Ha ha, lib. narrative lost again - this time it's Trump's taxes

[Frankeneinstein]

They were hopeful he didn't pay any tax........Sorry you're disappointed. He had nothing to hide. It's just none of your business.

Mr. Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on reported income of $150 million, an effective tax rate of 25 percent.

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Now that trumps tax returns have been released does trump have any "conflicts of interest" where they are concerned?

 

[Papageorgio]

They were hopeful he didn't pay any tax........Sorry you're disappointed. He had nothing to hide. It's just none of your business.

Mr. Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on reported income of $150 million, an effective tax rate of 25 percent.

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

Because it isn't any of your business. Pretty simple.

 

[hadit]

They were hopeful he didn't pay any tax........Sorry you're disappointed. He had nothing to hide. It's just none of your business.

Mr. Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on reported income of $150 million, an effective tax rate of 25 percent.

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, A) I don't agree it would be fair and B) that isn't a tax that benefits all Americans, now, is it?

Of course you don't agree because you are either intentionally or unwittingly conflating "fair" and "benefits" everyone as the same thing

You clearly proved the latter, so I'll stick to the former.

I ceded the latter with my original post which is why I countered with what is the only "fair" tax reply

Let's say you go into a restaurant and everyone pays a fee based on the weight of what they're eating. One dude goes in and has the steak and caviar, the other goes in and just has fries. Is the pricing of the meal fair? No, it's not.

Well well look who unwittingly proved my claim...In terms of taxation, if the fries cost $1 then the tax would be .18cents, if the steak and caviar cost $100.00 the tax would be $18.00, now if you are serious about keeping up what is unfair about that? if you are keeping up then "not a thing" should come to mind immediately, people who spend more on "necessities" food, clothing...etc.] would pay no taxes while those buying "luxury" items [boats, planes, bling...etc.] would be paying their fair share.

No, fair is what someone should pay compared to someone else. What benefits someone is a TAX CUT, quite clearly. If I have to pay MORE then it doesn't benefit me. So, you assessment was wrong.

No, you did not read what I wrote. I said everyone pays THE SAME as a percentage of WEIGHT of what they eat. Not that the fries cost this much so you pay a percentage of the tax on that.

If people are paying a flat tax, it does NOT take into account how much of something they are using, it takes into account how much money is being spent. Which means, quite easily, that if a multi-national company is earning X amount it could be using far more of the infrastructure than others.

Take the Iraq War as an example.

The US goes to Iraq and it costs, let's just take a rough estimate rather than be precise as this is just for example, $10 billion tax payers (again, just an easy figure to represent). $10 billion means that for 200 million people, each pays $50 on average.

But our man on the streets he doesn't earn anywhere near the average wage, he earns a lot less, so he's paying like $20 for the war per year. Whereas our guy who owns shares in say, Halliburton or Lockheed Martin, he's paying $300 a year in the flat tax you like.

Seems fair huh?

Except the man on the streets sees oil prices RISE because Iraq's been taken out and oil prices rose. So he's not better off. But our dude with shares in Halliburton, holy ****, he's just made a killing because the share prices have gone through the roof. Then he sees some story on the news about a US soldier who's just lost his life (paying taxes for the too) and he shrugs and goes back to counting the winnings he just gained.

Is it fair? Is it a fair tax that one dude just made a killing out of the US's policy of sending in its army, while another guy loses money because of this?

No, it's not.

Now, the point of what I'm getting at is that the US govt spends money, and it benefits some people more than others.

In Russia in the 1990s businesses had to pay for a mafia. It'd cost them a lot, like 30% of their earnings. US companies don't even pay 30% for EVERYTHING they get (potentially if they're a large **** you corporation). Who benefits the most from security? Is the benefit equally shared among the people? No, the rich get more than the people. So why should they be paying a tax which is equal, when one company is getting MORE for their tax money than someone else?

 

[frigidweirdo]

They were hopeful he didn't pay any tax........Sorry you're disappointed. He had nothing to hide. It's just none of your business.

Mr. Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on reported income of $150 million, an effective tax rate of 25 percent.

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

 

[hadit]

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

There is no law that requires this. If you look, every president has had information about themselves kept from the public eye. JFK and Bubba Clinton were horndogs, Obama had questions surrounding how he reported his citizenship status and benefitted from affirmative action in college, and so on.

 

[kwc57]

Maddow didn't lie. What she DID do is WORSE.

She let her partisan ideology completely overcome her and, sensing she found some political advantage, she stepped in a big pile of shit.

Now the Republicans can use this against the Left daily.

Too bad. That's what partisans get for not thinking straight.
.

You are saying she should have declined to air this and let someone else get free ratings?

Clearly YOU are the one not thinking straight.

It's the way she did it. Obviously.

Here, her ideological allies at Slate go into nice detail for you: Rachel Maddow Turned a Scoop on Donald Trump’s Taxes Into a Cynical, Self-Defeating Spectacle

I don't expect you to admit to or agree with any of this.
.

You think Maddow did something wrong, but you admit you have no clue what the right thing was to do.

You're the biggest partisan hack on this board.

I know you won't read this, because you're the biggest partisan hack on this board, but I'll post it (yet) again:

Rachel Maddow Turned a Scoop on Donald Trump’s Taxes Into a Cynical, Self-Defeating Spectacle

All the detail you need, right there. But you possess neither the integrity nor the intellectual honesty to just click on the ******* link and read it.

She blew it, but you're just another obedient hardcore partisan ideologue (side irrelevant), and you just don't have the balls to admit it.

Tough shit.
.

A blog....how nice.

However, this isn't over yet.

No, it isn't. The delusional bedwetting, pearl clutching, tinfoil hat wingnuts on the left will just keep making asses of themselves. I predict their conspiracy theories will continue beyond Trump's 8 years as president. So much wasted energy.

 

[kwc57]

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

Were you this adamant that Obama unseal the documents of his early life? I didn't think so. Hypocrite.

 

[beagle9]

He had nothing to hide.

That is not something that can be determined from the first two pages of a 1040. The important content of a tax return is found in the supporting schedules and forms that supplement the 1040 and that provide the support for the figures found on the 1040.

Only a total tax novice would think the 1040 form is what anyone wants to actually see.

. Well Maddow must have thought differently. LOL

Who's Maddow, and why might I care?

. Rachel Maddow is that dame on MSNBC.

 

[Little-Acorn]

No, it isn't. The delusional bedwetting, pearl clutching, tinfoil hat wingnuts on the left will just keep making asses of themselves. I predict their conspiracy theories will continue beyond Trump's 8 years as president. So much wasted energy.

At least it keeps them busy doing unimportant things, and keeps them out of the way where they can't hurt normal people, while the adults come in and start fixing all the things the liberals broke for the last 8 years.

 

[Little-Acorn]

 

[usmbguest5318]

He had nothing to hide.

That is not something that can be determined from the first two pages of a 1040. The important content of a tax return is found in the supporting schedules and forms that supplement the 1040 and that provide the support for the figures found on the 1040.

Only a total tax novice would think the 1040 form is what anyone wants to actually see.

. Well Maddow must have thought differently. LOL

Who's Maddow, and why might I care?

. Rachel Maddow is that dame on MSNBC.

Oh. TY. I think I heard someone mention her name now that you've reminded me.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Who's Maddow, and why might I care?

. Rachel Maddow is that dame on MSNBC.

Oh. TY. I think I heard someone mention her name now that you've reminded me.

Yes, MSNBC.

You know, that cable-TV "News" network that hates all Trump, all the time.

The one that exists only because it's included in nearly every cable-TV package by cable companies, whether anyone asks for it or not. And even with that, its viewership is down below Romper Room commercials.

If people had to ask for it, and pay for it, like they do HBO, its viewership would be zero.

 

[frigidweirdo]

They were hopeful he didn't pay any tax........Sorry you're disappointed. He had nothing to hide. It's just none of your business.

Mr. Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on reported income of $150 million, an effective tax rate of 25 percent.

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Now that trumps tax returns have been released does trump have any "conflicts of interest" where they are concerned?

If he had released his proper tax returns, we'd know. But this isn't his full tax returns, this is just a piece of paper he didn't even sign.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

There is no law that requires this. If you look, every president has had information about themselves kept from the public eye. JFK and Bubba Clinton were horndogs, Obama had questions surrounding how he reported his citizenship status and benefitted from affirmative action in college, and so on.

I didn't say there was a law that required it. Should politicians only do what the law says? They shouldn't try and do more than the minimum they're told to do?

There's a difference between Clinton ******* women other than his wife, and Trump's potential ties to another country.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

Were you this adamant that Obama unseal the documents of his early life? I didn't think so. Hypocrite.

Did Obama's documents potentially show that he was in bed with a foreign government? No, they did not.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

Were you this adamant that Obama unseal the documents of his early life? I didn't think so. Hypocrite.

Did Obama's documents potentially show that he was in bed with a foreign government? No, they did not.

"Potentially show"?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

Were you this adamant that Obama unseal the documents of his early life? I didn't think so. Hypocrite.

Did Obama's documents potentially show that he was in bed with a foreign government? No, they did not.

"Potentially show"?

Yes. Do you have a problem with the word "potentially"?

 

[kwc57]

Love how he beat Maddow to the punch.

The lib media has spent more time pushing fake news and trying to dig dirt from shallow ground than they did searching for the truth about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra scandal, NSA spying, IRS targeting conservatives, and the many other real crimes.

What point was there in illegally obtaining and releasing tax returns? We knew no crimes had been committed. Lord knows the Obama IRS would have been quick to press charges. No, it was a legal tax return but the left was more curious about that than the real corruption surrounding Obama and Hillary.

If a Dem takes every loophole to avoid paying taxes, or outright cheats the way many in Obama's cabinet did, it's a much bigger deal. They support higher taxes for the little people and it makes them hypocrites when they don't just voluntarily write a big check to the IRS. Of course, many Republicans will have their people go over things and keep their taxes as low as possible. I agree that it should be that way.

But Dems who have tax shelters or get out of paying are just ******* hypocrites who don't want to follow the rules they impose on others.

Now that Maddow has made a complete fool of herself for helping Trump prove that he paid a large sum in taxes, will she face the music for being in possession of stolen documents?

If there's nothing to hide, why hide it?

For the same reason you don't post your tax returns on the internet. You have nothing to hide, right?

Well, I'm not running the country...... or holding public office.... so I don't have a conflict of interest.

Now that trumps tax returns have been released does trump have any "conflicts of interest" where they are concerned?

If he had released his proper tax returns, we'd know. But this isn't his full tax returns, this is just a piece of paper he didn't even sign.

His version of Obama's Certificate of Live Birth?

 

[hadit]

Why should he release his tax returns? It wouldn't benefit him at all, because even if there's nothing there, the haters would string it out as long as possible, demanding more and more evidence, more and more information on his finances, and simply turn to some other avenue they think might be damaging if it doesn't pan out. He's doing a masterful rope a dope here, releasing enough to show the haters for what they are, while keeping their obsession white hot and distracting them from what he's actually doing.

Because he's a the president of the United States. He's not a businessman any more. He's supposed to represent all the people of the US, and not just himself, and his tax returns are a part of this.

I don't care if it would benefit him. He's in PUBLIC OFFICE, he's working for THE PEOPLE and the people have a right to know about their CEO.

Were you this adamant that Obama unseal the documents of his early life? I didn't think so. Hypocrite.

Did Obama's documents potentially show that he was in bed with a foreign government? No, they did not.

"Potentially show"?

Yes. Do you have a problem with the word "potentially"?

No one knows if Obama benefitted from affirmative action because he won't release his college application information. No one knows what kind of socialist malarkey he wrote in college because he won't release them to the public. Now, tell me which of Trump's documents potentially show that he was in bed with a foreign government? If you're whining about business dealings, better get a big bucket, because most of Congress has business dealings with foreign governments. It's called bribery, graft, corruption, whatever you want to call it, but a whole heck of a lot of them are "in bed with" foreign governments.

This is why there will be no substantive investigation into Trump's dealings, because anyone who tries knows that Trump will quickly unleash investigations on them.