FEDERAL election, not a state election. The states CANNOT usurp the Constitution, ever. No law is higher than that....NONE.

You folks looking to change the rules of the game without going through the proper processes, set in place for just such a thing, shows that there is no support for this at all. All I hear is, "it's too hard to do that, it will never pass". Yes, it IS hard to amend the Constitution, for GOOD reason.

You want to change the federal presidential election process, help convene a Constitutional Convention. Anything less is merely political BS.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

Is this really usurping the constitution though? Even if this passes its not like people won't be able to vote for Trump. You can write in whoever you want.

I'm going to err on the side of more transparency.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 09:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: DanDanDat

This applies to Democrats as well. So it isn't something selective that's only going to be an issue for Republicans.

It seems to me the only people angry about this would be the ones with a partisan bent that don't want to concede anything to the other side.


A candidate like Trump has far to more lose by showing his tax returns than the broke Democrat candidates currently running.

The more money you make, the more complicated your tax returns. It becomes very easy for a biased media to spin a legitimate tax filing as some how the candidate is not "paying their fair share".

We already saw this play run on Mitt Romney in 2012. First, Harry Reid gets up on the floor of the senate and blatantly lies about Romney's taxes. Once his returns are released, the story then becomes scrutinizing charitable donations or if a lower rate is being paid on capital gains or carried interest.

Trump has absolutely nothing to gain by releasing his tax returns only to have them spun negatively to an ignorant public that thinks getting a tax refund is a good thing.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

They each agreed to the U.S. Constitution when they joined the union......so no is the answer.

Proper format is an amendment to that document - not willy nilly snot throwing fits of in your eye rage events in some states because partisan controlled legislature decide they can make rules out of thin air.

You can couch this in way you do all you want but its really indicative of a wholly bankrupt platform and lack of coherent ideas thats driving this as a certain party CANNOT have an ice cubes chance in hell without gaming the system and they know it.

USSC will rule this unconstitutional.



posted on May, 4 2019 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

... or ....

If you don't think you have enough information on a candidate to make an informed decision, you simply don't vote for him or her. It's really very simple.

But I guess that's not enough for you, you have to go all impose your will and make sure that your standards for a candidate are to be imposed on everyone else.

Is that how it's supposed to work now? Everyone else must vote for only candidates who meet underwerks' standards?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join