While he plays a Senator on TV, in reality he’s just another out of work circus clown.
This photo of a Japanese American internment camp represents one of the darkest chapters of our history. Yesterday it was announced Donald Trump will be reopening one of these camps to detain migrant children. These children belong in homes, schools, and parks—not prison camps. pic.twitter.com/Ea1FBfCcWF
— Senator Jeff Merkley (@SenJeffMerkley) June 12, 2019
——————
1. The facility Trump is sending illegal aliens to is Fort Sill Army Base
2. It's the same facility that Obama sent illegal aliens to in 2014
Like the hack above, the hacks in media jumped on it too.
Again, this is why we mock you.
Trump administration plans to use Fort Sill, which previously served as a Japanese internment camp, to house 1,400 migrant children https://t.co/2IYALnbtmC
“When the tax cuts were passed in 2017, one major sticking point was the limit on how much of your state and local taxes (SALT) could be listed as a deduction on your federal return. The amount was capped at $10,000 and this brought howls of protest from Democrats, particularly those from higher-income states like New York and California. They quickly got to work seeking to thwart the rules by allowing taxpayers to “donate” the extra amount to a “charity” set up specifically for the purpose of evading the law. That’s about to come to a halt, as a new rule from the IRS goes into effect. (CNN)
Residents of high-tax states like New York and New Jersey will no longer be able to bypass a $10,000 limit on federal deductions for state and local taxes.
The Treasury Department on Tuesday finalized regulations that would bar individuals in high-tax states from creating charitable funds in exchange for state tax credits — a maneuver developed as a workaround for changes to the treatment of state and local taxes under the 2017 tax reform…
“The regulation is based on a longstanding principle of tax law: When a taxpayer receives a valuable benefit in return for a donation to charity, the taxpayer can deduct only the net value of the donation as a charitable contribution,” the Treasury Department said in a statement.
I’d been wondering how long it was going to take for the IRS to get around to doing this. Most of these schemes that were enacted in primarily blue states were obvious dodges from the beginning. The one in New York, for example, allowed taxpayers to take the amount of state tax in excess of $10,000 and make transfers to funds controlled by state or local governments, or other transferees specified by the state, in exchange for credits against the state or local taxes.”
They described these transfers as “fully deductible charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.” But since when is giving money to a government controlled fund considered a donation to a charity? (Well, in the case of New York, the budget is so badly managed they could probably use some charity, but that’s not the point.) It was a scheme intended to stick a thumb in the eye of the Republican controlled Congress and a way to get around the law.”
I agree. Perhaps, in addition to the legislation we are already working on together to ban Members of Congress from becoming lobbyists, we can team up here as well. A simple, clean bill making birth control available over the counter. Interested? https://t.co/7kh3kqxN1w
Still waitin’ on that proof you swore you had Schiffty.
This lying hack needs to be surgically removed from Congress, before his stupidity spreads to the rest of the body.
Never mind…… too late……
.@RepAdamSchiff didn’t believe me today when I told him Comey circumvented Congress by opening an investigation into the Trump campaign. Maybe he’ll change his mind once he hears it straight from Comey’s mouth? WATCH ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/xHtmGZTERe
“What About ‘Double Jeopardy?’ Why Are House Dems Allowed To Try President Trump For The Same Offense For The Fifth Time?”
“Last I knew, this was the United States of America. We lived by a Constitution which guaranteed a set of protections against tyranny for our citizens.
One of those protections is the guarantee that a person accused of a crime cannot be “twice put in jeopardy” for the same crime. This is called double jeopardy.
The text book definition of double jeopardy is as follows: “A procedural defense which prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges and on the same facts, following a valid acquittal or conviction.”
President Trump was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation which officially began in July 2016, although there is evidence that the FBI had been spying on his campaign before that time. The FBI investigation ended when the Special Counsel investigation was initiated in May 2017. FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified under oath that ten months into their investigation, there was still no evidence that Trump had colluded with the Russians to win the presidency.
After 22 months of intense examination, a highly partisan group of Democratic donors with unlimited resources at their disposal were still unable to find sufficient evidence that Trump had colluded with the Russians.
And boy did they try? We’ve already uncovered three instances in the Mueller report where members of his team manipulated information to misrepresent the facts.”
————–
“Now House Democrats, led by the poisonous, repulsive, snake-like Adam Schiff and the buffoonish, fat, repellent Jerrold Nadler want to try the President for the fifth time.
Below is a video of the entire House Intelligence Committee hearing on “The Mueller Report: Lessons Learned.” Schiff’s opening statement begins at 8:15. Watch it if you can. It will make your blood boil and your stomach churn.”
Someone I know is a brilliant student at a Catholic university. She was complaining because the health center on campus did not supply any birth control, much less any free birth control at the $70k a year university.
“You do know, birth control— particularly to unmarried people— is not approved by the Catholic Church?”
Student: “What difference does that make? Not everyone here is Catholic.”
“But the values are. How far away from your dorm is a pharmacy?”
Student: “About two blocks.”
Even her liberal mother stared at her.
“So, you believe a 2000 year old church’s tradition and teaching should be jettisoned so you don’t have to walk two blocks?”
Student: “ Oh, I don’t need it. It’s the principle.”
THIS is how you deal with the climate on today’s college campuses. A few more of these, and the schools will have no choice but to clean up the mob rule on campus.
“Here’s an excerpt from Oberlin Pays for Smearing the Town Grocer:
On a different campus on a different day, it is unlikely a simple shoplifting case would have gained much attention. But the incident occurred the day after Donald Trump was elected president, in the wake of which Oberlin students appeared ready to build on the school’s history of left-wing activism to exercise their angst. Thus this otherwise unexciting crime became their cause célèbre….
This historic case received scant media attention during the trial. My publication, Legal Insurrection, was the only national outlet to be present for the entire trial, because we felt Gibson Bros. v. Oberlin College was emblematic of tensions in American culture, particularly the “town vs. gown” divide that pits activist colleges against the places that host them.
In this case, Oberlin students and administrators appeared happy to smear a family-run institution in pursuit of a “social justice” agenda. Ignoring the facts, they attempted to destroy a business without concern for the damage they were inflicting on a family and workers in their own community….
The Gibson family showed that, using the legal system, it is possible to fight back and win. The verdict in Gibson Bros. v. Oberlin confirms that colleges and universities aren’t immune from accountability for participating in aggressive activism among their students, especially when that activism is built on lies and smears.
For Oberlin, it didn’t have to end this way. At the height of the controversy, the Gibson family says it asked the school to send a letter to students reiterating what had already become clear: The bakery didn’t engage in racial profiling. Administrators refused. Had the college agreed to refute the baseless claims of racism, it is unlikely that the Gibson family would have pursued the matter in court.
The verdict is in, and it regards more than money. The jury held accountable an unhinged progressive activist college that lost concern for the lives of working people in its community.”
I have noticed that I will stop what I’m doing to listen to what Trey Gowdy has to say.
(I have never heard of either name before. Not that it matters, just curious.)
Wandering Views 
While he plays a Senator on TV, in reality he’s just another out of work circus clown.
——————
—————–
—————
—————-
LikeLike
Like the hack above, the hacks in media jumped on it too.
Again, this is why we mock you.
————
————-
LikeLike
Here comes the pain for blue state residents.
https://hotair.com/archives/2019/06/12/irs-limit-salt-caps/
“When the tax cuts were passed in 2017, one major sticking point was the limit on how much of your state and local taxes (SALT) could be listed as a deduction on your federal return. The amount was capped at $10,000 and this brought howls of protest from Democrats, particularly those from higher-income states like New York and California. They quickly got to work seeking to thwart the rules by allowing taxpayers to “donate” the extra amount to a “charity” set up specifically for the purpose of evading the law. That’s about to come to a halt, as a new rule from the IRS goes into effect. (CNN)
Residents of high-tax states like New York and New Jersey will no longer be able to bypass a $10,000 limit on federal deductions for state and local taxes.
The Treasury Department on Tuesday finalized regulations that would bar individuals in high-tax states from creating charitable funds in exchange for state tax credits — a maneuver developed as a workaround for changes to the treatment of state and local taxes under the 2017 tax reform…
“The regulation is based on a longstanding principle of tax law: When a taxpayer receives a valuable benefit in return for a donation to charity, the taxpayer can deduct only the net value of the donation as a charitable contribution,” the Treasury Department said in a statement.
I’d been wondering how long it was going to take for the IRS to get around to doing this. Most of these schemes that were enacted in primarily blue states were obvious dodges from the beginning. The one in New York, for example, allowed taxpayers to take the amount of state tax in excess of $10,000 and make transfers to funds controlled by state or local governments, or other transferees specified by the state, in exchange for credits against the state or local taxes.”
They described these transfers as “fully deductible charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.” But since when is giving money to a government controlled fund considered a donation to a charity? (Well, in the case of New York, the budget is so badly managed they could probably use some charity, but that’s not the point.) It was a scheme intended to stick a thumb in the eye of the Republican controlled Congress and a way to get around the law.”
LikeLike
Thoughts?
————-
LikeLike
Still waitin’ on that proof you swore you had Schiffty.
This lying hack needs to be surgically removed from Congress, before his stupidity spreads to the rest of the body.
Never mind…… too late……
—————
https://twitter.com/KathrynMaga/status/1138894129348263936
LikeLike
Super secret double, double jeopardy.
It’s a thing now, because Orange Man Bad.
https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/06/12/double-jeopardy-adam-schiff-allowed-try-president-trump-offense-fifth-time/
“What About ‘Double Jeopardy?’ Why Are House Dems Allowed To Try President Trump For The Same Offense For The Fifth Time?”
“Last I knew, this was the United States of America. We lived by a Constitution which guaranteed a set of protections against tyranny for our citizens.
One of those protections is the guarantee that a person accused of a crime cannot be “twice put in jeopardy” for the same crime. This is called double jeopardy.
The text book definition of double jeopardy is as follows: “A procedural defense which prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges and on the same facts, following a valid acquittal or conviction.”
President Trump was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation which officially began in July 2016, although there is evidence that the FBI had been spying on his campaign before that time. The FBI investigation ended when the Special Counsel investigation was initiated in May 2017. FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified under oath that ten months into their investigation, there was still no evidence that Trump had colluded with the Russians to win the presidency.
After 22 months of intense examination, a highly partisan group of Democratic donors with unlimited resources at their disposal were still unable to find sufficient evidence that Trump had colluded with the Russians.
And boy did they try? We’ve already uncovered three instances in the Mueller report where members of his team manipulated information to misrepresent the facts.”
————–
“Now House Democrats, led by the poisonous, repulsive, snake-like Adam Schiff and the buffoonish, fat, repellent Jerrold Nadler want to try the President for the fifth time.
Below is a video of the entire House Intelligence Committee hearing on “The Mueller Report: Lessons Learned.” Schiff’s opening statement begins at 8:15. Watch it if you can. It will make your blood boil and your stomach churn.”
LikeLike
Someone I know is a brilliant student at a Catholic university. She was complaining because the health center on campus did not supply any birth control, much less any free birth control at the $70k a year university.
“You do know, birth control— particularly to unmarried people— is not approved by the Catholic Church?”
Student: “What difference does that make? Not everyone here is Catholic.”
“But the values are. How far away from your dorm is a pharmacy?”
Student: “About two blocks.”
Even her liberal mother stared at her.
“So, you believe a 2000 year old church’s tradition and teaching should be jettisoned so you don’t have to walk two blocks?”
Student: “ Oh, I don’t need it. It’s the principle.”
Exactly.
LikeLiked by 2 people
THIS is how you deal with the climate on today’s college campuses. A few more of these, and the schools will have no choice but to clean up the mob rule on campus.
33 million, with damages.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/oberlin-college-hit-with-maximum-punitive-damages-capped-at-22-million-by-law-in-gibsons-bakery-case/#more-286093
“Oberlin College hit with maximum PUNITIVE DAMAGES (capped at $22 million by law) in Gibson’s Bakery case
Added to $11 million compensatory damages, brings total to $33 million”
————————
Background for those unfamiliar.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/gibsons-bakery-v-oberlin-college-the-jury-held-accountable-an-unhinged-progressive-activist-college/
“Here’s an excerpt from Oberlin Pays for Smearing the Town Grocer:
On a different campus on a different day, it is unlikely a simple shoplifting case would have gained much attention. But the incident occurred the day after Donald Trump was elected president, in the wake of which Oberlin students appeared ready to build on the school’s history of left-wing activism to exercise their angst. Thus this otherwise unexciting crime became their cause célèbre….
This historic case received scant media attention during the trial. My publication, Legal Insurrection, was the only national outlet to be present for the entire trial, because we felt Gibson Bros. v. Oberlin College was emblematic of tensions in American culture, particularly the “town vs. gown” divide that pits activist colleges against the places that host them.
In this case, Oberlin students and administrators appeared happy to smear a family-run institution in pursuit of a “social justice” agenda. Ignoring the facts, they attempted to destroy a business without concern for the damage they were inflicting on a family and workers in their own community….
The Gibson family showed that, using the legal system, it is possible to fight back and win. The verdict in Gibson Bros. v. Oberlin confirms that colleges and universities aren’t immune from accountability for participating in aggressive activism among their students, especially when that activism is built on lies and smears.
For Oberlin, it didn’t have to end this way. At the height of the controversy, the Gibson family says it asked the school to send a letter to students reiterating what had already become clear: The bakery didn’t engage in racial profiling. Administrators refused. Had the college agreed to refute the baseless claims of racism, it is unlikely that the Gibson family would have pursued the matter in court.
The verdict is in, and it regards more than money. The jury held accountable an unhinged progressive activist college that lost concern for the lives of working people in its community.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have noticed that I will stop what I’m doing to listen to what Trey Gowdy has to say.
(I have never heard of either name before. Not that it matters, just curious.)
LikeLike