Trump Keeps Immunity from I.R.S., a Victory in a Long-Running Feud

2 days ago by silence7 to c/politics

Even as they rebelled against a $1.8 billion fund for President Trump’s allies, Republicans looked the other way as his administration granted him potentially lucrative tax protections.

load all comments
CharlesDarwin 14 points 2 days ago

I remember when I worked in a certain field, and you could pull driver record data as part of standard background checks.

However, certain individuals we had to whitelist. I'm not sure if there were others, but apparently pulling the record of a judge for a background check was not something we could do, because, apparently judges are magical creatures that are better than the rest of us.

It annoyed the shit out of me then, and things like seeing Donvict get special treatment irritate me now.

path: 0 24353113, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 8
silence7 1 point 2 days ago

Judges tend to be very protective of info like home address, and for good reason. Data brokers and background checks tend to expose it.

path: 0 24353113 24360568, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 7
zurchpet 6 points 2 days ago

But. This should apply to ANY person. I'm no judge and I too don't want to my home address found easily.

I get why the judge gets the protection. But I don't get why not everybody gets that protection too.

Data brokers as a whole should be forbidden.

path: 0 24353113 24360568 24364039, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 5
CharlesDarwin 3 points 2 days ago

This.

Also, the story - and maybe it was just one of those urban legends - was that the clampdown on this data, at least in the state of Colorado, came after a judge got a DUI and that became public knowledge or something.

path: 0 24353113 24360568 24364039 24365348, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
politics
politics

@lemmy.world

login for more options
30158
30919
9765

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

go to feed...