• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The new US Treasury secretary

Tim Geithner and Larry Summers are crooks.

You cannot appoint anyone from the Federal Reserve Bank scam or the Council on Foreign Relations to any position in the Government and preach about "change".
 
So like the other rightwing apologists, your view of tax evasion/mistakes vary according to who is doing it? I thought that the law is applied to everyone equally? Would you expect more from a Senator and presidential nominee?

Of course the law applies equally to everyone, and I never said otherwise. Do I expect the Treasury Secretary nominee to be someone who hasn't broken the law, especially the laws regarding taxes? Yes. Why you don't is beyond me. Could it be that you're a leftwing apologist?
 
You would rather Obama appoint cabinet members with no political experience? That's the only way you wouldn't be able to classify someone as not a "regular politician".
You trying to miss the boat on purpose here? Well you succeeded. Need a towel? :roll:
 
Last edited:
Of course the law applies equally to everyone, and I never said otherwise. Do I expect the Treasury Secretary nominee to be someone who hasn't broken the law, especially the laws regarding taxes? Yes. Why you don't is beyond me. Could it be that you're a leftwing apologist?
Again, I never said anything about it being right or wrong I simply noticed that repubs are all over this but weren't outraged by their own doing the same. Shouldn't you all have been outraged by McCain's tax evasion? I notice you all dismiss Joe the not so much a plumber as just a peon so it doesn't matter but you ignore McCain.

It's amusing to see you call me a leftwing apologist when I never took Gietners side. I only commented on the right's hypocrisy. Who's the apologist now? :doh
 
You have got to be kidding with this lame attempt at equivalence. Joe the plumber had a $1,200 tax lien that he didn't even know about and the courthouse official even attested to this point noting that Joe probably didn't know unless he checked his credit record because the notice of his tax debt was sent to his previous residence.

Geithner on the other hand was an official at the IMF. His employment arrangement was such that he was responsible for paying both the employee and employer portions of his SS and Medicare taxes. Every quarter the IMF REIMBURSED him for these taxes and he signed a form acknowledging his responsibility to pay them. He purposely ignored his obligation. Then when he was audited and it was discovered that he had evaded taxes in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004, the statute of limitation had elapsed for his 2001 and 2002 obligations, so he didn't pay them, but he paid his 2003 and 2004 obligations after being caught as a tax cheat. Further, he defrauded the government by claiming his kids summer camp expenses as daycare expenses. He was content to skate on the 2001 and 2002 obligations by taking advantage of the statute of limitations until he was nominated and only then did he come forward and pay what he owed.

Joe the plumber was the victim of inefficient bureaucracy that sent his tax notice to an old address and then simply filed a tax lien against him. Geithner purposely set out to cheat on his tax obligation, took advantage of statute of limitations and lied before Congress with his explanations.

That's odd that you happen to know that Geithner PURPOSELY cheated on his taxes and lied to Congress. Why don't you round up your evidence and get it to the authorities ASAP? :roll:
 
Again, I never said anything about it being right or wrong I simply noticed that repubs are all over this but weren't outraged by their own doing the same. Shouldn't you all have been outraged by McCain's tax evasion? I notice you all dismiss Joe the not so much a plumber as just a peon so it doesn't matter but you ignore McCain.

It's amusing to see you call me a leftwing apologist when I never took Gietners side. I only commented on the right's hypocrisy. Who's the apologist now? :doh

You are still. You cover for the left by attacking the right with your ridiculous notions.
 
Again, I never said anything about it being right or wrong I simply noticed that repubs are all over this but weren't outraged by their own doing the same. Shouldn't you all have been outraged by McCain's tax evasion? I notice you all dismiss Joe the not so much a plumber as just a peon so it doesn't matter but you ignore McCain.

I asked you for a link already. You didn't provide it, so I just assumed it was drive-by ranting.

Again, link?
 
That's odd that you happen to know that Geithner PURPOSELY cheated on his taxes and lied to Congress. Why don't you round up your evidence and get it to the authorities ASAP? :roll:

When the IRS audited him in 2006 and pointed out the error, Geithner paid the taxes he owed for 2003 and 2004. But he failed to pay the same taxes for 2001 and 2002. In his confirmation hearings, Geithner wouldn't say why. But the reason is pretty clear: He didn't have to. There's typically a three-year statute of limitations on tax audits. If the IRS doesn't catch you before three years have passed, you're off the hook. Unfortunately for Geithner, public officials are held to a higher standard. So in November 2008, he went and paid the back taxes even though he didn't have to. (Fun fact: The IRS can't accept money it isn't owed—and after three years, you legally don't owe the money anymore. In all likelihood, the agency will return the unowed back taxes to Geithner.)

Why Tom Daschle's tax sins are worse than Tim Geithner's. - By Christopher Beam - Slate Magazine

It's pretty obvious that even if the initial failure to pay wasn't intentional, his decision not to pay the back taxes for the earlier years was certainly intentional.
 
Oh for the good old days of the Bush presidency. Let's all holler as loud as we can, maybe we can impeach Obama and put a Real American in the White House...maybe Sarah Palin.:lol:
 
Oh for the good old days of the Bush presidency. Let's all holler as loud as we can, maybe we can impeach Obama and put a Real American in the White House...maybe Sarah Palin.:lol:

Again, you've managed to completely miss the topic at hand.
 
Again, you've managed to completely miss the topic at hand.

Oh? I thought it obvious the "topic at hand" is to pick relentlessly at every aspect of the Democratic administration hoping something will unravel, so the wise and benificent Republicans can reclaim the power that is rightly theirs, stolen through deceitful means by the irresponsible and trivial Democrats. No?
 
Oh? I thought it obvious the "topic at hand" is to pick relentlessly at every aspect of the Democratic administration hoping something will unravel, so the wise and benificent Republicans can reclaim the power that is rightly theirs, stolen through deceitful means by the irresponsible and trivial Democrats. No?

No need to pick. Did you hear the news that 2 of Obama's nominees withdrew their nominations because of tax issues? I'd say this administration is doing a fine job with the unraveling bit without any help from anyone else.
 
Oh? I thought it obvious the "topic at hand" is to pick relentlessly at every aspect of the Democratic administration hoping something will unravel, so the wise and benificent Republicans can reclaim the power that is rightly theirs, stolen through deceitful means by the irresponsible and trivial Democrats. No?

No, the topic at hand was "The new US Treasury Secretary."

You may want to work on reading comp.
 
No need to pick. Did you hear the news that 2 of Obama's nominees withdrew their nominations because of tax issues? I'd say this administration is doing a fine job with the unraveling bit without any help from anyone else.
How is it Obama's fault that these people have tax issues? Maybe his team didn't vet them well enough...
 
How is it Obama's fault that these people have tax issues? Maybe his team didn't vet them well enough...

No, it's not his fault these people have tax issues, and it's absurd for you to think I was making that point. It is his fault, however, that he continued supporting their nominations once he had all the facts. Very poor judgment.
 
Back
Top Bottom