Health Care Reform Defeated
- Thread starter Satya
- Start date
S
Shai Gar
Yeah, how about a real culture?
The argument could be made that income taxes are illegal.
S
Shai Gar
They're not provided for in the constitution or the bill of rights. Therefore they're illegal in the USA.
Property taxes are collected by the states. All I need is one action, remember.
S
Shai Gar
Could argue that Americans were prevented from paying their property taxes to the British during the Revolution.
If the argument that income taxes are illegal is accepted as truth, then every time the federal government collects on them, would that not be an illegal action?
How are they illegal if the government itself collects them? The government's lawbooks are the actual authorities on what is illegal or legal. The Constitution was just a document that the government was supposed to use to limit itself. Laws are enforced by police. The limitations imposed by the Constitution are enforced by judges, when put on trial in that manner.
Except that Nixon was still subject to the law in that he could be prosecuted by his own government. Congress, on the other hand, has the power to amend the Constitution and thereby give itself more power.
Except that he never was prosecuted by his government but was rather pardoned by his handpicked Vice President. And Congress does not have unilateral power to amend the constitution, the proposed amendment must then be approved by 3/4ths of the state legislatures, or by 3/4ths of the states through ratifying conventions.
I know he wasn't actually prosecuted, but he could have been. His vulnerability proved his statement about the legality of his activities false.
Okay, it's not just the US Congress that has to approve it. I should have made that clearer. But the point is that (the legislative branch of) government has that power, and therefore the Constitution does not really count as "law." If the government demands taxes, that is the law.
I think that no such vulnerability existed given the ability of the Vice President to issue a pardon in a clear quid pro quo. Presidents are unfortunately above the law in this country.
That's fair, I agree.
It was legal vulnerability hinging on personal loyalties. If Ford and Nixon had gotten into a spat, Ford could just have easily refused to pardon Nixon out of spite, and then Nixon would have been finished. Ford's protection had nothing to do with the legality of Nixon's actions, only his personal willingness to pardon.
I don't think that Gerald Ford makes decisions regarding personal pardons like an 8 year old at recess, but I acknowledge your point. I said Nixon as a (poor) joke and then just decided to debate the point for fun.