General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump (1 Viewer)

[SamAndreas]

Today it begins, Kamala has reached the point that she's the Democratic Party nominee:

There's video from today. this link has video from her first public appearance since Biden endorsed her:

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/22/live-updates-harris-democrats-biden-drops-out-trump-campaign.html

She spent yesterday on the telephone for most of the day. I read that yesterday that she called the party leaders in all 50 states. That would take me three days.

She's renamed her YouTube channel, that's the where to go for video: https://www.youtube.com/@kamalaharris

This is her video on her channel from two hours ago:



To play it, start it, and then move it up to 5:47. This was one of those live videos which don't start at zero.

I've named this thread General Election 2024 Harris vs Trump

Trump needs an introduction post as well, a MAGA suporter ought to write it: @Farb, @SaintForLife , @Others, calling for someone to please introduce your GOP candidate for this 2024 general election thread.

 

[B4YOU]

I love when he talks about stuff that he has no idea about (which is often). It’s hilarious.

MAGA: Dems want a great reset
Trump: Adopt Crypto to payoff debt

 

[Sendai]

I believe it does @DaveXA would know better but churches have been doing it for quite awhile. I think even preaching about politics is a no no

I think no one wants to be the one to remove a church's tax exempt status and deal with that outrage and backlash

No one wants to launch the court challenge that ends up at the Supreme Court in a first amendment case. Kinda like the Logan Act.

 

[bird]

No one wants to launch the court challenge that ends up at the Supreme Court in a first amendment case. Kinda like the Logan Act.

I would posit that taxing churches is not a religious freedom issue. It does not prevent anyone from worshipping in any manner. In point of opinion, all charities should be taxed in some manner and all charitable deductions should be removed from the tax code. Taxing charities can be a relatively small amount or percentage similar to the idea of the so-called Tobin tax on, iirc, stock transactions.

 

[Lapaz]

I love when he talks about stuff that he has no idea about (which is often). It’s hilarious.

What an idiot! He says we'll give China a bitcoin and they will accept that as payment of our debt to them. I guess that bitcoin will be worth a few trillion dollars. /S

Crypto currency is nothing more than securities, and should be regulated accordingly, otherwise we'll get more Bankman-Frieds and Zhaos. It is a magnet for illegal transactions and activities, so it needs to be regulated.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I love how almost every article I’ve read about Trump at this meeting of black journalists says something like “it went as well as you’d expect”




I didn’t know that the organization itself has been getting some criticism for inviting him in the first place

 

[DaveXA]

I love when he talks about stuff that he has no idea about (which is often). It’s hilarious.

Bigly high level!

 

[Optimus Prime]

I love when he talks about stuff that he has no idea about (which is often). It’s hilarious.

And I know Baritomo is a huge trumper (or at least plays one on TV)

Wonder what she said or thought about this exchange afterwards

 

[DaveXA]

I believe it does @DaveXA would know better but churches have been doing it for quite awhile. I think even preaching about politics is a no no

I think no one wants to be the one to remove a church's tax exempt status and deal with that outrage and backlash

You're on the right track. Churches can't do things like endorse or fund candidates, but they can and do discuss public policy topics, i.e. abortion, free speech and what not. What I did as a minister was encourage people to go vote, and vote their conscience, and tell them it's up to them how they vote.

 

[not2rich]

I love when he talks about stuff that he has no idea about (which is often). It’s hilarious.

Reminds me of his response to that question about the nuclear triad.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Reminds me of his response to that question about the nuclear triad. anything.

Fixed

 

[Sendai]

I would posit that taxing churches is not a religious freedom issue. It does not prevent anyone from worshipping in any manner. In point of opinion, all charities should be taxed in some manner and all charitable deductions should be removed from the tax code. Taxing charities can be a relatively small amount or percentage similar to the idea of the so-called Tobin tax on, iirc, stock transactions.

Congress can tax churches. But chooses not too. But that decision not to tax isn’t going to provide a constitutionally protected right to limit speech. There are churches all over the land that want to be first to take the irs to the Supreme Court. And the irs knows it. And they know they will loose. So why bother.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Trying to change the narrative, it is amusing how much this is getting under their skin

 

[DaveXA]

Congress can tax churches. But chooses not too. But that decision not to tax isn’t going to provide a constitutionally protected right to limit speech. There are churches all over the land that want to be first to take the irs to the Supreme Court. And the irs knows it. And they know they will loose. So why bother.

Until the law changes, the IRS won't lose that case. It's been tested numerous times before and the IRS has won a high percentage of those cases. Churches have take them to court before and churches usually lose those cases.

Some churches have lost their tax exempt status, although it's pretty rare. But when they do, usually the IRS will win those.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Until the law changes, the IRS won't lose that case. It's been tested numerous times before and the IRS has won a high percentage of those cases. Churches have take them to court before and churches usually lose those cases.

Some churches have lost their tax exempt status, although it's pretty rare. But when they do, usually the IRS will win those.

did those churches lose it over political talk or something else?

 

[Saint Jack]

Trying to change the narrative, it is amusing how much this is getting under their skin

It’s simple. Just one word.
Everyone knows a weird guy.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Right wing darling says he’s not voting for Trump



Which went over about as you’d expect

 

[Sendai]

Until the law changes, the IRS won't lose that case. It's been tested numerous times before and the IRS has won a high percentage of those cases. Churches have take them to court before and churches usually lose those cases.

Some churches have lost their tax exempt status, although it's pretty rare. But when they do, usually the IRS will win those.

According to this it’s very rare

“The IRS revoked the church’s tax-exempt status, leading to a long legal battle that ended with a U.S. appeals court siding with the federal agency.

The case remains the only publicly known example of the IRS revoking the tax-exempt status of a church because of its political activity in nearly 70 years. The Congressional Research Service said in 2012 that a second church had lost its tax-exempt status, but that its identity “is not clear.”

Until the law changes, the IRS won't lose that case. It's been tested numerous times before and the IRS has won a high percentage of those cases. Churches have take them to court before and churches usually lose those cases.

Some churches have lost their tax exempt status, although it's pretty rare. But when they do, usually the IRS will win those.

according to this it’s very rare.

“
The IRS revoked the church’s tax-exempt status, leading to a long legal battle that ended with a U.S. appeals court siding with the federal agency.

The case remains the only publicly known example of the IRS revoking the tax-exempt status of a church because of its political activity in nearly 70 years. The Congressional Research Service said in 2012 that a second church had lost its tax-exempt status, but that its identity “is not clear.”

Churches are breaking the law and endorsing in elections, experts say. The IRS looks the other way.

For nearly 70 years, federal law has barred churches from directly involving themselves in political campaigns, but the IRS has largely abdicated its enforcement responsibilities as churches have become more brazen about publicly backing candidates.

www.texastribune.org

This was 1992. The nature of the appeals courts have changed considerably. And the current Supreme Court’s view would be pretty obvious.

The irs knows better than to raise the issue.

 

[bird]

Congress can tax churches. But chooses not too. But that decision not to tax isn’t going to provide a constitutionally protected right to limit speech. There are churches all over the land that want to be first to take the irs to the Supreme Court. And the irs knows it. And they know they will loose. So why bother.

The church(es) or, rather, the priest class, should be able to say whatever they want. The current situation is not about abridging free speech. That is a lie. The IRS via regulations regarding charities can do as they wish. The problem with the scenario is a religionist majority on the SCOTUS. The answer is a majority in congress that would remove the restriction and also tax churches.