web analytics

Declare The Pennies On Your Eyes

By Mahons On May 7th, 2019

For all his happy hippy Hindu-babble and sitars George Harrison probably wrote the most materialist capitalist complaint of the rock era when he penned Taxman.
That irony pales in comparison to the House Democrats efforts to obtain President Trump’s tax returns. I agree with the Treasury Department that there is no convincing legislative purpose for their effort. Their request, technically legal, is transparently partisan. The Administration should resist.
Do I think that thete is embarrassing information in the returns? Certainly. Do I think the President should be compelled to produce them as fodder for his political enemies? Certainly not. It is a side show.
It has become a farce. Like Chico Marx claiming he had an Uncle in Dollars, Taxes under the cross examination of Groucho Marx in Duck Soup. There is no need for this Congressional tangent. There is more important work to do. Squabbling is not that work. Especially when it serves no legitimate purpose.

184 Responses to “Declare The Pennies On Your Eyes”

  1. All presidents since Nixon ( apart from Gerald Ford ) have voluntarily released their tax returns.

    There is no valid reason for Trump, who has foreign entanglements, including in shady places like Panama and Azerbaijan that the others did not, to keep concealing his tax returns. I don’t buy the ” I’m under audit, so I can’t disclose ” argument.

  2. There is no “legislative purpose”. That would be a convincing argument if the only role of Congress was to legislate. They also have major scrutiny functions. It is not only reasonable for them to scrutinise the President, it is their job. Now given that Presidents have routinely released tax returns it does seem suspicious that President Trump has not. Given that Trump lied about his reason for not releasing his tax returns it also seems like there is a compelling reason for Congress to look at them.

    Due to Trump’s failure to adequately divest from his businesses he, almost uniquely for Presidents, runs a serious risk of a conflict of interest. As such, in order to weigh that, Congress needs any and all relevant material to decide whether or not Trump is acting in a certain manner because it is in the interests of the United States, or whether or not he is acting a certain manner because it is in the interests of Donald Trump.

  3. He and the republicans might get more sympathy from me if it wasn’t for birtherism, Benghazi, Uranium 1, etc etc etc

    They practically invented public investigation for political purposes and its nice to see them on the receiving end for a change

  4. Nixon released his taxes because of accusations from Romney’s dad who he was running against.

    Nixon went on to defeat Romney for the nomination, and he faced no further pressure during the general election, thanks to Hubert Humphrey’s refusal to release his own tax returns…

    As you can see that same election the Dem did not release his taxes. Nixon the master of theater pulled a stunt and it’s now a “Tradition”. bullshit it’s another witch hunt.

    Congress has oversight of GOVERNMENT not a mans life before they held office. The only people who get to decide and examine a man or woman’s life before they hold office is the voter.

    I agree with Mahons 100%

  5. And just for Pat who is always flapping his gums anout Canadians going to the US for medical reasons(which is basically untrue)

    http://www.newsweek.com/caravan-americans-crossing-canadian-border-get-affordable-medical-care-1417582

  6. birtherism, was an idiots flight down fantasy lane Obama’s mother was American where he was born was irrelevant

    Benghazi, the Obama administration was illegally selling guns to terrorists in Syria and Hillary got our people killed.

    And Uranium 1, Clinton was bribed with 150 million to sell a quarter of uranium to russia and has yet to be investigated.

    you’ve begun to loose your touch with common sense EP.

  7. actually your link made me laugh ep thank you.

    but lets see the real reason shall we…..

    “We’re on a #CaravanToCanada because the USA charges astronomical prices for insulin that most people can’t afford,” tweeted caravan member Quinn Nystrom as she shared updates on the journey.

    So you have rich Americans who refuse to pay their fare share for drugs gaming canada.

  8. How are they gaming Canada?

  9. Your president was the founding father of Birtherism

    No one should overpay for necessary drugs. Price shopping is good. The inflated costs in the US are not anyone’s ” fair share “. You don’t have to take the side of Big Pharma on everything.

  10. Benghazi, the Obama administration was illegally selling guns to terrorists in Syria and Hillary got our people killed.

    And Uranium 1, Clinton was bribed with 150 million to sell a quarter of uranium to russia and has yet to be investigated.

    None of this is true

  11. ” If Sean Hannity says it, it must be true ”

    All from the right wing lie machine. Repeat it often enough and the sheeple actually believe it.

  12. Reagan actually did sell weapons to terrorists ( Contras, Iran ) and these fake news guys think that it was the best thing that anyone ever did.

  13. “Congress has oversight of GOVERNMENT not a mans life before they held office. The only people who get to decide and examine a man or woman’s life before they hold office is the voter.”

    Which Trump denied them the opportunity to do so by failing to release his tax returns and then giving a bullshit answer as to why.

    The fact is that Congress has oversight of the President. The President, due to his failure to divest from his businesses, has conflicts of interest. In order to properly investigate those conflicts of interest they need to know about them.

  14. Emerald Pimpernel, on May 7th, 2019 at 3:55 PM Said:
    Benghazi, the Obama administration was illegally selling guns to terrorists in Syria and Hillary got our people killed.

    And Uranium 1, Clinton was bribed with 150 million to sell a quarter of uranium to russia and has yet to be investigated.

    None of this is true

    Both are true they are the simple facts.

    your both lost in partisan politics and refuse to see facts.

  15. Seamus sorry wrong.

  16. https://apnews.com/ecc3a300383445d5a90dd6ca764c9e15

    In the aftermath of the attacks, Republicans criticized the Obama administration and its then-secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is expected to run for president in 2016. People in and out of government have alleged that a CIA response team was ordered to “stand down” after the State Department compound came under attack, that a military rescue was nixed, that officials intentionally downplayed the role of al-Qaida figures in the attack, and that Stevens and the CIA were involved in a secret operation to spirit weapons out of Libya and into the hands of Syrian rebels. None of that is true, according to the House Intelligence Committee report.

    So the House Intelligence Committee (which had a Republican majority at the time) investigated those claims they found them to be without merit.

  17. “Seamus sorry wrong.”

    That isn’t a rebuttal. If it is wrong show were it is wrong.

  18. Seamus

    Do you know what the MAJOR find was in the Benghazi investigation? Please answer.

    Here is a better summary of those hearings. The question above is very important but not part of this.

    Washington, D.C. – Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Trey Gowdy (SC-04) released the following statement after the committee’s Majority released a mark of its investigative report:

    “Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were heroes who gave their lives in service to our country. Their bravery and the courageous actions of so many others on the ground that night should be honored.

    “When the Select Committee was formed, I promised to conduct this investigation in a manner worthy of the American people’s respect, and worthy of the memory of those who died. That is exactly what my colleagues and I have done.

    “Now, I simply ask the American people to read this report for themselves, look at the evidence we have collected, and reach their own conclusions. You can read this report in less time than our fellow citizens were taking fire and fighting for their lives on the rooftops and in the streets of Benghazi.”

    The committee’s proposed report is just over 800 pages long and is comprised of five primary sections and 12 appendices. It details relevant events in 2011 and 2012.

    The following facts are among the many new revelations in Part I:

    Despite President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s clear orders to deploy military assets, nothing was sent to Benghazi, and nothing was en route to Libya at the time the last two Americans were killed almost 8 hours after the attacks began. [pg. 141]
    With Ambassador Stevens missing, the White House convened a roughly two-hour meeting at 7:30 PM, which resulted in action items focused on a YouTube video, and others containing the phrases “[i]f any deployment is made,” and “Libya must agree to any deployment,” and “[w]ill not deploy until order comes to go to either Tripoli or Benghazi.” [pg. 115]
    The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff typically would have participated in the White House meeting, but did not attend because he went home to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries. [pg. 107]
    A Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team (FAST) sat on a plane in Rota, Spain, for three hours, and changed in and out of their uniforms four times. [pg. 154]
    None of the relevant military forces met their required deployment timelines. [pg. 150]
    The Libyan forces that evacuated Americans from the CIA Annex to the Benghazi airport was not affiliated with any of the militias the CIA or State Department had developed a relationship with during the prior 18 months. Instead, it was comprised of former Qadhafi loyalists who the U.S. had helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution. [pg. 144]
    Rep. Mike Pompeo (KS-04) released the following statement regarding these findings:

    “We expect our government to make every effort to save the lives of Americans who serve in harm’s way. That did not happen in Benghazi. Politics were put ahead of the lives of Americans, and while the administration had made excuses and blamed the challenges posed by time and distance, the truth is that they did not try.”

  19. please answer if you know the most important finding of that hearing and the reason why it got nowhere.

  20. “And Uranium 1, Clinton was bribed with 150 million to sell a quarter of uranium to russia and has yet to be investigated.”

    Let’s start with the facts on Uranium 1 (Patrick cover your eyes; you’ll want to ignore this part).

    Firstly it was not Clinton’s to sell. Yes as part of the deal it had to be okayed by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, of which Clinton sat on. The CFIUS panel not only included the Secretary of State but also the Attorney General and the Secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Energy and Homeland Security, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

    However, in addition to those people sitting on the committee, Clinton never actually did. She delegated her role on CFIUS to Jose W. Fernandez, the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs. Which makes sense. In the four years that Clinton was Secretary of State CFIUS had 383 notifications of foreign investments with potential national security implications, of which 145 merited investigation. That is a lot of work on top of the other jobs the Secretary of State is expected to do, so it isn’t surprising that she delegated it. Fernandez insisted that Clinton “never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter”.

    Additionally the bulk of the money that the Clinton Foundation recieved was from Frank Giustra, who claims, at least, that he sold his share in Uranium One years before Clinton became Secretary of State, years before the Uranium One deal, and so would not personally benefit from the transaction.

    If Guistra is telling the truth then the total amount of money donated to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors was relatively small ($4 million, not $140 million).

    There is literally no proof suggesting that Clinton was bribed over Uranium One. There is a question of a conflict of interest. Should that have arisen at the time Clinton should have recused herself. Considering that she never actually sat on the panel, CFIUS, means that is pretty much what she did, intentionally or otherwise.

  21. “please answer if you know the most important finding of that hearing and the reason why it got nowhere.”

    You always seem to play this game. You ask a question about do I know this or do I know that. I answer and you type back

    “WRONG!!!!!!”

    Like it makes you clever in some manner.

    So why don’t you tell us what the main finding of the hearing was?

  22. The investigation into uranium 1 was blocked by the Obama Justice department. No forensic investigation was done by the FBI.

    Everything you wrote was spin.

    Do you know the answer to my question.

  23. Not least because the nature of the question means there generally isn’t a right or wrong answer. Major is subjective. So even if I answer honestly, and give you the answer you have replied with, you still come up with some bullshit reason as to why it is wrong.

  24. “Everything you wrote was spin.”

    To the fake news brigade like yourself, facts normally are spin.

  25. Ok the main finding of the Benghazi hearings was that Hillary Clinton had an illegal communications network that was not under government control and the reason that the Benghazi hearings ended the way they did was because when that system was subpoenaed Hillary deleted 33,000 emails and destroyed her server, her blackberry and every phone that was connected to the system.

  26. Really Seamus what were the FACTS found by the FBI investigation into Uranium 1 ?

  27. There was no scandal at Uranium One. Zero.

    Nothing wrong happened, there were no compromises as respects US/world safety, or US control of US uranium

    Complete laughable nonsense, even more than the rest of these yarns

  28. pretty bold statement Phantom about an investigation that was prevented by the White House.

  29. “Ok the main finding of the Benghazi hearings was that Hillary Clinton had an illegal communications network that was not under government control and the reason that the Benghazi hearings ended the way they did was because when that system was subpoenaed Hillary deleted 33,000 emails and destroyed her server, her blackberry and every phone that was connected to the system.”

    That is your interpretation of it. And why I refused to answer your question. Because personally I don’t believe that is the main finding. The main finding in the Benghazi investigations is that Republican fake news bullshit that was circulating about Benghazi was strangely enough fake news bullshit. That is why despite ten investigations into Benghazi, six of which were by Republican-controlled House committees, none of the ten investigations found any evidence to support the Republicans’ allegations.

    “Really Seamus what were the FACTS found by the FBI investigation into Uranium 1 ?”

    Have they made them public? I have no idea. However, in August 2016, the FBI had begun to confidentially investigate the Clinton Foundation over Uranium One. The investigation did not, or at least has not, led to any prosecutions. Given your response to the Mueller report I guess that means you think she was exonerated.

  30. Should the Uranium One transaction have been blocked?

    Why?

    Be as specific as you like

  31. They can’t make them public the White House shut down the investigation.

    and what you wrote on Benghazi was the spin or put it plainly bullshit.

    Clinton’s communication between the ambassadors were subpoenaed by the committee none of Clinton’s or the State depts communications were ever turned over. They were in fact deleted and the devices they were on destroyed. That is called Obstruction of Justice.

    John McCain arranged the sales, the CIA handled the deal through their state department bagman Amb Stevens. The money and guns were exchanged at the annex and shipped through Turkey.

    It was a blackbag op that went south and our people died.

  32. They can’t make them public the White House shut down the investigation.

    You don’t know that.

    And even if that were true, then this Barr flunky could begin a new investigation into the fake scandal.

  33. “Clinton’s communication between the ambassadors were subpoenaed by the committee none of Clinton’s or the State depts communications were ever turned over. They were in fact deleted and the devices they were on destroyed. That is called Obstruction of Justice.”

    No it is not. In order for there to be obstruction of justice then it would need to be proven that they did it for the purpose of not turning over the information. In order for there to be obstruction of justice they would need to have destroyed the servers for the sole reason of not allowing investigation.

    “John McCain arranged the sales, the CIA handled the deal through their state department bagman Amb Stevens. The money and guns were exchanged at the annex and shipped through Turkey.”

    All 10 investigations have found that to not be true.

  34. Phantom, on May 7th, 2019 at 5:17 PM Said:
    Should the Uranium One transaction have been blocked?

    Why?

    Be as specific as you like

    Yes

    Reason one the US imports uranium for our own needs selling our own is dumb.

    Reason to the final recipient was russia who is a strategic enemy and was in the middle of updating it’s nuclear missile arsenal to the next gen… which thank you is now on line. And they also need to import uranium because they don’t have enough….

    so we should sell them ours….. right skippy that makes good sense….

    But if you give me 150 million then then well it makes all the sense in the world.

  35. The US subsidiary was owned by a South African company, it is now owned by a Russian company.

    The US government retains 100% control of any uranium within its borders. Nobody exports anything without a license to do it.

    The US afaik doesn’t export uranium to Russia… we have long imported uranium from Russia and other countries.

    Sorry, you don’t understand any part of this issue.

    The transaction didn’t harm any US interests.

    https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=nuclear_where

  36. No it is not. In order for there to be obstruction of justice then it would need to be proven that they did it for the purpose of not turning over the information. In order for there to be obstruction of justice they would need to have destroyed the servers for the sole reason of not allowing investigation.

    I know you didn’t think before you wrote this Seamus you have a better mind than that. Breath

    She received a Subpoena TURN OVER ALL YOUR DOCUMENTS. After receiving said subpoena she destroys 33,000 emails and takes a hammer to her phones and has the drives of her server washed with acid. The “intent” is destruction of evidence to PREVENT them from being INVESTIGATED.

    If her name ended in a vowel that act alone would get her a sentence of life under the RICO act.

  37. The US government retains 100% control of any uranium within its borders. Nobody exports anything without a license to do it.

    Investigations have proven uranium was shipped out. https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/358339-uranium-one-deal-led-to-some-exports-to-europe-memos-show

  38. No Phantom as usual it is you who is clueless the topic involves weapons and the law, both subjects you prove on a daily basis that you know nothing about.

  39. No uranium was shipped outside US borders without an export license from the federal government.

  40. “She received a Subpoena TURN OVER ALL YOUR DOCUMENTS. After receiving said subpoena she destroys 33,000 emails and takes a hammer to her phones and has the drives of her server washed with acid. The “intent” is destruction of evidence to PREVENT them from being INVESTIGATED.”

    The evidence would overwhelmingly suggest that the emails were deleted in February 2015. The server was switched to 60 day retention in December 2014, suggesting the February 2015 date. The subpoena was issued in March 2015, suggesting there were deleted before any subpoena was issued.

  41. The US even imported uranium from former Soviet warheads to convert it to peaceful use.

    The US and the Russians have long cooperated in a sober way on the peaceful use of uranium and nuclear energy.

    This is a Sean Hannity / Rush tall tale for the rubes. They will believe anything.

  42. Phantom Phantom Phantom

    do you have a thing for hillary? I mean this crush you have on her is cute. And each man is entitled to find whatever he likes as attractive.

    Now put your crush aside and examine the Clintons as what they are. Organised Crime.

    Obama was an ideological fool, but an honest man. As honest as a politician can be, but the Clintons are now different than any mafia family. Not as violent, but they do business exactly the same way that an organised crime family does.

    I don’t care what trump does he did the only thing that matters he stopped that evil from getting back into the white house.

  43. Criticize the Clintons all day long for the bad things that they may have done.

    There was nothing wrong with the Uranium One transaction. As far as the US is concerned, nothing really changed.

    The US subsidiary and its mines were not even a main reason why the Russians bought that company.

    There real objective was to get the much larger uranium deposits in Kazakhstan.

  44. It’s rather amazing that anyone fell for the Uranium One story. This is right up there with Allan’s 9/11 controlled demolition yarns.

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

  45. Phantom snopes….. yeah ok

    There was nothing wrong with the Uranium One transaction.

    You don’t know that. Circumstantial evidence says there was, the investigation into those circumstantial bits of evidence was squashed by the white house, that also indicates there was something wrong.

    but no nothing to see here, these aren’t the droids you’re looking for.

  46. the investigation into those circumstantial bits of evidence was squashed by the white house

    Who told you that?

    And why doesn’t sycophant Barr open a blue ribbon investigation of the terrible scandal today?

  47. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHo8mFSN92w

    NY Rep King

  48. Barr is going after the fisa warrants and the hillary email investigation….. lets see where everything leads.

  49. Congress must exercise it’s power in a legitimate way. It should not abuse it’s power for partisan reasons, be it against Trump or Obama. There is no real reason to request his tax returns other than for partisan purposes. It is not only an abuse of power, it is terrible politics.

  50. I agree 100% Mahons and I would still agree if it was Obama’s or Clintons tax returns from when they weren’t in office.

  51. There must be things really damaging to Trump in his taxes judging by the ridiculous efforts to keep them secret. The relevant statute the House cited in the request for Trump’s taxes has no mention of “legislative purpose” as others above have stated the House has oversight responsibilities. This is nothing but a pathetic dodge by the slippery Treasury Secretary. I expect the House will take appropriate legal action.

    Trump brags about his wealth, so why would he not want to prove it by bragging about how much tax he pays on the enormous sums he earns?

    I think the NY AG is also requesting his taxes. I wonder what dodge they will use in that case?

  52. He has been involved in financial crimes ( stealing from charities, Trump University ) and has financial relationships with dodgy nations.

    But no one should look at his tax returns.

  53. “Congress must exercise it’s power in a legitimate way. It should not abuse it’s power for partisan reasons, be it against Trump or Obama. There is no real reason to request his tax returns other than for partisan purposes. It is not only an abuse of power, it is terrible politics.”

    Here in lies the problem. Of course the Democrats are acting partisan. But then moderate Republicans don’t exist anymore, for the most part. They have all jumped on the Trump train and have no interest, whatsoever, in holding him to account.

    As I said above Trump has not divested from his businesses. If his businesses are involved in deals with this person, and that country, then it presents a conflict of interest for Trump. Congress, in their scrutiny of Trump, need to know if there are conflicts before they can scrutinise it. Because decision A looks very different in the light that Trump going millions from the guy who benefited from it.

    It is why the Republicans are pretending that Clinton was involved in the Uranium One decision. Because someone who may, or may not have, benefited from Uranium One donated money to the Clinton foundation.

  54. NYr you’re endorsing fascist banana republic tactics.

    Ok then in every state where the Republican party holds office we want to see every Democrat in the House, Senate and Judicial Branch’s and their Families Tax Returns for the past 10yrs.

    We’ll act like the NY AG.

  55. How about all politicians from both parties in every state release 10 years returns?

    Trump has made this issue out of nothing – the real presidents who preceded him have released their returns, had been doing that for decades

    The Trump Crime Family don’t want to show their home cooking. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

  56. Of course the NY AG is asking for his taxes, she is hyper partisan. I want her law school records!

  57. If for no other reason than the theft from charity, the NY AG has every right in the world to see his tax returns.

  58. holding him to account.

    holding him to account for what?

    The fourth amendment protects our private records from scrutiny unless they are investigating a KNOWN crime. It specifically forbids the government from fishing. Which is exactly what they are trying to do.

    These are the things we will draw a line in the sand over. If we no longer have a 4th Amendment the country is about to erupt in violence like the world has never seen.

    I don’t see that happening. The Democrats/Republicans/Congress has no legal standing to demand the records. They can whine and bitch all they want they’ll never get them. I’ll bet whatever you want on that.

  59. Seamus – moderate Democrats exist in the electorate. I am one of them. This type of tactic by Democrats bothers me. Want to see him reelected, support this behavior.

  60. Phantom, on May 7th, 2019 at 7:32 PM Said:
    How about all politicians from both parties in every state release 10 years returns?

    I endorse that wholly 100% make it the Law though and each year the hold public office also.

  61. In Iceland, Finland and Sweden I am told that all persons’ tax returns are public information.

    Which is exceptionally weird.

  62. “holding him to account for what?”

    His conflicts of interest stemming from refusal to divest from his businesses while President.

    “The fourth amendment protects our private records from scrutiny unless they are investigating a KNOWN crime. It specifically forbids the government from fishing. Which is exactly what they are trying to do.”

    Actually no. The Revenue Act of 1924 specifically gives Congressional Committees the right to access tax information on citizens, and also the power to decide whether that information should be made public. The Tax Reform Act of 1976 retains the right of tax committees to do so as long as a disclosure served a legitimate committee purpose.

    The Fourth Amendment protects “against unreasonable searches and seizures”. The two prong test in Smith v. Maryland for determining whether a search has occurred for purposes of the Fourth Amendment are as follows:

    1. the person “has exhibited an actual expectation of privacy”; and
    2. society is prepared to recognize that this expectation is reasonable.

    Now the person has turned these records over to the federal government. As such the idea, that after turning them over to the federal government, that they will expect the federal government to never see them, is nonsense.

    And, as per the IRS:

    However, the courts have consistently held that disclosure of routine financial information required on a tax return does not incriminate an individual or violate the right to privacy.

    Tax returns do not violate the right to privacy, and tax committees in Congress have a right to access, and disclose, that information.

  63. “Seamus – moderate Democrats exist in the electorate. I am one of them. This type of tactic by Democrats bothers me. Want to see him reelected, support this behavior.”

    I disagree. Given his business actions, which are international in nature, and given his office, it is virtually impossible that his businesses do not provide for conflicts of interest. Congress cannot scrutinise his actions without the full facts.

  64. Trump at various points before the election said that he would fully disclose his tax returns ” once the audit was done ”

    Now he is saying ” never ” and look how they all follow him.

  65. “How about all politicians from both parties in every state release 10 years returns?” That is a good idea. Public officials should have transparent financial records. It would also deter bad actors.

    Over 60% of the nation disapproves of Trump’s conduct. They would favor release of his taxes. How is that bad politics?

    Ultimately, the dirt on Trump will come out whether by congressional investigations, federal and state investigations, clever reporters, someone on the inside with a score to settle, etc. At the end of the day, Trump’s resistance is futile. Then we will all see what a low creature inhabits the White House.

  66. mahons, disagree with your comments on this one.

    The Republicans are all in the tank for Trump and won’t hold him to account for anything.

    You seem to want the Dems to do the same.

    How is this in any way helpful?

    Why should all checks and balances be thrown overboard, now, when they are most needed?

  67. you can have trumps taxes when we get bills medical records, hillary’s final theses, and obama’s school transcripts….

    A person has the right to tell you to fuck off if you can’t charge them with a crime.

    Our rights come from natures god not our government. Our constitution is a restraint on them, not the people.

    The State needs a predicating crime.

  68. And the president and AG don’t need to respond to any Congressional subpoenas, either?

    They have a right to say fuck off to those requests, too?

    You used to pretend to care about the Constitution. No longer.

    Now, it’s ” let my dictator do anything that he wants “

  69. Phantom, on May 7th, 2019 at 8:15 PM Said:
    mahons, disagree with your comments on this one.

    The Republicans are all in the tank for Trump and won’t hold him to account for anything.

    You seem to want the Dems to do the same.

    How is this in any way helpful?

    Why should all checks and balances be thrown overboard, now, when they are most needed?

    There is the reasoning of someone with TDS.

    What are those in the tank republicans not holding him to account for?

    What are your charges?

    How is persecuting the President just because you dislike him helpful ?

    What checks and balances are not being used? He was just investigated for two years.

    You are motivated by emotion Phantom as is every member of the population. That is why man is governed by Laws not emotion.

  70. Phantom – the Dems in the House are speculating. They are HOPING to come up with something instead of having a good faith basis to do so.

  71. Phantom, on May 7th, 2019 at 8:37 PM Said:
    And the president and AG don’t need to respond to any Congressional subpoenas, either?

    They have a right to say fuck off to those requests, too?

    Where are the Fast and Furious documents that made Eric Holder the only AG in history to be found in contempt?

  72. Phantom listen to Mahons.

  73. Patrick is very big on ” what about this, what about that ” today.

    A broken record, if anyone remembers what records were.

  74. President Lincoln shut down newspapers during the Civil War.

    So if Trump shuts down CNN or the Times, that’s OK.

    Because if anyone did it once, it’s OK for Trump to do it now.

  75. “A person has the right to tell you to fuck off if you can’t charge them with a crime.”

    They aren’t asking Trump for anything. They are asking the IRS to give them documents the IRS already has.

    The government already have these documents. It wouldn’t be an invasion of privacy for another section of government to also have them.

  76. Seamus – do you not reckon that Congress is unfit to scrutinise anybody’s financial records given the scale of corruption funding of its members by various interests?

    Here’s Mitch McConnell…….

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary/mitch-mcconnell?cid=N00003389

    And here’s Nancy Pelosi……..

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary/nancy-pelosi?cid=N00007360

  77. You do know that Donald Trump also takes campaign donations. And donations are open and transparent. If the oil industry gives millions to a Senator and that Senator becomes a shill for big oil then the public can draw inferences from that.

    But it needs to be open and transparent. Which is why Trump’s financial dealings are a public policy issue, and not a private matter. Because if his companies are doing business with Person A, or Country B, and Trump pursues policies that are friendly for Person A, or Country B, then again the public can draw inferences from that.

  78. It appears that the NYT has obtained ten years of the fake presidents tax information.

    Let the gnashing of teeth begin.

  79. From the NYT:

    “The numbers show that in 1985, Mr. Trump reported losses of $46.1 million from his core businesses — largely casinos, hotels and retail space in apartment buildings. They continued to lose money every year, totaling $1.17 billion in losses for the decade.”

    “Over all, Mr. Trump lost so much money that he was able to avoid paying income taxes for eight of the 10 years. It is not known whether the I.R.S. later required changes after audits.”

    “In fact, year after year, Mr. Trump appears to have lost more money than nearly any other individual American taxpayer, The Times found when it compared his results with detailed information the I.R.S. compiles on an annual sampling of high-income earners. His core business losses in 1990 and 1991 — more than $250 million each year — were more than double those of the nearest taxpayers in the I.R.S. information for those years.”

    Trump likes to brag about bigness. Now he can claim to be the biggest loser for many years. $1.17 billion in losses over just ten years. Trump is the biggest conman and loser in the US. Some have said they voted for him because of his business ability. They should read the NYT and stop watching The Apprentice, the first is real the later is not.

  80. the glee you two display speaks for itself.

  81. ok lets get someone to steal and xerox Phantoms tax records for the past ten years and print them along with NYrs.

    You two don’t have the balls to even post on a nowhere blog in your own names out of fear yet because you dislike the man in the office you have absolutely no moral or ethical objection to such a violation.

    I’m not going to do it, but how would you two feel if I just printed your real names, let alone 10yrs of your taxes.

  82. You both need to understand that this is an attack on the civil liberties of EVERY American.

    The Democrats and both of you are criminalizing anyone having a political view that varies from your own….

    A couple of little stalin’s.

  83. In front of the world, Trump asked the Russians to steal Hillary’s emails and publish them.

    Now, someone has stolen Trump’s information. And has published it.

    Trump has no moral ground to stand on if he wants to trash the NYT on this.

    It’s likely not “ fake news “

    Trump’s business model is based on fraud, on treating business partners badly.

    There would be many who could have leaked these documents.

    Those who voted for Trump all saw him as a highly successful and self made businessman. A few of us, who’ve observed the Trump Crime Family for decades, always said that he was not just unfit, but that he was a fraud.

    Tonight, we are proven right. Those who voted Trump are proven to be unsophisticated rubes, one of a long line of people deceived by Trump. They will blame the messenger, the newspaper who did what Trump asked the adversary nation of Russia to do.

  84. You’re an embarrassment as an American, to you sarcasm is the same as a violation of a person’s 4th amendment rights.

    Sad Phantom.

  85. You have to put your emotions aside and look at this from a neutral position. Your perspective is not matching the intellect that I know you have.

  86. Since the time Trump lost over a billion he appears to have gained financial resources for various projects. No bank would touch him. Where did he get those resources?

  87. Trump’s fabrications are not the point. There was no real basis for the House to insist on his tax returns. And whoever leaked them had no right to do so. This will have unintended consequences that go way beyond him.

  88. PVR

    Do you now admit Trump lied about his financial history? He said he was enormously successful and worth billions. Now we know he was in a billion dollar hole. Do you believe that, or is it fake news to you?

    Do you approve of someone not paying any tax for nearly a decade? Everyone I know pays taxes. Here is a conman living the high life and paying no taxes. Are taxpayers fools when someone living in multi-million homes pays nothing? In addition, he holds the highest office in the US. It is a wonder anybody pays taxes with the example this guy sets.

    The NYT has made a major public contribution by exposing this charlatan. And, when the leaks begin, there is usually more than one. I wonder what we will find out next.

  89. As noted by many tonight, Trump continued to live a life of great luxury while his businesses were bleeding hundreds of millions, while his co investors were being devastated with losses – and these years were his glory years.

    Trump was very much like Enron – successful on the outside, but hollow on the inside, based on a business model involving fraud, on cheating people.

  90. “Trump’s fabrications are not the point.” On the contrary, Americans expect the President to conduct himself ethically and not tell massive lies. Trump has been caught in a whopper.

    “There was no real basis for the House to insist on his tax returns.” You are repeating yourself. Congress has oversight responsibility. It is part of checks and balances. Don’t you believe in that principle?

    “This will have unintended consequences that go way beyond him.” Please explain. Are you against transparency?

  91. Trump trashed Amazon and other real companies for not paying taxes.

    While he has a long history of not paying taxes himself.

    My, my.

    This is your drain the swamp guy? Really?

  92. The Fake News Brigade here will have all night to come up with some bullshit posts trying to saying how Trump was wronged in some way by the NYT.

    But they can’t call it Fake Newa, I don’t think.

    Do your best laddies. Pretend to be all angry, because you’re so cute when you’re upset.Mention the Constitution a hundred times please. That would be so cute. Off with you now.

  93. New Yorker – I don’t believe Trump’s puffer about his business success was be lived by many people, including many of those who voted for him. It was not under oath, and frankly won’t impact his base in my opinion.
    I repeat myself in the hope, naive perhaps, that rational thought offered by me may took root.

  94. You are confusing partisanship with checks and balances. Private tax returns disclosure are not compulsory. While I think candidates should release them they should not be compelled to do so.
    Do you believe FDR and JFK should have been compelled to release their health records, or that they were candid about their health?

  95. Phantom – Trump’s IRS records were apparently leaked without authorization. Is it OK cause he is an asshole?

  96. Trump praised Wikileaks many times.

    So let’s not hear any criticism of these leaks by the likes of him, Unless they’re not true,

  97. Which is part of my point. It isn’t Trump’s hypocrisy that is at issue. He’d be happy if it was done to his political enemy. The doesn’t make it right.

  98. mahons

    Again, he has praised leaking of confidential, sensitive information. And the mob praised all of that,

    He here receives a big steaming dish of his own medicine. We see now the real reason why he didn’t want to disclose his taxes.

  99. Lied didn’t Lied I don’t care.

    I see a man that decided to run for President that a sitting President either allowed or directed that he be framed. They didn’t expect him to win. When he did they invoked an investigation with no predicated crime believing they would be able to uncover something illegal on him and that would be what they needed for cover for fixing the Hillary investigation and framing him…..

    Except to everyone’s shock Trump is as clean as a whistle.

    Now once again without a predicating crime they want violate his fourth amendment right to be secure in his papers and property from illegal search and seizure.

    They have illegally obtained copies of his taxes by the press and the congress want to officially seize his private documents so they can scour them in hopes of finding a crime.

    That is the exact opposite of PRESUMED INNOCENT.

    It’s your guilty and we’re going to rip every aspect of your life apart till we find something to persecute you with.

    This is road you do not want to go down.

  100. It is in the public interest that this information be revealed, as it was in the public interest that the Pentagon.Papers were revealed.

    This isn’t the end of the revelations.by a long shot.

  101. See, his supporters don’t care if he lied. In fact, they know he does. On matters big and small.

    Patrick – there is zero basis for any claim that Trump is as clean as a whistle, and the 4th Amendment does not apply here.

  102. Should Mueller be allowed to testify before the Congress?

  103. He’s one of the dirtiest businessmen in a dirty industry, who somehow convinced extremely naive people that he a reform candidate. This was his biggest con yet

  104. As to what? Grand jury proceedings?

  105. To discuss the content of the Mueller Report.

  106. The fact that Trump conned and continues to con some of his base (I’ve noted that people who know he is lying aren’t conned) is not a crime. It is not equivalent of misrepresentations regarding a war.

  107. Phantom – Mueller’s report was necessarily redacted, I’m not sure that in the absence of him finding a basis to prosecute that his testimony is warranted.

  108. Barr lied and spun before Congress.

    I would like to hear Mueller unfiltered

  109. “I don’t believe Trump’s puffer about his business success was be lived by many people, including many of those who voted for him.” I think many of those who voted for him believed he was a big success at business and he would use those skills to bring prosperity to him. I say that based on interviews with his supporters. That is anecdotal and I am not aware of any surveys on the topic. Many of them watched his reality TV show, The Apprentice, and did not know the difference between fiction and reality.

    As I said above, Americans rightly expect the President to act ethically and massive lying is not ethical. I believe good ethics is part of the Presidential oath. We are not discussing a local repair shop guy who stretches the truth, Trump is President. It is not a matter of what his base thinks, rather it is a matter of conduct of the President.

  110. PVR

    You have not answered the questions in my 3:08AM.

    “Except to everyone’s shock Trump is as clean as a whistle.” With that statement you have outdone yourself. I don’t know of anybody who thinks he is clean.

  111. To be fair, Patrick just didn’t have time to finish that sentence. He meant to write,
    .. Trump is as clean as a whistle thats just popped out of a sick dogs arse…😱😱

  112. “They have illegally obtained copies of his taxes by the press and the congress want to officially seize his private documents so they can scour them in hopes of finding a crime.”

    There are not his private documents. Donald Trump is not being compelled to turn over anything. The IRS are being compelled to turn over documents. Trump has given these documents to the federal government. He has no reasonable expectation of privacy on documents he has given over to the federal government. As such the 4th Amendment is irrelevant.

    “You are confusing partisanship with checks and balances.”

    How would you go about determining if Trump has a potential conflict of interest in dealing with foreign governments, or other individuals?

  113. President Donald Trump complains that large corporations, such as Amazon.com Inc., are shirking their tax responsibilities. Yet for at least a decade, Trump paid none or very little in federal income taxes by exploiting some of the same generous tax breaks that the online retail giant and others have used to reduce IRS bills.

    Trump’s businesses generated huge losses, and his hotel and casino properties were eligible for large depreciation write-offs that meant he paid taxes for only two years between 1985 and 1994, according to tax records obtained by the New York Times. Trump, then a real estate developer, racked up $1.17 billion worth of losses in that time, according to the documents.

    ( Bloomberg )

    Its after noontime in the world, and The Fake News Commandos haven’t made a post on the Trump Tax Revelations yet.

    And they’ve not said that any of it was false.

    What time is Sean Hannity on the radio? I believe that they’re awaiting instructions.

  114. 3-6 but Rush is on now that’s where the marching orders come from to all us mind numb robots

  115. here Phantom I’ll make a comment on it….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0zaebtU-CA

  116. Trump was the biggest loser in the USA for two years running in the 1990s. But now he says it was just for tax purposes, i.e. to dodge paying taxes.

    I sincerely hope that whoever his Dem opponent turns out to be, they will hammer the tax issue every day of the next campaign. He has given them the ammunition with his refusal to disclose his returns (obviously he has something to hide) and also with that super-stupid explanation of his losses in the 1990s.

    “President Trump has said the losses his business made in the eighties and nineties were “for tax purposes”. He was tweeting in reply to a New York Times (NYT) article claiming that from 1985-95 he made losses of over $1bn. The newspaper said that Mr Trump’s property empire from 1985 “continued to lose money every year, totalling $1.17bn in losses for the decade”.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48201786

  117. Trump inherited the fortune of a very wealthy man.

    Bezos and Bloomberg did not inherit great wealth.

    Trump net worth $3 billion
    Bloomberg net worth $55 billion
    Bezos net worth $160 billion

    All numbers are approximate, but close enough.

    Who are the best builders of businesses, the best creators of wealth?

  118. “I sincerely hope that whoever his Dem opponent turns out to be, they will hammer the tax issue every day of the next campaign.”

    That would be a terrible idea. If the campaign is about Trump then Trump wins. The campaign needs to be about the Democratic candidate, and their healthcare plan. The Democratic candidate shouldn’t even mention Trump’s name.

  119. Tax will come up in the debates for sure.

  120. It shouldn’t. And the Democratic candidate should pivot away from personal attacks on Trump. Seriously if the campaign is about Trump then Trump’s face get’s plastered all over the news. Any time the Democratic candidate mentions Trump he is giving him free advertising.

  121. I think that the average American has a deepening knowledge of the type of untrustworthy failure that Trump has always been.

    That point has been proven to all and yes does not need to be restated.

    The Dems need to nominate a highly competent moderate that can build coalitions.

  122. Ultimately elections are not won by Candidate A being better than Candidate B across the board. More often than not the public will agree with Candidate A on issue X but will agree with Candidate B on issue Y. If the election is about X then A wins. If the election is about Y then B wins.

    The main issue the public agree with the Democrats more on than the Republicans is healthcare. If the election is about healthcare the Democrats win.

  123. Yes.

    Republicans have demagogued the issue of health care, and have set back all attempts at reform and moving to covering everyone on the national level.

    The public was confused for a time on this, but no longer.

    It’s still a very hard problem to fix though.

  124. It shouldn’t.

    Eh? Why should there not be questions about something so fundamental? The Dem candidate will have nothing to fear, unless they are proposing AOC tax rates of 105% or whatever. Trump is a known tax dodger whose tax cuts have overwhelmingly favoured the millionaire class. That has to be an election issue and the Dems mustn’t be afraid of it. I know that Sanders won’t be if he is the candidate.

  125. Peter

    The point’s been made. Only the most ignorant don’t know that Trump is a liar and a thief.

    Allude to that fact but don’t overemphasize it.

    Make the case of what the Dems can do to solve our problems, how they won’t cause new problems.

  126. Its not about fearing it. Its about being off message. You stay on message you win. You get off message you lose. Any time you are talking about Trump’s tax issues, even his tax plan, is time you are not talking about your own platform.

  127. You get off message you lose. Any time you are talking about Trump’s tax issues, even his tax plan, is time you are not talking about your own platform.

    Tax is an issue. You hammer Trump for his tax cuts for millionaires and directly or indirectly draw attention to that fact that he has refused to release his own tax returns. Of course they may have been released by the time of the campaign, but he will fight it to the SCOTUS and they are part of Team Trump now.

  128. You don’t because it isn’t a vote winner. Voters actually don’t care. If you ask them about it they will probably support it or oppose it but it won’t energise them. It is a 5th or 6th rated issue. 45% said they’d had no impact from his tax cuts. Of the 23% who felt harmed by them those groups are overwhelmingly voting Democrat anyway.

    The simple fact is that you campaign on the issues that you win on. Currently the Democrats can’t campaign on the economy. Simple fact is that the opposition can’t campaign on the economy in a good economy. In the midterms 22% felt the economy was the most important issue. That group broke 35/65 in favour of the Republicans.

    41% said healthcare. That group broke 75/25 in favour of the Democrats. Immigration was next (23%). It broke 25/75 in favour of the Republicans. Gun control was next (on 10%). 70/30 Democrat.

    Any Democrat talking about tax as a campaign issue is going to lose.

  129. I won’t go that far.

    The so-called Trump tax cuts were not popular among the general public.

    A lot of folks got small cuts, but didn’t think that they got a cut at all, some got tax increases, and the big corporations got a huge tax reduction, esp the international corporations. That discontent can and should be exploited.

  130. I’m not sure the discontent is really there, largely due to the wider strength of the economy. If Trump was doing this and the economy was in difficulty, and people were feeling the pinch of the economy followed by the pinch of the taxes, then that would be a different story. But overwhelmingly the people who are energised about the tax cuts are already relatively solidly in the Democratic column. And any criticism of Trump on taxes during the campaign allows him to pivot a) to the overall strength of the economy (a winner for him) or b) the media, Democrats, Rothschilds etc… are all out to get him (also a winner with him with his base).

  131. His base can be disregarded.

    Their minds are welded shut and no action by Trump will open them again.

  132. But there are swing voters, including a number in say PA MI and OH who voted for Obama and for Trump.

    Those are the ones you can convince. Convince half of those guys to vote Dem, and you’re well on your way.

  133. The big issues with that group are immigration (which the Democrats aren’t going to win on – certainly not with them), trade (broadly similar), social conservatism (which the Democrats aren’t going to touch with a barge-pole), and, without trying to sound like a broken record, healthcare.

    Interestingly as a group they tend to be opposed to the Affordable Care Act. They support its repeal. But they support its repeal and replacement with something better.

    The key to winning them over is, in my opinion, to have a viable healthcare plan that isn’t just a rehash or support of the Affordable Care Act.

  134. Trump could have led on the issue of healthcare, in a Nixon to China way.

    He chose to try to make things much worse ( trying to repeal and not replace it with anything decent ) , in violent opposition to his own public views of not so long ago.

  135. trying to repeal Obamacare and not replace it with anything

  136. “Where are the Fast and Furious documents that made Eric Holder the only AG in history to be found in contempt?”

    There you go Patrick. That is no longer true.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48204251

  137. Even most Republican voters, when polled on the issue, do not support repealing the Affordable Care Act and replacing it with less coverage.

  138. Very true, esp in places like Kentucky and West Virginia

    McConnell warned Trump about that when Trump tried to resurrect the issue of destroying health care

  139. The oul shimmy shake.

    They’ve all got their 10,000 hours practice in evasion and trickery.

    They are big experts now.

  140. You cannot possibly win the election on a single issue. Trump won on MAGA which was a mish-mash of policies, mostly lies of course, including a wall paid for by the Spics. And “no new wars” is looking very shaky as Bolton lines up his sights on Iran and maybe Venezuela.

    To think that the Dems can win in 2020 on healthcare alone is for the birds. They will have to engage on a whole range of issues, including wars and taxes. And of course Roe v Wade, which is likely to have been revoked by 2020 in effect if not actually. That could be their ace card.

  141. Healthcare repeal and replace was a lie that was spread by the GOP and it cost them the House. John McCain’s last act was the icing on his traitorous scumbag life.

    You guy’s are talking in an echo chamber. The TRUMP economy that he created with that magic wand that Obama said he didn’t have is doing great.

  142. Healthcare repeal and replace was a lie

    It was a lie.

    You guys wanted to replace it with nothing.

    That’s a hell of a plan.

  143. “And of course Roe v Wade, which is likely to have been revoked by 2020 in effect if not actually. That could be their ace card.”

    Probably not a) because the people who are going to be animated about that are going to vote Democratic anyway, and b) Roe v Wade won’t be revoked.

    “You cannot possibly win the election on a single issue.”

    You can. I’m not saying that will be their only policy. But it must be the central driving plank of their campaign. And they sure as hell shouldn’t pivot to issues they are going to lose on.

    “Trump won on MAGA which was a mish-mash of policies, mostly lies of course, including a wall paid for by the Spics.”

    Though all largely a theme. America First. So yes a mish-mash of policies but still all of a similar theme that allowed him to stay on message.

  144. “The TRUMP economy that he created with that magic wand that Obama said he didn’t have is doing great.”

    It isn’t the Trump economy. It is the Obama economy and the Trump taking credit.

  145. Phantom you say that constantly…. you guys didn’t have anything to replace it with….

    You know why???????????????

    Because it’s not the GOVERNMENTS JOB to do ANYTHING in healthcare the FREE MARKET will do the replace.

    Obamacare hurt middleclass america once again outside your bubble. Right now I don’t see anyone in the field of democrats that can touch Trump.

    The only thing they have is hate and the promise of “free stuff”

  146. No everything that went wrong in the Obama years was NOT GW Bush’s fault and everything that goes right in the Trump years is not because Obama fixed it…….

    You people are smokin crack

  147. It is the governments primary responsibility to ensure the welfare of its population

  148. that welfare is not welfare

  149. the safety nets are necessary we are a rich and generous people but it is not their job to provide.

  150. “No everything that went wrong in the Obama years was NOT GW Bush’s fault and everything that goes right in the Trump years is not because Obama fixed it…….”

    Obama inherited a mess. He shouldn’t be held responsible for that mess because he inherited. He gets credit for fixing it.

    Trump inherited a booming economy. He shouldn’t get credit for it. He does get credit for not ballsing it up.

  151. F*** the utterly fake “ generosity “

    This is common sense I’m talking about

    If it’s possible to take care of the health of the nation, You should do it

    And we are not doing it well now

  152. it’s not possible for the government to run our healthcare phantom you’re a vet you should know that.

    The system had problems before Obamacare that could have been fixed with a few minor legal changes. Instead they just couldn’t wait to show they could be the ones to make socialism work and guess what they made it worse.

    Pass the minor fixes and let the insurance business do it’s business.

  153. Plenty of nations on the planet have state run, or state managed, universal health care. And they seem to do fine.

  154. Seamus Trump inherited a depression and brought back jobs and raising base wages.

    That is the reality that you don’t see because you don’t live here and Phantom don’t see because he lives in his bubble.

    Rightnow it’s been less than two weeks since the mueller ended the two year lie, the democrats are gearing up for the 2020 election. I’m watching a dem townhall on fox with amy klobuchar who actually I view as a sane dem. I want to see if running she has changed.

    But the democrats are looking for an issue to run on. They were just handed a major lose cause trump is honest, they can’t run on the economy all they have is free giveaways and only the inner city dems and those who don’t need them think they work in spite of decades of proof that they don’t.

  155. Seamus, on May 8th, 2019 at 11:33 PM Said:
    Plenty of nations on the planet have state run, or state managed, universal health care. And they seem to do fine.

    We can’t Seamus the VA proved it.

  156. “We can’t Seamus the VA proved it.”

    Nonsense. Just because the VA was mismanaged doesn’t mean the US can’t run a health care system.

    “Seamus Trump inherited a depression and brought back jobs and raising base wages.”

    Utter tripe. Complete nonsense. The US economy has grown every year since 2010. Unemployment has been dropping for years. The US economy was booming when Trump got his small hands on it.

  157. you are a victim of spun numbers Seamus

  158. The economic growth under obama was the worst of any president in history and at the highest cost. Also the sectors of that economy that did grow did not equate to job growth. The growth under trump has been in the jobs sector by a huge majority.

    The growth is on the worker level under Trump that’s a big difference.

  159. “you are a victim of spun numbers Seamus”

    No I’m not. The simple fact is that the US economy was in the doldrums when Obama took over. He fixed it. That isn’t spin. That isn’t selective. That is what happened. It was well under way before January 2017.

  160. “The economic growth under obama was the worst of any president in history and at the highest cost.”

    No it wasn’t. Obama averaged 2.1% GDP growth per year. For example George W Bush averaged 1.7% GDP growth per year. And Bush Snr only managed 2%.

  161. It’s only Republican base types who speak as PVR does about economic growth during the Obama era

    Business people, US and non US, CEOs , Treasurers, etc did not and do not generally speak like that. ( I speak to some of them ) Trump doesn’t count as a businessman.

    You didn’t hear things like that in the business press either.

    You only heard that stuff from the GOP operatives on AM talk radio

  162. probably not a) because the people who are going to be animated about that are going to vote Democratic anyway, and b) Roe v Wade won’t be revoked.

    No and no, yet again.

    The stats show that one in five US women have had an abortion and they cannot all be Democrat voters.

    Roe v Wade will be revoked, because Trump was elected on a promise to revoke it and he has loaded the SCOTUS to do it. They don’t have to revoke it outright of course, there are sneakier ways of doing it, but the effect would be to restrict abortion to north of the Mason-Dixon line. However, my bet is that they will just revoke it outright and Trump will campaign on that bigly.

  163. “No and no, yet again.”

    Yes, and yes, and yet again. If you keep talking crap I’m going to keep pulling you on it.

    “The stats show that one in five US women have had an abortion and they cannot all be Democrat voters.”

    Only 9% of registered Democrats felt abortion was a voting issue (ie an issue on which they would vote or change their vote on). Despite a lot of people, on both sides of the issue, giving the issue a lot of publicity, the voters tend to not really care about it.

    “Roe v Wade will be revoked, because Trump was elected on a promise to revoke it and he has loaded the SCOTUS to do it.”

    Only 1 judge on the court openly supports revoking Roe v Wade. 2 other judges on the conservative side of the court have ruled on abortion before and have upheld Roe v Wade (though allowed most restrictions to go through). The 2 judges Trump have nominated have, at least in their comments, suggested they are closer to Roberts and Alito than they are to Thomas. Even if they weren’t it would still only be 3 judges. It takes 5 to tango in this case.

    “They don’t have to revoke it outright of course, there are sneakier ways of doing it”

    Which means Roe v Wade will still be on the books which means it struggles to be a campaign issue.

  164. Obama spent more money than every other president before him combined and only increased the welfare rolls. He devalued the dollar printing it out of thin air….. he had an averarge growth rate of less than 2%. Now that may be growth on your side of the pond but people were suffering and now they are not. It’s that simple.

    smoke and mirrors and even then it still looked horrible.

  165. “Obama spent more money than every other president before him combined and only increased the welfare rolls. He devalued the dollar printing it out of thin air….. he had an averarge growth rate of less than 2%. Now that may be growth on your side of the pond but people were suffering and now they are not. It’s that simple.”

    0.1% is growth. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a moron regardless of what side of the pond they are on. So yes Obama failed to grow the economy if you change the meaning of growth.

  166. roe vs wade is bad Law but it’s the Law and it’s never going away and it shouldn’t go away.

  167. 0.1% is growth. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a moron regardless of what side of the pond they are on.

    tell that to any of the record breaking number of people who lost their homes under Obama.

  168. “tell that to any of the record breaking number of people who lost their homes under Obama.”

    I will do. You got their phone numbers?

  169. I’ll start emailing them to you

    😉

  170. Good

  171. If I was going to vote Dem I like Amy Klobuchar. She just gave a townhall and actually sounded sane. That put’s in the top of those running alone.

  172. that put’s her in the top 10 of the dems running

  173. Yes, and yes, and yet again. If you keep talking crap I’m going to keep pulling you on it.

    You are wrong about Roe v Wade and I note that you do not contradict that 20% of women in the US have had an abortion and that they can’t all be Democrats.

    Please try to be polite. I could call you a dogmatic gobshite but it wouldn’t get us very far in terms of civilised debate.

  174. She was one of the few Democratic (and Republican for that matter) Senators on the Judiciary committee who came out of the Brett Kavanaugh hearings with their reputation intact. She’s always been largely in line with the Democratic Party (so can’t be targeted with anything in the primaries) but not so to the left as to hurt her in the general.

    Her staffing issues would suggest she is a dick of the highest order though. She had the highest turnover of staff of any Senator, and it was reported in February that her office was “controlled by fear, anger, and shame”. Not exactly the candidate you want if you want to show contrast to Trump.

  175. “You are wrong about Roe v Wade and I note that you do not contradict that 20% of women in the US have had an abortion and that they can’t all be Democrats.”

    I’m not. You still have in no way shape or form highlighted why you believe that after a decade on the court that John Roberts and Samuel Alito will suddenly change their positions.

    And no I don’t disagree that 20% (probably closer to 25%) of women in the US have had an abortion and they can’t all be Democrats. However, when you factor in the fact that the largest group of women who have abortions are below the federal poverty line (49%, with a further 26% of people in the income brackets just above the poverty line), when you factor in the racial aspects of abortion (black, hispanic, and other ethnic minorities are more likely to have an abortion than white women – black women are nearly 3 times as likely) and you get a group of people who are disproportionatly going to vote Democratic either.

    Considering that the overwhelming majority of Democrats don’t consider abortion as a voting issue it is ludicrous to suggest that there is a huge group of Republican women for whom this is going to be a voting issue.

    “Please try to be polite. I could call you a dogmatic gobshite but it wouldn’t get us very far in terms of civilised debate.”

    I have the luxury of being correct. You don’t. And you were the one who threw in the sly “yet again” line so behave yourself before you call out anyone else.

  176. I’d say the number is a lot high than in the 20s I’d put it in the 30s.

    Even if rvw is overturned which it could be it’s bad law the issue defaults to the states over half will still have abortion on demand.

  177. I have the luxury of being correct.

    No, Roe v Wade is toast:

    “On 7 May, Georgia became the fourth state this year to pass a ban on abortions after six weeks, well before many women know they are pregnant. Earlier this year, Ohio, Kentucky and Mississippi also passed six-week bans, which are often misleadingly called “heartbeat bills”.

    The idea put forward by anti-abortion extremists is that six weeks represents a natural cut-off for abortion because it is the point at which doctors can first detect a foetal heartbeat – though at this stage an embryo does not yet have a heart. The beat that is detected is what doctors call foetal pole activity, and the embryo cannot survive independently of a woman’s body.”

    https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2019/05/new-anti-abortion-bill-georgia-shows-how-extremists-are-racing-overturn

  178. “Earlier this week, Texas state legislators began considering a bill that would allow a woman who has an abortion, or a medical professional who performs one, to be charged with homicide – a crime that carries the death penalty in Texas.”

    https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2019/04/texas-lawmakers-considered-bill-would-make-abortion-punishable-death

  179. Be in no doubt, Trump wants Roe v Wade overturned well before November 2020. I say bring it on:

    “The biggest problem is that Trump’s comments coincide with the rise of an extremist anti-abortion movement that has become increasingly unmoored from any rational, facts-based debate and that has escalated its rhetoric to alarming new levels. Earlier this month, Republican lawmakers in Texas proposed a bill that would have made abortion punishable by death. Like Trump’s execution comment, the message is that the quarter of American women who have abortions, the medical professionals who perform them and, by extension, the politicians and campaigners who support women’s reproductive rights, are baby-killers. And what punishment is fit for a baby-killer? ”

    https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2019/04/why-it-s-so-dangerous-when-trump-describes-abortion-baby-execution

  180. The thing is Peter abortion at least not yet, and I think not at this cycle is not “the issue”.

    Abortion is like the race card it’s thrown all the time it just isn’t the headline getter this time. No this election is a Democrat hate.

    Sorry but don’t worry the abortion issue never goes away.

  181. Patrick

    Abortion will be a major issue if Roe v Wade is repealed before the 2020 campaign starts. Which is very likely to happen.

  182. It matters bigly because it is the only legal defence which keeps abortion legal in the Confederate states. As soon as it goes they will all pass or resurrect state laws making abortion illegal. In some states it will be a capital offence.

  183. John Roberts now becomes the swing vote on the Court. Which does shift the Court firmly to the right. However he has shown a willingness to uphold previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion. He is not in favour of overturning Roe or Casey. In fact in February he voted with the 4 liberal judges to block an anti-abortion law.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/us/politics/louisiana-abortion-law-supreme-court.html

    Roberts has started to shift more to the middle (his votes matter more now that he’s in the fifth chair).

  184. John Roberts now becomes the swing vote on the Court. Which does shift the Court firmly to the right. However he has shown a willingness to uphold previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion. He is not in favour of overturning Roe or Casey. In fact in February he voted with the 4 liberal judges to block an anti-abortion law.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/us/politics/louisiana-abortion-law-supreme-court.html

    Roberts has started to shift more to the middle (his votes matter more now that he’s in the fifth chair).