Found at An Ordinary American:
Can't happen too soon for me... I can't help wondering whether President Trump will sic the IRS onto both of them. AFAIK, Sharpton still owes over $4 million in taxes, and under President Obama he's been given a pass. Unless he makes some very rapid arrangements with the IRS, I suspect that after January 20th, 2017, he may not be given such an easy ride. Similarly, Jesse Jackson has a long history of income tax shenanigans. Will the IRS axe come down on both of them? It's a consummation devoutly to be wished.
Peter
4 comments:
As of Feb 2015, yep, he owed that much, either personally or through his "non-profits".
http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2015/02/05/people-jailed-for-owing-less-taxes-than-al-sharpton.html
I, for one, would like it if those who've been sheltered from the consequences of their misdeeds were called to account; not just Jackson & Sharpton, but Charlie Rangel & the numerous Obama-administration tax avoiders, many in the Cabinet.
We must be cautious, though, that such action doesn't develop into the kind of targeted persecution we've seen for the last 8 years. Ideally, conservatives are more interested in equal application of the law. We all know that humans don't always live up to the ideal. I'm especially concerned about the coarsening of our society. The temptation to say "they did it, so it's only fair that we do" could be strong.
It comes down to a dilemma: Our opponents fight dirty. We are better, higher-minded, more honorable, so it's important that we not lower ourselves to their level. OTOH, if we limit ourselves to Marquis of Queensbury rules, we're doomed to defeat. The old military saying I've heard is "If you're not cheating, you're not fighting hard enough".
It's not a new problem, but I don't know the answer.
--Tennessee Budd
Nixon tried that and was summarily rebuffed. It is widely understood in DC that the IRS (and probably every other alphabet soup agency) is a subsidiary of the DNC and will not act against their fellow travelers. If Trump wants the agencies to be equal opportunity oppressors, he'll have to appoint department heads from industry, preferably ones with nicknames like "chainsaw" who can adjust attitudes along with headcounts quickly and efficiently.
I would think Trump could appoint a new head of the IRS with the authority to fire those who refuse to do their job. I know from working for the VA medical system (until it got so bad I had to quit - five months short of retirement) that the easiest thing to get fired for is saying "No. I won't do that." There are sometimes ways of getting around it, but I was told in no uncertain terms that a refusal to do what you are ordered to do is cause for dismissal.
In response to Anon@8:22, enforcing the law upon scofflaws like Sharpton, Jackson, Rangel, and Geithner would simply be returning to the rule of law. Where is the moral dilemma in using the very same moves the Left espouses back against them? Isn't that "equality"? Isn't that a "level playing field"? I think it is a smashing idea, and I hope Trump has the cojones to do it.
I understand why he won't prosecute Clinton for the emails - it would blow up the entire government, not just for the federal laws broken, but because the whole pedophile business - and they all should be roasted over a fire (literally) for the rape and abuse of children - involves so many in government that Trump has certainly been advised against doing it, with sound reasons why not. Like the threatened deaths of his family, or being "Breitbarted" himself. As much as we all hate it, there may be better ways for the Clinton pedophiles to be removed from the scene. Hillary will probably suffer more at becoming a mere citizen again than from doing the perp walk - although inflicting both upon her would only be mild justice.
Post a Comment