tax protest

Setanta wrote:

Oh, i certainly agree that this is an idiotic thread.

My point is that the constitution does not specify a violation of any statute as a grounds for impeachment. One could make the case that violation of a law might be evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors, but the basis upon which the House would impeach any public official need not be a violation of law.

This is true. That is why a President was impeached for lying about a blow job/sex or what the meaning of "is", is.

Therefore, I would suspect a Congress could have a field day if a President told the public "DO NOT PAY YOUR TAXES", which is a clear violation of the law.

parados wrote:

2 people does NOT constitute MOST taxpayers

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2002/April/02_tax_212.htm

"people do go to prison for tax evasion"

Quote:

Otherwise the minute he leaves office it's a whole new ball game.
Unless a court has dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice it can be refiled.

You are assuming that the government would never run out of money as a consequence of this tax protest.

Quote:

The way it does now, by borrowing.

The tax protest would have to be brought to an end somehow or the government would never have money to pay back what it borrows. Its credit would go to zero and no one in their right mind would loan money to it.

The government won't run out of money or the ability to borrow in a 4 year time frame.

parados wrote:

The government won't run out of money or the ability to borrow in a 4 year time frame.

Typical liberal. You cannot fathom a world in which the government cannot tax and spend to your heart's content.

woiyo wrote:

Setanta wrote:

The only definition of impeachable offenses is treason, bribery or high crimes and misdemeanors--try reading the constitution some time, it doesn't specify the violation of laws.

Article Two, Section 4, Disqualification, reads, in its entirety:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

What a maroon.

I am not sure but I would think that if a President was to tell the citizenry to break the law, that just might qualify as a "high crime and/or misdemeanor" which would be an impeachable offense in the eyes of the Congress.

But then again, this is a silly post.

If John F. Kennedy had told black people that he would pardon any one of them that used a water fountain in Washington, D.C. that were legally reserved for white people, would he have been breaking the law?

parados wrote:

The government won't run out of money or the ability to borrow in a 4 year time frame.

Typical liberal. You cannot fathom a world in which the government cannot tax and spend to your heart's content.

Of course not. Yet, the above example is quite different from your initial post.

Try to be consistant.

woiyo wrote:

Of course not. Yet, the above example is quite different from your initial post.

Try to be consistant.

It is exactly the same. The president would be telling people to break the law for the purposes of protesting an unjust law.

Just curious flaja,

For whom will you be voting in the primary?