• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WikiLeaks Slams Trump, Urges Hackers To Reveal His Tax Returns

AlbqOwl said:
And I have already explained to you and anybody who wants to read my posts that he does not have to release his tax returns to all America in order for federal watch dogs to know whether he is engaged in conflict of interest as President. 37 of our 45 Presidents have not released their tax returns. It is not a custom engraved in granite.
Click to expand...

And I've explained to you that the relevant audience isn't federal watchdogs but the American people. Would you trust federal watchdogs, or the House under Nancy Pelosi, to faithfully report conflicts of interest for Hillary were she POTUS? I wouldn't and I lean democratic!
 
Fletch said:
I highly doubt that Trump does his own taxes. I suspect that he does little other than sign a form that has been prepared for him by others. And as for the examples you listed, wouldn't the IRS spot that during an audit? And I still don't see why we need to know his exact income.
Click to expand...

From the perspective of the IRS, there is nothing amiss. And we don't need to know his EXACT income, but IMO it's relevant if he, for example, sells a foreign hotel for 5 times his investment and makes $5 mllion OR $50 million on the sale. The financial disclosure cuts off at $5m....

You may find this hard to believe, but its not a political issue with me. Ive not cared about the tax returns of any prior president so not caring about Trumps isn't a change for me. As to Hillary, I think the intersection of her office and CGI was important. And I think Trump should distance himself from his company as completely as possible to avoid any possible conflicts. Plus, going forward, he should release any financial documents and tax returns now that he is president. What he did in prior years doesn't strike me as all that relevant. What he does from here forward, does.
Click to expand...

And I've examined every POTUS tax return, D or R, for the past couple of decades. And I agree 100% that it's FAR MORE important going forward than it was in the past. Based on that we essentially agree on the important point! :peace
 
KLATTU said:
Sure you can. Not only can you , but I'm certain it happened.
I was talking about his undergrad records. Why would Harvard LAw care about a D he got at Occidental?

His sycophants get all wigged out that their demigod probably got c'd or d's s an undergrad, but I say it doesn't matter at all. Completely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Look, why is this such an issue that someone has to astroturf "alternative facts"? The Weekly Standard has acknowledged that Obama didn't just graduate with honors. He graduated Magna Cum Laude. I just don't see how someone can have mediocre grades in their first couple of years in college and end up in Harvard in the first place. For those who will now bloviate "affirmative action", it's all about the hate. Look, I didn't vote for Obama, but I will not be reduced to hating him so much that I have to make up stuff about him. Turns out that he is an extremely intelligent and motivated person. Period.

The Real Obama | The Weekly Standard

The Weekly Standard doesn't like him either, but at least they are honest enough to be honest about him.
 
JasperL said:
And I've explained to you that the relevant audience isn't federal watchdogs but the American people. Would you trust federal watchdogs, or the House under Nancy Pelosi, to faithfully report conflicts of interest for Hillary were she POTUS? I wouldn't and I lean democratic!
Click to expand...

No, but I would trust the Republicans in Congress to do so. And they would go on camera if the House or Senate leadership was blowing them off. As will the Democrats if Ryan or McConnell did not act. The watch dog committees contain people from both parties.
 
JasperL said:
From the perspective of the IRS, there is nothing amiss. And we don't need to know his EXACT income, but IMO it's relevant if he, for example, sells a foreign hotel for 5 times his investment and makes $5 mllion OR $50 million on the sale. The financial disclosure cuts off at $5m....



And I've examined every POTUS tax return, D or R, for the past couple of decades. And I agree 100% that it's FAR MORE important going forward than it was in the past. Based on that we essentially agree on the important point! :peace
Click to expand...

Yes, going forward he should absolutely turn over everything regarding his financial arrangements. In fact, it wouldn't bother me a bit if his accountants and tax lawyers were grilled before a congressional committee. As of January 20, the man has to be 100% transparent
 
danarhea said:
Look, why is this such an issue that someone has to astroturf "alternative facts"? The Weekly Standard has acknowledged that Obama didn't just graduate with honors. He graduated Magna Cum Laude. I just don't see how someone can have mediocre grades in their first couple of years in college and end up in Harvard in the first place. For those who will now bloviate "affirmative action", it's all about the hate. Look, I didn't vote for Obama, but I will not be reduced to hating him so much that I have to make up stuff about him. Turns out that he is an extremely intelligent and motivated person. Period.

The Real Obama | The Weekly Standard

The Weekly Standard doesn't like him either, but at least they are honest enough to be honest about him.
Click to expand...

{ Sigh} None of that deals with his undergrad record and no matter WHAT GPA he got there is irrelevant based on what he did at Harvard and later n in life. Tons of successful people had mediocre grades. It means NOTHING. But you liberals are SO determined to make him a demigod you can't use your common sense.

If he got A's at Occidental and Columbia that transcript would have been plastered all over the NY TIMES, WA PO , Huff po and every other lw media outlet.college .

So what if his Gallup ratings were lower than Nixon and Bush. That's based on his job performance not his undergrad grades.
 
Last edited:
AlbqOwl said:
Oh I can handle criticism of myself or anybody else so long as it is honest criticism. But schoolyard insults don't really wash with me and so color me bad. Have a nice day anyway.
Click to expand...

Saying that Trump was dishonest when he promised to release his tax returns is a schoolyard insult now?
 
tres borrachos said:
Saying that Trump was dishonest when he promised to release his tax returns is a schoolyard insult now?
Click to expand...

No except for the dishonest part. When he said it he no doubt meant it. And since then, according to Kellyanne--I still haven't heard it from him--he has changed his mind as we all sometimes do. But making it about me in an insulting way, characterizing him in the way you do, etc.--yeah, that is pretty much schoolyard stuff.
 
AlbqOwl said:
No except for the dishonest part. When he said it he no doubt meant it. And since then, according to Kellyanne--I still haven't heard it from him--he has changed his mind as we all sometimes do. But making it about me in an insulting way, characterizing him in the way you do, etc.--yeah, that is pretty much schoolyard stuff.
Click to expand...

I characterize him as I see him. I'm not sure you're cut out for message boards that have people of all opinions. I doubt you're going to see cheering and wooting on here 24/7. This isn't a Trump rally. It's reactions to what's put out there.
 
AlbqOwl said:
No except for the dishonest part. When he said it he no doubt meant it. And since then, according to Kellyanne--I still haven't heard it from him--he has changed his mind as we all sometimes do. But making it about me in an insulting way, characterizing him in the way you do, etc.--yeah, that is pretty much schoolyard stuff.
Click to expand...

No, that is laughable on your part. The mental gymnastics you guys do to defend Trump is pathetic. If he didn't say it to Kellyanne then he would have CORRECTED it. He hasn't. Nice try
 
KLATTU said:
{ Sigh} None of that deals with his undergrad record and no matter WHAT GPA he got there is irrelevant based on what he did at Harvard and later n in life. Tons of successful people had mediocre grades. It means NOTHING. But you liberals are SO determined to make him a demigod you can't use your common sense.

If he got A's at Occidental and Columbia that transcript would have been plastered all over the NY TIMES, WA PO , Huff po and every other lw media outlet.college .

So what if his Gallup ratings were lower than Nixon and Bush. That's based on his job performance not his undergrad grades.
Click to expand...

You haven't seen his record, so you assume that he must be hiding something. I've got news for you. No other candidate released his or her transcripts.

You and I have something in common. Neither of us voted for Obama. You and I are also different. I don't hate the man so much that I will push a fake issue like this.
 
tres borrachos said:
I characterize him as I see him. I'm not sure you're cut out for message boards that have people of all opinions. I doubt you're going to see cheering and wooting on here 24/7. This isn't a Trump rally. It's reactions to what's put out there.
Click to expand...

And another point made went sailing right over her head.

I wish you no ill will tres borrachos. I have even tried to befriend you in the past before you decided to make my sins, shortcomings, flawed opinions, and inadequacies your personal mission. But oh well. Everybody isn't going to appreciate my opinions and everybody isn't going to love me.

If I am not cut out to post on message boards, I'm sure I will be banned soon. And I will raise a glass in salute to you on my way out.
 
I have mixed feelings about this.

On one hand, I've suspected since the election that it was just a matter of time before Wikileaks turned on Trump. Above all else, Assange and his cohorts hate government secrecy and lack of transparency, which undoubtedly will be a hallmark of the Trump Regime.

On the other hand, Assange is... friendly to Putin. It seems a bit odd that he'd cross Trump so quickly. Putin will also eventually cross Trump, but I think that will take a few months.
 
Mithros said:
My point is more that the President is still the President, even if it happens to be a joke from
The Simpsons. And our enemies enemy isn't necessarily our friend.

I don't condemn Wikileaks for releasing the DNC's emails, nor the secret state department cables. There is a case to be made for whistleblowing, even when we disagree. But they didn't just release the DNC emails, they dripped them. That is not whistleblowing, it's politicking. Now they want to undermine Trump. That's not a good thing. They aren't doing this for us.

Congress, the intelligence community, and the American public need to deal with Trump.
Click to expand...

The 'dripping' probably coincided with the timeline on which Wikileaks received the information rather than the release schedule being a conscious and wilful decision on their behalf.

I don't think that Wikileaks itself is partisan so much as the supplier of the leaks (probably Russia or a contractor/associate to afford plausible deniability) was; the party truly responsible for the timing by selectively choosing when to provide it with information.

Some may argue that the decision even to act as a simple conduit for a clearly partisan actor makes Wikileaks partisan, but so long as they are simply transmitting rather than intervening actively in the timing of releases, I disagree completely.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom