• Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:05 AM
    Weisselberg wasn't the only company exec who got unreported benefits. The companies may have felt it was worth it to keep these execs by paying them unreported compensation. In addition, the company evaded paying payroll tax on the extra benefits.
    11 replies | 493 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    12-06-2022, 04:12 PM
    A Manhattan jury has found two Trump Organization companies guilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records connected to a 15-year scheme to defraud tax authorities by failing to report and pay taxes on compensation for top executives. https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/06/politics/trump-organization-fraud-trial-verdict/index.html https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trump-organization-entities-found-guilty-all-counts-tax-fraud Although Donald Trump wasn't charged it's hard to believe he wasmn't aware of what was going on.
    11 replies | 493 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    12-05-2022, 11:01 AM
    Trump's statement should have come as no surprise. He had previously urged Pence to crap on the Constitution by rejecting certified electors.
    87 replies | 2017 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    12-04-2022, 05:23 PM
    Who else should be in besides TCU? Neither Ohio State nor Alabama even played in its conference championship, and everybody else had more than one loss. The Frogs should have won but Duggan was just too gassed for the coaches to call his number.
    71 replies | 2515 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    12-04-2022, 11:20 AM
    Ms. Lake's attorneys were sanctioned for making false allegations in their filings and failing to make a reasonable pre-filing inquiry as to the factual and legal basis of their claims. The judge's order on sactions can be read here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.azd.1294569/gov.uscourts.azd.1294569.106.0.pdf
    87 replies | 5520 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    12-01-2022, 08:09 AM
    Given that the last thing a retailer would want is a mass reduction in customers, I think your reaction to the ad is a bit much.
    11 replies | 762 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-30-2022, 05:37 PM
    Based on the Tenth Circuit's opinion SCOTUS won't hear the case. It appears Brunson lost because he failed to properly preserve his objections to the trial court's holdings that he lacked standing and that the defendants had the defense of sovereign immunity. That's the risk of bringing a suit like this pro se. Tenth Circuit's opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-380/243739/20221024152923186_20221024-152524-95757879-00000747.pdf
    3 replies | 1448 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-30-2022, 05:17 PM
    Maybe not. The bill doesn't require a state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. It requires a state to recognize a marriage that was entered into in a state where such a marriage was legal. Congress' authority to enact such a requirement is arguably the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause:
    26 replies | 1377 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-23-2022, 09:41 AM
    Whether they were declassified or not has no bearing on the fact that the papers belong to the government, per the Presidential Records Act. Trump illegally retained possession of them, plain and simple. It's more likely that he wanted them as trophies to feed his ego than he wanted to release any information they contain (except perhaps for the "love letter" he claims to have received from Kim Jong-un, which he could show off at parties).
    97 replies | 3082 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-20-2022, 10:15 AM
    In Trump's mind it wasn't a sacrifice. It was an opportunity to feed his massive narcissism.
    32 replies | 679 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-18-2022, 02:58 PM
    Not to mention similar laws passed by state legislatures, including those dealing with intestacy, civil actions for wrongful death, and community property.
    26 replies | 1377 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-18-2022, 10:02 AM
    As noted above, there is nothing in the bill as amended in the Senate that would allow a church's tax exemption to be revoked because of its belief in traditional marriage. It should also be noted that the tax exemptions of non-church organizations are already at risk if they employ certain practices that are deemed to violate public policy. See Bob Jones University v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983), where the Court (8-1) upheld the revocation of a university's exemption because of its racially discriminatory practices.
    26 replies | 1377 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-17-2022, 10:27 AM
    While some think marriage is purely a religious institution, it is also a legal one that has significant ramifications. Civil marriages aren't going away, and so long as the government is going to recognize them and prescribe their legal results (e.g., determining who gets the property of someone who dies without a will), it cannot refuse to recognize a union on the basis of race or sexual orientation.
    26 replies | 1377 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-17-2022, 10:04 AM
    Codifying Loving v. Virginia, Windsor v. U.S., and Obergefell v. Hodges is essentially an exercise in political posturing. Those decisions are currently the law of the land and legislation codifying their holdings is therefore unnecessary. Supporters of the legislation believe that it would forestall the Supreme Court's overturning these cases. But what is the constitutional basis for Congress to enact such legislation? Presumably, it's Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, which authorizes Congress to enact appropriate legislation to enforce the Amendment. But if SCOTUS overturns these cases and says that there is no constitutional prohibition against anti-miscegention laws or laws recognizing only same-sex marriage, it seems that the basis for the codification legislation vanishes, except perhaps for the legislation's requirement that a state recognize a marriage that was legal under the laws of the state in which it was entered into. See https://reason.com/volokh/2022/07/20/federalism-and-the-respect-for-marriage-act/ for a good discussion.
    26 replies | 1377 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-17-2022, 08:24 AM
    Section 6 of the Act says otherwise.
    26 replies | 1377 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    11-10-2022, 03:00 PM
    The District Court's opinion can be read here: https://casetext.com/case/massie-v-pelosi The 27th Amendment argument seems rather far fetched. Satisfying a fine out of a Congressman's compensation isn't a reduction any more than taking withholding taxes out of it would be. It shouldn't matter that the fine was imposed and enforced without an intervening election, because if compensation isn't being "varied" the Amendment is inapplicable. Looked at another way, if taxing a federal judge's compensation doesn't constitute a diminishment of the salary in violation of Article III (which the Supreme Court has held is the case), it's hard to see how taking a fine out of a congressman's pay is "varying" his compensation. It's true that, unlike a fine, taxes are enacted by Congress, but since the Constitution gives each house the specificv authority to adopt it own rules of procedure and discipline its members, such a distinction is immaterial.
    3 replies | 1857 view(s)
No More Results
About Sonny Tufts

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):


We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
Erwin N. Griswold

Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 08:32 PM
Join Date











  • 10:57 AM - Hidden


No results to display...
Page 1 of 79 1231151 ... LastLast













Page 1 of 79 1231151 ... LastLast