TBayXXXVII

Trump was convicted of tax fraud? Really. Sounds like the court didn't see that way. I don't care that a bunch of liberals in Manhattan found Trump guilty of anything. I'll take the rest of your post as being in denial of everything that's in front of your face. I have zero clue of how LLC's work? What did I say in my post that was wrong? You are incorrect when you say that the info is private. I gave you a link telling you specifically what states allow anonymity for LLC holders. Are you telling me that all 500± LLC's that Trump owns are in Delaware (weird... where Joe is from), Nevada, New Mexico, and Wyoming? Tell me, what states are Hunter's LLC's in? Tell they're in Delaware. Go ahead... tell me. YOU CAN INDEED, find out who owns the LLC's and what they're for... you just have to do the leg work. Also, like I said, I have no idea what Trump's LLC's are, again, they're not private, and again, leftists would've found out if they were nefarious. Also, I even said I don't know what Hunter's are. Do you? How can you say there's no corruption if you have no idea if there is or isn't... you're just assuming there isn't without having an info. Yet, you have no info about Trump and you're saying he is. Who's the one that's bias here? Keep your head in the sand sheep. Baaaa baaaa baaaa

Again, we ALL KNOW why Trump has them. They're for real estate. What's Hunter's? We can back track Trump's history... his dad owned property and turned it into a million dollar enterprise. Trump took money from his BUSINESSMAN father and turned that into a billion dollar enterprise. He has many LLC's which are most likely for real estate purposes. We can assume that because the leftist article you posted didn't list any nefarious ones. I'm pretty confident that if there were nefarious ones, he'd have made it known to the world. The reason I say this is because you think Trump is corrupt and Biden isn't. So, let's back track Hunter's history... Hunter has 17 LLC's. What are his businesses? Where did the money come from? Well, we know the money came from Chinese and Ukrainian sources. Jobs that he got, to which he was not qualified for, via connections to his father. His father being a career politician. So again, what are Hunter's LLC's? What business could be possibly be in? In the setting I laid out for you... who's most likely to be corrupt?

Yes, but oddly, you seem to think that Trump having 500 is odd? Also, we KNOW what Trump's business is. It's in real estate. What's Hunter's?

Agreed. We just have many here who think that it's only the right that is guilty of it.

It actually can be public information (only 4 states... Delaware, Nevada, New Mexico, and Wyoming that allow anonymous filings for LLC's). Also, it's clear that people can find out what Trump's LLC's are, because you provided a link to someone who found out that Trump has over 500 of them. My cousin works in the tax assessors office in a town in North Jersey. One guy owns over 200 LLC's. It primarily Section 8 housing. What happens is that a person ("Developer"), gets an LLC and buys a property that has been foreclosed on, under that LLC. He then refurbishes that property and turns it into a multi-family residence (low income). These properties get special tax emptions, that's another reason the person/developer gets the LLC. A lot of times, the LLC owner will be listed as the address. For example, for a property at 125 Johnston Street, the owner name will be listed as "125 Johnson Street LLC". What you can do is go to city hall and ask who is the person who owns that property. You can also get their mailing address. Well, in 46 states you can do that. Here's my guess. Trump is doing the same thing, he's just not using in on Section 8 housing, but on higher income properties.

I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the leftist government. A point that our board lefties always choose to ignore. That's all.

Understood, but that wasn't the national message, was it? There were cities and states that implemented new policies because of it. Do you think those same cities and states will respond the same way? I'm willing to bet that the answer is "No". Again, we both know why, don't we?

He comes across as a very uneducated person. It's good for the folks of Florida that he took his ignorance to another state.

I think we all know what incident.

Well, "IT's" a car right? Vehicles are genderless, are they not?

So, a few years ago there was political outrage over a singular incident. That incident sparked national outrage from one side of the aisle. To supplement their claims, they gave about 10 to 15 other examples as proof. We have here, 350 incidents (as an educator, you should know that's a substantially higher number). I'm curious as to where the political outrage is from that same side of the aisle who seems to be on the side of victims?

Wasn't that supposed to be the idea a few years back? I thought the NFL said they wanted to schedule all division games early and late. I don't think they've held to the "early" part, but they have stuck to the "late" part, over the years.

While true, the NFL has always put the Super Bowl champion on the opening Thursday night. The choice of the Lions is very suspect though. In years past, it's usually been a noted "good team" or key matchup... with the Lions being their opponent, a blowout seems eminent. Also, fantasy footballers make every game worth watching.

This seems to be an opinion, not fact. In the Daily Mail article, they said the prompts were handed out to students. The USA Today article credits the Superintendent as saying they weren't. Is there proof that one is right and the other is wrong? On the surface between the two articles, it's basically "he said / she said". The mayor says it was distributed to the kids, the SI says it wasn't. May be purely coincidental, but said Superintendent resigned to apparently take a new job, just two months later. "Health reasons", is stated as being the cause of said school board president, to resign 9 months after that. From what I've read, the others are still in place, but the top 2 peeps in charge, left within 10 months of the article coming out.

In what way have Republican's slavishly support police unions? Average police officer salaries by state: Link The national average is a touch under $45k. Average teacher salaries by state: Link: The national average is a touch under $63k. (to note, there are only 2 states where teachers average less than $50k per year... there are only 5 states where police offices average OVER $50k per year). If you're talking about policy, you'll notice that the Democrat monopolized cities have the biggest problems with crime... it certainly isn't Republican's handling any police contracts in those cities. Clearly, you are ill-informed. In my post that you quoted, highlight where I said anything about illegal immigrants and crime?

Judging by this, I'm thinking that it's Pickett and none of the guys in San Fran. We all know that Darnold sucks... so if there's no differentiation between him, the guy who can't get/stay on the field, and Mr. Irrelevant, then neither are that good.

LOL, definitely Gutter and Rusty.

This is how you know the Left has gone full retard. Thinking that everyone should be taxed at a fair rate is NOT a "far-right" idea. In other words, the Left's standpoint is, "if you don't agree with me/us, you're "far-right".

I'd prefer someone other than Trump. Always have. Though, I do love how he pizzes off the leftists. I wouldn't be upset if he won again for that reason. Again, my preference is for someone else.

Correct. Communist is the appropriate term.

The "They need to feed their family" argument never works for me when you constantly see these instances being at 7-11 or joints like this and not at a real grocery store. I mean, if you really need to feed your family, go to Whole Foods and steal $200 worth of food that is good for you. At least at that point, I'll listen. But not when they're stealing microwavable burritos from a convenience store/gas station.

I don't really think that is the case. The bulk of the people running for political office at the federal level are generally people who were at the state level first. That won't change.

I'm not for term limits, but I'm ok with age limits. I think everyone who holds a federal position... House, Senate, WH, and SC should be between the ages of 40 and 70.

Don't tell him that! We want people like him to stay where they are.

Here Tim, if you'd like... I'll start. If others want to chime in and add more, feel free. In no particular order.... Unconditional support of unions - Unions force, not encourage or support, but force higher wages. This leads to lesser quality of work (because unions make it harder to have their members be fired), for an arbitrarily increased cost. The end result is a higher cost of goods and services that lower income people are forced to pay. Demonizing the police - When they do this, it emboldens the criminal element to be more reckless and be a nuisance on society. The net result is higher costs to repairing or replacing broken or stolen property... again, raising the costs of goods and services to lower income people. Not prosecuting crime - Kind of piggy backs off the above, but as these criminals get arrested, the Liberal DA's don't prosecute the crimes. ON TOP OF THAT, they even go as far as to set a dollar amount as to which they ALLOW people to steal. Openly inviting illegal immigrants into their towns. The rising amount of people in these communities increases the amount of Section 8 housing and decreasing the value of the neighboring properties. These neighboring properties are generally in lower income areas to begin with, so increasing the number of lower income housing makes it harder for legal citizens to build equity in their current housing. Above are 4 policies that specifically negatively affect low income earners... whom Liberals supposedly are helping, but are actively hurting them.