What is Trump hiding, what is he afraid of?

[Bill the Cat]

No it's not. And whilst there is no legal requirement for a presidential candidate to make his tax returns public, every major party nominee since 1976 has done so, which makes it suspicious that Trump won't.

It's not the bandwagon fallacy. Everyone is just doing it...

False analogy, that's an issue of day-to-day privacy.

As is a tax return. Especially as detailed as Trump's has to be.

OTOH if I was a public figure and accused of say, illegally avoiding taxes, I would welcome the opportunity to clear my name. So what's Trump hiding?

Why must someone be "hiding something" by refusing to turn over 30,000 emails tax returns? That damned double edge sword strikes again...

[JimL]

so if it is hurting him, and you don't want him to win, then you should be cheering him on for not releasing his returns. yet you are not?

I'm as confident, actually more confident, that Trump is going to lose than I was confident that Obama was going to win, so I don't care one way or the other. But I do think that releasing them will seal the deal. I also think that the employers should know whether or not the person they are hiring to conduct their business is a crook or not, particularly when there is evidence that he is a crook and a man of poor ethical character. I already believe him to be a con man and a crook, but I think you should know as well.

[Tassman]

It's not the bandwagon fallacy. Everyone is just doing it...

No, the ‘bandwagon fallacy is that everyone mindlessly conforms to everyone else for no good reason. But there’s very good reason for releasing tax returns when running for public office, which is why all candidates in recent times have done so.

As is a tax return. Especially as detailed as Trump's has to be.

No more so than Bloomberg’s or Warren Buffett's...or any of the other candidate in recent years.

Why must someone be "hiding something"

Because it would be so very easy for Trump to prove that he's NOT "hiding something".

by refusing to turn over 30,000 emails tax returns? That damned double edge sword strikes again.

Sigh!

Just accept the umpire’s decisions rather then endlessly whining “we wuz robbed”. It’s pathetic. FBI director James Comey said that Hillary’s actions re the emails were careless but not criminal. Just as the longest and costliest witch hunt in congressional history, i.e. the Benghazi Investigation, found no evidence of culpability or wrongdoing. So stop pretending otherwise.

[Sparko]

I'm as confident, actually more confident, that Trump is going to lose than I was confident that Obama was going to win, so I don't care one way or the other.

Right. that is why you have been harping on this tax thing for months now. Because you don't care one way or another.

[Cow Poke]

I'm as confident, actually more confident, that Trump is going to lose....

Well, that's possible, because Trump keeps stepping on his own message, and he's not offering NEARLY as much FREE STUFF as The PantSuited One.

[Sparko]

instead of giving free stuff to these young lazy hippies, we should force them into laboring to pay for our retirements. After all, we worked hard for most of our lives and social security pays nearly nothing. If anyone should get "free" stuff it should be those that have retired after 40+ years of working, not the lazy jerks who can't even get through college.

Put em on a chain gang!!! Make em work for a living... Our living! Triple or quadruple social security payouts, funded by their sweat. That's what I want to see.

[Bill the Cat]

No, the ‘bandwagon fallacy is that everyone mindlessly conforms to everyone else for no good reason. But there’s very good reason for releasing tax returns when running for public office, which is why all candidates in recent times have done so.

And not choosing to do so should have no bearing on anything.

Source: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/bandwagn.html

The Bandwagon Fallacy is committed whenever one argues for an idea based upon an irrelevant appeal to its popularity.

© Copyright Original Source

Just because "everyone else has done it" does not make it right for Trump to jump on the bandwagon. Your "desire to know" is also insufficient to make him releasing them right.

No more so than Bloomberg’s or Warren Buffett's...or any of the other candidate in recent years.

And they CHOSE to reveal their returns. They elected to relinquish their privacy. Trump has not, and I don't see how you can honestly fault him for that. Is this a free country or not?

Because it would be so very easy for Trump to prove that he's NOT "hiding something".

He has nothing to prove to the public. If the IRS is fine with them after the audit is complete, then we should be as well.

Sigh!

You know she got away with it. It was criminal, and the director of the FBI let her go. And she continues to lie about it:

Source: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/01/hillary-clinton/hillary-clintons-wrong-claim-fbi-director-comey-ca/

Says, regarding the presence of classified information in her email, FBI Director James "Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I've said is consistent with what I have told the American people."

— Hillary Clinton on Sunday, July 31st, 2016 in an interview on "Fox News Sunday"

pantsonfire.gif

© Copyright Original Source

Just accept the umpire’s decisions rather then endlessly whining “we wuz robbed”. It’s pathetic.

No. What is pathetic is that a man sworn to uphold the Constitution and fulfill his duty impartially let something so major just slide by with absolutely no consequences. Not even a revoked security clearance. And he was blatantly exposed by the Republicans in Congress as making excuses for her incompetence. She blatantly lied about the entire thing. And he let her go.

FBI director James Comey said that Hillary’s actions re the emails were careless but not criminal.

And that is a lie, for which Comey should be fired. The law specifically says careless mishandling of classified data is a criminal offense. He let her off with the pathetic and utterly false excuse that she "didn't mean to". You simply can not deny that and claim to be impartial.

Just as the longest and costliest witch hunt in congressional history, i.e. the Benghazi Investigation, found no evidence of culpability or wrongdoing.

Since American lives were lost, I think it was a justifiable investigation. Plus, the investigation and subsequent report was intended to analyze the entire debacle so the risk of a future disaster is reduced.

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-benghazi-hillary-clinton-obama-rhodes-edit-0629-jm-20160628-story.html

The Benghazi report offers evidence of Clinton's lapses, but not a lot of pathbreaking information. That's good in a way. We never thought there would be some smoking gun proving that four brave Americans might have been saved. Instead, we looked for evidence that Clinton managed a terrible ordeal and its fallout with exemplary skill and integrity. Unfortunately, we didn't find that either.

© Copyright Original Source

So stop pretending otherwise.

Oh, I didn't think Hillary or Obama were culpable, just incompetent. The report shows that in spades.

[JimL]

Well, that's possible, because Trump keeps stepping on his own message, and he's not offering NEARLY as much FREE STUFF as The PantSuited One.

I thought you weren't supporting Trump CP?

[JimL]

Right. that is why you have been harping on this tax thing for months now. Because you don't care one way or another.

Do you always read only what you want to read. I believe that releasing his taxes would seal the deal, because then, even those that don't care or want to know if he is a crook would be forced to face the facts.

[demi-conservative]

Meanwhile still waiting for Hillary to release Big Bank speech transcripts!!!

I believe that releasing her transcripts would seal the deal, because then, even those that don't care or want to know if she is a complete sellout would be forced to face the facts.

Fixed!!!

[Tassman]

And not choosing to do so should have no bearing on anything.

Just because "everyone else has done it" does not make it right for Trump to jump on the bandwagon. Your "desire to know" is also insufficient to make him releasing them right.

The desire for the public to know that Trump isn’t a crook or a liar, as many think him to be, is more than sufficient reason for him to release his tax returns.

And they CHOSE to reveal their returns. They elected to relinquish their privacy. Trump has not, and I don't see how you can honestly fault him for that. Is this a free country or not?

See above.

He has nothing to prove to the public. If the IRS is fine with them after the audit is complete, then we should be as well.

The IRS merely confirms legality, not ethics. Trump needs to prove to the public that he’s not the opportunistic, dishonest, narcissistic, loud-mouthed bully he comes across as. Releasing his tax returns would at least open up his business dealings to scrutiny.

You know she got away with it. It was criminal, and the director of the FBI let her go. And she continues to lie about it:

I know no such thing. The director of the FBI is a reputable figure with impeccable conservative credentials. There is no reason not to take his word that there is no good reason to indict Mrs. Clinton.

Says, regarding the presence of classified information in her email, FBI Director James "Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I've said is consistent with what I have told the American people."

— Hillary Clinton on Sunday, July 31st, 2016 in an interview on "Fox News Sunday"

A minor misrepresentation compared with the list of Trump whoppers.

No. What is pathetic is that a man sworn to uphold the Constitution and fulfill his duty impartially let something so major just slide by with absolutely no consequences. Not even a revoked security clearance. And he was blatantly exposed by the Republicans in Congress as making excuses for her incompetence. She blatantly lied about the entire thing. And he let her go.

See above. There is no reason to think he would be biased in Clinton's favour.

And that is a lie, for which Comey should be fired. The law specifically says careless mishandling of classified data is a criminal offense. He let her off with the pathetic and utterly false excuse that she "didn't mean to". You simply can not deny that and claim to be impartial.

What's pathetic is your refusal to abide by the umpire's verdict.

Since American lives were lost, I think it was a justifiable investigation. Plus, the investigation and subsequent report was intended to analyze the entire debacle so the risk of a future disaster is reduced.

It was an unashamed witch-hunt that uncovered nothing, despite the millions of tax dollars thrown at it in a blatantly partisan attempt to discredit Hillary’s name.

Oh, I didn't think Hillary or Obama were culpable, just incompetent. The report shows that in spades.

And yet you wanted to get Hillary indicted, even though she wasn’t culpable. Come now! As for Obama, history will judge him as one of the great presidents

[Cow Poke]

I thought you weren't supporting Trump CP?

Wow, you got something right! STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!

[Bill the Cat]

The desire for the public to know that Trump isn’t a crook or a liar, as many think him to be, is more than sufficient reason for him to release his tax returns.

In your eyes. It makes no difference to me whatsoever how much or little ANY of them make. If the IRS is ok with the legality of their dealings, then I don't need to see it. That's the difference between us. You assume Trump is dishonest and then use that assumption to malign him because he hasn't followed a courtesy. Like it was said earlier, if Trump released his returns, and there WAS something that could be spun as an ethical problem, your side will run with it like it was the Olympic torch. If there wasn't anything, you still would think he was dishonest. There is absolutely nothing to gain for Trump by releasing his returns.

See above.

If he releases them and there is nothing bad in them, will you then consider him trustworthy?

The IRS merely confirms legality, not ethics.

That's all that matters in the end.

Trump needs to prove to the public that he’s not the opportunistic, dishonest, narcissistic, loud-mouthed bully he comes across as.

He's a businessman. Of course he is opportunistic. And I'd challenge you to find one single politician who isn't narcissistic. Hillary's narcissism is just different from Trump's.

Releasing his tax returns would at least open up his business dealings to scrutiny.

Which is none of your business. If his dealings were legal, then that's all the scrutiny you need to worry about. It's not like he can ever convince you to vote for him anyway...

I know no such thing.

Then you are an ignorant fool. I do this for a living, and what she did was criminal. I've cited the law more than once on the subject.

The director of the FBI is a reputable figure with impeccable conservative credentials.

And he made an error in judgment. Her actions were criminal, and he laid out why. He just chose to not recommend charging her with them. Doesn't mean she didn't do it, it just means the FBI director said he didn't care.

There is no reason not to take his word that there is no good reason to indict Mrs. Clinton.

That's not the point. The point is that she DID break the law. The excuse of not indicting her for those broken laws is irrelevant to the fact of the matter. She broke the law and he let her off.

A minor misrepresentation compared with the list of Trump whoppers.

MINOR MISREPRESENTATION???? It was a blatant lie, and even in her "clarification", she STILL swears she did not send ANY classified emails, which Dir. Comey directly stated she did. She is either a blatant liar or completely delusional. She got caught sending emails with a classified header and still says she didn't.

See above. There is no reason to think he would be biased in Clinton's favour.

Job security. The well-documented 2 tiered justice system. There are reasons.

What's pathetic is your refusal to abide by the umpire's verdict.

No, what's pathetic is that your candidate still continues to blatantly lie through her teeth, even after directly contradictory testimony by the one you called "a reputable figure with impeccable conservative credentials".

So, c'mon Tassy. Did she send classified emails that were marked classified on her private server, and did she say she never did?

It was an unashamed witch-hunt that uncovered nothing, despite the millions of tax dollars thrown at it in a blatantly partisan attempt to discredit Hillary’s name.

It uncovered plenty. It showed yet another shining example of the thorough incompetence of Obama and Hillary.

And yet you wanted to get Hillary indicted, even though she wasn’t culpable.

I never said she was directly culpable for Benghazi. She was fully culpable for her email scandal.

Come now! As for Obama, history will judge him as one of the great presidents

Get the heck outa here, Tassy... you are a funny, FUNNY guy! Seriously, you are the next Lenny Bruce!!

[Sparko]

Do you always read only what you want to read. I believe that releasing his taxes would seal the deal, because then, even those that don't care or want to know if he is a crook would be forced to face the facts.

so let's assume you are correct and he is a crook and releasing his taxes would prove it. Why would he release his taxes then?

If he is not a crook, he has no reason to release his taxes, because his enemies will find SOMETHING to pick at. If he is a crook, he would be admitting it. No reason to release his taxes. It is a lose/lose situation. No upside.

[The Thinker]

Warren Buffett challenges Trump to show his tax returns.


"You will learn a lot more about Donald Trump if he produces his income tax returns, Mr. Buffett said. At one point he said, he said it several times that he can't release it because he is under audit. I've got news for him: I'm under audit, too, and I'd be delighted to meet him any place anytime between now and election and I'll bring my tax return, he can bring his tax return. Nobody is going to arrest us. There are no rules against showing your tax returns, and just let people ask us questions about the items that are on there."

Mr. Buffett went on to state the obvious:

"You're only afraid if you have something to be afraid about."

So, does anyone think that there is a legitimate reason for a presidential candidate to refuse to release his tax returns to the public. Would you vote for him anyway, even if he refuses to do so?

Remember, Donald Trump could shoot somebody on 5th avenue and he wouldn't lose any support.