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.

 

To Lefties: Why Won't Nancy Vote On A Proper Impeachment Resolution?

page: 8
23
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2019 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

It all depends on how you define triple taxation.
We get taxed on the same money far more than three times. I get taxed on the aggregate of my paycheck for:
A) payroll taxes
B) Income taxes
C) Medicare taxes
D) Social security taxes

Let me lay it out more thoroughly. Let's say I make $1,000 on a check.
I am taxed the payroll tax on $1,000. At this point I now have less than $1,000, but that doesn't stop the government.
I get taxed at my income tax rate on $1,000 .
I get taxed for medicare on $1,000
I get taxed for social security on $1,000.

As pointed out, after the first tax was applied my income was no longer $1,000, yet the government kept taking money like it was.

Income taxation needs to be abolished




posted on Oct, 30 2019 @ 01:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

LOL ... "income taxes" are different from "payroll taxes?"

How so? No, nevermind.

Look if you guys want to talk about "triple taxes" complain about Federal taxes, State taxes and unemployment taxes. That way three different entities recieve the tax amount.

At least that makes a small amount of sense, but not much.



posted on Oct, 30 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Well, the "Resolution" is out. It mentions rules for the President and his counsel, but they haven't come up with or published those yet.

It doesn't look like Pelosi decided to turn the reins back over to the Judiciary Committee either. That would probably make this whole "investigation" look more legitimate.

Schiff has given himself a lot of control over who the Republicans can allow as witnesses and how much of their testimony (if any) gets included in the reports that end up in the hands of the Judiciary Committee.

docs.house.gov...



posted on Oct, 30 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined
they are post dating their investigation with this "resollution".
too bad we already have a skewed timeline from nadler

they started this "investigation" prior to the whistleblower

this is an attempt to cover up that fact

too bad we are paying attention



posted on Oct, 30 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Because if they did then Republicans will expose their partisan witnesses. They want to continue to do it in the dark and so they can push conspiracy theories to their allies in the media and don't have to verify anything.



posted on Oct, 30 2019 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: neo96

Also, see the first sentence in the first Section?



All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.


Speaking of someone trying to trash the Constitution ... what's the status of Trump's EO to abolish birthright citizenship? Eh?







The broader language in the case suggesting that birth on U.S. soil is alone sufficient (thereby rendering the “subject to the jurisdiction" clause meaningless) is only dicta — not binding. The court did not specifically consider whether those born to parents who were in the United States unlawfully were automatically citizens.

The misunderstood policy of birthright citizenship provides a powerful magnet for people to violate our immigration laws and undermines the plenary power over naturalization that the Constitution explicitly gives to Congress. It is long past time to clarify that the 14th Amendment does not grant U.S. citizenship to the children of anyone just because they can manage to give birth on U.S. soil.


Source

I'm not wholly convinced it is constitutional..


edit on 30-10-2019 by Wardaddy454 because: (no reason given)




top topics
 
23
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join