(12-07-2019 09:50 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 09:44 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  He has the excuse of being bound by law, but I doubt the media will speculate much on what they would find, unlike Trump’s tax returns.

Technically, he is bound by contract, not by black-letter law.

And further technically, he has a binding legal obligation under the NDA, assuming the validity of the NDA.

Quote:It's actually the release of Trump's tax returns that is bound by law. I'm not talking about the audit. I'm talking about the fact that, assuming Trump has competent legal and tax advice, he doesn't do any of his deals individually, but through corporations, S Corps, partnerships, and LLCs. So his personal return would be basically a bunch of one-line entries from K-1s. To see any of the actual activity, you'd have to go to the corporation, S Corp, partnership, and LLC returns. And by law, the S Corp, partnership, and LLC returns are not releasable without consent of all shareholders/partners/members.

Funny, the same principle applies to the release by Schiff of phone records of third party journalists. Schiff *might* have obtained them by a valid subpoena (might be iffy there, mind you). But the public release of that information relating to the journalists is absolutely grotesque, and may very well be outside the bounds of the law.

But the entire issue of 'proper obtainment' and 'proper public release' seems to be a concept that the entire Democratic party has taken a dump on, in a very selective manner.

Quote:But of course, you won't see much, if any, media speculation about what we might find there, because he's on their team.

I agree that the speculation would be absolutely rampant if an ® were by his name. Most notably, I remember vividly the rampant speculation when Bain Capital refused to let Romney release a list of investors based on an NDA.

And in a direct and very on point example, when a Democrat member of Bain Capital throws their hat into the ring the response from the MSM on the same issue, same people is ------ <crickets>.

I think the phrase 'Democratic operatives with a byline' is amazingly appropriate to use.