Check out topic: Biden Builds on Trump’s Policies to Get Tougher on China
another state to require trumps taxes to get on the ballet
Jul 31, 2019 12:08:33 #
The Critical Critic wrote:
I was meaning freedom of association. It’s not the government’s concern with whom I do business, or how I earn my money, unless and until there’s an accusation of impropriety.
I’m not sure the fourth fits. They don’t want to seize the returns, they want the candidate to provide the returns by law. The candidate doesn’t have to if they don’t want to, however they will not be allowed on the ballot. But, I can almost see that as a form of coercion.
I’m not sure the fourth fits. They don’t want to seize the returns, they want the candidate to provide the returns by law. The candidate doesn’t have to if they don’t want to, however they will not be allowed on the ballot. But, I can almost see that as a form of coercion.
It might be a little difficult to actually 'seize' someone's tax returns. However, searching is another aspect of the 'fourth':
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..."
In my opinion. it is an unreasonable search, as there's no reasonable purpose for it beyond satisfying idle curiosity...
Jul 31, 2019 12:21:55 #
Larry the Legend wrote:
It might be a little difficult to actually 'seize' someone's tax returns. However, searching is another aspect of the 'fourth':
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..."
In my opinion. it is an unreasonable search, as there's no reasonable purpose for it beyond satisfying idle curiosity...
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..."
In my opinion. it is an unreasonable search, as there's no reasonable purpose for it beyond satisfying idle curiosity...
A very interesting take, Larry. But now we’re getting into defining unreasonable. An argument could be made that a law passed, is a just or reasonable law, deeming said search, reasonable. I do like your mindset though.
Jul 31, 2019 12:26:52 #
Barracuda2020 wrote:
But that's not what they've done, they didn't set new requirements to be president, they set a requirement to be on the ballad. I think they got this
The ballad? Are we singing now?
Jul 31, 2019 12:31:09 #
Jul 31, 2019 12:34:35 #
The Critical Critic wrote:
A very interesting take, Larry. But now we’re getting into defining unreasonable. An argument could be made that a law passed, is a just or reasonable law, deeming said search, reasonable. I do like your mindset though.
Reminds me of the old cop 'gotcha' where they ask if you mind being searched and give you the old 'if you refuse, what are you hiding?' speech. They are 'asking' because they have no reasonable or 'just cause' impetus so they're going fishing. "I do not consent to any searches" will often result in a long waiting period where the 'canine officer' *indicates*, giving them legal cover to turn your belongings over. Whether they find anything or not is irrelevant, because the search is now deemed 'legal'.
Jul 31, 2019 12:43:03 #
Larry the Legend wrote:
Reminds me of the old cop 'gotcha' where they ask ... (show quote)
Lol so true! An excellent analogy. What gets me is, after they’re done, your vehicle is trashed with your belongings thrown everywhere, they should have to put everything back exactly as they found it.
Jul 31, 2019 12:50:59 #
The Critical Critic wrote:
Lol so true! An excellent analogy. What gets me is, after they’re done, your vehicle is trashed with your belongings thrown everywhere, they should have to put everything back exactly as they found it.
That's not a 'legal requirement' either. Trash it and walk away. They did it to me once, and even left my car seats sitting on the side of the road.
Check out topic: Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News, May 18, 2024, #458
Jul 31, 2019 13:04:52 #
Trump's name doesn't need to be printed on the ballot
It'll be written in.
And why is everyone so interested in Trump's finances?
It'll be written in.
And why is everyone so interested in Trump's finances?
Jul 31, 2019 13:06:12 #
Kevyn wrote:
Of course it’s legal, states run their own elections.
Once again Kevyn is DEAD wrong! 1) it is a NATIONAL election and states cannot dictate national (federal government)election requirements. 2) this tax return BS started with Nixon voluntarily submitting his tax returns, there is NO FEDERAL law requiring this. 3) California tried to do this 2 years ago and then governor Jerry Brown nixed it due to constitutional issues. And 4) California tried this type of crap years ago with their out of state SMOG fee requiring citizens to pay an additional $300.00 if the individual purchased a car in any state but CA. The CA law was shot down for violations of the interstate commerce clause and it cost CA hundreds of millions of dollars to refund citizens the fee plus interest. A state CANNOT override federal law or federal election requirements! Federal laws trump (no pun intended) state laws it's in OUR constitution. A state can improve on a federal law but they CANNOT restrict a federal law.
Jul 31, 2019 13:07:05 #
promilitary wrote:
Trump's name doesn't need to be printed on the ballot
It'll be written in.
And why is everyone so interested in Trump's finances?
It'll be written in.
And why is everyone so interested in Trump's finances?
'Everyone' isn't. Just those in Congress who are dead jealous of his resounding successes and need something to make them even more so. Who knows, maybe its another one of their 'fishing expeditions'.
Jul 31, 2019 13:09:34 #
RickyDCUSMC wrote:
Federal laws trump (no pun intended) state laws it's in OUR constitution.
Good pun all the same! I smiled...
Jul 31, 2019 13:10:38 #
Snoopy wrote:
Lone:
It is called a ballot, you asshole!
Snoopy
It is called a ballot, you asshole!
Snoopy
Well, you got the 'asshole' part about right.
Jul 31, 2019 13:18:01 #
Larry the Legend wrote:
That's not a 'legal requirement' either. Trash it and walk away. They did it to me once, and even left my car seats sitting on the side of the road.
That’s messed up... doesn’t help to garner a favorable view of police officers either.
Jul 31, 2019 13:21:04 #
The Critical Critic wrote:
That’s messed up... doesn’t help to garner a favorable view of police officers either.
Well, you might say I got a little 'lippy' with the one big gorilla who thought it was a good idea to ask if I had any weapons in the car. I told him that's none of his business. He didn't like that. Next thing I know I'm handcuffed on the curb as they rip my car to bits, because the 'canine officer' *indicated*.
Jul 31, 2019 13:22:12 #
promilitary wrote:
Trump's name doesn't need to be printed on the ballot
It'll be written in.
It'll be written in.
That’s certainly an option. But in all seriousness, who cares if his name is on the ballot there anyway. In 2016 he only received a little more than 30% of the votes. Lost that state and still won. And he’ll do it again in 2020.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out topic: Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News, May 18, 2024, #458