What is Trump hiding? Where are his Tax Returns

[HappyJoy]

Just a quick hint. "(snicker)" makes you look like a douche.

You would know what one looks like....from looking in the mirror.

Uh-oh, ya got me sinking to your pathetic level...time to put you hypocrites on ignore.

Yes, please do what you guys do when you lose a debate, pretend it didn't happen.

Esyt65 lost what exactly? Only in your little pea-sized brain maybe.....

Ending an argument by claiming to put somebody on ignore who you have been incessantly replying to is losing.

Wasting time talking to someone who has nothing more to contribute intellectually, just insults, is a 'loss'. You want to do that? YOU talk to Siete.

I guess the putting me on ignore was a ruse then?

When you keep redefining my posts over and over to make them fit your argument then why should I take you serious?

 

[HappyJoy]

You would know what one looks like....from looking in the mirror.

Uh-oh, ya got me sinking to your pathetic level...time to put you hypocrites on ignore.

Yes, please do what you guys do when you lose a debate, pretend it didn't happen.

Esyt65 lost what exactly? Only in your little pea-sized brain maybe.....

When someone reaches a point in a debate / discussion where they no longer have anything intellectually significant to contribute and are reduced to childish name-calling - as in Siete's case here - they have, for all intents and purposes, surrendered. They are out of 'ammo' in the intellectual battle.

In essence, He SURRENDERED... FORFEITED..Game, set match.

I'm surprised you can spell intellectual.

So discovering you are talking to someone intelligent surprises you? You need to hang out with a different crowd if this is rare aroud the people with whom you associate.

There's that reading comprehension problem you have again.

 

[Dale Smith]

Really? If I was in a situation where I needed to use the "Call A friend" option to answer a question, I would pick Easyt65 over you ANY day of the week and twice on Sunday. You don't have a ******* clue as to how the banking system works, you know nothing about the real history of this country including the 16th amendment, how the SCOTUS ruled on more than one occasion that the un-ratified 16th amendment did not give "da gubermint" no new taxing powers. You know nothing about the CAFR or composite "gubermint" wealth. You are the ******* clueless one...as stupid as a sheep and that goes for all your leftard pals as well. The income tax goes to pay interest to a central bank that creates money out of nothing and it is our labor that moves this valueless paper. It's the biggest scam ever and the Grace Report that Reagan had done proves that our taxes do not provide even 1 percent of what "da gubermint" spends....not that they need it because the bankers that own this country have been skimming off the top since the Bretton Woods agreement and using our money to invest. I hope Donald Trump or anyone else that works for a living can scam the collection arm of the IMF which you know as the I.R.S which is incorporated in Puerto Rico and is Trust #62.

Fact of the matter is, you don't have the slightest clue....your teeny, tiny brain would blew a gasket if you knew the things I do. The Constitution was kicked to the curb and a corporate constitution took it's place and it's nothing but a corporate charter. You have been gamed...we all have but stupid ***** like you are worried that someone might not be paying "their fair share".
You don't even have a clue on what that even means.....so many STUPID people....so little time (sigh)

Next you’ll be telling us that 9/11 was an inside job.

You mean 7/11 don't you?

9/11, 7/11..given his avatar he’ll probably say that the reason he is not in the band 311 is a conspiracy too.

His tin foil hat is on a bit too tight.

Everything I posted is easily verified...but what the ****, just keep watching MSNBC. I doubt that you have the mental capability to even comprehend the information that you would have to search for. Keep believing in your beloved "corporate "gubermint"....what a stupid ****...seriously.

So is that a yes…your tinfoil is on too tight?

Your debating skills are right on par with the rest of the leftard clown posse which means it's non-existent. You morons have nothing....you don't know anything. Your only reason to be here is to push leftard candidates that are owned by the same POS that own the republican party and lash out at people that will not comply with a "group think" mentality. You and those like you HONESTLY believe that you can browbeat, insult and intimidate people into kowtowing to your wishes...don't believe it? Look at the trash that tries to disrupt people going to a political rally of a party that opposes yours. You can't debate me on ANY topic and win because I don't have an agenda...you do and you will lie, steal and cheat because the end justifies the means....but I have news for ya...it's not gonna happen in my lifetime. People all over are waking up the thievery and out right fraud that has been done to us. When it is finally revealed? You can bet that leftards will be saying "Yeah, I knew all along that we were being gamed".

You propose nothing because you know nothing and that is the honest to God's truth.

 

[easyt65]

Yes, please do what you guys do when you lose a debate, pretend it didn't happen.

Esyt65 lost what exactly? Only in your little pea-sized brain maybe.....

When someone reaches a point in a debate / discussion where they no longer have anything intellectually significant to contribute and are reduced to childish name-calling - as in Siete's case here - they have, for all intents and purposes, surrendered. They are out of 'ammo' in the intellectual battle.

In essence, He SURRENDERED... FORFEITED..Game, set match.

I'm surprised you can spell intellectual.

So discovering you are talking to someone intelligent surprises you? You need to hang out with a different crowd if this is rare aroud the people with whom you associate.

There's that reading comprehension problem you have again.

You need to get some help with that 'projection' problem. Let me know if you need help figuring out what that is.

 

[HappyJoy]

This election, every presidential candidate has made at least some tax information public—except for Donald Trump.

More at MSN.com

Obviously the small fraction of a person who won the GOP nomination last evening is hiding something. One would figure that the normally boisterous bloward would be happy to show off his riches....unless they are not as impressive as he has been saying.

National Review said the following which may be the way a lot of delegates feel:

A political party that didn’t demand the public release of Donald Trump’s tax returns could be committing electoral suicide. In his 40-year business career, he has assembled an empire of great complexity along with a serial record of credibility problems. In other words, he often “makes stuff up.” This is a man who said, under oath, in a 2008 libel suit he later lost: “My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with the markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.”

Clearly Drumpf is engaged in hiding something from his supporters. The question is whether or not the supporters care or not.

After all that, you're OP stands up well.

 

[easyt65]

You would know what one looks like....from looking in the mirror.

Uh-oh, ya got me sinking to your pathetic level...time to put you hypocrites on ignore.

Yes, please do what you guys do when you lose a debate, pretend it didn't happen.

Esyt65 lost what exactly? Only in your little pea-sized brain maybe.....

Ending an argument by claiming to put somebody on ignore who you have been incessantly replying to is losing.

Wasting time talking to someone who has nothing more to contribute intellectually, just insults, is a 'loss'. You want to do that? YOU talk to Siete.

I guess the putting me on ignore was a ruse then?

When you keep redefining my posts over and over to make them fit your argument then why should I take you serious?

I was actually talking about Siete, you narcissist, but you make a great point. Talking to you is a complete waste of time, too.

 

[candycorn]

Next you’ll be telling us that 9/11 was an inside job.

You mean 7/11 don't you?

9/11, 7/11..given his avatar he’ll probably say that the reason he is not in the band 311 is a conspiracy too.

His tin foil hat is on a bit too tight.

Everything I posted is easily verified...but what the ****, just keep watching MSNBC. I doubt that you have the mental capability to even comprehend the information that you would have to search for. Keep believing in your beloved "corporate "gubermint"....what a stupid ****...seriously.

So is that a yes…your tinfoil is on too tight?

Your debating skills are right on par with the rest of the leftard clown posse which means it's non-existent. You morons have nothing....you don't know anything. Your only reason to be here is to push leftard candidates that are owned by the same POS that own the republican party and lash out at people that will not comply with a "group think" mentality. You and those like you HONESTLY believe that you can browbeat, insult and intimidate people into kowtowing to your wishes...don't believe it? Look at the trash that tries to disrupt people going to a political rally of a party that opposes yours. You can't debate me on ANY topic and win because I don't have an agenda...you do and you will lie, steal and cheat because the end justifies the means....but I have news for ya...it's not gonna happen in my lifetime. People all over are waking up the thievery and out right fraud that has been done to us. When it is finally revealed? You can bet that leftards will be saying "Yeah, I knew all along that we were being gamed".

You propose nothing because you know nothing and that is the honest to God's truth.

Yet here you are getting your ass kicked all over the place on my thread….

 

[HappyJoy]

Yes, please do what you guys do when you lose a debate, pretend it didn't happen.

Esyt65 lost what exactly? Only in your little pea-sized brain maybe.....

Ending an argument by claiming to put somebody on ignore who you have been incessantly replying to is losing.

Wasting time talking to someone who has nothing more to contribute intellectually, just insults, is a 'loss'. You want to do that? YOU talk to Siete.

I guess the putting me on ignore was a ruse then?

When you keep redefining my posts over and over to make them fit your argument then why should I take you serious?

I was actually talking about Siete, you narcissist, but you make a great point. Talking to you is a complete waste of time, too.

With Siete the point stands just as well. SIete kicked your ass around the thread and your response was to put him on ignore even though you kept engaging him. So, good on you to bring this up again.

 

[Papageorgio]

Yep and no one has based their choice based on a tax return. So you have no argument.

Oh, how do you know?

Prove that someone has.

Didn't you just post that Romney's tax return hurt him?

No, I said he gave $3,000,000 to charity, Gore gave $100 to charity.

Nope, you said:

$3,000,000 given in charity and it hurt Romney,

What hurt Romney?

Sarcasm nut job sarcasm.

 

[candycorn]

This election, every presidential candidate has made at least some tax information public—except for Donald Trump.

More at MSN.com

Obviously the small fraction of a person who won the GOP nomination last evening is hiding something. One would figure that the normally boisterous bloward would be happy to show off his riches....unless they are not as impressive as he has been saying.

National Review said the following which may be the way a lot of delegates feel:

A political party that didn’t demand the public release of Donald Trump’s tax returns could be committing electoral suicide. In his 40-year business career, he has assembled an empire of great complexity along with a serial record of credibility problems. In other words, he often “makes stuff up.” This is a man who said, under oath, in a 2008 libel suit he later lost: “My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with the markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.”

Clearly Drumpf is engaged in hiding something from his supporters. The question is whether or not the supporters care or not.

After all that, you're OP stands up well.

Well, it’s pretty easy. Hillary is repeating the Obama playbook almost move for move and the idiots on the other side haven’t watched the game film.

Drumpf is being defined early. The elegance of this trap is that no matter how much he screams, he only hurts himself because it draws attention to the central fact that he’s hiding something. The only way to de-fuse the bomb is to release the records and now, it looks like he’s giving into pressure if he does it.

 

[Siete]

the longer Trump hides from the public, and the longer his base deflects for him, the greater the curiosity becomes and the more damaging that curiosity becomes ...

even though he is on record stating his opinion about Romney and his tax returns, he does a 180 on his own opinion and his tax returns .

 

[easyt65]

Hmmmm, who is the one actually hiding something?

The guy who has decided not to release his tax returns, which is NOT required by the law...

Or the President who just set a criminal US non-compliance record by illegally refusing to comply with 70% of all FOIA requests, which IS required by law, in order to keep what he is doing secret from the American people?

Liberals are going bat-shit crazy over the guy following the law while ignoring the Liberal President who has and continues to break US law.

Surprise, surprise...

 

[HappyJoy]

Oh, how do you know?

Prove that someone has.

Didn't you just post that Romney's tax return hurt him?

No, I said he gave $3,000,000 to charity, Gore gave $100 to charity.

Nope, you said:

$3,000,000 given in charity and it hurt Romney,

What hurt Romney?

Sarcasm nut job sarcasm.

Sure it was.

But back to your question.


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

 

[Papageorgio]

Prove that someone has.

Didn't you just post that Romney's tax return hurt him?

No, I said he gave $3,000,000 to charity, Gore gave $100 to charity.

Nope, you said:

$3,000,000 given in charity and it hurt Romney,

What hurt Romney?

Sarcasm nut job sarcasm.

Sure it was.

But back to your question.


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

Yeah, giving $3,000,000 to charity will cause anyone to lose.

So which voter changed their vote? It made someone more or less favorable but it did change a voter's vote? No proof.

 

[HappyJoy]

This election, every presidential candidate has made at least some tax information public—except for Donald Trump.

More at MSN.com

Obviously the small fraction of a person who won the GOP nomination last evening is hiding something. One would figure that the normally boisterous bloward would be happy to show off his riches....unless they are not as impressive as he has been saying.

National Review said the following which may be the way a lot of delegates feel:

A political party that didn’t demand the public release of Donald Trump’s tax returns could be committing electoral suicide. In his 40-year business career, he has assembled an empire of great complexity along with a serial record of credibility problems. In other words, he often “makes stuff up.” This is a man who said, under oath, in a 2008 libel suit he later lost: “My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with the markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.”

Clearly Drumpf is engaged in hiding something from his supporters. The question is whether or not the supporters care or not.

After all that, you're OP stands up well.

Well, it’s pretty easy. Hillary is repeating the Obama playbook almost move for move and the idiots on the other side haven’t watched the game film.

Drumpf is being defined early. The elegance of this trap is that no matter how much he screams, he only hurts himself because it draws attention to the central fact that he’s hiding something. The only way to de-fuse the bomb is to release the records and now, it looks like he’s giving into pressure if he does it.

I agree, For something that anyone with any amount of common sense should know, if a billionaire runs for president...hey, maybe they should clean up their taxes because there is going to be a more than fair amount of attention paid to them.

 

[HappyJoy]

Didn't you just post that Romney's tax return hurt him?

No, I said he gave $3,000,000 to charity, Gore gave $100 to charity.

Nope, you said:

$3,000,000 given in charity and it hurt Romney,

What hurt Romney?

Sarcasm nut job sarcasm.

Sure it was.

But back to your question.


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

Yeah, giving $3,000,000 to charity will cause anyone to lose.

So which voter changed their vote? It made someone more or less favorable but it did change a voter's vote? No proof.

I think a poll is more than enough evidence to counter your point. What you are now doing is asking for proof that would be impossible to gain.

 

[eddiew]

What business is it of yours? What does the revealing of personal taxes prove when becoming a President? How does a tax return make a better or worse President?

You are wrong, not every Presidential hopeful has done so, it started in the 60's.

Should everyone release their taxes, if they don't, everyone could be hiding something. OMG!

Every Presidential candidate should release their tax returns.

Fact check: Trump’s tax returns

Donald Trump said “there’s nothing to learn” from his tax returns, but experts say there’s plenty to learn from presidential candidates’ tax returns, including sources of income, effective tax rates, charitable giving habits and more.

[...]

But voters learn several pieces of information from candidates’ tax returns.

Roberton Williams, the Sol Price fellow at the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told us that there are three things we could learn from Trump’s tax returns: details about where he gets his income and how much it is; “how he’s structuring his income for tax purposes”; and what kind of deductions he takes, including charitable giving. If Trump had overseas income or foreign bank accounts, for instance, that information would be on his tax return.

Jeremy Scott, editor in chief of the commentary and analysis products for the nonprofit Tax Analysts, told us in a phone interview that it was “strange for Trump to say you don’t learn anything,” when just four years ago, Romney’s effective tax rate, revealed through his tax returns, was a significant issue. (In fact, Romney’s 14% effective tax rate in 2010, due to most of his income coming from dividends and capital gains, became fodder for Obama campaign attack ads.)

Scott told us that ever since President Richard Nixon released his returns in 1973, the candidate’s returns have been “a form of checking on how a candidate conducts his financial affairs.” Conflicts of interest can be exposed, as well as how a candidates’ individual tax policy squares with his proposals.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt, said Scott, pushed the idea of paying your fair share, but his returns — released by his presidential library after he was in office — show he was “actually very aggressive at trying to minimize his own taxes.”

The Tax Analysts’ Tax History Project is compiling an online archive of candidates’ returns. Project Director Joseph J. Thorndike wrote in a May 12 blog post on taxnotes.com that beyond an effective tax rate, “[r]eturns can shed light on the way a candidate lives his life. It can tell us about charitable giving as well as personal borrowing and investment activity. Returns can also illuminate the complicated business arrangements that often provide the bulk of a candidate’s income, especially for a real estate mogul like Trump.”

And the returns also “tell us a lot about how candidates conduct themselves in the gray areas of the tax law,” Thorndike wrote. “Some items on a tax return are black and white, like the income reported on a W-2. But other items, especially for someone with lots of non-salary business income, are open to debate and interpretation.”

Trump’s comments also prompted Time magazine to outline “5 Interesting Things We Learned From Presidential Tax Returns,” including: Obama gave sizable charitable contributions to his controversial pastor; Romney had an unusually high IRA balance; and President George H.W. Bush gave nearly 62% of his 1991 income to charity.

So you personally read over every Presidential hopefuls tax return. Have you personally looked over Clinton's tax returns? What did that tell you about her?

Is Trump releasing his tax returns going to sway you to vote for him?

No but it may sway independents to not vote for him. It’s called persuasion. And not releasing them tells independents the he is definitely hiding something….

His choice, of course. Why you support someone who is not willing to fulfill his commitments….that is your problem.

Who am I supporting that is not willing to fulfill his commitments and what commitments are you talking about?

You need a new playbook skippy.

Trumps unfavorable ratings BREAK RECORDS

 

[Siete]

Didn't you just post that Romney's tax return hurt him?

No, I said he gave $3,000,000 to charity, Gore gave $100 to charity.

Nope, you said:

$3,000,000 given in charity and it hurt Romney,

What hurt Romney?

Sarcasm nut job sarcasm.

Sure it was.

But back to your question.


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

Yeah, giving $3,000,000 to charity will cause anyone to lose.

So which voter changed their vote? It made someone more or less favorable but it did change a voter's vote? No proof.

giving to charity had very little to do with him losing ... lying about his offshore bank accounts did.

 

[easyt65]

Libs, you continue to accuse Trump of hiding something because he refuses to give you something you feel you are entitled to, which you are not.

Let's end the debate once and for all. The burden of proof is on the accuser....put up or shut up. Provide the evidence, other than your opinion or the fact that YOU say so, that Trump is hiding something. The fact that he has chosen not to give you what you want and is not legally required to do, is not proof of wrong-doing.

The continued insistence that he has to show you anything to prove his innocense is a ploy that would never hold up in court but is an often highly effective tactic on playgrounds and in grade schools. In the grown-up world such demands / opinions are yo be appropriately shunned / ridiculed / reasonably rejected.

 

[Camp]

No, I said he gave $3,000,000 to charity, Gore gave $100 to charity.

Nope, you said:

$3,000,000 given in charity and it hurt Romney,

What hurt Romney?

Sarcasm nut job sarcasm.

Sure it was.

But back to your question.


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

Yeah, giving $3,000,000 to charity will cause anyone to lose.

So which voter changed their vote? It made someone more or less favorable but it did change a voter's vote? No proof.

giving to charity had very little to do with him losing ... lying about his offshore bank accounts did.

That and his wife's hobby horse claimed as a medical expense.