quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Someone please explain how this is legal for Biden to waive 'any' student debt (or any other debt for that matter). I just see no constitutional basis at all for this, though that doesn't seem to be much of a concern anymore.

No, Biden has no magic wand.

However, the Federal government has taken over student lending almost entirely. It used to be that banks and other lenders made these loans which were limited in interest and often 'guaranteed' by the federal government.
Now, I think the Federal government is the sole, direct lender.

A lender has always had the power to forgive a debt. Unilaterally, I don't think the agencies holding this paper could do it. But, if Congress went along with it--- it could be done.

That doesn't make it a good idea. It's just more $trillions in money printing. It will further damage our currency and drive inflation.
More importantly, it's a further disincentive for hard work and thrift.

From Page A3 of today's Wall Street Journal:

"Using executive action to cancel debts for student borrowers without tying relief to their individual needs and using regulatory procedures would put the Biden administration at risk of having its plan overruled in court, according to a legal analysis prepared by Charlie Rose, who served as the top lawyer in the Education Department under President Obama from 2009 to 2011.

"'If the issue is litigated, the more persuasive analyses tend to support the conclusion that the Executive Branch likely does not have the unilateral authority to engage in mass student debt cancellation,' Mr. Rose wrote in a memo for his law firm, Hogan Marren Babbo & Rose Ltd. He suggested that loan-servicing companies and investors that own securities backed by student loans might be in a position to sue the administration over broad-based debt cancellation."

Biden Begins Buying Back Oil To Refill Strategic Reserve... Will Send Gas Prices Back To Record Highs

Tl;dr: Not The Onion...

Frankly, when this headline hit we just assumed it was a mistake... but it's not.



Just 6 weeks after President Biden unveiled the greatest, most-massivest, democracy-saving plan to release millions of barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve into the market to bring down the price of gasoline at the pump for Americans... which was crushing his approval ratings as the average joe's pocket book is eaten alive by Biden-flation...

CNN reports that the Biden administration plans to seek bids this fall to buy 60 million barrels of crude oil as the first step in a years-long process aimed at replenishing America's shrinking emergency oil reserve, an Energy Department official said.

"As we are thoughtful and methodical in the decision to drawdown from our emergency reserve, we must be similarly strategic in replenishing the supply so that it stands ready to deliver on its mission to provide relief when needed most," Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in a statement.

Beyond trying to refill a vital rainy fund, the Biden administration hopes the buyback plan will encourage domestic oil production by guaranteeing a source of future demand.

This cunning plan to sell low and buy high has sent oil prices back above $110... and erased any short-term impact on oil prices from Biden's plan...

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...s-prices-back-record

quote:

CNN reports that the Biden administration plans to seek bids this fall to buy 60 million barrels of crude oil as the first step in a years-long process aimed at replenishing America's shrinking emergency oil reserve, an Energy Department official said.

This fall, huh? Just before midterms drive oil prices up further...good plan.

Just waiting patiently to see who they end up buying oil from. I am betting it will end up being Venezuela, Iran, and Russia.
These guys are completely incompetent.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

That doesn't make it a good idea. It's just more $trillions in money printing. It will further damage our currency and drive inflation.
More importantly, it's a further disincentive for hard work and thrift.

And creates an all new welfare class: Pussies who graduated from college who got some stupid-ass degree from an expensive college that they couldn't afford. A degree that they can't or won't pay for because they think "society" owes them, because somehow "Society" benefited from them getting a useless degree. These are not the neediest people in our country, by far. Hell, why don't we just pay their rent too.

Also, some think that by forgiving these loans, tuition may rise even further as more money flows in that direction.

For some insane reason, President Potato and his handlers all seem to think Americans paying $7-8 a gallon of gas by the midterms is a winning strategy.

AG Garland strikes again

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/...ental-justice-office

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday announced the creation of a new Office of Environmental Justice along with a series of actions "to secure environmental justice for all Americans."

Why it matters: Environmental justice seeks to ensure that all people — regardless of race, class, or national origin — receive equal protection from environmental and health hazards, and are equally able to participate in the creation and implementation of environmental laws, per the Environmental Protection Agency.

The big picture: The new office will help "oversee and help guide" the justice department's efforts on environmental justice, Garland said during a press briefing Thursday morning.

It is being launched alongside the department's new environmental justice enforcement strategy.
The department also issued an Interim Final Rule, restoring its ability to use supplemental environmental projects "to compensate victims and remedy violations of federal environmental laws," Garland added.

What they're saying: “Although violations of our environmental laws can happen anywhere, communities of color, indigenous communities, and low-income communities often bear the brunt of the harm caused by environmental crime, pollution, and climate change,” Garland said in a statement.

“OEJ will prioritize meaningful and constructive engagement with the communities most affected by environmental crime and injustice," he added during the press conference.

Excellent, I am sure the current victims of inner city crime sprees will be relieved to know that there is someone addressing their constant environmental crime issues.

New WH spokesman. And as all of us in this forum would have guessed, checks all of the boxes

quote:

President Biden announced Thursday that Karine Jean-Pierre will replace Jen Psaki as White House press secretary when Psaki leaves the job on May 13.

Why it matters: Jean-Pierre, currently principal deputy press secretary, will be the first Black woman and first openly LGBTQ woman to hold the position.

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/...ecretary-biden-psaki

quote:

openly LGBTQ

It's all of those?

Yes, of course he will.

***********************

Biden likely to avoid IRS audit that could’ve revealed if he made made money from Hunter’s deals

President Biden is likely to avoid an audit that could reveal whether he made money from his son Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings — because the Internal Revenue Service has rejected a whistleblower complaint that alleged he owes at least $127,000 in taxes, The Post has learned.

The IRS allows people to inform on fellow taxpayers and win a slice of the proceeds — prompting Chris Jacobs, a former Republican staffer on Capitol Hill, to submit complaints against Biden and his accountant, though he said he didn’t want any financial reward.

Jacobs shared with The Post a reply from the IRS titled “denial” that explained that the government didn’t use his information.

Tax law expert Bob Willens, who teaches at Columbia University’s business school, said the rejection means Biden is likely to run out a three-year statute of limitations, meaning Republican claims that Biden owes up to $500,000 in taxes are unlikely to be resolved.

“It looks like the question of whether the president underpaid his Medicare taxes will never be aired,” Willens told The Post.

The dispute concerns more than $13 million that Joe and Jill Biden routed through S corporations in 2017 and 2018 to avoid paying a 3.8 percent Medicare tax on most of the haul by declaring a small part of it as “salary.” Many wealthy people use S corporations to lower their tax bills and the IRS pursues relatively few cases of lowballing the amount of income that counts as taxable.

The income is believed to be linked to Biden book sales and speaking fees after he left office as vice president. Experts say income that is the direct result of a person’s labor generally should count as subject to the Medicare tax and ethics experts are calling on Biden to reveal the precise sources amid scrutiny of the president’s links to his son Hunter Biden’s overseas business relationships.

Jacobs did not specifically seek information on the first son’s links to his father, but an IRS audit would necessarily require a review of how Biden earned various income streams.

University of Minnesota law professor Richard Painter, who was chief White House ethics lawyer for then-President George W. Bush, told The Post recently that without the corporate returns, “you don’t know where the money’s coming from.”

“This exactly why it’s better to disclose — then every card is face-up on the table,” he told The Post last month. “Otherwise, people have no idea what’s in there … and that undermines public confidence in the government.”

IRS auditor Tresa Williams wrote to Jacobs in a reply dated April 22: “Under [IRS rules], an award may be paid only if the information provided results in the collection of tax, penalties, interest, additions to tax, or additional amounts based on the information provided. Therefore, you are not eligible for an award.”

“Although the information you submitted did not qualify for an award, thank you for your interest in the administration of the internal revenue laws,” Williams wrote.

Jacobs filed two separate complaints: one in February against Biden and another last month for Tax Day that mentioned both Biden and his accountant. The IRS notified Jacobs on March 31 that it received his February complaint — before writing 22 days later to say it would not act on the tip. He has not received a reply to his most recent complaint, but the underlying facts are nearly identical.

The IRS generally has a three-year statute of limitations to go after back taxes, so long as the evasion isn’t a willful non-reporting of income.

“Here, without any interest on the IRS’s part in bringing an enforcement action, there’s no way for Mr. Jacobs, that I’m aware of, to prosecute the case himself,” Willens said. “So, clearly, there will be no whistleblower award here because the [IRS] indifference to the information he provided, means there will be no ‘proceeds’ out of which these awards are ordinarily paid.”

Willens said that the three-year statute of limitations hits on either the anniversary of Biden’s 2018 tax filing or the filing deadline in April 2019 — meaning the clock’s probably up already or will be in the near future. Biden released an amended copy of his 2018 tax return dated July 7, 2019, and it’s unclear when he initially filed.

“The only other statute of limitations extension that I’m aware of is where the taxpayer ‘fails to report gross income in excess of 25 percent of the gross income he or she reported on the tax return.’ In those cases, there is a six-year statute of limitations imposed. However, here, I don’t think the president failed to ‘report’ his gross income. Instead, what he may have done is ‘mischaracterize’ a portion of his income,” Willens said.

“If the income is merely mischaracterized, rather than omitted, the six-year statute is not operative.”

Willens added: “Of course, filing a ‘false’ return with ‘an intent to evade tax’ means that the statute of limitations never expires, but I don’t think anyone expects the IRS to make that assertion with respect to the president’s tax return(s)… the dispute here, regarding what is ‘reasonable compensation for services actually rendered,’ probably doesn’t rise to that level since the question of reasonable compensation is a factual, rather than a legal, question.”

Jacobs said he’s concerned about the IRS decision to deny his claim.

“It seems highly curious that the IRS could spend five months processing a simple change to fix a typographical error made by one of my clients, and yet dismiss a complaint regarding Joe Biden’s conduct in just three weeks,” Jacobs said.

Read more at the link...

https://nypost.com/2022/05/05/...campaign=android_nyp

quote:

Originally posted by BigSwede:

quote:

openly LGBTQ

It's all of those?

+

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Someone please explain how this is legal for Biden to waive 'any' student debt (or any other debt for that matter). I just see no constitutional basis at all for this, though that doesn't seem to be much of a concern anymore.

No, Biden has no magic wand.

However, the Federal government has taken over student lending almost entirely. It used to be that banks and other lenders made these loans which were limited in interest and often 'guaranteed' by the federal government.
Now, I think the Federal government is the sole, direct lender.

A lender has always had the power to forgive a debt. Unilaterally, I don't think the agencies holding this paper could do it. But, if Congress went along with it--- it could be done.

That doesn't make it a good idea. It's just more $trillions in money printing. It will further damage our currency and drive inflation.
More importantly, it's a further disincentive for hard work and thrift.

My point was that Congress could probably pass a bill forgiving student loan debt, but I don't see how Biden and the Executive branch has the authority to do anything on this topic. And yes, any forgiveness of student loan debt is a horrible idea for this country and nothing but a blatant vote buying scheme for the Potatus.

^^^^^ For every one whose debt is forgiven there are probably a dozen who would be mad that they paid theirs off without it, and would be angry about it.

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

For every one whose debt is forgiven there are probably a dozen who would be mad that they paid theirs off without it, and would be angry about it.

There are some of us who did it without loans, without debt. I worked my way through college, much of the time working a full time day job and taking courses in the evening.

Seventeen years from my first day of college until I earned the B.S., but I did it.

If those borrowers get away without repaying the loans, I want a refund of the hard-earned tuition that I paid.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
^^^^^ For every one whose debt is forgiven there are probably a dozen who would be mad that they paid theirs off without it, and would be angry about it.

That's a very good point. The 'free crap' crowd doesn't want OTHER people to get free crap - they want THEMSELVES to get free crap. And seeing 'their' free crap go to others instead of themselves will just infuriate them .

Now, I wonder what kind of algorithm they will use. I'm betting they will prioritize the free money to gender studies and black inequality studies over Military History and Law Enforcement degree paths. . .

So now we know the real reason this phony President uses a phony WH set instead of the Oval Office, his handlers don’t want you to see the HUGE TV teleprompter screen with the 65 point font they have to use for this puppet when they make him go out and read the words on the screen. The Oval Office is shaped such that it would be seen in photographs:


Biden has ditched using the Oval Office for press events because it 'can't fit a teleprompter' and the fake stage can be set up with 'easily read' screen

We’ve caught glimpses of it during the 2020 campaign and other places:

Here's an excerpt from Joe's speech in the Rose Garden yesterday for the FIFTH OF MAY event:

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...nts-learning-spanish
"Twenty-five out of every 100 children in grades kindergarten through senior in high school speak Spanish," Biden stated. "Twenty-five out of every 100. It's overwhelming the interest of not only those kids but of all Americans that we invest – we invest in the community. And we'll conquer and honor and lift up all those folks who in fact, are, have gotten in the way."

Uhhh, what?

I am tired of people thinking there is something wrong or unfair about coming from a successful family, and who think an apology is owed for it.

I was fortunate to have parents who worked extremely hard to afford a really nice upper middle class lifestyle by the time I was a teen. I did have to work to pay for some of my college expenses, but my parents paid the tuition. That doesn't constitute some form of unfairness to be embarrassed about or to have to make amends for.

My mother was the first in her family to ever attend college, and she went on to medical school. My father was second ever in his family to go to college, his older sister being the first. He earned an ivy league MBA in the mid 1950's.

They both worked tough jobs for the purpose of benefiting their kids. I'm sure many of you have similar stories, and are yourselves working hard to provide a good future for your kids/grandkids.

Money did not rain down from the sky to pay for anything. There is no shame in parents' success providing well for their children, including paying for college.

I was able to pay it forward to my kids. Neither I nor my kids owe it to anybody else to pay off their loans.