Democrats Demanding Trump Break Numerous Laws and Regulations

[martybegan]

As far as I can tell, clergy pay income taxes.

Yep, kind of throws away the whole "they don't pay any taxes thing", doesn't it?

 

[Marener]

Yep, kind of throws away the whole "they don't pay any taxes thing", doesn't it?

It actually throws away the whole “taxes infringe on freedom of religion and speech” thing.

 

[martybegan]

It actually throws away the whole “taxes infringe on freedom of religion and speech” thing.

If you allow some organizations to be tax free/not for profit and allow them to be political, you need to allow all of them to be so.

Singling out religious groups for such treatment violates the 1st amendment.

It's amazing you continue to defend a law creates by racists shits to **** over black churches.

 

[Marener]

If you allow some organizations to be tax free/not for profit and allow them to be political, you need to allow all of them to be so.

Singling out religious groups for such treatment violates the 1st amendment.

It's amazing you continue to defend a law creates by racists shits to **** over black churches.

Contributions to churches are tax deductible, are they not?

 

[martybegan]

Contributions to churches are tax deductible, are they not?

So are the property taxes on my CO-OP. so because I pay a them and get a tax deduction I should not be allowed to have political views?

 

[Marener]

So are the property taxes on my CO-OP. so because I pay a them and get a tax deduction I should not be allowed to have political views?

Contributions to PACs and 501c4s aren’t tax deductible so the benefits for a church go above and beyond.

Churches are more analogous to 501c3s which do have restrictions.

 

[martybegan]

Contributions to PACs and 501c4s aren’t tax deductible so the benefits for a church go above and beyond.

Churches are more analogous to 501c3s which do have restrictions.

And which only applied to Churches because of racist dems not wanting Black churches to be politically active.

 

[Marener]

And which only applied to Churches because of racist dems not wanting Black churches to be politically active.

Feel free to change the law.

The point here is that Trump is just choosing to ignore it. It’s not the only example of this. I can think of a few others.

And yet we are told by the MAGA cult that it wouldn’t be possible for Trump to ignore the SNAP rules and allow grocery stores to help poor families.

Why?

Because MAGAs are assholes.

 

[martybegan]

Feel free to change the law.

The point here is that Trump is just choosing to ignore it. It’s not the only example of this. I can think of a few others.

And yet we are told by the MAGA cult that it wouldn’t be possible for Trump to ignore the SNAP rules and allow grocery stores to help poor families.

Why?

Because MAGAs are assholes.

The SNAP rules are pretty clear cut. and of course if he did break them you would want him impeached if you take the House in 2026.

You twats made politics a zero sum game, stop bitching when it comes back to bite you in the ass.

The Dems can just allow cloture on a CR and be done with it.

 

[struth]

You guys have to be pretty ******* disgusting to threaten stores who want to help poor people have enough food to feed their families.

Just gross.

Yeah it was pretty disgusting you all won’t fund rhe program

You aren’t threatening them, you demafasict are actually doing it

Sick

 

[Marener]

The SNAP rules are pretty clear cut. and of course if he did break them you would want him impeached if you take the House in 2026.

You twats made politics a zero sum game, stop bitching when it comes back to bite you in the ass.

The Dems can just allow cloture on a CR and be done with it.

So is law about political activity with churches and Trump’s ignoring that. No one is impeaching him for it.

Republicans could just fund expanded ACA subsidies and be done with it.

 

[struth]

Way too late for that.

Trump Directs IRS Not to Enforce the Little-Enforced ‘Johnson Amendment’

The president signed an executive order directing the Internal Revenue Service not to enforce the “Johnson Amendment” against religious organizations, but it’s unclear what effect the move will have.

www.philanthropy.com

The EO says not to unfairly do something? Why do you want the executive branch to unfairly target people or organizations?

So fascist of you

 

[struth]

So is law about political activity with churches and Trump’s ignoring that. No one is impeaching him for it.

Republicans could just fund expanded ACA subsidies and be done with it.

No he didn’t, you just linked us to an article where Trump signed an EO to not unfairly target organizations, not to not enforce it

 

[Foxfyre]

The insanity in the Democratic Party world continues.

There is no funding available to fully fund SNAP in November, only a contingency fund is available for a partial funding (and it will take states weeks at least to redo their computers to input partial payments). Duh!

Yet Democrats demand SNAP be fully funded. But only Congress can appropriate those funds.

Also, regulations do not allow special treatment for SNAP holders unless a store applies for a waiver. but Democrats are demanding such special treatment be allowed without waivers.




This and more.

All that needs to happen to fully fund SNAP is for Schumer to allow the CR to move on to the President's desk. Then all the money to everybody authorized to get it will be flowing again.

The ONLY reason there is a SNAP problem and that necessary people like air traffic controllers aren't getting paid is because of Schumer's grandstanding and holding up the funding via filibuster.

 

[Marener]

All that needs to happen to fully fund SNAP is for Schumer to allow the CR to move on to the President's desk. Then all the money to everybody authorized to get it will be flowing again.

The ONLY reason there is a SNAP problem and that necessary people like air traffic controllers aren't getting paid is because of Schumer's grandstanding and holding up the funding via filibuster.

All that needs to happen to fully fund SNAP is for Republicans to agree to fund expanded ACA subsidies.

 

[struth]

All that needs to happen to fully fund SNAP is for Schumer to allow the CR to move on to the President's desk. Then all the money to everybody authorized to get it will be flowing again.

The ONLY reason there is a SNAP problem and that necessary people like air traffic controllers aren't getting paid is because of Schumer's grandstanding and holding up the funding via filibuster.

Schumer and the dems won’t do it, they think it makes them better but holding Americans hostage

They wanted to meet with Trump…and he said he would, yet they refuse to open govt

This all makes the No Kings protest even weirder

 

[struth]

All that needs to happen to fully fund SNAP is for Republicans to agree to fund expanded ACA subsidies.

How can they even do that when the govt is shut down?

The CR they already passed keeps funding for your big insurance covid bailouts

 

[Marener]

How can they even do that when the govt is shut down?

What a dumb question.

 

[martybegan]

So is law about political activity with churches and Trump’s ignoring that. No one is impeaching him for it.

Republicans could just fund expanded ACA subsidies and be done with it.

The Johnson amendment has been ignored vis a vis black churches by Dem lawmakers for decades.

Dem Senators can just vote for cloture, and the money flows.

 

[Marener]

The Johnson amendment has been ignored vis a vis black churches by Dem lawmakers for decades.

Dem Senators can just vote for cloture, and the money flows.

It’s called prosecutorial discretion and has been a part of every administration.

There’s nothing stopping the Trump administration from allowing stores to help needy families.