I don't know if its cute or not, but its the truth. It's the same reason many presidents put their assets in a blind trust.
Holy. Crap.
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
I don't know if its cute or not, but its the truth. It's the same reason many presidents put their assets in a blind trust.
Well please tell me, which presidential candidates in the past were you concerned about having a conflict of interest?
There are a lot who did not. In fact, the supermajority of Clinton and, even more so, Obama wealth has come in their post-Presidential terms.
I am not sure your point. It is just for full disclosure purposes. Basically every major candidate in the lasts 60 years give or take has done it. So I don't get why it matters who I had concerns about, because if they release their information, then we are at least able to see if anything should be concerning.
Not all do, but it isn't necessary for all. Obama didn't, but he did release his assets and his investments wouldn't really have any potential conflicts because they were mostly treasury notes and index funds. But he did at least release his assets so we could see there weren't any potential conflicts.
That's easy to do when your net worth is only $1.3M or so.
Trump has countless assets and liabilities that are likely embargoed from public disclosure. No one talks about that. I'm not saying he couldn't release his returns partially redacted, but I also have to agree that the redaction would only make it worse too.
Heck, it's what got Hillary constantly in trouble, and I'm not talking the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Global Initiative was shut down for a reason. There was no disclosure whatsoever, and it ran amuck of various international laws.
This is why I despise the 3rd grader US media. 40 years ago, they'd 'educate' the masses on why some things in Trump's returns cannot be disclosed. Now they just look for ways to demonize him, among others.
Trump is now 'walking it back.'
- Trump Disavows ‘Send Her Back’ Chant as G.O.P. Frets Over Ugly Phrase
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/18/us/politics/ilhan-omar-donald-trump.html
Maybe this will get Omar and AOC to 'walk back' some of their comments on those supporting the Jewish faith and law enforcement? If not, then the Democratic party will continue to suffer, while the Republicans gain more ranks.
Reality TV and Social Media stars have limits to their cult-of-personality ... in all parties.
Why would his assets be "embargoed" from public disclosure? Before winning the presidency he was a private citizen, so why in the world would he need to redact stuff like its is highly classified information?
You really have a talent for deferring when being questioned. It matters because you are concerned about this president. Were you concerned about others or is this an anomaly?
I want everyone running for office, or at least when they are the party candidate, to release their financial information, so the answer is yes. The only reason it was a big deal with Trump, is because he refused to do it. Satisfied now?
3rd party agreements
Having worked at Red Hat -- who does everything in-the-open, and has 0 proprietary or hidden software -- for a full decade, 3rd party agreements and embargo were the biggest PITA to deal with.
I actually got my butt-in-a-sling more than once, the one way I could be fired by legal -- or anyone else for that matter. Sales attempted more than once, but legal always backed me -- i.e., worked well in reverse too. 
Intel's NDAs were the worst -- including the 2017+ TLB, etc... security issues that I knew about back in late 2007, since before Nehelem was released. I.e., we had Nehelem pre-release systems on Wall Street for trading a good 6 months before customers.
I just pointed people to the initial 5 (and later it grew) Linux kernel commits that added microcode and workarounds for lack of microcode. If you know how the TLB and paging works in IA-32e (aka x86-64), then you can quickly figure out how Intel doesn't 'protect' things in hardware, like AMD (and even ARM, especially late ARMv7 and ARMv8), does.
Same with Intel at Timesys and others before that.
I knew about the Atom 6 months before release. I even told them they were going to regret selling ARM to Marvell. Sure enough, they did, and finally re-licensed ARM a few years ago. It was kinda funny how I couldn't tell Intel about the superscalar, out-of-order, ARMv7 developments, while we were working with them on in-order Atom.
Talk about biting my lip!
Intel's NDAs were the worst -- including the 2017+ TLB, etc... security issues that I knew about back in late 2007, since before Nehelem was released. I.e., we had Nehelem pre-release systems on Wall Street for trading a good 6 months before customers.
I just pointed people to the initial 5 (and later it grew) Linux kernel commits that added microcode and workarounds for lack of microcode. If you know how the TLB and paging works in IA-32e (aka x86-64), then you can quickly figure out how Intel doesn't 'protect' things in hardware, like AMD (and even ARM, especially late ARMv7 and ARMv8), does.
Same with Intel at Timesys and others before that.
I knew about the Atom 6 months before release. I even told them they were going to regret selling ARM to Marvell. Sure enough, they did, and finally re-licensed ARM a few years ago. It was kinda funny how I couldn't tell Intel about the superscalar, out-of-order, ARMv7 developments, while we were working with them on in-order Atom.
Talk about biting my lip!
Trump is in the same boat. He's got a lot of things that he wouldn't mind disclosing, but cannot legally. Again, it's made worse by lack of full disclosure, let alone redacting.
Last edited:
That is a hypothetical that is impossible to answer without knowing what exactly is in the tax returns. But again, it is really just more about disclosure, so lawmakers aren't trying to pass laws just to benefit their bank accounts and things of that nature. This really isn't a difficult concept to understand.
You are talking about different things. I am just talking about his assets, not about violating NDA's or giving up company secrets.
Ok. Well, is there any possibility that something in Hillary's tax returns would have made you vote for Trump?
Obviously you haven't been a party to some contracts with related assets and liabilities that cannot be publicly disclosed.
Even if he released his returns, they're probably not going to list out the information that you're hoping will be there. Even if he released the multitude of tax returns from all of his companies, you still may not see any of that listed. This is really just an overblown talking point.
Obviously you haven't been a party to some contracts with related assets and liabilities that cannot be publicly disclosed.
We are talking about stocks and bonds and things of that nature, not contracts with a company.
Again, ownership and related assets and liabilities are intertwined. I've been a party to several that would greatly affect tax returns.
I've honestly learned more international law and fiscal requirements of so many countries as of late, all of which affect the US tax code for US citizens, than I ever thought I'd ever been exposed of in my life. The educational side benefit of being a corporate officer of a non-profit in 186 countries.
You are way over complicating this. Every president has investments and business interests, and every one since Nixon has released their tax returns but one. It is not unreasonable at all to want to know who our politicians profit off of, so we can better evaluate if their policies are for the good of America, or the good of themselves. I will just leave it at that and agree to disagree.
Because it's complicated in the case of Trump on all sorts of levels. I know if I was him, I wouldn't want it public. He's going to have to redact all sorts of things, which will likely include key amounts.
I.e., I know everyone wants to see if Trump is still showing a 'net loss.' But it's far more than just that.
It isn't about a net loss, it is about potential conflicts of interest. It is nothing more than a full disclosure type of thing. This is has been accepted in this country by both parties for close to 60 years, but now all of a sudden even less transparency by our leaders is a good thing I guess.
You’re acting like his returns will list everyone he’s done business with and how much he made from all of them. That’s not likely. You’ll also need a lot more than his personal returns.
Exactly. It's not like he is getting w2s or 1099s from his business dealings. There is literally nothing in his tax returns that will tell us who he does business with.
If liberals actually had jobs and paid taxes they’d understand this. Tax returns don’t tell you shit about how you made money, just what you have.
Why is this thread 5 pages long? What I'd their to discuss? Trump is 100% racist, you inbreds are just as racist to defend him.
You have more hate in you than 1000 Trumps or his supporters ever could for their worst enemies
You are a mentally ill caveman who needs to seek help
I just don’t understand why liberals are so hell bent on his tax returns. The only thin I can think of they don’t know how taxes and the IRS works.
