Rachel Maddow tweets. BREAKING We've got Trump tax returns. Tonight, 9pm ET. MSNBC.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: introvert
A bit disappointed in Maddow so far.

She seems to have overblown this issue without having more supporting documents to cast doubt on Trump's dealings.

I completely agree that Trump potentially has some conflicts of interest that need to be investigated and we should all be in favor of transparency in such an instance.

That holds true, whether it's Trump, Obama, Clinton...etc.

OMG! After reading about four pages of how stupid this whole setup was, then hitting your "speed bump" of a post trying to make it sound like it wasn't the most ridiculous thing from MSNBC in a while is...well...typical. You will do anything to make it look like the left has even an ounce of credibility left. Which it doesn't.

But your denial, your unrelenting support for the idiotic is truly the punchline of this thread.

What did I deny?

I even said Maddow is coming up short.

You are being nice. This is akin to 2 false starts in the 100m track and field Olympic final, with the world watching.

Again, should we not want to know what financial ties our leaders have?

Like I said - Trump has financial ties to several countries because he was a real estate developer and entrepreneur.
What financial ties are you looking for????

Ties that may compromise his decisions as president.

Is that unreasonable?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

If it was important he would not have been elected.

He was elected by a bunch of people swooned by chants of "build the wall" and how hot his wife is. I don't think his potential financial conflicts were a top priority.

What you are failing to admit is that the conflict of interests remains to be an issue for those that think beyond propaganda chants and the looks of his lady.

This is wholly incorrect. Statements like this hurt your credibility and show cause as to why the Democratic party lost so bad in the past elections.

I don't take you as a fool Introvert but this is a foolish statement.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

If it was important he would not have been elected.

He was elected by a bunch of people swooned by chants of "build the wall" and how hot his wife is. I don't think his potential financial conflicts were a top priority.

What you are failing to admit is that the conflict of interests remains to be an issue for those that think beyond propaganda chants and the looks of his lady.

Truthfully...he was elected by people sick and tired of the left destroying America, its values, morals, etc. We voted for NO MORE to a government that puts everyone and everything above America and it's citizens. We voted for America and Americans first...everything else...second.

a reply to: Grambler

a reply to: introvert

really

you were just shown proof

originally posted by: Ohanka

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: introvert
A bit disappointed in Maddow so far.

She seems to have overblown this issue without having more supporting documents to cast doubt on Trump's dealings.

I completely agree that Trump potentially has some conflicts of interest that need to be investigated and we should all be in favor of transparency in such an instance.

That holds true, whether it's Trump, Obama, Clinton...etc.

OMG! After reading about four pages of how stupid this whole setup was, then hitting your "speed bump" of a post trying to make it sound like it wasn't the most ridiculous thing from MSNBC in a while is...well...typical. You will do anything to make it look like the left has even an ounce of credibility left. Which it doesn't.

But your denial, your unrelenting support for the idiotic is truly the punchline of this thread.

What did I deny?

I even said Maddow is coming up short.

You are being nice. This is akin to 2 false starts in the 100m track and field Olympic final, with the world watching.

Again, should we not want to know what financial ties our leaders have?

Sure why not.

But if someone like just owns a hotel in Belarus and 3 or so in Russia it's hardly a cause for concern. Hotel chains open up all over the place. It's a legitimate business after all.

Now if someone runs an international "charity" organisation, which is basically a front for laundering money and bribery, now that's a cause for concern. Especially if that money is coming from the likes of the tyrannical Saud dynasty.

So why aren't you open to transparency and full-disclosure?

Seems to me that many of you are being hypocritical.

Transparency in one case, but the other is none of our business.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: introvert
A bit disappointed in Maddow so far.

She seems to have overblown this issue without having more supporting documents to cast doubt on Trump's dealings.

I completely agree that Trump potentially has some conflicts of interest that need to be investigated and we should all be in favor of transparency in such an instance.

That holds true, whether it's Trump, Obama, Clinton...etc.

OMG! After reading about four pages of how stupid this whole setup was, then hitting your "speed bump" of a post trying to make it sound like it wasn't the most ridiculous thing from MSNBC in a while is...well...typical. You will do anything to make it look like the left has even an ounce of credibility left. Which it doesn't.

But your denial, your unrelenting support for the idiotic is truly the punchline of this thread.

What did I deny?

I even said Maddow is coming up short.

You are being nice. This is akin to 2 false starts in the 100m track and field Olympic final, with the world watching.

Again, should we not want to know what financial ties our leaders have?

As long as they are legal, which can be checked with the IRS...it probably isn't anyone's business.

We will not know if he actions are president are completely constitutional if we do not know whom he may be obligated.

In America...you are innocent until proven guilty.

originally posted by: Grambler
Oh wow, Tucker just drops the mic!!!

Says these returns from 2005 show that Trump paid over 10% more in taxes in 2005 than Bernie Sanders paid in 2014!


Hahahaha! You mean mister "Everyone needs to pay their fare share!" paid less of a percentage than Trump!

Wow, this story just keeps getting better.

A neener neener moment !!

a reply to: Ohanka

Especially if that money is coming from the likes of the tyrannical Saud dynasty.

And Qatar
And China
And even... Russia!

The list goes on.

Holy Crap... The spin...

Now they are playing a clip of Trump saying that he paid 100's of millions in taxes... and this shows that he lied as he only paid 38!

Spin it..... They are doubling down on stupid!


The comedy value... I never knew... I have to start watching MSNBC more!

This is quality comedy entertainment!

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

If it was important he would not have been elected.

He was elected by a bunch of people swooned by chants of "build the wall" and how hot his wife is. I don't think his potential financial conflicts were a top priority.

What you are failing to admit is that the conflict of interests remains to be an issue for those that think beyond propaganda chants and the looks of his lady.

If you say so... I think they were normal Americans who wanted change and didn't care about tax returns from a billionaire real estate developer. I know many of them.
You can revel in your moral superiority all you like, but what we saw tonight from Maddow was car crash TV.
1hr of presenting pure speculation from information like "A Russian's boat was parked next to a person associated to Trump", which turned into an insinuation that Trump is being blackmailed.
Not even Alex Jones on one of his wildest rants would come up with crap like that.

Once again the Donald comes out smelling like a rose and the regressive lefties are screeching wildly off the tracks

They don't even realize they are burning themselves to the ground.

What a beautiful sight.

a reply to: infolurker

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: introvert
A bit disappointed in Maddow so far.

She seems to have overblown this issue without having more supporting documents to cast doubt on Trump's dealings.

I completely agree that Trump potentially has some conflicts of interest that need to be investigated and we should all be in favor of transparency in such an instance.

That holds true, whether it's Trump, Obama, Clinton...etc.

OMG! After reading about four pages of how stupid this whole setup was, then hitting your "speed bump" of a post trying to make it sound like it wasn't the most ridiculous thing from MSNBC in a while is...well...typical. You will do anything to make it look like the left has even an ounce of credibility left. Which it doesn't.

But your denial, your unrelenting support for the idiotic is truly the punchline of this thread.

What did I deny?

I even said Maddow is coming up short.

You are being nice. This is akin to 2 false starts in the 100m track and field Olympic final, with the world watching.

Again, should we not want to know what financial ties our leaders have?

Like I said - Trump has financial ties to several countries because he was a real estate developer and entrepreneur.
What financial ties are you looking for????

Ties that may compromise his decisions as president.

Is that unreasonable?

That is opinion only. You could prove ties to many businesses, individuals and countries. Whether they impede the future actions of an individual can only be proved after those actions take place. Other that that...it is conjecture and opinion. Uneducated opinion also. No different than racism like me saying "he is black...he might steal if I let him in my store".

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Well...I take it back and give you credit for saying that.

Perhaps people should read what I say and put their partisan hackery aside.

Sorry for hammering you

Is that what that was?

but after seeing everyone else, left and right calling her (basically) a moron for first not checking the facts, and second screaming theories to make up for it...then you saying "maybe", etc. just cracked me up.

There very well could be conflicts. There may not be.

In the interest of transparency, we should be able to look in to it.

There is a reason why all president in modern times have released their tax info.

LOL

FoxNews confirming the leak is illegal.

originally posted by: infolurker
Holy Crap... The spin...

Now they are playing a clip of Trump saying that he paid 100's of millions in taxes... and this shows that he lied as he only paid 38!

Spin it..... They are doubling down on stupid!

They are counting on their viewers to not know how to math. They take them for dolts. Surprised?

Hillary Clinton just threw a bottle of booze into her TV screen again after watching Mancow's epic fail.
And I quote "Damn that Donald...he paid more taxes in 2005 than me and Bill have our entire lives....foiled again!!!!"

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Ohanka

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: introvert
A bit disappointed in Maddow so far.

She seems to have overblown this issue without having more supporting documents to cast doubt on Trump's dealings.

I completely agree that Trump potentially has some conflicts of interest that need to be investigated and we should all be in favor of transparency in such an instance.

That holds true, whether it's Trump, Obama, Clinton...etc.

OMG! After reading about four pages of how stupid this whole setup was, then hitting your "speed bump" of a post trying to make it sound like it wasn't the most ridiculous thing from MSNBC in a while is...well...typical. You will do anything to make it look like the left has even an ounce of credibility left. Which it doesn't.

But your denial, your unrelenting support for the idiotic is truly the punchline of this thread.

What did I deny?

I even said Maddow is coming up short.

You are being nice. This is akin to 2 false starts in the 100m track and field Olympic final, with the world watching.

Again, should we not want to know what financial ties our leaders have?

Sure why not.

But if someone like just owns a hotel in Belarus and 3 or so in Russia it's hardly a cause for concern. Hotel chains open up all over the place. It's a legitimate business after all.

Now if someone runs an international "charity" organisation, which is basically a front for laundering money and bribery, now that's a cause for concern. Especially if that money is coming from the likes of the tyrannical Saud dynasty.

So why aren't you open to transparency and full-disclosure?

Seems to me that many of you are being hypocritical.

Transparency in one case, but the other is none of our business.

No, I think the hypocrites are the people talking about full disclosure, who turned a blind eye to all the foreign entanglments of Trump's election opponent and said 'prove it' every time she was questioned.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

But where was that attitude under Obama

Deflection.

Reflection.

C'mon Grmabler. You can do better than that.

What I have said in this thread is not unreasonable and you simply deflected...for whatever reason.