Yes, "terrorists"! The administration has a very difficult time describing these fanatics as
"terrorists", apparently because that term inflames our enemies. Well, the PC-approach is not making much of a impact with these wackos, so let's just be sensible adults and call them what they are - "terrorists"! It's also time to begin treating them as enemy combatants and keep them in our GITMO detention facility.
The "warm and fuzzy" tactic our Administration has implemented at the behest of his ultra Left wing "anti war" backers was doomed to fail from the outset. A perfect example of how this group's agenda will ultimately lead to further pain for our citizens. The terrorists are not interested in making peace and we can't due anything to appease or change them. It's just so silly when any serious observer can readily see that these fanatics are no different (arguably worse, since they aren't affiliated with any nation) from enemies we faced in World Wars 1 and 2.
It's also high time for some accountability! Obviously, someone approved the "junk-in-the-trunk" bomber's U.S. Visa. Someone didn't seriously follow-up on concerns his own Father recently reported to our State Department and CIA, even after the terrorist was denied a Visa earlier this year by the UK. Someone allowed him to board the flight in Amsterdam without the proper documents and with enough "red flags" to have denied boarding to an 89-year old Grandmother from Kansas! There are at least three people who have some real explaining to do and they should be publicly identified. Until we start making people accountable for their actions, especially those charged with protecting our country's security and the safety of our citizens.
The amazingly poor selection of Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security is potentially worse than President Bush's appointment of Michael Brown as FEMA Director! This woman has no clue and this is no time for someone with her "everything's working fine" attitude to be running the Department responsible for protecting our country's infrastructure and citizens. A very weak attempt to deflect criticism and an example of her incredible naivety - this lady must go and must go NOW!
Let's declare the TSA a group that will not be allowed to unionize due to national security and get on with appointing a leader for this post. By leaving the TSA leaderless, it only provides another way to get around assigning responsibility for any blunders made under this group's umbrella.
It's time for the United States to treat these terrorists the same way we treated our enemies in WW's 1 and 2! These are NOT isolated attempts, they ARE our enemies, we MUST stop them. If we do not radically change our tactics, I would suggest any and all Administration advocates of our current approach and their families make arrangements to meet representatives of these "extremist" groups in, oh, let's say Sudan or Somalia. I'm sure if they can all just set down and hug this can all be settled. If supporters of the current approach would not bring their loved ones to a meeting in Sudan or even refuse to go themselves, they are just showing that they are afraid to engage these radical Islamists because it might make them feel bad.
The next attempt, if successful and within the next month, will totally be the fault of Janet Napolitano, President Obama and anyone who refuses to aggressively engage these terrorist factions NOW! Do we need another tragedy, two more? When are we going to find and finish the leaders of the radical Islamist factions that have vowed to bring down America? Put the IRS in charge of finding and tracking these terrorists. The IRS can sure do a good job of not letting anyone who owes federal taxes "fall through the cracks", that is unless you're a member of Congress or happen to work in the White House.
And Alan Combs, these are not minimart thieves - they are enemies of our country just like Germany, Japan and the axis countries were in WW 2. Why are we so intent on treating these wackos differently than prisoners captured in all previous wars? THEY WANT TO KILL US MR. COMBS! Maybe you and your family should lead the U.S. contingent when they meet Osama bin Laden and his "warm and fuzzy" comrades in Sudan.
Showing posts with label IRS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IRS. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
HOW DO YOU GET A RANGEL TAX DEAL?
July 28, 2009
In a matter that has gotten little attention from the mainstream media, Way and Means Committee Chairman, Charles Rangel (D-NY) has, so far, been able to stonewall efforts to "encourage" him to PAY HIS TAXES!!
This is the guy responsible for actually writing the tax code and he has the audacity to think that he is above the requirements he forces upon the rest of us. The Wall Street Journal is finally putting some pressure on him today in its lead editorial entitled “Morality and Charlie Rangel’s Taxes”.
The following are excerpts from an excellent overview from today's WSJ's editorial.
"Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent."
"Exhibit A concerns a rental property Mr. Rangel purchased in 1987 at the Punta Cana Yacht Club in the Dominican Republic. The rental income from that property ought to be substantial since it is a luxury beach-front villa and is more often than not rented out. But when the National Legal and Policy Center looked at Mr. Rangel’s House financial disclosure forms in August, it noted that his reported income looked suspiciously low. In 2004 and 2005, he reported no more than $5,000, and in 2006 and 2007 no income at all from the property".
We were delighted when Rangel admitted to failing to report and disclose his rental income, but we were puzzled that the media simply accepted Rangel’s figure of $75,000 when it appeared the total was much higher.
"We have provided additional information about this income in a Complaint to the Internal Revenue Service. Maybe Rangel realizes that his estimate of unreported and undisclosed income will not fly. As the Journal points out:
Mr. Rangel promised last fall to amend his tax returns, pay what is due and correct the information on his annual financial disclosure form. But the deadline for the 2008 filing was May 15 and as of last week he still had not filed. His press spokesman declined to answer questions about anything related to his ethics problems.
Besides not paying those pesky taxes, Mr. Rangel had other reasons for wanting to hide income. As the tenant of four rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem, the Congressman needed to keep his annual reported income below $175,000, lest he be ineligible as a hardship case for rent control. (He also used one of the apartments as an office in violation of rent-control rules, but that’s another story.)
Mr. Rangel said last fall that “I never had any idea that I got any income’’ from the villa. Try using that one the next time the IRS comes after you. Equally interesting is his claim that he didn’t know that the developer of the Dominican Republic villa had converted his $52,000 mortgage to an interest-free loan in 1990. That would seem to violate House rules on gifts, which say Members may only accept loans on “terms that are generally available to the public.” Try getting an interest-free loan from your banker."
The editorial notes another NLPC-exposed instance of Rangel cheating on his taxes:
The National Legal and Policy Center also says it has confirmed that Mr. Rangel owned a home in Washington from 1971-2000 and during that time claimed a “homestead” exemption that allowed him to save on his District of Columbia property taxes. However, the homestead exemption only applies to a principal residence, and the Washington home could not have qualified as such since Mr. Rangel’s rent-stabilized apartments in New York have the same requirement.
The House Ethics Committee is supposedly investigating Rangel’s tax evasion, as well as a Rangel-led, Citigroup-funded junket to the Caribbean, also exposed by NLPC. Add to the list the propriety of donations to the so-called Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York.
Until recently, Rangel was predicting an imminent and total exoneration by the Ethics Committee. This prediction was echoed by Eugene Isenberg, the Chairman of Nabors Industries, when I confronted him at the Nabors’ annual meeting on June 2. Isenberg made a million dollar pledge to the Rangel Center at the same time Rangel was preserving a lucrative tax break for the company.
Rangel and Isenberg may be right. The Ethics Committee, under the thumb of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is perfectly capable of clearing tax-evader Rangel of wrongdoing, even as Congress levies big, new taxes on the American people.
In a matter that has gotten little attention from the mainstream media, Way and Means Committee Chairman, Charles Rangel (D-NY) has, so far, been able to stonewall efforts to "encourage" him to PAY HIS TAXES!!
This is the guy responsible for actually writing the tax code and he has the audacity to think that he is above the requirements he forces upon the rest of us. The Wall Street Journal is finally putting some pressure on him today in its lead editorial entitled “Morality and Charlie Rangel’s Taxes”.
The following are excerpts from an excellent overview from today's WSJ's editorial.
"Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent."
"Exhibit A concerns a rental property Mr. Rangel purchased in 1987 at the Punta Cana Yacht Club in the Dominican Republic. The rental income from that property ought to be substantial since it is a luxury beach-front villa and is more often than not rented out. But when the National Legal and Policy Center looked at Mr. Rangel’s House financial disclosure forms in August, it noted that his reported income looked suspiciously low. In 2004 and 2005, he reported no more than $5,000, and in 2006 and 2007 no income at all from the property".
We were delighted when Rangel admitted to failing to report and disclose his rental income, but we were puzzled that the media simply accepted Rangel’s figure of $75,000 when it appeared the total was much higher.
"We have provided additional information about this income in a Complaint to the Internal Revenue Service. Maybe Rangel realizes that his estimate of unreported and undisclosed income will not fly. As the Journal points out:
Mr. Rangel promised last fall to amend his tax returns, pay what is due and correct the information on his annual financial disclosure form. But the deadline for the 2008 filing was May 15 and as of last week he still had not filed. His press spokesman declined to answer questions about anything related to his ethics problems.
Besides not paying those pesky taxes, Mr. Rangel had other reasons for wanting to hide income. As the tenant of four rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem, the Congressman needed to keep his annual reported income below $175,000, lest he be ineligible as a hardship case for rent control. (He also used one of the apartments as an office in violation of rent-control rules, but that’s another story.)
Mr. Rangel said last fall that “I never had any idea that I got any income’’ from the villa. Try using that one the next time the IRS comes after you. Equally interesting is his claim that he didn’t know that the developer of the Dominican Republic villa had converted his $52,000 mortgage to an interest-free loan in 1990. That would seem to violate House rules on gifts, which say Members may only accept loans on “terms that are generally available to the public.” Try getting an interest-free loan from your banker."
The editorial notes another NLPC-exposed instance of Rangel cheating on his taxes:
The National Legal and Policy Center also says it has confirmed that Mr. Rangel owned a home in Washington from 1971-2000 and during that time claimed a “homestead” exemption that allowed him to save on his District of Columbia property taxes. However, the homestead exemption only applies to a principal residence, and the Washington home could not have qualified as such since Mr. Rangel’s rent-stabilized apartments in New York have the same requirement.
The House Ethics Committee is supposedly investigating Rangel’s tax evasion, as well as a Rangel-led, Citigroup-funded junket to the Caribbean, also exposed by NLPC. Add to the list the propriety of donations to the so-called Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York.
Until recently, Rangel was predicting an imminent and total exoneration by the Ethics Committee. This prediction was echoed by Eugene Isenberg, the Chairman of Nabors Industries, when I confronted him at the Nabors’ annual meeting on June 2. Isenberg made a million dollar pledge to the Rangel Center at the same time Rangel was preserving a lucrative tax break for the company.
Rangel and Isenberg may be right. The Ethics Committee, under the thumb of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is perfectly capable of clearing tax-evader Rangel of wrongdoing, even as Congress levies big, new taxes on the American people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)