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

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Whether they impede the future actions of an individual can only be proved after those actions take place.

How can we prove if their actions were wrong/unconstitutional if we do not know whom they are tied to?

That's the main point here.

If you have some proof of wrongdoing that the FBI, CIA, etc. don't have...lets see your proof. Otherwise, it is typically called a PARTISAN WITCH HUNT.

This was a glorious disaster.

So bad it was good.

You can't spin this.

So the quality control department's life at the IRS just went to hell in a hand basket. The audit and logs files that will have to be analyzed is unfathomable in it's size.

originally posted by: Martin75

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: burgerbuddy
Someone left them in David Clay Johnson's mail box and he gifted this to her.

Yeah, they should investigate him for solicitation of the tax returns.

That's a felony charge for him and whoever in the IRS gave them to him.

I noticed on the copy of taxes there is a stamp of "Client Copy". Does that matter? Would both sides have that document or should that one be Trump's copy?

Of course, if someone wanted to cover their butts, ink stamps are cheap.

Before i get too excited about Maddow and/or others being charged for releasing Trumps taxes, I need to ask why wasn't the reporter who leaked some of Trump tax information during the election charged? Wasn't it illegal then also?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

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.

Another deflection.

Oh, it's deflection to look at hypocritical behaviour because it relates to the past? Interesting.
Anyway, you won't sour my mood. That was hilarious and a disaster for the 'taxes movement'.

Trump makes a shed load of money and paid a higher percent tax rate than Bernie. You could not script it any better for Trump.

There are even liberals on twitter now claiming the tax return is a fake

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



Normal American's also voted for other candidates. That's the problem. You think people other than those who think like you are abnormal.

No you loss your ability to make that argument when you accused Trump supporters of voting for him because the wall chant and he has an attractive wife.

You don't then get to complain what other people may think about those who voted for other candidates.

And funny, the only mainstream people I ever here complaining about the other sides voters are the tolerant people like Hillary, you called half of Trump supporters deplorable. Don't remember Trump attacking Hillary voters.

Damn I missed it.. but let me guess, a whole bunch of blah blah blah?

All they did with this was shoot themselves in the foot and give Trump more ammunition.

Very fake news, SAD! Rachel Maddow is a complete idiot.

Fear not, I've got a new scoop for Maddow. Something I think she would be very well advised to investigate in the coming days.

a reply to: UKTruth

So why is there no investigation into possible criminal activity for every public servant?

Who said Trump was engaging in criminal activity?

Or do you think tax returns are the oracle for conflicts of interest?

They are a good insight in to what activities people engage in.

a reply to: infolurker
Thank you for posting a pic! That's what I saw. Wonder if that matters at all?
ETA: True...if it's a real stamp.

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
Damn I missed it.. but let me guess, a whole bunch of blah blah blah?

Comedy Gold!

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: burgerbuddy
Someone left them in David Clay Johnson's mail box and he gifted this to her.

Yeah, they should investigate him for solicitation of the tax returns.

That's a felony charge for him and whoever in the IRS gave them to him.

I guess start with the IRS as source for the leak.

It makes me wonder who would leave useless information, and why she would report it.

introvert
How can we prove if their actions were wrong/unconstitutional if we do not know whom they are tied to?
That's the main point here.

How can we prove you didn't rape a male squirrel unless we are allowed to investigate, question the squirrel and check for mishandled nuts?

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: burgerbuddy
Someone left them in David Clay Johnson's mail box and he gifted this to her.

Yeah, they should investigate him for solicitation of the tax returns.

That's a felony charge for him and whoever in the IRS gave them to him.

I guess start with the IRS as source for the leak.

It makes me wonder who would leave useless information, and why she would report it.

isnt it obvious

pepe

originally posted by: Martin75
So the quality control department's life at the IRS just went to hell in a hand basket. The audit and logs files that will have to be analyzed is unfathomable in it's size.

Well why would the IRS care? They already got away with targeting conservative groups, so how is this any different?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

So why is there no investigation into possible criminal activity for every public servant?

Who said Trump was engaging in criminal activity?

Or do you think tax returns are the oracle for conflicts of interest?

They are a good insight in to what activities people engage in.

So best to have millions of people pouring over his returns and acting like Maddow? I think not.
There is plenty of released information to determine what activities Trump engages in - including his complete business revenues and all his creditors.

People like Maddow want the returns to do exactly what she did tonight. Insinuate, lie, twist and deceive the people for political purposes.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

How can we prove if their actions were wrong/unconstitutional if we do not know whom they are tied to?
That's the main point here.

How can we prove you didn't rape a male squirrel unless we are allowed to investigate, question the squirrel and check for mishandled nuts?

OMGosh WAW you need to warn people before posting like this! Damn, I saved the keyboard but pop came out my nose!

a reply to: Grambler

I said if you didn't fall into that group then that post wasn't directed at you.

Does not matter who is was directed towards. It was a deflection.

Why is the left wing media and democrats only interested in these ties when its trump?

Ask the media and Democrats.

Look at Maddow tonight. Should we really trust these "journalists" to fairly investigate Trumps ties?

Why are we concerned? They cannot investigate Trump's ties due to lack of transparency.

She just spent an hour spreading conspiracy theories off of a document that says Trump paid over 20% of his income in taxes, and shows no wrong doing.

If Trump did pay over 20% and the documents prove that, it's not a conspiracy.

But yep, lets trust her and her cohorts to keep the investigation going, even when the admit they hate Trump.

It's has nothing to do with trusting her or her investigation. It's that she actually does bring up good questions that seem to be dismissed outright, because of partisan politics.

I'm not sure how those that completely dismiss this issue are any different than the partisan media.