[POLL] 2020 U.S. Presidential Election

[gregory-samba]

The question isn't whether or not there's something wrong with his taxes. The question is whether or not his taxes are evidence of other crimes.

It's only the job of the IRS to look over peoples taxes. If there was some glaring abnormality they probably would have caught it already. I for one wouldn't want to hand over my taxes to random strangers that have a record of attacking you just because they lost an election. The only reason Congress wants his taxes is to try to find a way to fuck him over. It doesn't make much sense to then just hand them over to a group of clowns who've already set a precedent that you can impeach a President based on the fact you can't deal with the fact you lost an election. Even regardless if he did something wrong or not. Yeah, I wouldn't hand over shit. The only Government agency he legally has to hand them over to is the IRS and he already did that.

 

[JeepX87]

I'm not Biden nor Trump supporters but as moderate, I'm not fan of polarization in US political system as right went far and left went far.

For me, I want both sides - liberals and conservatives to be happy so I do feel that state rights need to be extended and less demand on federal government. Many people in California and Alabama don't share the same views.

I'm not interested to bash at any politicians and they have different philosophies so no need to bash at Trump or Biden supporters either.

 

[deficitdisorder]

Just have to understand why a lot of us don't have him at his word.

He has a shady financial history. How he defrauded his foundation charity and cant legally operate another one or the mountain of lawsuits for unpaid contract work. There are other clear conflicts of interest between Trump as president and his businesses but he wouldn't place them in a blind trust to avoid those issues.

He says he has nothing to hide but he is breaking from a 40 year tradition and hiding his tax returns regardless.

Orange Sus as the Among Us kids say


EDIT*Mistaken regarding parts of the charity discussion. Feel free to shame me.

 

[gregory-samba]

Just have to understand why a lot of us don't have him at his word.

He has a shady financial history. How he defrauded his foundation charity and cant legally operate another one or the mountain of lawsuits for unpaid contract work. There are other clear conflicts of interest between Trump as president and his businesses but he wouldnt place them in a blind trust to avoid those issues.

He says he has nothing to hide but he is breaking from a 40 year tradition and hiding his tax returns regardless.

Orange Sus as the Among Us kids say

He's not hiding anything. The IRS has them and if there were issues they'd deal with them. It would be stupid for him to hand over something that will be used against him as a weapon to attack him with regardless if he's guilty or not. If that's the case, how about you send me your returns? I'll look through them to see if there's anything I can notify the authorities over. If I can't find anything I'll just make something up as I'll be calling the police on you regardless. So how about it? Want to DM me a url of your scanned or digital tax returns?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I'm not Biden nor Trump supporters but as moderate, I'm not fan of polarization in US political system as right went far and left went far.

For me, I want both sides - liberals and conservatives to be happy so I do feel that state rights need to be extended and less demand on federal government. Many people in California and Alabama don't share the same views.

I'm not interested to bash at any politicians and they have different philosophies so no need to bash at Trump or Biden supporters either.

It's fine if you don't bash Biden, but if you don't bash Trump then one of those polarized groups you mentioned will attack and outcast you.

 

[Foxi4]

He has a shady financial history. How he defrauded his foundation charity and cant legally operate another one (...)

Do you mean the "cancer charity"? That's a made-up story. Neither Trump nor anyone in his immediate family have been barred from operating charities. Initially that was one of AG Underwood's demands, but it's not in the settlement. It is not unusual to "trump-up" (ha!) charges if the intention is to sign a deal and reduce them from the start.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-steal-kids-cancer-charity/

mountain of lawsuits for unpaid contract work

Nearly every corporation operates like that, they don't pay their financial commitments until they absolutely have to. You show me one that wasn't sued for allegedly unpaid contracts/bills and I will show you a unicorn.

As far as his tax records are concerned, that's his money and I don't care, I just wanted to drop in and say that disinformation exists on both sides of the aisle. He's not "barred from charity work", he didn't "steal from children with cancer", he's also not the Grinch.

The question isn't whether or not there's something wrong with his taxes. The question is whether or not his taxes are evidence of other crimes.

"If you're innocent then you have nothing to fear and nothing to hide" is an inherently totalitarian point of view, if that's where you're going with this. This is an investigation in search of a crime, that violates basic rights to privacy. There's an argument to be made that as President he should release them willingly as his right to privacy is waived due to his position, but despite tradition, that is not a legal requirement as of right now.

 

[deficitdisorder]

Do you mean the "cancer charity"? That's a made-up story. Neither Trump nor anyone in his immediate family have been barred from operating charities. Initially that was one of AG Underwood's demands, but it's not in the settlement. It is not unusual to "trump-up" (ha!) charges if the intention is to sign a deal and reduce them from the start.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-steal-kids-cancer-charity/

I never mentioned stealing from children charities story so not sure why you brought that up. I was referencing the 2 million misappropriation fraud that ended with the Trump Foundation charity being dissolved. You appear to be right as I misremembering the barring from operating future charities part. I will edit those previous posts in shame.

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/201...ed-2-million-illegally-using-trump-foundation

Nearly every corporation operates like that, they don't pay their financial commitments until they absolutely have to. You show me one that wasn't sued for allegedly unpaid contracts/bills and I will show you a unicorn.

Its not about paying late it's about the myriad of cases where he didn't pay at all which meant he had to be sued.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/

 

[Foxi4]

I never mentioned stealing from children charities story so not sure why you brought that up. I was referencing the 2 million misappropriation fraud that ended with the Trump Foundation charity being dissolved. You appear to be right as I misremembering the barring from operating future charities part. I will edit those previous posts in shame.

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/201...ed-2-million-illegally-using-trump-foundation



Its not about paying late it's about the myriad of cases where he didn't pay at all which meant he had to be sued.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/

Yes and yes on both. The Snopes article is all about the dissolution of the foundation, same case. Obviously he was sued for unpaid contracts too, I was merely saying that it's not at all unusual.

I mentioned the "stealing from children with cancer" bit because it's a very popular meme right now when, in reality, it never happened. I thought it was worth mentioning here also.

 

[deficitdisorder]

Yes and yes on both. The Snopes article is all about the dissolution of the foundation, same case. Obviously he was sued for unpaid contracts too, I was merely saying that it's not at all unusual.

Please just continue to casually dismiss the President's history of effectively stealing from its citizens on a regular basis. Here I was under the illusion the most powerful man in the world should be held to a higher standard.

 

[Foxi4]

Please just continue to casually dismiss the President's history of effectively stealing from its citizens on a regular basis. Here I was under the illusion the most powerful man in the world should be held to a higher standard.

You get used to it once you realise that taxation is theft. Jokes aside, point taken, but that's precisely what court is for - resolving financial disputes.

 

[notimp]

Gee willikers, that sounds like a real Scooby mystery! Let's uncover it together.

So, according to you, you've received no notification of your warning and no indication which post it might be referring to. How exciting!

View attachment 226085

If only there was some kind of way I could inform you in private about your infraction to make you aware of the content in question.

View attachment 226093

Some way to message you and tell you which rule you've broken and which posts have been removed or modified...

View attachment 226088

...something I could invite a higher instance to in the event the action is questioned. I wish we had that system in place.

You can stop nailing yourself to the cross now, we can see that you're using a Fisher Price tool set. The jig is up, you got caught lying. Are you one of those guys who thinks that as long as they don't accept a ticket from the officer, they didn't get a ticket? Because I'm afraid that's not a real thing.

If you're trying to trick @Issac into thinking that you're getting bullied, you're going to have a hard time. In addition to being of excellent moral character, I'm also willing to wager a $100 right now that he's the smartest person in the room, and I'll win that bet anytime.

I don't know what to do with you at this stage so I'm just going to ignore your attempts at crucifying yourself. If you continue breaking the rules, you will continue seeing consequences of your actions. I took the liberty of inviting @Issac into every exchange we've had within the last week, for the purposes of transparency. I wanted him to know everything that has transpired in order to ensure a fair and just judgement, and that's exactly the kind of judgement he made.

Since you are fond of Latin, "Ignorantia juris non excusat". You should check your inbox a little more often, might save you future headaches and a fair bit of embarrassment.

I won't address this issue anymore, I consider the case closed. Ball's in your court, be respectful to other users, regardless of whether or not their opinions align with yours.

F*ck with someone else.

I've received PN that went as follows.

Inpropriate behavior, no I'm not banning you LOL, inapropriate language, then a public threat 'dont think you are immune - I will ban you', followed by no ban, but two warning points.

On top of this this was after you PERSONALLY interjected on several arguments in here with an absolute irrational stance, indicating to people in here, that banking on BS murder/death theories in relation to who to vote for is OK, you even liked this, that switching the default to spinning women who have abortions as BABYKILLERS was ok, and me turning this back using the word "idiot" was the problem here.

That was what I received two warning points for, as far as I can make out. Only on gbatemp.

The ON TOP OF THAT, you followed that up with a freaking posting, that celebrated the republican party ideologically BREAKING one of its members to get back on partly line - so now they could display unity.

YOU EVEN RIDICULED THAT PERSON.

On the first behavioral fallout, I went straight to admins, begging them for you to be removed from this forum, because you actively destroyed any opportunity to have a rational debate in this thread, supported people that were out to SHUT DOWN and divert communication in here, to BABYKILLERS, it all is connected, or Biden is only the nominee, so he can die, and be replaced by Kamala Harris with personal likes.

And then went haywire on double meaning in your messaging towards what you would do to me and when. I had no certainty regarding anything. You were high on a power trip, flipping one way or the other by the minute.

Luckily - I went to other moderating stuff, before this had happened. (See screenshot.)
--

ON TOP OF THIS - the two warning points appeared OUT OF NO WHERE, and without any indication given as to why - in that instance (screenshot is of my latest message history).

I got informed by ANOTHER MODERATOR, that 'a thread in question' probably the one taking a stance against baby killing being the normal way to talk about things, and the greek word fetus being a 'deception' in the freaking election 2020 thread, was deleted - which I had no idea it had been, afterwards.

But was informed about me getting warning points IN A PUBLIC POSTING, sporting A TREAT, against me getting banned, with you gloating like a baby with a spoon full of honey in his hand.
--


Your behavior was outreageos.

The way this was handled is pittyful.

The outcome according to the 'dont flame' rule, according to the admin was 'just'. But all the behavior that lead to it, you sanctified, or got away with.

And then the public threat on top of it. While flipping between 'love you', 'hate you with a passion' in your messaging, and then taking moderating action, in arguably exactly the wrong way.

None of that is resolved.

Lets make it public.


The cherry on top was that you promoted 'falling in party line' behavior, by gloating over and making fun of a politician, that probably was bullied and preassured - just because that was the party line thing to do.

In the 2020 election thread.

And the thing you were most concerned about was telling be, that I shouldt take a moral stance, because and I quote "you are not the moderator here".

 

[Issac]

F*ck with someone else.

Only on gbatemp.

We have timestamps, we've been transparent, you know exactly why you've been warned, why messages have been removed.

Stop playing the martyr, stop believing that your opinion is some magical thing that must be silenced, you're fram from alone woth your political opinion.

But if GBAtemp is so bad, and combined with your incredible inability to follow the simplest rules (don't call other people names) - well, maybe you should be banned from this section all together? How about that?

 

[notimp]

We have timestamps, we've been transparent, you know exactly why you've been warned, why messages have been removed.

I maintain, I dont. If you look at the screenshot you see, that I've stopped reading PNs from a certain moderator, while I was in an open dispute with him, that I had escalated to other moderators at that point.

Dont call me a liar.

If the issue here comes out to me not realizing the warning points earlier, because I intentionally ignored all of those moderators messages, after I reported them and their behavior in here. Then thats the issue.

Also - your moderating behavior and decision making is highly questionable, and only followed the path of least resistance. You completely ignored the behavior that person showed in here, as far as I can tell.

You made my usage of the word 'idiot' the main focus, and the main issue, as far as you were concerned.

You had a moderator actively engaged in making this a populist contraption of lies, and featuring issues, that have nothing to do with americans decisions to vote - and then go to town on the person that moved to not let we have to vote because of BABYKILLERS, and we have to vote, because BIDEN IS SUPPOSED TO DIE TO BE REPLACED, stand in here as the promoted ground level of normalcy of debate.

At that point that was what was promoted as the baseline of discussion we were supposed to have in here.

The moderator was actively destroying critical debate in here.

And I'm not at least interested in timestamps, at this point. You can puzzle together your rectification, for why this meant you had to punish me all the way till you reached catharsis, but your actions here were wrong.

Also, once more dont call me a liar.

 

[Chrisssj2]

That's a fair argument, if we lived in a perfect world where everyone followed the law as it is written. Sadly, this is not the case, so law only exists if there are entities that 1) legislate, 2) execute and 3) adjudicate. That's how you end up with three branches of government. Without arbiters of the law there would be no end to conflict as everyone would have their own interpretation of what is and is not permissable.

No. You are already into slave mentality!!! We need not need this to keep us "Safe" it has never keeped us safe that is an illusion. Only create wars, sivision, poverty/scarcity. We don't need laws. Only now perhaps to a degree because we became so reliant on it. We need to be educated and moral as humans. If you can't trust your citizen humans with that, how are you gonna trust a selected few with that.

Your premise as to there "would be no end to conflict' is flawed and based on inactuality. While like I said it is true, if we completely remove the standing structures it would become a mess. It does not mean it is the Natural way of living. Understand the nature of life and concioussness and you will see your Natural Authority. And the monstrosity religion we call "authority" we have created, which is a FAKE illusion based authority. So ultimately when done right it would be THE END of conflict to a great degree as we know. (not totality ofcourse) It is the other way around my friend. This is the answer many people fail to see. Instead keep on doing the same thing that has proven not to work and create pain and suffering.

Humans arbitrarily deciding what is moral in one border and what is not in the next. That is an incorrect definition of being moral.
VIOLENCE is immoral no matter what border or what law that goes against this, anything that takes your freedom away and that seeks to destroy. Oh hey -----> GOVERNMENT.

Everyone having their own interpertation of what is and is not permissible is HOW LIFE IS MENT TO BE and ACTUALLY is. Though there is a nature principle people can understand/discover/ be educated upon. A self governing principle build in to life if you will. That doesn't self destroy as we do now.
Some of this nature principle actually survives into "written law' but it has been grocely distorted since Natural Lore became written law.

 

[Foxi4]

I maintain, I dont. If you look at the screenshot you see, that I've stopped reading PNs from a certain moderator, while I was in an open dispute with him, that I had escalated to other moderators at that point.

Dont call me a liar.

If the issue here comes out to me not realizing the warning points earlier, because I intentionally ignored all of those moderators messages, after I reported them and their behavior in here. Then thats the issue.

Also - your moderating behavior and decision making is highly questionable, and only followed the path of least resistance. You completely ignored the behavior that person showed in here, as far as I can tell.

You made my usage of the word 'idiot' the main focus, and the main issue, as far as you were concerned.

You had a moderator actively engaged in making this a populist contraption of lies, and featuring issues, that have nothing to do with americans decisions to vote - and then go to town on the person that moved to not let we have to vote because of BABYKILLERS, and we have to vote, because BIDEN IS SUPPOSED TO DIE TO BE REPLACED, stand in here as the promoted ground level of normalcy of debate.

At that point that was what was promoted as the baseline of discussion we were supposed to have in here.

The moderator was actively destroying critical debate in here.

And I'm not at least interested in timestamps, at this point. You can puzzle together your rectification, for why this meant you had to punish me all the way till you reached catharsis, but your actions here were wrong.

Also, once more dont call me a liar.

You're actively destroying debate in here by spilling spaghetti all over the thread. "I don't know what I was warned for because I didn't open the PM" must be the single funniest excuse I have ever heard in my entire career.

 

[Issac]

Dont call me a liar.
Also, once more dont call me a liar.

I have not once called you a liar.

*If the issue here comes out to me not realizing the warning points earlier, because I intentionally ignored all of those moderators messages, after I reported them and their behavior in here. Then thats the issue.
*Also - your moderating behavior and decision making is highly questionable, and only followed the path of least resistance. You completely ignored the behavior that person showed in here, as far as I can tell.
*You made my usage of the word 'idiot' the main focus, and the main issue, as far as you were concerned.
*And I'm not at least interested in timestamps, at this point. You can puzzle together your rectification, for why this meant you had to punish me all the way till you reached catharsis, but your actions here were wrong.

*Claiming that you have not been told why you were warned, causing a fuzz and crying about unfair moderation... when the reason you are unaware is because you have not read the AUTOMATIC PM you get when getting warned... Well that just tells everyone here something

*How come my moderating behaviour and decision making is questionable? I think most people would disagree in general. And in this particular case, what have I done that is questionable? Please tell me which moderating behaviour and which decision that is questionable? As far as I know, I've looked at facts, and explained why you were warned and had some messages removed.

*It was not just the word "idiot" and you know that. But yes. the main focus here IS that you aren't arguing your opinion, you are calling people names, flaming people and just being rude. Try arguing your opinions without calling people names, and you'll see that the posts WON'T be removed. It's extremely simple. You seem very angry that someone might use the term babykillers, so shoot down that person's use of that word with proper arguments. And if you think that term is so highly offensive, why not report that post instead? You won't win any arguments just by throwing a tantrum.

*If you aren't interested in timestamps, then why are you saying that you were warned AFTER a certain post and after it was reported, when the truth in the matter is that it was way before. The timestamps shows the order of things. If you are trying to paint a picture that you are being treated a certain way because of some reasons you yourself made up, then the timestamps are very simple to look at.
And again, my actions here are wrong? What actions? Writing a reply here? I do believe that a supervisor is allowed to reply on the forum

Also:

Luckily - I went to other moderating stuff, before this had happened. (See screenshot.)

Again, look at the timestamps in your own screenshot.
The unread explanation of your warning was on THURSDAY. The message you sent to the site admin was "Yesterday" which is FRIDAY. You did not contact the other moderating staff before this had happened. You did it afterwards.
The reason it is lower in the list is because it's read by you, while the unread ones stay at the top. LOL

 

[Lacius]

It's only the job of the IRS to look over peoples taxes. If there was some glaring abnormality they probably would have caught it already.

The IRS does not look for, for example, evidence of bank fraud in one's taxes. They only care about your taxes and tax law. If the IRS were to look for evidence of bank fraud (they don't), they wouldn't find anything because they're missing half the evidence (e.g. statements made to the bank that contradict the tax returns, etc.).

It takes a criminal investigation to uncover evidence of bank fraud, and tax returns provided by the IRS can (and often are) used as evidence in conjunction with other evidence.

The House has a constitutional obligation to investigate alleged crimes by the president, and the president has allegedly committed bank fraud, among other crimes. I haven't heard a single compelling reason why the House should not get Trump's taxes.

 

[gregory-samba]

The IRS does not look for, for example, evidence of bank fraud in one's taxes. They only care about your taxes and tax law. If the IRS were to look for evidence of bank fraud (they don't), they wouldn't find anything because they're missing half the evidence (e.g. statements made to the bank that contradict the tax returns, etc.).

It takes a criminal investigation to uncover evidence of bank fraud, and tax returns provided by the IRS can (and often are) used as evidence in conjunction with other evidence.

The House has a constitutional obligation to investigate alleged crimes by the president, and the president has allegedly committed bank fraud, among other crimes. I haven't heard a single compelling reason why the House should not get Trump's taxes.

What alleged crimes are those? If the police had evidence of a crime then a legal subpoena could be granted by a Judge to get Trump's tax records. Here's the thing, there's no evidence of wrong doing at this point in time. What's taking place is the Liberals want Trump's tax records to comb through them to try to find something to fuck Trump over with. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. You don't get to say "we're going to go fuck this person over regardless of guilt" and then magically get access to their personal information to do so. There's privacy laws and like I've stated like 3 times now, Trump already handed over his tax records ... to the IRS.

 

[Lacius]

What alleged crimes are those?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump

If the police had evidence of a crime then a legal subpoena could be granted by a Judge to get Trump's tax records.

The Trump administration defied those subpoenaed, and they sued to block others. Have you been paying attention?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_returns_of_Donald_Trump

Here's the thing, there's no evidence of wrong doing at this point in time.

We have evidence that Trump has committed crimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump

I recommend looking at Trump's criminal obstruction of justice in the Mueller Report first. With regard to tax returns, I recommend starting with the hush-money payments.

What's taking place is the Liberals want Trump's tax records to comb through them to try to find something to fuck Trump over with. Sorry, it doesn't work like that. You don't get to say "we're going to go fuck this person over regardless of guilt" and then magically get access to their personal information to do so. There's privacy laws and like I've stated like 3 times now, Trump already handed over his tax records ... to the IRS.

That's not what's happening.

 

[gregory-samba]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump


The Trump administration defied those subpoenaed, and they sued to block others. Have you been paying attention?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_returns_of_Donald_Trump


We have evidence that Trump has committed crimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump

I recommend looking at Trump's criminal obstruction of justice in the Mueller Report first. With regard to tax returns, I recommend starting with the hush-money payments.

That's not what's happening.

I'll look over those pages, but at first glace this stuck out.

Separately, the House Oversight Committee issued a subpoena to Trump's accounting firm for tax records and other records, as part of the committee's investigation into (1) whether Trump "may have engaged in illegal conduct before and during his tenure in office";

I'll translate that for you; witch hunt.

They've got no evidence he did anything illegal regarding his taxes, they just want his tax records to try to fuck him over.

As per that other page, it seems most of his legal matters were simply lawsuits and not criminal cases and out of those most have been settled or ruled on. The only open matter (at first glace) is Congress's witch hunt. The page also starts with mentioning that being successful comes with being sued a lot so most of that entire page, the stuff Trump was sued for, is normal day to day business for rich people. Though, this statement made me chuckle a little bit. "Barr said that the special counsel found did not find that Trump colluded with Russia."

 

[Lacius]

I'll look over those pages, but at first glace this stuck out.



I'll translate that for you; witch hunt.

They've got no evidence he did anything illegal regarding his taxes, they just want his tax records to try to fuck him over.

As per that other page, it seems most of his legal matters were simply lawsuits and not criminal cases and out of those most have been settled or ruled on. The only open matter (at first glace) is Congress's witch hunt. The page also starts with mentioning that being successful comes with being sued a lot so most of that entire page, the stuff Trump was sued for, is normal day to day business for rich people. Though, this statement made me chuckle a little bit. "Barr said that the special counsel found did not find that Trump colluded with Russia."

The House Oversight Committee issued a subpoena after Cohen's testimony, dude.

Edit: Also, Barr is a hack whose statements abotu the report contradict the report.