The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
#1101
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,507
Total Cats: 4,079
your logic, not mine.
They paid a fine, so they must be guilty. Even though they were cleared of wrong doing and have still yet to recover the funds.
#1108
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,507
Total Cats: 4,079
He faced 75 ethics charges and only one took.
The charge was about how he financed his "Renewing American Civilization" class at Kent state by using a tax-exempt status, arguing it was partison class--thus forfieting tax-exeption.
He agreed to pay the fine, like many people do, to just get it over with.
3.5 years later, the IRS claims he violated no tax laws.
But, since he paid a fine, you state he's guilty of a crime.
I use that same logic to say that toyotas do accelerate on their own. I get to that conclusion by using your logic.
Toyota gets fined 16.375 million dollars. Pays. and then is later found innocent of all charges and there is no fault.
but since they paid a fine, the cars really DO self-accelerate.
The charge was about how he financed his "Renewing American Civilization" class at Kent state by using a tax-exempt status, arguing it was partison class--thus forfieting tax-exeption.
He agreed to pay the fine, like many people do, to just get it over with.
3.5 years later, the IRS claims he violated no tax laws.
Originally Posted by IRS EXAUNERATION
The ... course taught principles from American civilization that could be used by each American in everyday life whether the person is a welfare recipient, the head of a large corporation, or a politician.
But, since he paid a fine, you state he's guilty of a crime.
I use that same logic to say that toyotas do accelerate on their own. I get to that conclusion by using your logic.
Toyota gets fined 16.375 million dollars. Pays. and then is later found innocent of all charges and there is no fault.
but since they paid a fine, the cars really DO self-accelerate.
#1109
Brain, seriously bro.
Let me quote you something reallll quick here...It's already been linked and you could read it for yourself.
It's not "Did he violate" or "They set him up" or anything else.
He admitted to it, dude. And it was not "just one charge" that he admitted to.
Let me quote you something reallll quick here...It's already been linked and you could read it for yourself.
Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.
He admitted to it, dude. And it was not "just one charge" that he admitted to.
#1111
I'm a terrible person
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,174
Total Cats: 180
Rep. Jim McDermott (Wash.), who had been the ethics panel's top Democrat, was among those who voted "present."
He withdrew from the Gingrich case last week after being implicated in the leaking of a tape recording of a telephone conference call involving the speaker, which Republicans said was illegally made.
He withdrew from the Gingrich case last week after being implicated in the leaking of a tape recording of a telephone conference call involving the speaker, which Republicans said was illegally made.
#1112
Brainy, you are more closely aligned to Democrats than I am sweetie. We've been over this.
And, so are you saying that Gingrich was lying when he admitted to violating multiple laws? Seriously, I'm just going by what the guy said himself here.
Trust me bro, if they are from WA and in congress/the Senate, they are full on scumbag.
And, so are you saying that Gingrich was lying when he admitted to violating multiple laws? Seriously, I'm just going by what the guy said himself here.
Originally Posted by FRT_Fun
LOL well looks like the people trying to hang him got hung themselves. It seems to me he just accepted it to get it over with faster. In the end no one really knows, but the circumstances around it sure make it look like he was a scape goat.
#1113
I'm a terrible person
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,174
Total Cats: 180
Do you not thing it's possible that he decided to admit to something that didn't happen, rather then have the investigation go on for longer and in the end probably hurt him more even if he didn't do it? And obviously now he can't just say he admitted to something he didn't do, then he would look even worse. The only thing he can do is continue to say yes he did it, and say he is sorry.
I'm not saying I believe one way or the other, he probably has done something illegal or shady whether it was this or not. But find me a politician who hasn't.
I'm not saying I believe one way or the other, he probably has done something illegal or shady whether it was this or not. But find me a politician who hasn't.
#1114
Do you not thing it's possible that he decided to admit to something that didn't happen, rather then have the investigation go on for longer and in the end probably hurt him more even if he didn't do it? And obviously now he can't just say he admitted to something he didn't do, then he would look even worse. The only thing he can do is continue to say yes he did it, and say he is sorry.
I'm not saying I believe one way or the other, he probably has done something illegal or shady whether it was this or not. But find me a politician who hasn't.
I'm not saying I believe one way or the other, he probably has done something illegal or shady whether it was this or not. But find me a politician who hasn't.
And here's a second. Rand Paul.
#1117
I'm a terrible person
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,174
Total Cats: 180
I still haven't seen any empirical evidence that Newt has done anything.
Anyways I'm not here to prove that he has done something, I'm just here to say it's obvious that all politicians need to make certain decisions. I'm not against shady stuff, I think to a certain extent it needs to be done. But when it gets out of hand, and becomes only for personal benefit I have an issue.
Anyways I'm not here to prove that he has done something, I'm just here to say it's obvious that all politicians need to make certain decisions. I'm not against shady stuff, I think to a certain extent it needs to be done. But when it gets out of hand, and becomes only for personal benefit I have an issue.
#1118
I still haven't seen any empirical evidence that Newt has done anything.
Anyways I'm not here to prove that he has done something, I'm just here to say it's obvious that all politicians need to make certain decisions. I'm not against shady stuff, I think to a certain extent it needs to be done. But when it gets out of hand, and becomes only for personal benefit I have an issue.
Anyways I'm not here to prove that he has done something, I'm just here to say it's obvious that all politicians need to make certain decisions. I'm not against shady stuff, I think to a certain extent it needs to be done. But when it gets out of hand, and becomes only for personal benefit I have an issue.
I mean, I'm sorry man, but the argument of "He admitted it just to get it over with!" sounds like a conspiracy theory. That's like me saying "Well, Brainy said I'm a Democrat, but didn't really mean it."
P.S. Brainy, I know you really didn't mean it, you don't seriously make cheap shots like that <3
#1119
I'm a terrible person
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,174
Total Cats: 180
Well yea if all I said was he "admitted it but didn't mean it" then maybe. But if you look at all the other BS going on at that time regarding the party then it makes a bit more sense that he might have been set up the bomb.
#1120
What you are saying is equivalent to saying that Gingrich lied about lying to the ethics commission about lying about finances.
Honestly, I'd be probably believing it if it was Democrat, but it was bipartisan. Look at some of the....recent "stellar" GOP examples. They don't abandon their own without a really good reason.