" No one had ever been charged with them before"

WTF are you talking about?!?

Over the prior nine years, that office had filed a Falsified Business Records case, on average, EVERY TWO HOURS.

What "news" outlet has been bullschitting you?

"To follow the process you are advocating it would take dozens of years"

Even if you're correct, where in the Constitution does someone lose their rights based on how long it would take to keep them?

You're just barfing bullschitt because you can't defend it without lying about their rights

"Define due process for deportation."

The salient Constitutional phrase is ALL PERSONS.

When, exactly, does the illegal lose personhood under the Constitution?

"Deportation is within the purview of the federal government. Given that, I am not seeing overreach"

What you're not seeing is Due Process.

Following the Constitution has suddenly become "overreach" (to the former self-proclaimed Constitutional expert).

" Same crime, same penalty."

Except you backed wildly DIFFERENT penalties.

How about if both of your faces talk to each other and come up with one answer?

"Trump is doing what he told the American people he was going to do."

He told the American people he was going to bring prices down on day one. He told us the markets would rise, and he'd end the war in Ukraine in the first 24 hours.

Instead, the market is down, prices are up, and Trump humiliated America by showing once again he's Putin's bitch.

Feel free to explain why Trump failed to get the ceasefire he demanded. Putin told him to STFU about ceasefire and start using "peace accord".

So Trump came out of the meeting pretending he wanted something else all along.

"Everyone knows about the fake charges brought against (Trump)"

Then you should be able to point out the sham indictments for stuff you or I could do without fear of legal repercussions.

And since you pluralized, please provide TWO examples.

Of course, "Everyone knows" you've got nothing.

" ... do Republicans have a dual-standard?"

Obviously not.

First, they'd have to have ANY standards.

"Utah has been voting by mail for over a decade, and it has proven to be a secure and accessible way to vote."

Oregon: same thing, over 30 years.

NO ONE, in either state has ever come forward with BillJohnson's scenario.

After a close election, they'd be coming out of the woodwork. IF it was happening.

But 5 years, and NO ONE makes that claim?!? Only one conclusion: That means it NEVER HAPPENED.

" So BillJohnson aligns yet again with Putin."

He's desperate for any port in the storm.

It's now been FIVE YEARS, and a total of ZERO people have come forward confirming BJ's theories regarding mail-in ballots being taken by others in the same household, when the fact of the matter is there'd have to be TENS OF THOUSANDS of these incidents to overturn the results.

" Local violent crimes not reported to the FBI are not included in the reported statistics claiming crime is down."

Is that unique to DC, or are you just pretending it is?

" ... a Travesty of Two Mockeries of a Sham"

Is Corky going Bananas?

" I never imagined waiting on SS but the tax exposure changes my perspective."

Generally speaking, the better earner of the two should wait until 70 to take SS, to max out the survivor's benefit.

Ideally, both should wait until 70, if it's doable. We caught a huge break because the bride wanted to retire, and I had no desire, which was weird, since I'd always told myself I'd retire the first day possible, and ESPECIALLY before 65.

Then the numbers caught up, and when 65 hit ... I wanted to keep working. That gave us these great opportunities for tax-shifting, and the extra annual income means less out of savings and more to spend on exotic travel.

" Had I hit refresh and seen Danforth's response I wouldn't have even bothered!"

On the contrary, your post was dead-on.

For me, taking SS just three months earlier would cost me $150 a month!

" It makes me wonder if we should wait to take a larger SS benefit and spend down my IRA/Roth funds in my early 60s to bridge me until we take SS."

That's EXACTLY what we've been doing. The bride retired four years ago, suddenly leaving us lots of room before going into a higher bracket. Ever since, I've been doing a rough return on December 1st. Then I take out from taxable IRAs the max I can, without getting in a higher bracket.

A few years ago, I took out a little too much, but all I had to do was toss $1K into a Traditional IRA by filling to get out. The rest went to Roths ... which we've been maxing out every year.

I'm basically paying HALF the income tax rate I'll owe once we're both 70 and taking out Social Security. And, as I said, turning around with the extra and doing what we wouldn't be able to afford otherwise: maxing out the Roths.

When we started this, we had about 50% more in our T-IRAs than our Roths. Now, after the aggressive moves and a pair of kick-ass investment years, our Roths are now more than double our T-IRAs. (We've yet to take a penny from Roths.)

This allows us to pay taxes when, where, and at the rate we choose. It also will lower our RMDs once we hit 73. Remember: no RMDs on Roths, and RMDs from a taxable IRA can be ameliorated via a Qualified Charitable Distribution (QCD), where the donation goes from your taxable IRA (or rolled over, self-directed IRA) directly to the charity, WITHOUT going through your bank account.

The great thing about that is, it counts towards your RMD, but it DOESN'T show up as income on the tax return.

" please explain the huge tax cut you say Social Security recipients will be receiving."

Well first, it's not specifically for SS recipients, it's for filers who turn 65 or older in 2025. For example, both my wife and I qualify, although neither of us is getting SS at this point.

And SS isn't exempted from taxation, each filer simply gets an additional $6K standard deduction. The benefits are subject to income caps, starting at $150K for a married couple. By $250K, the benefit completely fades out.

The important stats: 80% won't pay income taxes on their SS. Currently, 64% don't.

" That assumes both wait until....70? and they both qualify for the max. right?"

Yes. But you're missing the point.

Social Security, by itself, is not taxable. Even those who max out and wait until 70, won't owe federal taxes on their Social Security ... if that's their only taxable income.

It's OTHER TAXABLE INCOME which makes SS taxable.

"The poor do not pay federal income taxes, so how are they hurt?"

Tariffs.

Tariffs are taxes.

In addition, health insurance subsidies have been cut, Medicaid will be cut $1 trillion, and the deficits will force sequestration cuts to Medicare.

Also, the poor might currently benefit from SNAP or other programs, all under the knife.

" At one time Musk's companies were being sued by 7 Federal agencies, and 2 state agencies. But it didn't occur until Musk picked a side."

The lawsuits, or the law breaking?

" What are you ------- going to do when the cease fire starts in Ukraine?!?!?"

What, did Vladdy promise Trumpy a ceasefire AGAIN?!?

What a riot.

Trump is Charlie Brown trying to kick Vladdy's football.

"Well now you know how women feel with a man in the locker room."

What a riot.

Trans folks change in the restroom. The last thing they're looking for is hassle. Chicks with dlcks aren't going to shower with women; that's done at home.

What you're referring to is a predator, who never needed the ruse, to be a predator.

" It would seem extremely easy.....for me.....and most everyone else."

Define most.

And tell me what you're doing to the exceptions. At 20 million possibly losing coverage, even 5 percent gets you to a million people.

" 20 hours they have....since they have no job"

Some are caregivers ... but that's doesn't count, does it?

And I'm betting national holidays aren't free bingo spaces, just a week more difficult to maneuver to get 20 hours.

BTW, what happens when all the charity slots get filled? I'm guessing charities are expected to change their operating plans and policies to prepare for inundation.

Frankly, not all charities are scaled to address the coming spike in volunteer inquiries.

" You're not even offering bus fare."

And-let me guess-time spent to fulfill required reporting won't count towards the 20 hours ... .

" it will seem to the average employed Joe that the barrier isn't much of a barrier."

And what if you had to get new, signed statements from every one of your clients on a quarterly basis? Would that seem like an easy burden, or no burden at all?

In addition ... has anyone considered the additional costs in having to look for work or do charity? 20 hours a week means a MINIMUM of three days, unless you're doing overtime. Who's paying for the extra costs? You're not even offering bus fare.