(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Informed voters can decide how much the non-disclosure means to them...
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
are still American citizens like you and me. You have no right to see another citizen's protected privacy from legal perspective. That's incompatible with constitution. If candidates volunteer to trade his privacy with earning your vote, that's fine. This is called freedom.
(no message)
(no message)
it matter to you whether AOC properly declared her tips as a barista? I suspect the answer is also No, and therefore your concern about Trump's returns is disingenuous.
And not by you at any rate
What possible ulterior motive could there be for requiring disclosure of candidate's tax returns?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Including Jim.
(no message)
(no message)
You know she's a tax cheat. No barista declares their tips.
I suspect Jimbasil does not either.
rapier wit to the board?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
He promoted both, knowing that GOP voters were total fuckwits.
I must have missed the arrests and dozens of indictments regarding the place where Obama was born, though.
(no message)
(no message)
So, a candidate showing you his taxes is not going to show you anything about shady infusions of cash. An audit might find them, but not a bunch of reporters peering at a copy of his 1040.
This week the story that Don called his Dad before and after the Tower meeting was refuted. Funny, I didn't see your mea culpa.
Jared and Orange Jr, next.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)