19 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

One of many misleading statements made by him

aka lies 

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Read the thread that says Trump will not co operate with the impeachment which means no information will be forthcoming.

If the Dems want to get rid of Trump, find a candidate that can beat him at the polls, then after he is defeated he will no longer have presidential immunity, and a criminal investigation can begin.

IMO it's because the Dems know in their hearts that Trump can't be defeated in the election.

 

IMO, all the uproar is only making Trump MORE likely to be re elected.

 

A lot of people are beginning to move from the deck of the Liz Warren boat and getting better seats closer to the lifeboats. Tv is becoming an endless resource of amusement from the out of touch and misinformed.

 

The feds don't mess around if there is a case they do no rely on rumors and innuendo. They don't sit around behind closed doors in closed closets with whistleblowers. As far as Trump's wealth goes, who care? He had enough to become the president. 

 

There is around 10% of the population that even cares about this. The rest of us have jobs and homes and a plan for the future.

 

18 hours ago, pmarlin said:

They will only show that he has paid no or very little income tax. Not  un-common for people who own large companies. He gets audited by the IRS each year and if anything criminal was there it would have come out long ago. This is a which hunt by a democrat district attorney and that is way Trump is fighting it. It's no bodies business what is on those tax returns.  

Which Witch? ???? ????

14 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

There is around 10% of the population that even cares about this. The rest of us have jobs and homes and a plan for the future.

 

Polls show that over 60% of Americans (varies by poll) want to see Trump's tax returns released. And as of today polls also show that the majority of Americans support an impeachment inquiry (not impeachment but the inquiry). Those also vary but they are coming in as high as 58%. 

Edited October 8, 20196 yr by jcsmith

3 minutes ago, jcsmith said:

Polls show that over 60% of Americans (varies by poll) want to see Trump's tax returns released. And as of today polls also show that the majority of Americans support an impeachment inquiry (not impeachment but the inquiry). Those also vary but they are coming in as high as 58%. 

 

People care about their retirement funds more. Trump's tax returns aren't an everyday concern.

13 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

People care about their retirement funds more. Trump's tax returns aren't an everyday concern.

I agree, but one has absolutely nothing to do with the other. Trump's tax returns subpoena and release won't affect my retirement one iota, nor any other US citizen's. 

23 hours ago, webfact said:

"A thing like this has never happened to any President before. Not even close!"

Well, they haven't had a President like Donald Trump before. Not even close!

 

9 hours ago, Sujo said:

What law?

The tribal laws of the GOP.  Party before country, period.  Full speed ahead, damn the facts.

2 hours ago, Guitarzan said:

Unfortunately for you lefties. The law is on Trumps side. 

The law is what will take Trump down. The fact that he is president is all that is saving him from prosecution. 

the last call in this respect will have the supreme court, surely the left will keep getting a bloody nose.

 

wbr

roobaa01

On 10/8/2019 at 11:49 AM, pmarlin said:

They will only show that he has paid no or very little income tax. Not  un-common for people who own large companies. He gets audited by the IRS each year and if anything criminal was there it would have come out long ago. This is a which hunt by a democrat district attorney and that is way Trump is fighting it. It's no bodies business what is on those tax returns.  

Perhaps you are right.

 

However he DID promise to release his tax records and he DID lie about a current IRS audit preventing him from doing so.

 

While it's not llegal to be inconsistent or for a sitting  president to lie to the public (as GW Bush did), it is certainly dishonorable, misleading, and provocative. A natural human reaction is to wonder if he is hiding something.

 

So ultimately his ill-conceived (as usual) gambit fosters doubt about his honesty, once again achieving the opposite of his presumed goal.

 

Also, tax fraud IS anybody's business. The IRS provides a tax fraud tip hotline where ANYBODY can leave an anonymous tip.

 

Regarding the witch hunt reference: let it rest please. Republicans and his misguided supporters have quite thoroughly fatigued this weary meme in the last two years.

 

Seeking truth relevant to criminal activity does not constitute a witch hunt per se. Trump and his cronies/family  have provided more than sufficient fodder for such investigations both before and after he was illegitimately elected.

 

That said, I certainly understand your emotional response and your unease with the current situation.

 

Abraham's Lincoln's statement about being unable to "fool all of the people, all of the time" comes to mind.

16 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

A lot of people are beginning to move from the deck of the Liz Warren boat and getting better seats closer to the lifeboats. Tv is becoming an endless resource of amusement from the out of touch and misinformed.

 

The feds don't mess around if there is a case they do no rely on rumors and innuendo. They don't sit around behind closed doors in closed closets with whistleblowers. As far as Trump's wealth goes, who care? He had enough to become the president. 

 

There is around 10% of the population that even cares about this. The rest of us have jobs and homes and a plan for the future.

 

You in fact care so little that you post endlessly on the subject.

supreme court ruling in 3.. 2.. 1...

11 minutes ago, tgw said:

supreme court ruling in 3.. 2.. 1...

That's why Ginsberg is hanging in there. This woman's efords are heroic.  

C'mon please some compassion....his Missus must be far more costly to maintain then a Pattaya bar girl !!

15 hours ago, roobaa01 said:

the last call in this respect will have the supreme court, surely the left will keep getting a bloody nose.

 

wbr

roobaa01

When will you wise up , its not about right v left , republican v democrat , its about a man trashing the constitution and acting like a wanabee dictator. Be honest , you were calling out Obama and Clinton for far far less ( supposed ) misdemeanors.

The White house has just refused to comply with the wishes of Congress , what next , ignore the Senate , the courts ?

For goodness sake , if you are going to back one man against the constitution , pick a great man , not a lying , criminal piece of excrement !

Adding to what I posted yesterday... Now even in a Fox poll the majority of people want Trump impeached and removed from office. 51% want him impeached and removed, 40% don't want him impeached.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

 

That's the bastion of his support. He's gone too far.

Edited October 9, 20196 yr by jcsmith

A post containing trolling memes has been removed as well as other troll posts and replies.

 

 

Some off topic posts and replies about the election results have been removed. 

Edited October 10, 20196 yr by metisdead

On 10/9/2019 at 6:05 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Read the thread that says Trump will not co operate with the impeachment which means no information will be forthcoming.

If the Dems want to get rid of Trump, find a candidate that can beat him at the polls, then after he is defeated he will no longer have presidential immunity, and a criminal investigation can begin.

IMO it's because the Dems know in their hearts that Trump can't be defeated in the election.

 

IMO, all the uproar is only making Trump MORE likely to be re elected.

"IMO, all the uproar is only making Trump MORE likely to be re elected."

Which would be the best evidence yet, that the USA have collectively lost their minds!

On 10/9/2019 at 6:27 AM, Cryingdick said:

 

A lot of people are beginning to move from the deck of the Liz Warren boat and getting better seats closer to the lifeboats. Tv is becoming an endless resource of amusement from the out of touch and misinformed.

 

The feds don't mess around if there is a case they do no rely on rumors and innuendo. They don't sit around behind closed doors in closed closets with whistleblowers. As far as Trump's wealth goes, who care? He had enough to become the president. 

 

There is around 10% of the population that even cares about this. The rest of us have jobs and homes and a plan for the future.

 

1st paragraph :

Does this mean that anybody not taking your view is out of touch and misinformed? You are talking about a large and non-homogeneous group of folks. Does it seem reasonable to you that they are ALL as you describe them? Your mass branding of a large group implies that you are yourself misinformed. Opinions that differ from yours do not per se become illegitimate.

 

Paragraph 2:

Federal and state laws govern the privacy and protection of individuals having privileged information. Congress is merely honoring such laws in pursuit of facts. While this may be inconsequential to you and your hero, our country remains one of law, and politicians and the military, above all others, should and must hold the laws sacrosanct.

 

How does a person's wealth qualify them for high public office? In the real working world, the one you purport to live in, qualification for a job requires knowledge and experience in the field of endeavor. Your hero admitted and currently demonstrates that he has an extremely limited and tenuous grasp of his job responsibilities, much less the issues themselves. Worse yet, he declares most of the issues to be irrelevant or trivial. Nonetheless he has been, to date, naught but 'a sound and a fury' while making progress on few of them, if any, excepting the invocation of mindless jingoism, racism, and hatred from the members of his minority support base.

 

Paragraph 3:

It seems likely that your statistic of those who 'care' is specious and probably culled entirely from your own imagination. Recent polls suggest that your figure is shy by a factor of five. Further, I assure you that virtually all Americans care about their jobs, homes and lives. One does not have to be a political ideologue to value such things.

 

In summary:

Your post appears to be simply thoughtless rhetoric that asserts little of consequence to either side of this issue. If you were attempting to make an insightful point I suggest you try again.

Do not mean to spoil the party , but would this judge behaved the same say if it was an Obama or a Clinton being required to submit tax returns ?

 

We all know that many former presidents have used their notoriety and charge tens of thousands of dollars for giving conferences, once they leave office. Not to mention the royalties on books published,  with facts and elements obtained only thanks to their previous top post in office. Is that legal ? Ethical ? nobody seems to challenge it ?

Edited October 10, 20196 yr by observer90210

Really looking forward to trawling through a billionaires petty cash vouchers !

2 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Do not mean to spoil the party , but would this judge behaved the same say if it was an Obama or a Clinton being required to submit tax returns ?

 

We all know that many former presidents have used their notoriety and charge tens of thousands of dollars for giving conferences, once they leave office. Not to mention the royalties on books published,  with facts and elements obtained only thanks to their previous top post in office. Is that legal ? Ethical ? nobody seems to challenge it ?

Perhaps I misunderstand the gist of your question. In general though people elevated to positions of notariety in any field, are privy to information, experiences, and perspectives that few of us mudsuckers could access.

 

It seems a natural outcome that these people are rewarded for sharing those experiences and where legal, that information.

 

Ethical considerations are certainly relevant however. Charles Manson or Bernie Madoff profiting from lectures or books detailing their their harmful exploitation of innocent people is quite different from a president speaking of the events and challenges of his office.

 

The issue of the tax returns is superficially innocuous, but it has become a tradition followed for several decades by presidential candidates. It is intended to display transparency in the candidate's past financial activities and the counterparties involved. The intent was never to measure the person's wealth.

 

Trump however used his purported wealth and business acumen as a cudgel to demonstrate his superiority over his opposition. In this case, it seems that he should relish gloriying in the success his tax records would highlight.

 

If a man claimed to have decades of military experience at elevated levels that would qualify him as an expert in national defense but refused to disclose any of his history or service record wouldn't that seem curious and mystifying also?

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Groundless boasting simply marks the speaker as a common fool.

 

Additionally, the financial community has for many years had doubts about the level of success that he has remarked upon so often in his public life. His many business failures have inevitably been published when he sold or closed properties at huge losses.

 

So again, it is normal to be curious about what his returns would show and even more curious that he refuses so aggressively to release them even after blithely promising to do so.

 

What revelations might they actually contain? It is abundantly clear now that his deceit knows no bounds and that he lies about trivial things that are easily disproven.

 

For a judge to suspect that his returns might reveal even more noxious and/or illegal behavior is not unreasonable. It is abundantly clear now that there are more skeletons in the man's closet than there are in the National Cemetary.

 

Hell, for all I know he's sold the Washington Monument to a banana republic tin pot dictator or a Russian oligarch.

 

Really, would anybody put that past him besides McConnell and his dedicated troupe of slavering sycophants?

 

 

 

20 hours ago, Saint Nick said:

"IMO, all the uproar is only making Trump MORE likely to be re elected."

Which would be the best evidence yet, that the USA have collectively lost their minds!

I don't know about that, but a nation that has to choose between two terrible candidates certainly needs to look at it's election system which allows such a choice.

On 10/10/2019 at 12:32 PM, jcsmith said:

Adding to what I posted yesterday... Now even in a Fox poll the majority of people want Trump impeached and removed from office. 51% want him impeached and removed, 40% don't want him impeached.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

 

That's the bastion of his support. He's gone too far.

and how many people answered the poll? 51% of 500 or so in a nation of 350 million or so is hardly enlightening.

16 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Do not mean to spoil the party , but would this judge behaved the same say if it was an Obama or a Clinton being required to submit tax returns ?

 

Awesome deflection. The Russian judge gives you an "11".

 

Who knows? Maybe just lock them (Obama, Clinton) up without involving a judge?

 

Party not spolied at all.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by mtls2005

34 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Awesome deflection. The Russian judge gives you an "11".

 

Who knows? Maybe just lock them (Obama, Clinton) up without involving a judge?

 

Party not spolied at all.

 

 

 

 

Obviously you are a deeply engaged Trump fan, on looking at your avatar????. Good for you dear fellow.

On 10/8/2019 at 11:24 AM, Sujo said:

I saw Jay Sekulow stated the ruling was a win for trump. Simply because there was a stay on the ruling.

 

You just cant make this stuff up.

 

in the context of and referring to the stay they argued for and were granted was it not a win?

18 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Do not mean to spoil the party , but would this judge behaved the same say if it was an Obama or a Clinton being required to submit tax returns ?

 

We all know that many former presidents have used their notoriety and charge tens of thousands of dollars for giving conferences, once they leave office. Not to mention the royalties on books published,  with facts and elements obtained only thanks to their previous top post in office. Is that legal ? Ethical ? nobody seems to challenge it ?

But but but Whatifitwas Obama... Clinton.

39 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

in the context of and referring to the stay they argued for and were granted was it not a win?

Because stays on cases like this are not routinely granted? Pretty close to saying every time you draw a breath it's a victory over death. Winning!

Edited October 11, 20196 yr by bristolboy