SassyIrishLass
Diamond Member
- Mar 31, 2009
- 96,006
- 73,434
- 3,605
Hmmm didn't that Big Eared disaster weaponize the IRS also? Think that Louis Lerner clown for a reminder
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That act only applies to transactions over 10k. But who am I to criticize you for going after the kids monthly lawn mowing jobs...
You want to change the legislation do it properly and not by this garbage
The act in 1970 was just as unconstitutional as this. This new surveillance provision does't just track large cash transactions but monitors all account activity for all accounts that have over 600 dollars.
And are you ok with this?The act in 1970 was just as unconstitutional as this. This new surveillance provision does't just track large cash transactions but monitors all account activity for all accounts that have over 600 dollars.
Bless your heart. Of course it doesn't raise any red flags with you because you're stupid. You weren't expected to understand.It does not raise any red flags. When the article quotes right wing fascists, you know it is so much garbage. It seems Republicans are so interested in helping the rich evade taxes they legally owe.
No. I'm just not surprised by it. Imho, we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.And are you ok with this?
I agree. It is a spending problem. The question now though is do we allow our government to continue down the rabbit hole that the act in 1970 started digging or do we citizens start insisting that those we elect fill in the hole?No. I'm just not surprised by it. Imho, we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.