(04-07-2019 02:03 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(04-07-2019 01:46 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-07-2019 01:17 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(04-07-2019 11:18 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(04-07-2019 10:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  But tax returns won't tell you that.

Fie on your "logic"!

From what I have read from tax specialists, a review of Trump's returns may or may not shed significant light on the intricacies of his various businesses. Most, though, see it an an important initial step in shedding clarity on this situation.

You either start somewhere or ignore the conflict of interest issue.

All that can be ascertained is a bottom line. There really is no substitute in any degree for balance sheets and income statements.

Tax returns (even with included entities) shed as close to zero as one can imaginably get to a picture. Even less than that on 'intricacies.

But I guess the rhetoric weighs more than the practical aspects with some. Even on this board.

'first step in shedding clarity' ----- to use a 'l33t' gamer term: double LOLZ.

So is it worth looking into Trump's businesses and the possibility of conflicts of interest (whether or not release of his tax returns are included within this review)? Are you good with his companies accepting payments both from the United States as well as foreign governments? Nothing to see here?

I have to balance that concern against the obvious hard-on that the 'get Trump no matter what it takes' segment has.

Too bad the latter is such a huge amount to have to get past at this point in time, isnt it?

I guess your side of the fence has now substituted the "exactness of inquiry" that it already had ('enough smoke') for true snipe hunts now. Truly getting to the 'In Search of Ancient Aliens' level presently.....

As for 'nothing to see here' -- I dont have a fing clue. Nor does anyone else. And that seems to be the appropriate level of trigger to set up another inquiry for y'all. Got it.

What is less than 'enough smoke for me'? Apparent answer for the present: well lets just get his tax records for ***** n giggles. Does that sound about right to you? It should, that is what you are apparently trying to defend here. Yay!