Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?"

"Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?"

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
69 Posts 16 Posters 1.5k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #18

    Disgusting.

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Online
      jon-nycJ Online
      jon-nyc
      wrote on last edited by
      #19

      So the IRS has direct deposit information from something like 80MM households.

      The ones that were delayed for Trumps ego surely skewed old and poor.

      Only non-witches get due process.

      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
      1 Reply Last reply
      • MikM Offline
        MikM Offline
        Mik
        wrote on last edited by Mik
        #20

        Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.

        “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

        JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #21

          IRS sources say yes, while programmers work from home to make programming changes. Officially Trump's treasury says no.

          Only non-witches get due process.

          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
          1 Reply Last reply
          • MikM Mik

            Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.

            JollyJ Offline
            JollyJ Offline
            Jolly
            wrote on last edited by
            #22

            @Mik said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":

            Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.

            The Treasury said the paper checks are rolling out on schedule and that adding his signature added no time to the check printing dates.

            Figured as much. How much time does it take to sub one signature for another in a computer program? Payroll departments do it all the time.

            H8ters gotta hate...

            “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

            Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

            AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ Online
              jon-nycJ Online
              jon-nyc
              wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
              #23

              Try to imagine what Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh would have done if Obama wanted his signature on checks from the United States Treasury. Not to mention posters here.

              Only non-witches get due process.

              • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
              1 Reply Last reply
              • MikM Offline
                MikM Offline
                Mik
                wrote on last edited by
                #24

                So we don't know for sure.

                What we do know is it is a very bad idea, a huge unforced error.

                But one thing I take exception with in an article in WaPo:

                "But to critics and some IRS employees, many of whom started to learn of the decision on Tuesday, the presence of Trump’s name on the checks reeks of partisanship in a corner of the government that touches all Americans and has, since the Nixon era, steadfastly steered clear of politics. "

                Steered clear of politics? Anyone remember the weaponization of the IRS against conservative groups in the Obama admin? What a short memory WaPo has.

                “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                1 Reply Last reply
                • jon-nycJ Online
                  jon-nycJ Online
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                  #25

                  Sometimes I think the worst aspect of Trump is not even his behavior, rather it's watching his supporters further and further debase themselves by defending him or looking the other way.

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • JollyJ Jolly

                    @Mik said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":

                    Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.

                    The Treasury said the paper checks are rolling out on schedule and that adding his signature added no time to the check printing dates.

                    Figured as much. How much time does it take to sub one signature for another in a computer program? Payroll departments do it all the time.

                    H8ters gotta hate...

                    AxtremusA Offline
                    AxtremusA Offline
                    Axtremus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #26

                    @Jolly It is a completely unnecessary change that (1) creates extra work for the IRS in a time of crisis and (2) confers no additional benefit to the nation. For that, it deserves criticism.

                    JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                    • JollyJ Offline
                      JollyJ Offline
                      Jolly
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #27

                      Try to imagine what job would have said it Trump delayed the printing of the checks for one day.

                      Look, adding a sit to a monumental program has been done in the past and it will be done in the future.

                      It's a nonstory for the TDS crowd.

                      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                        #28

                        Honestly any additional delay or effort is trivial in the grand scheme of things.

                        It's really the principle of it, l'Etat, c'est lui.

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • AxtremusA Axtremus

                          @Jolly It is a completely unnecessary change that (1) creates extra work for the IRS in a time of crisis and (2) confers no additional benefit to the nation. For that, it deserves criticism.

                          JollyJ Offline
                          JollyJ Offline
                          Jolly
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #29

                          @Axtremus said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":

                          @Jolly It is a completely unnecessary change that (1) creates extra work for the IRS in a time of crisis and (2) confers no additional benefit to the nation. For that, it deserves criticism.

                          Horsefeathers.

                          The IRS has a due date of 7/15 for tax returns. I suspect they aren't near as busy this time of year as usual.

                          And if you judge the Federal government by the yardstick of unnecessary, let's have a talk about the Department of Education and their 68 billion dollar budget.

                          “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                          Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • AxtremusA Offline
                            AxtremusA Offline
                            Axtremus
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #30

                            @Jolly you see federal work that is "unnecessary," so you criticize that.
                            Adding Trump's name to the checks is definitely unnecessary. So that, too, deserves criticism.

                            JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                            • CopperC Offline
                              CopperC Offline
                              Copper
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #31

                              He is hoping to increase his name recognition for the upcoming election.

                              Standard for any politician.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • AxtremusA Axtremus

                                @Jolly you see federal work that is "unnecessary," so you criticize that.
                                Adding Trump's name to the checks is definitely unnecessary. So that, too, deserves criticism.

                                JollyJ Offline
                                JollyJ Offline
                                Jolly
                                wrote on last edited by Jolly
                                #32

                                @Axtremus said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":

                                @Jolly you see federal work that is "unnecessary," so you criticize that.
                                Adding Trump's name to the checks is definitely unnecessary. So that, too, deserves criticism.

                                Excuse me, who is the President? Does it hurt to have his name on the check? How much was the supplemental appropriation to hire the army of programmers it took to effect this change?

                                Your position is so absurd, it's laughable. You have now equated a small signature change that cost nothing, to an unneeded federal department that costs billions of dollars.

                                Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!

                                “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • jon-nycJ Online
                                  jon-nycJ Online
                                  jon-nyc
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #33

                                  Why don't we put his signature on the death certificates?

                                  Only non-witches get due process.

                                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                  JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                    Why don't we put his signature on the death certificates?

                                    JollyJ Offline
                                    JollyJ Offline
                                    Jolly
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #34

                                    @jon-nyc said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":

                                    Why don't we put his signature on the death certificates?

                                    Because legally, you can't do that. Do you wish to change the law?

                                    Would make for an impressive looking document...

                                    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • MikM Offline
                                      MikM Offline
                                      Mik
                                      wrote on last edited by Mik
                                      #35

                                      The optics of the check sig are terrible, no matter how you look at it.

                                      “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • markM Offline
                                        markM Offline
                                        mark
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #36

                                        Self aggrandizing bullshit!

                                        JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                        • KlausK Online
                                          KlausK Online
                                          Klaus
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #37

                                          I'm pretty sure Trump has already toyed with the idea of his signature and image on dollar bills.

                                          markM 1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups