CURRENT EVENTS - JANUARY 2026

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rock
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 469
  • Views: 8K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
“…Mr. Graham was among those who were recommended for indictment but were not ultimately charged in the case. In his testimony, he described the president as a friend with whom he played golf fairly regularly.

A prosecutor asked him whether the president cheated at golf.

“Some people say you may outdrive him, but you’re not going to outdrive his caddy,” Mr. Graham replied. “It is what it is.””
Click to expand...
When Trump finally kicks it, Lindsay will be one of the first people to piss on his grave. That’s just the spineless coward he’s always been.
 
nycfan said:
IMG_3784.jpeg
Click to expand...

Did a little googling because it’s obviously unclear what’s included in that, and was curious whether NC had a chance of making the list. Not sure what exactly they’ll go off of, but the DOJ did publish a list of sanctuary jurisdictions last year:

STATES:
  • California
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • Delaware
  • District of Columbia
  • Illinois
  • Minnesota
  • Nevada
  • New York
  • Oregon
  • Rhode Island
  • Vermont
  • Washington
COUNTIES:
  • Baltimore County, MD
  • Cook County, IL
  • San Diego County, CA
  • San Francisco County, CA
CITIES:
  • Albuquerque, NM
  • Berkeley, CA
  • Boston, MA
  • Chicago, IL
  • Denver, CO
  • East Lansing, MI
  • Hoboken, NJ
  • Jersey City, NJ
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • New Orleans, LA
  • New York City, NY
  • Newark, NJ
  • Paterson, NJ
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • Portland, OR
  • Rochester, NY
  • Seattle, WA
  • San Francisco City, CA
www.justice.gov

Justice Department Publishes List of Sanctuary Jurisdictions

WASHINGTON – Today, the Justice Department published a list of states, cities, and counties identified as having policies, laws, or regulations that impede enforcement of federal immigration laws.
www.justice.gov www.justice.gov
 
Every governor of the affected states should come out and say, “and in response we will not be giving any tax revenue to the federal government.”
And the governors of states that pay more in taxes to the federal government than they receive should sarcastically thank Trump for the gift.
 
ChileG said:
Every governor of the affected states should come out and say, “and in response we will not be giving any tax revenue to the federal government.”
And the governors of states that pay more in taxes to the federal government than they receive should sarcastically thank Trump for the gift.
Click to expand...
Exactly. States should just keep their money and let Washington and the Feds starve. Perhaps all those States just kept their money and distribute it not to Red States, but kept it all in their respective States to dole out as they see fit. Of course this would do a fat lotta good here in N.C. - with the gerrymandered legislature we have in Raleigh... they would just starve the blue cities and give all the money to the redneck rural rhubarbs.

So this leads to the next petty conclusion: Blue cities keep their tax money local and don't send it to Raleigh. And so on and so on...
 
ChileG said:
Every governor of the affected states should come out and say, “and in response we will not be giving any tax revenue to the federal government.”
And the governors of states that pay more in taxes to the federal government than they receive should sarcastically thank Trump for the gift.
Click to expand...
This would only have a limited effect because federal taxes (including withholding) paid by individuals and businesses are paid directly to the IRS. The state is not a middleman. States could probably refuse to hand over to the IRS federal taxes withheld on state employees, I guess, because they'd have some control over those funds. But it would quickly fail in court on Supremacy Clause grounds.
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
This would only have a limited effect because federal taxes (including withholding) paid by individuals and businesses are paid directly to the IRS. The state is not a middleman. States could probably refuse to hand over to the IRS federal taxes withheld on state employees, I guess, because they'd have some control over those funds. But it would quickly fail in court on Supremacy Clause grounds.
Click to expand...
We've discovered what court rulings without enforcement power means, haven't we? Granted, the Feds probably could but it sure would get messy.
 
finesse said:
We've discovered what court rulings without enforcement power means, haven't we? Granted, the Feds probably could but it sure would get messy.
Click to expand...
The feds would go after the individuals who underpaid their taxes. It would not be a popular move for a state to cause that kind of headache for its citizens.
 
www.census.gov

2024 Presidential Election Voting and Registration Tables Now Available

In the 2024 presidential election, 73.6% of the voting-age population was registered to vote and 65.3% voted according to new voting and registration tables.
www.census.gov www.census.gov

In the 2024 election, of the population that was eligible to vote, only 73.6% were actually registered to vote. And only 65.3% of those eligible to vote actually voted. You simply can't have a democracy where 1/3rd of eligible voters can't be bothered to register and vote. The United States deserves whatever befalls us. If you are just too GD proud to vote because, whatever, then move your sorry ass to some country where voting actually doesn't matter. There are plenty of places like that in this world. I would say that there should be consequences for not voting, but we--all of us--are actually, RIGHT NOW, suffering the consequences of asshats who are too cool to vote.
 
05C40 said:
www.census.gov

2024 Presidential Election Voting and Registration Tables Now Available

In the 2024 presidential election, 73.6% of the voting-age population was registered to vote and 65.3% voted according to new voting and registration tables.
www.census.gov www.census.gov

In the 2024 election, of the population that was eligible to vote, only 73.6% were actually registered to vote. And only 65.3% of those eligible to vote actually voted. You simply can't have a democracy where 1/3rd of eligible voters can't be bothered to register and vote. The United States deserves whatever befalls us. If you are just too GD proud to vote because, whatever, then move your sorry ass to some country where voting actually doesn't matter. There are plenty of places like that in this world. I would say that there should be consequences for not voting, but we--all of us--are actually, RIGHT NOW, suffering the consequences of asshats who are too cool to vote.
Click to expand...
I don't know what the Win trend would be if "everyone" voted?
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
This would only have a limited effect because federal taxes (including withholding) paid by individuals and businesses are paid directly to the IRS. The state is not a middleman. States could probably refuse to hand over to the IRS federal taxes withheld on state employees, I guess, because they'd have some control over those funds. But it would quickly fail in court on Supremacy Clause grounds.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the perspective. I suppose then the only recourse is a lawsuit from the affected states?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top