Trump's tax returns

[Dexter]

 

[Oceander]

Voted yes not because I think there is anything devastating in them but because I think it's a good practice generally and has become an accepted custom for presidents.  I am inclined to say that it should be enforced through statute from now on.

[alicewonders]

Voted NO.  The man won - obviously nobody cares about the tax returns.

[Oceander]

Voted NO.  The man won - obviously nobody cares about the tax returns.

They matter even more now if they reveal a conflict of interest.  If Trump ends up - hypothetically speaking - having a huge investment in Gasprom, that would be a problem. 

[anubias]

Voted No.  He was elected without releasing them.  It drives the Dementos crazy that he hasn't and won't.

[massadvj]

They matter even more now if they reveal a conflict of interest.  If Trump ends up - hypothetically speaking - having a huge investment in Gasprom, that would be a problem.

If there is an investigation by congress or the FBI, the tax returns could be put under subpoena.  Then I would say the POTUS must release to the investigating entity.  But he was elected without releasing them, so apparently the public does not care much about what they might show.   

[Joe Wooten]

I say NO. It drives the libs nuts and keeps a few of them from doing things more destructive......

Besides, I like seeing their heads explode every time he refuses...

[Oceander]

If there is an investigation by congress or the FBI, they tax returns could be put under subpoena.  Then I would say the POTUS must release to the investigating entity.  But he was elected without releasing them, so apparently the public does not care much about what they might show.   

I don't think the benefits are limited solely to criminal matters and so a subpoena doesn't cover other important situations - knowing whether there is a conflict of interest is necessary, even if it's not illegal.  And whether the general public thinks it's a good idea or not is not the touchstone; whether it provides measurable benefits consistent with the burden of disclosure is.  And the fact that he has been elected does not vitiate those concerns. 

[Cyber Liberty]

I voted "No" because they would be fodder for the demagogues in the Rat party.  Trump, not being a politician, has always filed taxes as a businessman should, taking every deduction and write-off permitted by law. 

Professional politicians don't do that, they deliberately overpay by not taking deductions they're entitled to, to ward off political attacks.  They release those returns as a matter of course over the years, so they have to do that as a cost of doing business.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Voted yes, he should have released them. He said he would do so after the "audit", lied about it.


His supporters don't care either.

[Wingnut]

Other: Hell No.

Didn't care when I was a #Nevertrump.  Don't care now.   

[Frank Cannon]

Voted no. If Washington and Lincoln didn't release theirs, that's good enough for me. On top of that taxes are so complicated anymore, especially if you own a business, that there is ALWAYS going to be something that some low level thinker will find outrageous and corrupt.

Instead of wasting energy over getting people to release their returns for gotcha, how about we focus on a flat tax so no one gives a shit.

[Cripplecreek]

Voted yes not because I think there is anything devastating in them but because I think it's a good practice generally and has become an accepted custom for presidents.  I am inclined to say that it should be enforced through statute from now on.

Not to mention the fact that he demanded it of everyone else.

[Frank Cannon]

I am inclined to say that it should be enforced through statute from now on.

Absolutely, because statute should be based on a cheesy campaign ploy by a professional loser in 1967.

[bigheadfred]

Voted no.   

Unless you do it to every fed/gov polly.

Force them to reveal ALL of their Financial info when they are sworn in. Then reveal all of it at the end of each term.

I want to exactly know how they can get there poor and leave with millions.

[Cyber Liberty]

Voted no.   

Unless you do it to every fed/gov polly.

Force them to reveal ALL of their Financial info when they are sworn in. Then reveal all of it at the end of each term.

I want to exactly know how they can get there poor and leave with millions.

I'll bet Trump bucks the trend on this.  Betcha he leaves office poorer than when he went in.

[skeeter]

Did he pass his audit is all that should interest anyone.

Unless he violated the law the tax return itself is meaningless. The media will selectively release bits and pieces to create controversy where there is none.

[ABX]

I have a simple way of looking at it.

If you or I were applying for a job hanging curtains in the White House, we would have to go through an extensive background check including financial disclosure.

An 18 year old, signing up for the Army, has to pass a basic MEPS background check that includes financial disclosure such as tax returns.

It makes absolute sense that someone who is the Commander in Chief of that young 18 year old have to go through at bare minimum the same disclosure. He is no longer a private citizen. It is up to us as citizens to demand proper transparency of those who serve this country, even in the highest offices to ensure there is no corruption. The higher the office, the more one should be responsible to be transparent. After all, they are living on our dime.

[Cripplecreek]

I have a simple way of looking at it.

If you or I were applying for a job hanging curtains in the White House, we would have to go through an extensive background check including financial disclosure.

An 18 year old, signing up for the Army, has to pass a basic MEPS background check that includes financial disclosure such as tax returns.

It makes absolute sense that someone who is the Commander in Chief of that young 18 year old have to go through at bare minimum the same disclosure. He is no longer a private citizen. It is up to us as citizens to demand proper transparency of those who serve this country, even in the highest offices to ensure there is no corruption. The higher the office, the more one should be responsible to be transparent. After all, they are living on our dime.

I had a couple of Air Force officers show up at my door back in the early 80s to ask questions about my cousin who was apparently being considered for a move to an intel position.

They asked if I knew of her ever having debts problems, if I loaned her money would it be paid back promptly, was she known to drink and get out of control etc.

[ABX]

Voted NO.  The man won - obviously nobody cares about the tax returns.

Take the poll for what its worth, but Rasmussen has been one of the better companies historically. During the last election, 67% polled wanted to see both his and Hillary's tax returns, 73% polled wanting to see candidate's tax returns the prior year. Not exactly 'nobody cares'.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2016/most_want_to_see_clinton_trump_tax_returns_medical_records

ABC/Washington Post did a similar poll and found 74%.

Business Insider/Morning Consult, which leans right had it at 67%.

Even Newsmax, very right leaning pro-Trump, found 60% of Republicans wanted him to release them and only 20% didn't. That's coming from his base, not the general public.

At that, I couldn't find a legitimate poll where releasing them was in the minority. (there are always unscientific web polls one can refer to but I never use those).

[Wingnut]

Take the poll for what its worth, but Rasmussen has been one of the better companies historically. During the last election, 67% polled wanted to see both his and Hillary's tax returns, 73% polled wanting to see candidate's tax returns the prior year. Not exactly 'nobody cares'.

.

It really doesn't matter anymore.  The point is moot.
His returns will not be released.

[Frank Cannon]

Take the poll for what its worth, but Rasmussen has been one of the better companies historically. During the last election, 67% polled wanted to see both his and Hillary's tax returns, 73% polled wanting to see candidate's tax returns the prior year. Not exactly 'nobody cares'.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2016/most_want_to_see_clinton_trump_tax_returns_medical_records

ABC/Washington Post did a similar poll and found 74%.

Business Insider/Morning Consult, which leans right had it at 67%.

Even Newsmax, very right leaning pro-Trump, found 60% of Republicans wanted him to release them and only 20% didn't. That's coming from his base, not the general public.

At that, I couldn't find a legitimate poll where releasing them was in the minority. (there are always unscientific web polls one can refer to but I never use those).

Fairly irrelevant considering that wasn't even on the radar for concerns of voters this year. This whole tax return thing is a fraud started by a pissing match between George Romney and a reporter 50 years ago. Prior to that no one released them and after that there is a sporadic history of them being released. It wasn't until Harry Reid saw an opportunity to cause trouble with Mitt Romney that this even became an issue.

You show large margins wanting to know this information. I would bet that the same margins would like to know what sexual proclivities candidates have because people are nosy.

[libertybele]

I vote no.  At this point what difference does it make?  He's our President.  The left would only have a field day regardless of what was reported. When the IRS and the Federal Reserve are audited then maybe we can revisit this issue.

[Slide Rule]

Voted yes, he should have released them. He said he would do so after the "audit", lied about it.


His supporters don't care either.

I voted that he should not release them. At any time.

Perhaps he will release them, as he leaves public service. To make
the SnowFlakes melt.

Al