Immediately release Donald Trump's full tax returns, with all information needed to v

Is this related to the thread?

The lawsuit that was filed also seeks his tax returns because that is an important possible source of additional evidence of financial interests that may also violate the emoluments clause. There may be some things revealed in his tax returns that do not show up elsewhere.

 

Trump relied on the ultra right wing television evangelist crowd to get him into the White Wash House because he has shifted his views on Roe v Wade. It is rumored that he does not want to disclose his tax returns because it would show that he has contributed THOUSANDS of dollars to Planned Parenthood thereby showing what a political hypocrite he is.

 

Is it not ok to point out the hypocrisy then? Your post was that the nice folks at C.R.E.W were taking this on. Ok, they are a group financed by mr Soros. If we're honest about his agenda, we have to view it from the perspective of his own self interest, and his own financial health. Id say that from your own commentary, you'd call it out as fascism, but because you agree with the agenda, you don't.

To attempt to create credibility to linking an attorney to a previous republican president simply defies logic. So what? Does that make that attorney a token? Can you even say? I doubt it. So, what was the point of providing that little factoid, other than to further demonstrate your hyperpartisanship?

If you now feel that a foreign billionaire's interference with the new administration is a just thing, well..... that's an interesting position to take these days for a liberal....

 

He relied on them you say?? And how many folks do you think this represent? Hundreds? Thousands? Laughable.

 

Dunno what part of the world you're from Buddy, but here in the Upper Midwest the ultra right wing television evangelist types retain a very strong influence over the right wing populace.

 

In the earlier of pages of it, yes. Did you read it?

Ok, but that's two different things. Say a lawsuit gets hold of his tax returns. That's not turning it over the public. All these people upset that they can't have tax returns still won't get the tax returns in that scenario. Personally, given the length of time the IRS has investigated and knowing government finance (military finance is the same) I'm pretty confident they would have hammered him if they could. Anyone ever overpaid by the military knows how merciless and ruthless government finance is - so I find it rather hard to believe he ran for office and gained office without the IRS doing anything if there was something of troubling nature.

 

That makes zero sense. Soros is free to contribute to whatever orgs he chooses, but I don't know that he has ever had anything to do with non-partisan C.R.E.W.
And if you think Soros is a fascist, I don't think you know what fascism is.

To attempt to create controversy by linking Soros to a non-partisan org. simply defies logic. And if CREW were so biased, they wouldn't be taken as seriously as they are. They would be kicked to the curb.

What is the point of suggesting Soros is a fascist and that he "finances CREW" other than to demonstrate your own partisan bias that drives you to post BS?

 

They do? So how many folks is that exactly? And when you say "evangelical" who are they? Anybody but Catholics? I hear this a lot, from folks on the left, so, it might be nice if you could actually quantify this, and who these evil evangelicals are. Honestly, this is sounding a little brown shirty of you.

 

Yikes. That struck a nerve. How about a list of financial contributors then:
Among the foundations that have made significant contributions to CREW in recent years:
•The Foundation to Promote Open Society (controlled by liberal billionaire financier George Soros and his family): $740,000 since 2010
•The Open Society Institute (another foundation controlled by Soros): $150,000 in 2010
•The Bohemian Foundation (controlled by Colorado Democratic donor Pat Stryker and her political operatives): $850,000 since 2010
•Gill Foundation (private foundation of Colorado Democratic mega-donor Tim Gill): $608,615 since 2010
•Dyson Foundation (family foundation of the late Charles Dyson, an FDR Administration official, leveraged-buyout titan, and longtime board member of liberal group Common Cause): $500,000 since 2011
•Steven M. Silberstein Foundation (run by Steven Silberstein, a Democracy Alliance financier and member of the board of advisers for U.C. Berkeley’s public policy school who made his money in the software industry): $500,000 since 2010
•Marisla Foundation (environmentalist foundation run by J. Paul Getty oil fortune heiress Anne Getty Earheart): $425,000
•Leland Fikes Foundation (controlled by Lee Fikes, Texas oilman and major donor to Democrats and abortion-rights causes): $200,000
•Daniel and Janet Mordecai Foundation (foundation controlled by major Colorado Democratic Party donor Janet Mordecai): $100,000

Does that help put this conversation into focus? Perhaps not, I would expect nothing less from the faithful....

 

Beyond the obvious desirability of demanding that a presidential candidate at least make an effort to tell the truth and keep his promises, for whatever reasons Trump feels he has to lie and keep his tax returns hidden, a number of issues of concern and legality could be resolved by his coming clean. If he has blatantly lied to the American public in the matter, one can only conclude that he has decided that being a boldface liar is less damaging to him than whatever might otherwise be revealed.

Of course, he knows his groveling, submissive cult is incapable of applying normal standards of morality to their messiah: "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters!"


.

 

Diversions of any sort do not contribute to focus, actually. Trump's repeated promises to come clean with his tax returns and his determination to hide them despite his promises deserves to be confronted directly.

 

Don't be silly. There is no way to put a number on it. If you lived here and turned on the AM radio you would get flooded with all kinds of right wing radio/television evangelists types sewing hate filled garbage in the name of Jesus Christ. It is these people and their supporters who are the Brown Shirts of society.

 

he doesn't have to release them, but it's stupid not too, unless he has something to hide

 

And what would it look like to you if it had not "struck a nerve"? -I would whimper away, tail between my legs, and vanish in fear, right?

You lose.

I think we all know that you oppose any org. that is dedicated to the wellbeing of the public with great zeal. You don't object to right wing corporatist orgs. that are stripping us of any remaining shred of democracy we have left, like A.L.E.C. and you fully approve of every right wing lie and distortion published by the likes of O'Reilley, the Heritage Foundation, the A.E.I., Cato, Breitbart, DailyCaller, and the rest.

But it drives you nutz to think that liberals and the left might have any orgs defending their interests.

Upon searching for what you might be reading I also found this:
"CREW has received financial backing from the Arca Foundation, the David Geffen Foundation, Democracy Alliance, the Mayberg Family Charitable Foundation, the George Soros's Open Society Institute, the Sheller Family Foundation, the Streisand Foundation, the Tides Foundation, the Wallace Global Fund, and the Woodbury Fund -- all institutions distinguished by their support for far-left causes.

CREW was joined in its campaign against DeLay by numerous Soros-funded organizations, all posing as “non-partisan” watchdogs -- among them Common Cause, Democracy 21, Public Citizen, Public Campaign, and the Campaign Legal Center."

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=7309


But then we have this too:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2006/10/when-doubt-blame-soros

I'm quite please that there are a few wealthy individuals around who oppose right wing attempts to subvert democracy and who defend the interests of the people.

 

the Palin types

"The Palin Principle – Bible trumps Constitution"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/sarah-palin-american-law_n_569922.html

"Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant — they’re quite clear — that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments." - Palin

.

 

Typical. Assert the sky falls, and then run away from having to be accountable for the reason the sky falls... Perhaps they exist on AM radio. Perhaps, if this was still the 1940s, that might be a problem. From my perspective though, brown shirts are the ones actively trying to repress which, it seems clear that you're willing to do. Check a mirror.

 

Quoting from a whack job isn't building you street cred. So what if Palin thinks this? I suggest that McCain ran her as an excuse to lose. He didn't want to leave his cushy life time appointment.... It's what followers like McCain do.

 

she endorsed the President, she ran as a past VP, and it's not just her that is a wack job on the right

 

Your post is based on the premise that he is being audited. We have only his word for that and his word is clearly not his bond.

 

Hold your breath until he complies

 

Know what? If I went to your grade school they wouldn't show me squat about you, not even if you got past the 3rd grade or did detention for peeking up girls dresses on the playground. They are not sealed. Nor is Obama's . The schools can't give out anything not explicitly authorized other than years attended. Diplomas show up in year books and such, transcripts are not.

 

That will be your little secret.

 

So, your point is that the left is more concerned about corruption and willing to put their money where their mouth is. OK.
It reminds me of African dictators complaints that a large number of prisoners at the Hague are Africans. The idea that there are a disproportionate number of dictators ruling with impunity in Africa shouldn't matter. Am I surprised that more Republicans get targeted for corruption? Not in the least.

 

I suppose it's a question of what "corruption" is, or who gets to define it. I see it this way. Mr Soros is intent of his agenda, and willing to put real money behind it. If his actions as a foreign national interfere with our governance, it sure seems like it's fine with liberals to have him do so. Which puts them into a fine frame of hypocrisy then acting like they actually care about foreign interference or influence anywhere. Wonder why?

 

Soros is an American .