House 9495....what's the effing problem Dems?

[justoffal]

Are you fuxxking kidding me? A party line vote on something like this?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/9495#:~:text=9495%20%2D%20Stop%20Terror%2DFinancing%20and,2023%2D2024)%20%7C%20Get%20alerts

What a bunch of sick Fuxxks

 

[JGalt]

Shameful. How could anyone vote against that bill?

 

[westwall]

Shameful. How could anyone vote against that bill?

They no doubt get back door kickbacks.

 

[justoffal]

Shameful. How could anyone vote against that bill?

Well obviously there are a bunch of them vested in the NGO's that do these things. I'll bet Trump knows it too.

 

[rampart]

Are you fuxxking kidding me? A party line vote on something like this?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/9495#:~:text=9495%20%2D%20Stop%20Terror%2DFinancing%20and,2023%2D2024)%20%7C%20Get%20alerts

What a bunch of sick Fuxxks

could be we know wgere this is going. is planned parebthood a "terrorist organization?" the aclu? some ranbom university?

if you are interested in stopping terrorist funding, and who isn't, there may be a more reasonable approach.

lets start with a definition of terrorist that does not include teachers' unions.

 

[justoffal]

could be we know wgere this is going. is planned parebthood a "terrorist organization?" the aclu? some ranbom university?

if you are interested in stopping terrorist funding, and who isn't, there may be a more reasonable approach.

lets start with a definition of terrorist that does not include teachers' unions.

Well if planned parenthood funnels money out to activist groups anywhere in the world that support or purvey terror ... Yeah.

I don't see teachers unions turning over cars or burning down businesses...I don't think that's what this is about anyway.

There are however large Madrassa nonprofits here who may send money either directly or indirectly to places like Iran.

Also places like LaRazza that may have money connections to cartel coyotes.

 

[IM2]

We all know where this is going. So the bill should be opposed. It takes a sick fuck to author such a bill.

 

[jwoodie]

There needs to be strict limits on what actions an outgoing Congress can take after a general election. Perhaps a mandatory recess during that period?

 

[JGalt]

We all know where this is going. So the bill should be opposed. It takes a sick fuck to author such a bill.

WTF dude? Stopping the financing of terrorist organizations and tax penalties against American hostages is "sick"?

You're not right in the head, boy.

 

[rampart]

Well if planned parenthood funnels money out to activist groups anywhere in the world that support or purvey terror ... Yeah.

I don't see teachers unions turning over cars or burning down businesses...I don't think that's what this is about anyway.

There are however large Madrassa nonprofits here who may send money either directly or indirectly to places like Iran.

Also places like LaRazza that may have money connections to cartel coyotes.

in the case of madrassas or ethnic "social aid and pleasure clubs" as we call them in new orleans, it is possible that the honest, citizen, members are not aware of terrorist activities in the back room.

the downtown irish club, with whom i march, may have ira synpathetic members. that does not mean my dues go to much more than a spot at the bar and a parade license.

 

[rampart]

There needs to be strict limits on what actions an outgoing Congress can take after a general election. Perhaps a mandatory recess during that period?

what does the constitution say?

 

[rampart]

WTF dude? Stopping the financing of terrorist organizations and tax penalties against American hostages is "sick"?

You're not right in the head, boy.

we think, with plenty of evidence, that the oath keepers, proud boys and such are "terrorist organizations."

you're tight. i would have shut them down.

 

[Winston]

Are you fuxxking kidding me? A party line vote on something like this?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/9495#:~:text=9495%20%2D%20Stop%20Terror%2DFinancing%20and,2023%2D2024)%20%7C%20Get%20alerts

What a bunch of sick Fuxxks

Mr. Speaker, this is a death penalty bill that we are considering
today, a bill that empowers Donald Trump to extinguish the life of any
nonprofit, of any civic society group, which happens to be on his
enemies list.
Authoritarianism is not born overnight. It creeps in. It erodes our
freedoms. A tyrant tightens his grip, not just by seizing power, but
when he demands new powers and those who can stop him willingly cede
and bend to his will.
Opposing terrorism and hostage taxation, truly those are not even
issues this morning, but fascism is. Today we must show that we are
more than a speed bump on the march to fascism.
Of course, we oppose terrorism and all who support terrorists. That
is why it is already a Federal criminal offense to provide material
support for terrorism or foreign entities who are engaging in
terrorism. Tax-exempt organizations are already prohibited from
engaging in illegal activity.
What current law does not prohibit, however, is the type of sweeping
power advocated today to enact a revenge campaign and silence any
nonprofit or public media outlet that may criticize Donald Trump,
assist the many innocent people he demonizes, or those who simply don't
offer enough support to satisfy him.

There are so many groups in America, almost 300, that have expressed
their concern about this bill and their opposition to it. Nor does
anyone here today oppose protection of American hostages from tax
penalties.
The chairman is absolutely correct about one tiny thing: A part of
this bill has been approved by unanimous consent in the United States
Senate. That is the part that he won't let us consider today as a
freestanding bill, which as late as Monday, we have tried again to have
presented here because we could have unanimous consent here to protect
those hostages.
No. What he is doing is holding the hostages' tax provision hostage
to provide more power to Donald Trump. Chairman Smith did not bother to
disclose to this House that on October 1 of this year, the Internal
Revenue Service renewed relief for taxpayers affected by terrorist
attacks, postponing the hostages' tax filings and payment deadlines.
Without our approving even the legislation we support, hostages would
not face penalties or interest costs.
As to the over 290 groups that are opposing this legislation and
calling for a ``no'' vote, they recognize the danger that it poses.
Today I urge my colleagues to believe more in Donald Trump.
Believe what he says. Listen when he says the press is the ``enemy of
the people.'' Listen to him when he declares ``I am your justice, I am
your retribution.'' Listen to him when he says he will be a dictator
``on day one.''
Trump will not use this provision provided today as a shield to
protect us from some foreign terrorism. He will use it as a sword
against those he views as his political enemies. Today's vote is a
chance for this House to take Trump at his word.
A ``no'' vote signals that we will not be accomplices in turning
threats into reality. If this bill were to become law, we would hand
him a bludgeon for a crusade against those who he deems the greatest
danger to America, what he called the enemy within.
A unilateral designation by the President-elect through his Treasury
Secretary would mean immediate-- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of
the gentleman has expired.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself an additional 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, through the Treasury Secretary, he would be given the
power to have immediate revocation of the tax-exempt status, an
effective death penalty for the nonprofits.
An appeal after the tax-exempt status is taken away is no relief at
all. The President would not be required to provide the reasons for the
decision or the evidence upon which he relied.
It is not just Trump imposing a death sentence that should concern
us, but it is his power to intimidate, to threaten to eliminate a
hospital, to eliminate a community nonprofit press entity, to eliminate
those who give aid to immigrants.
The fear of that death penalty, that intimidation, is what would do
great damage to American civil society.
Clearly, the bill would have a chilling effect on any group that has
the audacity to criticize his dark vision. Surely, the first rule of
confronting a wannabe tyrant is not to provide him more tools to
achieve that tyranny.

https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-170/issue-173/house-section/article/H6159-3?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22Stop+Terror-Financing+and+Tax+Penalties+on+American+Hostages+Act%22%7D&s=6&r=3

 

[Winston]

WTF dude? Stopping the financing of terrorist organizations and tax penalties against American hostages is "sick"?

You're not right in the head, boy.

You really need to be more informed. It is already against the law to provide aid to terrorists. Those tax penalties and abatements were stopped months ago, I believe it was in February. Democrats have repeatedly attempted to introduce a stand-alone bill that would make those provisions permanent. They have been repeatedly blocked. Even the primary sponsor of the bill, in debate yesterday, admitted, the IRS already removes those penalties on the back end, when the person returns. Why do they need it removed on the front end? I mean damn, you are sitting in a rat and roach infested jail cell in Iran, you really think you are worrying about your taxes? Ridiculious.

Evidently, you are a libertarian, JGalt. I got to ask, why would a libertarian hand over so much power to a president, or worse, to an unelected member of his cabinet. Read Doggett's speech. The man has been in Congress for almost three decades.

This bill has nothing to do with those that fund terrorism. It has nothing to do with tax penalties for Americans held hostage overseas. It has everything to do with giving the president, or the Secretary of the Treasury, the ability to unilateral revoke the tax-exempt status of any organization. With no requirement to furnish evidence. The ability to appeal, it is a damn joke. It is after the fact, and Trump already has half the federal judiciary in his back pocket, separation of powers be damned.

 

[justoffal]

You really need to be more informed. It is already against the law to provide aid to terrorists. Those tax penalties and abatements were stopped months ago, I believe it was in February. Democrats have repeatedly attempted to introduce a stand-alone bill that would make those provisions permanent. They have been repeatedly blocked. Even the primary sponsor of the bill, in debate yesterday, admitted, the IRS already removes those penalties on the back end, when the person returns. Why do they need it removed on the front end? I mean damn, you are sitting in a rat and roach infested jail cell in Iran, you really think you are worrying about your taxes? Ridiculious.

Evidently, you are a libertarian, JGalt. I got to ask, why would a libertarian hand over so much power to a president, or worse, to an unelected member of his cabinet. Read Doggett's speech. The man has been in Congress for almost three decades.

This bill has nothing to do with those that fund terrorism. It has nothing to do with tax penalties for Americans held hostage overseas. It has everything to do with giving the president, or the Secretary of the Treasury, the ability to unilateral revoke the tax-exempt status of any organization. With no requirement to furnish evidence. The ability to appeal, it is a damn joke. It is after the fact, and Trump already has half the federal judiciary in his back pocket, separation of powers be damned.

Bullshit....
If the money flows out to terrorist states it is confiscable.

End of story.

Moral: Don't fund terrorism

 

[justoffal]

WTF dude? Stopping the financing of terrorist organizations and tax penalties against American hostages is "sick"?

You're not right in the head, boy.

Somebody is hiding something....can you smell that? Smells like shit.....

 

[justoffal]

You really need to be more informed. It is already against the law to provide aid to terrorists. Those tax penalties and abatements were stopped months ago, I believe it was in February. Democrats have repeatedly attempted to introduce a stand-alone bill that would make those provisions permanent. They have been repeatedly blocked. Even the primary sponsor of the bill, in debate yesterday, admitted, the IRS already removes those penalties on the back end, when the person returns. Why do they need it removed on the front end? I mean damn, you are sitting in a rat and roach infested jail cell in Iran, you really think you are worrying about your taxes? Ridiculious.

Evidently, you are a libertarian, JGalt. I got to ask, why would a libertarian hand over so much power to a president, or worse, to an unelected member of his cabinet. Read Doggett's speech. The man has been in Congress for almost three decades.

This bill has nothing to do with those that fund terrorism. It has nothing to do with tax penalties for Americans held hostage overseas. It has everything to do with giving the president, or the Secretary of the Treasury, the ability to unilateral revoke the tax-exempt status of any organization. With no requirement to furnish evidence. The ability to appeal, it is a damn joke. It is after the fact, and Trump already has half the federal judiciary in his back pocket, separation of powers be damned.

No requirement to furnish evidence? That's a lie!
Evidence = a proven money flow to terrorist recipients....like Hamas, Hezbollah....Iran.

It's not going over in a envelope marked terror contributions you dumb ass. Shell companies and NGOs launder it layer for layer.

Back end refunds my ass...
That's after the family has been forced into poverty. Instead of reversing it you don't cause it in the first place.

 

[Winston]

No requirement to furnish evidence? That's a lie!
Evidence = a proven money flow to terrorist recipients....like Hamas, Hezbollah....Iran.

It's not going over in a envelope marked terror contributions you dumb ass. Shell companies and NGOs launder it layer for layer.

Back end refunds my ass...
That's after the family has been forced into poverty. Instead of reversing it you don't cause it in the first place.

 

[Winston]

Really, then copy and paste the part of the bill that requires evidence or STFU.

 

[justoffal]

Really, then copy and paste the part of the bill that requires evidence or STFU.

All accusations require evidence you nano mind. There are court systems.

290 groups oppose the bill? Bwahahaha...oh yeah I'll just freaking bet they oppose it.