If Fox News could ever hope to do what Maddow does, monkeys would fly out of my butt.
No*** legal*** obligation, just like all the other candidates who have voluntarily done it anyway. Because they are willing to let the voters see that they are not lying.
Of course, Trump voters quite obviously don’t care how much he lies. Orange is not the new black.
Something that jumps out at me immediately: line 21 under ‘Other Income.’ It’s over $100M in losses. So that $150M income for the year is actually more like $50M, as stated on line 22. As mentioned above, there’s no info as to what incurred the losses, though.
I’m no CPA, but I’m betting a lot of those taxes were on real estate deals.
My thoughts too. If you had access to, and were of a mind to leak, any of Trump’s tax returns and had malice in mind why would you
a) Release this year and only this year?
b) Release these pages and only these pages?
cui bono?
Does this pig-squealing hypothetical involve Fox News releasing Trump’s tax returns, which we’ve all been clamoring for, or Hillary’s tax returns, which she has already made public?
Yes, that was a hyphen, not a negative sign.
I think it’s quite likely that this was deliberately leaked by Dolt 45 himself. Reasons:
1- I get more publicity. There is no such thing as bad publicity.
2- Hey, look at me! I’m rich!
3- I paid taxes! Neener neener neener!
4- Heh heh. While they’re fixating on my taxes, I can continue to gut the EPA and dismantle the safety net.
By not leaking the schedules, we don’t see the juicier part of the return. Just cold numbers.
Under the BobLibDem government, all tax returns of all payers would be public information. Run for office, we have your tax returns. Want to know what your dipstick brother in law makes? Download it.
But that’s different!
There’s a higher principle involved, and sometimes lesser considerations must be swept aside in pursuit of a greater good. Therefore the SDMB must respect the summum bonum - the one and shining Truth that shapes all reality, and before which all other lesser considerations, like consistency and the rule of law, must give way.
IOKIADDI.
Regards,
Shodan
No, this wasn’t the biggest deal in the world, especially since all we have is the basic two pages, and none of the supporting schedules. And it’s still not so much his tax returns we need to see, but his business assets and liabilities. Especially those liabilities: who’s he in hock to?
But the AMT thing is at least a medium-sized deal, given his strong opposition to it.
The AMT, as others have noted in this thread, took him from paying 4% on his income - being taxed like a poor person - to paying 25% - being taxed like an upper middle class person.
This shows why it’s important that we know more than we do about his financial affairs, because even this little tidbit shows that he’d personally benefit from AMT repeal, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars per year.
The problem is there’s so much more we **don’t **know about what he might do as President that would benefit him personally. We need to know what he owns, and what he owes.
What exactly would be the equivalent from Fox News? All the Democratic candidates recently have released their tax records.
If Fox News ever releases the tax returns of a candidate for President, Congress, or governor of a state, I’ll say: good for them.
If they want to release Hillary Clinton’s or Barack Obama’s or Bernie Sanders’ 2005 tax returns tomorrow, they should go for it. No complaints from me.
That’s easy: releasing Hillary’s medical records.
While I don’t think they’re equivalent (and I think she did release some medical records), I doubt liberals would be particularly upset if Fox News did that during the campaign. If CNN or MSNBC got them they’d probably publish them too. It would be news, after all, just as Trump’s tax records are.
We don’t know to what degree his income is dependent on hostile nations or a handful of wealthy individuals like Russian and Chinese investors.
I’m listening to a podcast of Maddow, nothing spectacular about this.
The other thing it revealed is that Maddow is a barking idiot. Well, not revealed as much as reinforced. And it will be interesting to see if there is any legal action taken over this. I believe that tax returns are confidential, and if so, it would be amusing to see Trump sue her and NBC for illegally revealing the return.
NBC’s legal team must have determined that they are on solid legal ground before allowing the report to air. There will be no suit and it wasn’t illegal.
A friend of mine put it very well: this was a compelling infomercial for leaking more of Trump’s tax returns to the Rachel Maddow Show (or, preferably, to David Cay Johnston).
Unfortunately for Republican authoritarians like yourself, we still live in a democracy that has strong protections for freedom of the press. While the individual who leaked these might be subject to legal prosecution, the news media won’t be.
As for Maddow, what specifically what idiotic about what she said?
FWIW David Cay Johnston has been deep-diving in Trump’s finances for years, and basically takes the position that Trump is a crook. Not the rule bending kind, but the outright criminal kind, with ties to organized crime and all kinds of other illegality. Johnston at least thinks it’s entirely possible Trump is the one who sent him the tax returns, and it’d be in line with the kind of media manipulations Trump has engaged in in the past.
Well, she’s no Sean Hannity. Right, Clot?