Should we be more concerned with seeing the tax returns of a billionaire who became a politician?
Or the politicians who became millionaires while in office?
by 
ANSWERS: 6
-
When applying this to Trump, it is not just that he became a politician, but POTUS, with the ability to effect world trade and diplomatic policy. Having made questionable hires and firings, having family members in the Cabinet while claiming arm's length separation from his worldwide business, holding undisclosed official meetings, having worldwide contacts in his private clubs and remaining so obstinate about releasing tax returns all add to the suspicion of hiding his dealings. Every major party candidate since 1980, plus Carter in '76 has released their returns, including billionaire Ross Perot, who is highly likely to be no exception from ongoing tax audits. A century ago, Warren Harding was caught in a payola scandal of his Interior Secretary; Nixon almost 50 years ago, who famously said ".I welcome this kind of examination, because people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I am not a crook."
-
-
Archie Bunker As the President, all of his staff serve at the President of the United States. Even James Comey. He doesn't even need a reason to fire them. Having family or friends on staff is not unusal in the least. Nor is holding undisclosed official meetings. As a matter of fact, undisclosed official meetings should be expected. You can't disclose everything we're doing to the media. That would tip our hand as the media speculates on absolutely every word to come out of this President's staff. Not only do they speculate, they just plain make up shit. And with the tax returns, no one really cares. Only the democrats care. We all knew that he didn't release them when they made a stink about it during the campaign. And we elected him anyway. It's a non-starter. They just need to keep their Anti-Anything-Trump agenda in the news for as long as possible. So they'll keep this up and make sure that no one pokes into how they're making their money. -
mushroom Sure, JFK appointed Bobby as AG and setup a potential conflict of interest, which led to much public comment and a new anti-nepotism law. But nothing like the past two years' of appointments had ever been seen before. -
Archie Bunker Which appointment seems to be the problem?
-
Army Veteran I believe Ross Perot will be an exception from ongoing tax audits - he died three years ago. You sure are eager to expose non-issue talking points about Trump, but I notice that you say not a word about Biden's corruption. I wonder why that is...? Maybe it's because AB is totally correct in his assessment.
-
-
I personally don't care. I do care when he breaks laws and nothing happens. The standard of presidency is dropping badly like Caligula's rule during the Roman Empire.
-
-
Archie Bunker
Well, according to the Meuller investigation, no laws were broken by Trump. Isn't that what we were supposed to be waiting for? -
Army Veteran
Both Biden and Harris said during their campaigns, "No one - not even the President is above the law". Trump was cleared of all of the false accusations against him. It's time to see if the Biden/Harris statement holds true - or if it was nothing but a Democratic talking point to discredit the President. There's no real question about which it was since no one in the corrupt Democratic administration would even think about prosecuting a fellow Democrat for anything.
-
-
rnaybe
-
No, not at all. That whole "make the tax returns public" started with Richard Nixon. It isn't a law, or even a rule. It is just something politicians started doing after Nixon first set the trend. Nobody has to make their tax records public in the US. Congress trying to force former potus to publicize his is a waste of our time and resources, IMHO.
-
The latter. *** But to be fair: I see no problem with being concerned about the tax returns of ANYONE running for office. After they've left office, though, it doesn't really matter any more...unless they plan to run again, that is...
-
A person's tax return is supposed to be a private matter - even the President's. They're not a prerequisite for running for office. Proving that you're an American citizen, however, is. This is where Obama violated the law - he never provided a valid birth certificate to prove his legal citizenship status. There was the debate about his mother being an American, but it was never proven that she was his mother. He presented a forged birth certificate, so why not forge one with her name on it? It could have been proven very easily - Ann Stanley had a daughter. By comparing a DNA sample from Obama to hers, it would have proved him legitimate without question. But this was never done, either. His own brother provided a birth certificate out of Kenya that was ultimately "dismissed" as a fake. It's funny how his own blood brother discredits Obama's legitimacy - someone who should know him better than anyone, but everyone takes the word of forged documents instead. This is very questionable and should be investigated.
-
-
Army Veteran
Hello. I see that you're a denier. As long as you've read my posts, you have obviously seen this one: "Denial is no substitute for intelligence." Stop by anytime you like as soon as you develop some common sense.
-
Roaring 
pearllederman 
dalcocono RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC