Hillary crushed Trump over tax return

[warriorfan]

He's not upset with the IRS. He doesn't want us to get a peek.

Last night he was expressing irritation about how the IRS wants to look at his Taxes every year...Ignoring the fact that making hundreds of millions and not paying a cent is usually a red flag.

[FillJackson]

You gonna vote for Trump if he releases it and finds out ABCNews was wrong?

Of course, it should be purely transactional. Just like Trump would want it.

I can't have an interest in this as US citizen and taxpayer. I can't approve of this standard because it strengthens our democracy. I can only want to uphold this standard because it would hurt Trump.


If Trump's claims about his businesses and his taxes turned out to be true I would give him credit for that. However, he has many, many deficits he would need to overcome to be fit to be President.

[Smoke117]

You genuinely don't understand this guy.

He genuinely doesn't understand ANYTHING. He's a self-inflated dimwit.

[FillJackson]

Last night he was expressing irritation about how the IRS wants to look at his Taxes every year...Ignoring the fact that making hundreds of millions and not paying a cent is usually a red flag.

Irritated yes, but he still shows them to the IRS.

It's not so much a red flag as the fact that is likely taking advantage of a tax loophole that only applies to real estate developers and is not available to a wage earner like me. See David Cay Johnston on this.

A political red flag, but legal.

[Hawker]

Of course, it should be purely transactional. Just like Trump would want it.

I can't have an interest in this as US citizen and taxpayer. I can't approve of this standard because it strengthens our democracy. I can only want to uphold this standard because it would hurt Trump.


If Trump's claims about his businesses and his taxes turned out to be true I would give him credit for that. However, he has many, many deficits he would need to overcome to be fit to be President.

The standard is made up and holds no value. It distracts from real issues and doesn't jeopardize national security in any way. Last time I checked, it's completely legal to not release the tax returns if you're running for president and that seems to be the standard you hold for transparency when it comes to Hillary so lets make sure we're keeping the standard consistent please.

[warriorfan]

Irritated yes, but he still shows them to the IRS.

It's not so much a red flag as the fact that is likely taking advantage of a tax loophole that only applies to real estate developers and is not available to a wage earner like me. See David Cay Johnston on this.

A political red flag, but legal.

He showed them because he was forced to, and yes it was all legal under law (Unfortunately). However I thought it was funny that he acted how the notion of the IRS investigating him was ridiculous and unfair when himself admits he is making huge sums of money and isn't paying a cent. When that is going on the IRS is going to be involved to make sure everything is checking out.

[FillJackson]

The standard is made up and holds no value. It distracts from real issues and doesn't jeopardize national security in any way. Last time

I disagree.

I checked, it's completely legal to not release the tax returns if you're running for president and that seems to be the standard you hold for transparency when it comes to Hillary so lets make sure we're keeping the standard consistent please.

I think you're making a point awkwardly here, but Hillary Clinton has released 30 years of tax returns, so she is up to this standard.

[bladefd]

Last night he was expressing irritation about how the IRS wants to look at his Taxes every year...Ignoring the fact that making hundreds of millions and not paying a cent is usually a red flag.

IRS should rush finish his tax return and finish the audit. Then we can see his new excuse

[Hawker]

I disagree.




I think you're making a point awkwardly here, but Hillary Clinton has released 30 years of tax returns, so she is up to this standard.

Whether you disagree or not it doesn't matter, it's not true.

I'm also referring to the emails brah. People want those released and you deflected and said she doesn't legally have to. Same tactic applies here.

[ZenMaster]

You seem to be laboring under the idea that she was under subpoena when she turned her emails over. She was not. This colors the rest of your analysis.


You seem to thinking that if the FBI subpoenas emails and she deleted them after that happened, the FBI would be cool with that. They wouldn't be.

She was asked by the State Department in the second half of 2014 to turn over her government record emails. She tasked her lawyers to sort out the government record emails from her personal emails and turn them over to the State Department. They turned over the files in December 2014. None of this happened due to a subpoena. At the same time she tells her aide to delete her personal emails.

Far from the FBI Saying they couldn't prove criminal intent with regards to these deletions, they found no evidence there was intent to deceive.



In March 2015, she is subpoenaed for emails not from the FBI, but from the Benghazi Committee and the subpoena only applies to emails that relate to Benghazi. Since then the FBI recovered deleted emails and reviewed them and found no wrongdoing.


On a related note, if Hilary Clinton used a State.gov address, this WOULD NOT have been sufficient for government archiving records as the State Department systems did not meet the Federal requirements for archiving government records. She still would have been required to print out her emails and turn them over as there was not automatic/digital way to archive government emails at the time she worked at state. They had a system called SMART State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolset, but it was not rolled out to senior officials.

Luckily for us, neither Jason Chaffetz, Trey Gowdy or Jim Jordan believes in the cover up by the FBI..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ

Why did she sit and lie at the Benghazi hearing? Why was Bill Clinton meeting Loretta Lynch for 30 minutes shortly before having to decide whether to prosecute or not? Why didn't FBI look at her Benghazi testimony where she sat and lied? Why not prosecute her for lying under oath?

The corruption is there for everyone to see, and a lot of people do, but the people who can charge her for it, is unfortunately for the public, in on the whole deal.

[FillJackson]

Whether you disagree or not it doesn't matter, it's not true.

I'm also referring to the emails brah. People want those released and you deflected and said she doesn't legally have to. Same tactic applies here.

Because that is, in fact, a made up standard.

It's ludicrous to be asked to turn over personal emails.

[Nanners]

Whether you disagree or not it doesn't matter, it's not true.

I'm also referring to the emails brah. People want those released and you deflected and said she doesn't legally have to. Same tactic applies here.

some people would still like to see the transcripts of those wall street speeches she was paid millions of dollars for...

[Hawker]

Because that is, in fact, a made up standard.

It's ludicrous to be asked to turn over personal emails.

And it's ludicrous to be asked to turn over tax returns. WGAS

[TheMan]

some people would still like to see the transcripts of those wall street speeches she was paid millions of dollars for...

Yo Dr Nanners, I suspect that you watched last night's debate...

So how is our girl doing? She looked pretty good if you ask me, then again, I'm no physician like you of course.

Didn't she look sprite and quick witted, despite being in the throes of death, per your diagnosis

Salutations good doctor