Jaxom 1974 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 7 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said: Apparently he's been asked for proof of being audited and he hasn't supplied that either. Did the IRS not say, at one point, that the audit shouldn't be a factor in releasing the returns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 18 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said: Did the IRS not say, at one point, that the audit shouldn't be a factor in releasing the returns? They sad that yes and they cannot confirm that he, or anyone else for that matter, is under audit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 20 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said: Did the IRS not say, at one point, that the audit shouldn't be a factor in releasing the returns? Many times, but Trump continues to insist that his lawyers advise him to the contrary. (Well, he would never use a phrase like 'to the contrary' but you know what I mean.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Not sure what the EPAs job will be after this... Then there is this. Wondering if it's for optics since the TPP was never even submitted to Congress for approval so nothing to withdraw from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 58 minutes ago, mormont said: Many times, but Trump continues to insist that his lawyers advise him to the contrary. (Well, he would never use a phrase like 'to the contrary' but you know what I mean.) Which is where the media did no good service by not working together, at least tangentially, during the campaign. It seems so patently obvious that there is something truly terrible in there that it's the unknown tax returns that are likely to take him down, should they ever come to light... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I do wonder about that. I don't think that there's necessarily some singular, absolute bombshell in those returns. I kind of think it's more about the fact that they might show Trump's wealth to be less than he boasts, maybe even that his business is built on a house of cards debt-wise. And I don't think there's any bombshell in his health records either, but his dodge on the health issue was as egregious as the tax returns one. The combination suggests that Trump just hates having to tell people, and particularly the media, anything about himself unless he can spin it. It could really be that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Queen Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 4 hours ago, Arakan said: When I think about it, I still cannot believe that DJT is president of the mightiest nation on earth...a country with almost 250 years of continuous democratic tradition, a country of many bright minds. And even more dumber ones, apparently. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Just now, mormont said: I kind of think it's more about the fact that they might show Trump's wealth to be less than he boasts, maybe even that his business is built on a house of cards debt-wise I think this likely is the reason. His whole persona, his "brand", so to speak, is built upon being an extremely astute and successful businessman and the Swamp Thing that can make the trains run on time. And a lot of people bought into that and believe that. His tax records would likely show otherwise. A lot of people, or at least, the one's I know, believe "the country should be run like a business". Of course that's mainly nonsense. But, that I believe was the appeal of Trump for many people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 2 hours ago, Rippounet said: There are plenty of historical comparisons. One need only look at the last Republican presidents. No, you can't. Reagan and GWB were governor's of California and Texas, respectively. Both did a good enough job to get reelected in those positions. Being governor of a large state is probably the best possible experience for being president (save perhaps vice president), and thus they were undeniably qualified when they took office. Trump has nothing like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kouran Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 15 hours ago, Einheri said: 15 hours ago, Kouran said: The Russians logistics are crap because they effectively have no MAC, they have shit all for sea lift, and there isn't any roads or rail lines in the Arctic that can't be disabled by a 4 man demo team in a few minutes. They can seize civilian ships to expand their sea lift capacity, and blowing up roads/railroads is still just a temporary delay. If the Russians want to invade Scandinavian they will win after a short fight followed by a long slow loss because they have no capacity to hold. The Wehrmacht managed to hold on to Norway for the entirety of the war despite being fairly isolated. If the Russians manage to take over parts or the entirety of Scandinavia, the EU countries would need years to rebuild their forces again if they desired to retake it, and I'm not 100% sold on the notion that they'd still be willing to resume the fighting after all that time has passed. For God's sake look at how badly they did in Chechnya. Toss in the fact they can barely supply the tiny force they have in Syria. Chechnya Part 1 was indeed a clusterfuck, but the Russians learnt from it, and it did not go so well for the Chechens in Part 2 I seem to remeber. Also, it's not exactly hard to understand why it's very difficult for them to supply their forces in Syria if we take a look at the map. Russia is primarily a land power, and it's mostly the countries bordering it who has reasons to keep their guard up. Ok you sure can seize civilian ships, about 10 minutes later when every nation on earth embargoes them I'm sure the Russians will regret it. You dont mess with merchant shipping without serious consequences. Additionally, sure roads and railroads can be rebuilt, but a large number of roads/railroads in Norway/Sweden have large sections that are elevated or against cliffs, again a decent demo team can drop a few spans or collapse a cliff face. You aren't going to drive a 40 ton tank over an improvised bridge, you're going to rail head it to near the front then use it. Even modern Russian gear has high mechanical failure rates for drive trains, final drives and transmissions so putting more hours on the clock just means you have to repair more shit. Good luck bringing all the spares along with food, fuel and ammo if you hauling shit around improvised bridges. Not to mention the rail gauge difference. Sure the Wehrmacht stayed in Norway for 4 years, they also had functioning ports and a supply line from Denmark through Oslo. The Russians have 1 year road ice free port they could use on a Scandinavian adventure. Good luck with that every attack sub on earth would be parked outside Murmansk waiting to kill anything with a Russian flag on it. In addition, there is a world of deference in keeping a semi modern army/airforce supplied instead of a WW2 army that had essentially no electronics. The crap tactic supply job the Russians are doing in Syria is on point. They have a year round warm water port that's 982 km away and they can't keep an understrength brigade supplied to combat readiness levels. That's 50 hours at sea at 10 knots with no bad weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 1 hour ago, mormont said: I do wonder about that. I don't think that there's necessarily some singular, absolute bombshell in those returns. I kind of think it's more about the fact that they might show Trump's wealth to be less than he boasts, maybe even that his business is built on a house of cards debt-wise. And I don't think there's any bombshell in his health records either, but his dodge on the health issue was as egregious as the tax returns one. The combination suggests that Trump just hates having to tell people, and particularly the media, anything about himself unless he can spin it. It could really be that simple. That's part of it but I also think it shows who he owes money too and that's a big question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, Mexal said: That's part of it but I also think it shows who he owes money too and that's a big question. Nah. His personal returns are going to attach a bunch of IRS Forms K-1 from the various investment partnerships in which he owns interests. You're going to want the IRS forms 1065 from each of those investment partnerships, some of which he may not contractually be able to disclose (I mean, if there's a third party and someone semi-competent drafted them, disclosure would be a breach of contract). I think there is all KINDS of interesting goodies on his personal tax returns, including how much of his investments are overseas, but I don't think we'd know counterparty IDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, Mexal said: That's part of it but I also think it shows who he owes money too and that's a big question. It should be the only question right now. Too many things lining up to seemingly indicate he's paying off debts...now that Rubio has caved on Tillers on, ExxonMobil will likely be drilling in Siberia before the end of the summer and then they'll all be making even more money... And isn't folks like Graham and McCain wanting the stronger sanctions on Russia andthe lifting of sanctions to be something that Congress has a say in a toothless gesture when they're willing to let someone like Rex Tillers on be SecState? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 14 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said: Nah. His personal returns are going to attach a bunch of IRS Forms K-1 from the various investment partnerships in which he owns interests. You're going to want the IRS forms 1065 from each of those investment partnerships, some of which he may not contractually be able to disclose (I mean, if there's a third party and someone semi-competent drafted them, disclosure would be a breach of contract). I think there is all KINDS of interesting goodies on his personal tax returns, including how much of his investments are overseas, but I don't think we'd know counterparty IDs. Thanks. What could he be hiding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 1 minute ago, Mexal said: Thanks. What could he be hiding? Proportion of foreign income Overall interest expense (that is interesting in and of itself)/amount of suspended losses Potential disclosures related to listed and reportable transactions (basically things that the IRS tells you that you shouldn't be doing, though reportable transactions is broader so that isn't entirely fair) The fact that at the end of the day his ETR is probably in the 10-12% range. Given time, I could come up with more, I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 On the Trump Tax issue: For me, one of the most interesting things about be figuring out the exact value of his assets and then figuring out the rates of return he was actually getting over his career. That would tell us a lot about how of an "awesome" businessman he really was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 24 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said: It should be the only question right now. Too many things lining up to seemingly indicate he's paying off debts...now that Rubio has caved on Tillers on, ExxonMobil will likely be drilling in Siberia before the end of the summer and then they'll all be making even more money... And isn't folks like Graham and McCain wanting the stronger sanctions on Russia andthe lifting of sanctions to be something that Congress has a say in a toothless gesture when they're willing to let someone like Rex Tillers on be SecState? Its probable that they spoke with Tillerson and decided (rightly or wrongly) that, much like Mattis, he is on a completely different page, different chapter, different book from Trump. He's definitely knowledgable about foreign affairs and at dealing with erratic foreign leaders; and ExxonMobil claims that they severed all ties with him on Jan. 3 to ensure compliance with conflict-of-interest laws. If he convinced the senators that he actually is separate from the company now and will not take actions to benefit them, he wouldn't be the worst pick for SoS. Its just, I don't think there's any way to be 100% certain that he is conflict-of-interest free or that he won't go right back to ExxonMobil after his public career ends; especially not after seeing how oil guys acted under the Bush administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 I see DT has sent his son-in-law to Canada, to Calgary, where the federal cabinet is meeting this week. I thought Kushner's role was going to be saving the Middle East. You know, negotiating The Peace that no one else has been able to do? Is he supposed to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada at the same time? Maybe Trump isn't as fond of his son-in-law as he claims to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: I see DT has sent his son-in-law to Canada, to Calgary, where the federal cabinet is meeting this week. I thought Kushner's role was going to be saving the Middle East. You know, negotiating The Peace that no one else has been able to do? Is he supposed to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada at the same time? Maybe Trump isn't as fond of his son-in-law as he claims to be. He's going to do everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snake Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 9 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: I see DT has sent his son-in-law to Canada, to Calgary, where the federal cabinet is meeting this week. I thought Kushner's role was going to be saving the Middle East. You know, negotiating The Peace that no one else has been able to do? Is he supposed to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada at the same time? Maybe Trump isn't as fond of his son-in-law as he claims to be. Stephen Schwarzman is also going. He heads Trump's Strategic and Policy forum. I would say they are going to lay the groundwork for new NAFTA negotiations and possibly security matters. President Trump said jobs and security are numero uno right now. ETA: Israel has approved new housing permits and are poised to take more land in the West Bank. So peace talks will not happen anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.