It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why doesn't Trump want to release his tax returns?

page: 7
9
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: thedigirati




and?? doyou have sex in public? of course not


Get real, asking for taxes (which every other president has done) is not like having sex in public.
Asking for our tax returns is not equal either, as we are not running for office.

My guess is that other presidents have released theirs because they want to be transparent.
Not because they were forced to or it was the law.


And everyone keeps pretending he never said he would show them, when he most definitely did.

I think they will be embarrassing to him..corporate welfare or simular..showing he has nothing in common with his fan club.
edit on 8-10-2019 by vonclod because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
perhaps you should read #5
interesting you seem to value "proving the haters wrong" more than basic rights.......or perhaps not.


Full text of the 5th Amendment:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

OK, a capital crime is one where someone is killed, so tax avoidance isn't covered by that bit. 'Infamous' possibly, that bit is veeery fuzzy and seems to refer to the 'newsiness' of a crime. Nor would double jeopardy apply to tax. Seems that the entire 5th is really about outcome of legal procedure.

Or else, the law in the US is rendered toothless. So I really don't think it defensively applies to the case of declaration of taxation.

But I suppose it could.

Which really is an indicator that there are some fairly muddy areas encompassed in the atrociously inexact use of language in many of the clauses of the US Constitution. That isn't a good thing.

edit on 8/10/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: shooterbrody

Is it in the Bill of Rights that you shouldn't release your tax returns? I think I missed that part. If not, what's your point? He's a public servant, he should be as transparent as he possibly can. What is he hiding? If nothing, why not prove his haters wrong?


There is this small fact that it is not required of any president to release their tax returns for public scrutiny. As long as he doesn't do anything illegal, and by now the IRS would absolutely know if he did, then it's none of anyone's business how he made his money.

Democrats, read this again - it's none of your business!



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Edumakated

Well if that’s your view have at it.

To me him not realising them is highly suspicious, you feel differently I guess unless they’re ever released we will never know who is right.


Do you honestly think the Dems in the House won't use his tax returns as political ammo?

What gives you any inkling they wouldn't? Let's be honest here.

Trump gains nothing from releasing his returns.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Edumakated

Well if that’s your view have at it.

To me him not realising them is highly suspicious, you feel differently I guess unless they’re ever released we will never know who is right.


We know who is right. The IRS is the final arbiter of the tax code. If he has done something wrong, then the IRS will charge him for tax evasion or force him to pay back taxes. They have done neither.



How do you know that?

The IRS would never reveal a taxpayer’s errors or if it found evidence of tax evasion to the public,

Unless criminal charges were filed.



Releasing tax returns to the public doesn't show anything other than how his income is earned and taxed over a given year. Tax returns don't show debt or wealth.


You obviously haven’t prepared many tax returns.

Although the return, itself, pages 1 and 2 of the 1040, don’t provide much in terms of income sources, it is true;

The schedules which must be completed and attached to the return provide a wealth of information regarding the sources, type, disposition, location, residual value, ownership, even future applications of both income and debt.

And not just for the current year.

Remember, all capital gains have a basis, and all NOL’s have a life.

You know what those are, right?

As I said earlier in this thread, which seems to have passed everyone’s attention,

The reason Trump still refuses to release his tax returns may very well have nothing to do with any evidence of error or wrongdoing contained in the returns themselves,

but in the discrepancies those returns may bring to light when compared to OTHER legal documents he has filed!


Discrepancies that could lead to serious legal problems he won’t be able to defend himself against.
edit on 8-10-2019 by Bhadhidar because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

He doesn't have to, it's not required. Also for the record he has been audited every year since filing bankruptcy.

If the IRS hasn't found any discrepancy in his filings, what makes any one think corrupt politicians could?

There's nothing in his tax's to see, now the tax's of those demanding to see his, are another story. Show me the democrats tax returns.

Yeah exactly....



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Why Should He ? Why Should Anyone ? It's Still a Free Country , No LAW Says you Have To Reveal Personal Information to the Public Against Your Own Free Will . Maybe I Missed Something ? Did that JUST Change > ? Ever Hear of the Term - " That's Their Business " > ?
edit on 8-10-2019 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Muninn

Well close enough. I got under a certain member's skin to the point where they felt the need to search me out on Facebook and find out my identity. My fault for putting personal info on here but still pretty creepy nonetheless.



So that is a no on the doxxing, more lies from you.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
If you have nothing to hide then why not prove the haters wrong? Oh yeah, he's "trolling the Democrats". Convenient excuse if you ask me.


This is so wrong. Guilty until you prove your innocence?

Yeah not gonna happen in my world broseph. Yours maybe.








edit on 8-10-2019 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:10 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

You have no children?

That's a deduction

Deductions mean you are not paying you fair share

I have no children and no automobile but you have both

taking more resources then I. But you get a tax break.

You tax cheat.



posted on Oct, 8 2019 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

It is exactly like having sex in public

In both instances you are screwed. 🍌🍌🍩🍩



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

They can voluntarily do whatever they wish.
The bill of right protects them from being forced.

Im still waiting for obamas college records...
Especially his admission forms...

Doubt we will ever see those..


The time for vetting Obama's college records has passed... but since you favor transparency you will no doubt favor the disclosure of Trump's tax returns.... am I right? (that's a rhetorical question in case you're wondering)


Quite the opposite actually.
I think he should release his tax returns.
Voluntarily....

He should not be forced to do so because like every other American citizen he is protected by the constitution.

As for obama you are completely wrong.
Statues of our forefathers are being eradicated and they have been dead for 200 years.
Their lives are still being scrutinized and judged so what makes Barry any different?
Him committing fraud to gain admission to college is a totally valid topic today.


Statues of Confederate generals that were commissioned during the Civil Rights movement to intimidate people of color are being torn down, not the founding fathers. It's not their lives that are being scrutinized, people are merely righting a wrong. Traitors shouldn't be glorified.

If Barack committed crimes during his tenure, then by-all-means, let's see the evidence. BTW - no one believes a word that comes from Giuliani's mouth so the Right will have to better than that. The Right isn't going to get any traction on the Obama corruption accusations because they are being made by a crazy man...

As a moderate, it's hard for me to take anyone on the far Right seriously when they speak of corruption when Trump is neck deep in it. His corruption is well known, with the AG and military paying to stay at Trump's hotels, his attorney and campaign chair in jail, promises to his aides to pardon them if they break the law, and all of the hush money payments... to name a few. The general public understands that the impeachment accusations are just the tip of the iceberg.

It's not too difficult to understand... if you're hiding something then you have something to hide... even my dog knows that.
edit on 9-10-2019 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: thedigirati

Me and her mother are separated and she claims the child per the court order..


I get no tax break..

I do a what is it?? EZ -240??

The tax form where you are only claiming income and taxes taken..


I have also given the government 20+%of my income since 16.. so I feel that should cover my usage of the roads and such.



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: thedigirati

Not if he has made the kind of money he claims and has paid the appropriate taxes..



There is no lose for trump in that case.



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

and??

doyou have sex in public?

of course not

is it because you are ashamed or feel sex is wrong?

of course not

you have no leg to stand on..

he has no NEED

because you have no RIGHT.



Errr what does sex in public have to do with this??



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut



nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself

translation issues it seems



Which really is an indicator that there are some fairly muddy areas encompassed in the atrociously inexact use of language in many of the clauses of the US Constitution.

no
not muddy at all



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut



nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself

translation issues it seems


So, in order to claim to be covered by this partial sentence, Trump would have to be guilty of a criminal action in a court.

So, to not present his full taxation dealings, on the grounds of this partial sentence, would be an admission of criminality. What a paradox!

Fortunately, the law doesn't use part sentences like this, it is based upon whole sentences. Dividing up a sentence with multiple commas and colons includes all the various stipulations, which must parsed into the meaning, before the whole sentence can be considered to be in effect.

The US Constitution has several examples like this where strange punctuation and unrelated stipulations make understanding the sense of what is intended exceptionally difficult. It is, in my opinion, poorly written.



Which really is an indicator that there are some fairly muddy areas encompassed in the atrociously inexact use of language in many of the clauses of the US Constitution.
no
not muddy at all


Yes, muddy. Sort of 'swampy' muddy, actually.

And there are clauses that contradict each other, too.



edit on 9/10/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Muninn

Let me search you out on social media without your knowledge and let's see how you feel about it, tool.



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

" Errr what does sex in public have to do with this?? "


Ah , that's Their Business ............)



posted on Oct, 9 2019 @ 11:32 PM
link   




top topics



 
9
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join