Or they're just temporarily embarrassed millionairesMakes me wonder if some people here want this to happen because they personally benefit from it....
Or they're just temporarily embarrassed millionairesMakes me wonder if some people here want this to happen because they personally benefit from it....
Maybe Andrew Paul Johnson is on here. With so many pedo defenders here it wouldn't be surprising.Makes me wonder if some people here want this to happen because they personally benefit from it....

I’m not sure which part of “fruit of a poisonous tree” needs explaining. If the IRS was antagonistic specifically against the aggrieved parties and they have reason to believe the agency engaged in untoward activities with the express intent to find hooks were there weren’t any to begin with, they might not want those biased investigations to continue. Think of it as entering a domicile in the absence of a warrant. It kind of doesn’t matter what you’ve found, it gets thrown out because the search was illegal in the first place. It falls under the 4th’s exclusionary rule. Similar principle, just applied to taxation.Ah yeah, I see they did later issue a clarification about that. That's alright then, nothing suspicious at all about agreeing to never investigate the evidence they should already have.
Already said this, but the exclusionary rule and "fruit of the poisonous tree" are specific for unlawfully obtained evidence.I’m not sure which part of “fruit of a poisonous tree” needs explaining. If the IRS was antagonistic specifically against the aggrieved parties and they have reason to believe the agency engaged in untoward activities with the express intent to find hooks were there weren’t any to begin with, they might not want those biased investigations to continue. Think of it as entering a domicile in the absence of a warrant. It kind of doesn’t matter what you’ve found, it gets thrown out because the search was illegal in the first place. It falls under the 4th’s exclusionary rule. Similar principle, just applied to taxation.

I'll jump in before someone else says 'Not illegal. Not corruption. He's the president, and therefore can do whatever he wants.'Trump builds, or taxpayers?

Only an idiot would think that a cognitive test is the same as an intelligence test.Most corrupt, but let's not forget something else....
View attachment 575201
And yes, Trump did post that......
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116646986947580696


Better question: where they ever interested in freedo of speech to begin with? Rightwing media has been narrating, peddling and covertly subverting any other agenda since at least 9/11, and the whole 'woke' /cancel culture criticism is hard to see it as anything but an excuse for racism. So no, I'm not surprised they're not minding deep big brother surveillance.More corruption: the US DOJ is actively trying to get names and details on x and reddit of people criticising ICE.
Where are the freedom of speech paladins, actually blackguards, now?

No.where they ever interested in freedo of speech to begin with?
It'd be a neat loophole, wouldn't it? If I don't want my tax returns to be investigated, all I need to do is bait someone into leaking them and that magically grants me immunity because...other people can also see the evidence?Already said this, but the exclusionary rule and "fruit of the poisonous tree" are specific for unlawfully obtained evidence.
IRS tax filings are not the same as police illegally kicking down someone’s door. The IRS already lawfully possessed the tax returns because Trump’s companies voluntarily provided that information to the government in the first place.
So unless you’re now saying the IRS illegally obtained the tax data itself, the comparison fails immediately. Again, at most most, they could argue certain investigative steps from the leak were tainted. But that wouldn't mean all prior filings suddenly becomes invalid forever. Abuse of power, plain and simple.
Right? Really not hard to motivate someone to do that to a corrupt rich person who has literally stolen from charities. It's a moronic premise on its face, and that's why Foxi has ignored it after being corrected twice about how the rule really works. I'm sure he saw some mouthpiece for Trump say "fruit of the poisonous tree", and Foxi just parroted it without looking into what it really is. Typical for a cultist.It'd be a neat loophole, wouldn't it? If I don't want my tax returns to be investigated, all I need to do is bait someone into leaking them and that magically grants me immunity because...other people can also see the evidence?
No, only Trump in this situation because special pleading is a thing here for sycophants. I'm sure Elon and Bezos would also LOVE to use that loophole since their data was released as well.Does everyone else who had their returns leaked also gain immunity?

Megyn Kelly and Shawn Ryan openly saying that Trump is more corrupt than they could have ever imagined.
The rats are fleeing. The only one's left don't realize the ship is sinking.
