BREAKING...Maddow: we've got Trump's tax returns!

[Flash]

Very crafty of the Trump administration to let one year leak out, likely the one year Trump actually paid some taxes.

How much Federal taxes did you pay in 2005 Moon Bat? Did you pay $40 million?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Look, Maddow can do whatever dykes do. But when that dude goes on TV she is part of the press; I.e., part of the purported constitutional Check on government power becoming too concentrated.

However, when the press, or factions therein, start choosing political sides then it can no longer fulfill this duty. A biased press is a corrupt press. They disguise this corruption by labeling it "investigative journalism".

The MSM is corrupt, MSNBC is corrupt, and Maddow is corrupt. Maddow was not breaking a story. Rather, she was perpetuating a narrative and trying to undermine Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Advocacy journalism is a legitimate subset of journalism in general.

which is really just a $9.00 college term for biased journalism

 

[OldLady]

Why do we care what his tax return was like 12 years ago?
Big f-ing deal.

Strange.....6 months ago it was a big deal. Now that you know the media was blowing air up your skirt it doesn't matter.

I personally never thought it was a big deal, because Trump pretty much TOLD us he paid as little as possible--hinted he paid basically nothing--and I believe him. It was after 2005 when he took that huge loss writeoff and it is the tax returns in the last five years that interest me.
Shouldn't that audit be about finished by now?
Is the Deep State not working in the IRS? Will no one leak it when that audit is complete?

 

[basquebromance]

Rachel Maddow revealed that Trump paid more taxes in '05 than most people will pay in their entire lives.

What ground-breaking journalism.

 

[Mac1958]

Why do people keep arguing this? As a journalist who was given the information anonymously she did not break any laws. Holy shit you people need to learn the laws before starting 5 million threads and posts about this.

Yeah, what she did would hold up in court, journalistic sources, that stuff.

The bigger problem she has is the assist she gave Trump and the GOP with this stunt.
.

No doubt Trump released them himself.
The copies were marked "client copy".

That's the way it goes. If he dangled some cheese and Maddow bit, that's her own fault.

That's what happens when hardcore partisan ideology overcomes rational thought.
.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Why do people keep arguing this? As a journalist who was given the information anonymously she did not break any laws. Holy shit you people need to learn the laws before starting 5 million threads and posts about this.

Yeah, what she did would hold up in court, journalistic sources, that stuff.

The bigger problem she has is the assist she gave Trump and the GOP with this stunt.
.

No doubt Trump released them himself.
The copies were marked "client copy".

That's the way it goes. If he dangled some cheese and Maddow bit, that's her own fault.

That's what happens when hardcore partisan ideology overcomes rational thought.
.

She simply reported it. She didn't imply anything was wrong with the return.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The left...scrambling to find a new narrative...this is hilarious.

Thank you, Madcow....hahaha

 

[Mac1958]

Why do people keep arguing this? As a journalist who was given the information anonymously she did not break any laws. Holy shit you people need to learn the laws before starting 5 million threads and posts about this.

Yeah, what she did would hold up in court, journalistic sources, that stuff.

The bigger problem she has is the assist she gave Trump and the GOP with this stunt.
.

No doubt Trump released them himself.
The copies were marked "client copy".

That's the way it goes. If he dangled some cheese and Maddow bit, that's her own fault.

That's what happens when hardcore partisan ideology overcomes rational thought.
.

She simply reported it. She didn't imply anything was wrong with the return.

Slate, usually a political ally of hers, strongly disagrees: Rachel Maddow Turned a Scoop on Donald Trump’s Taxes Into a Cynical, Self-Defeating Spectacle

She blew it. It would best to admit it.
.

 

[Auld Phart]

If anyone takes the so-called president down with good solid investigation and facts, it will be Rachel Maddow. Good for her. She needs to keep digging.

Keep Digging>

 

[TNHarley]

It's fairly obvious the Trump administration leaked the the partial tax return, of one year, with Trump's blessing.

Is that why he is saying whoever leaked it broke the law? Do you think he wants to arrest himself?

 

[Rob37]

Maddow stated that they had to get Trump's tax return to make sure there were not foreign money "dumps" that would influence Trump in ways inconsistent with American interests.

How noble! Except that:

1. There is no basis for this belief; and

2. The return in question did not reveal any such thing.

By Maddow's logic we ought to take a marathon runner (a perfectly healthy person) and do open heart surgery on him because there may be some plaque buildup in his aortic arteries that may one day result in a heart attack.

No, this is NOT ok!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Doc1]

A big fat nothing burger, the left looks like fools once again. Maddow is a buffoon.

 

[martybegan]

Why do people keep arguing this? As a journalist who was given the information anonymously she did not break any laws. Holy shit you people need to learn the laws before starting 5 million threads and posts about this.

It's called Journalistic Privilege. She did not solicit the information and therefor broke no laws.

How can you sit and say it was a "nothing burger" in one breath and then ask for her to be arrested in the next... you're having a mental meltdown.

because if it truly is a crime to disseminate someone's tax information, the content of said tax return is meaningless.

And ask the people over at Gawker how far you can stretch journalistic privilege.

 

[tyroneweaver]

ah come on guys. Let's cut Maddow some slack.
She probably has aides and half her brain has been eatin away.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Why do people keep arguing this? As a journalist who was given the information anonymously she did not break any laws. Holy shit you people need to learn the laws before starting 5 million threads and posts about this.

Yeah, what she did would hold up in court, journalistic sources, that stuff.

The bigger problem she has is the assist she gave Trump and the GOP with this stunt.
.

No doubt Trump released them himself.
The copies were marked "client copy".

That's the way it goes. If he dangled some cheese and Maddow bit, that's her own fault.

That's what happens when hardcore partisan ideology overcomes rational thought.
.

She simply reported it. She didn't imply anything was wrong with the return.

Slate, usually a political ally of hers, strongly disagrees: Rachel Maddow Turned a Scoop on Donald Trump’s Taxes Into a Cynical, Self-Defeating Spectacle

She blew it. It would best to admit it.
.

I watched it. I don't need someone else's opinion to know what to think about it.

 

[Rob37]

Maddow

Look, Maddow can do whatever dykes do. But when that dude goes on TV she is part of the press; I.e., part of the purported constitutional Check on government power becoming too concentrated.

However, when the press, or factions therein, start choosing political sides then it can no longer fulfill this duty. A biased press is a corrupt press. They disguise this corruption by labeling it "investigative journalism".

The MSM is corrupt, MSNBC is corrupt, and Maddow is corrupt. Maddow was not breaking a story. Rather, she was perpetuating a narrative and trying to undermine Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Advocacy journalism is a legitimate subset of journalism in general.

Political hit jobs are not legitimate journalism.

 

[Mac1958]

Yeah, what she did would hold up in court, journalistic sources, that stuff.

The bigger problem she has is the assist she gave Trump and the GOP with this stunt.
.

No doubt Trump released them himself.
The copies were marked "client copy".

That's the way it goes. If he dangled some cheese and Maddow bit, that's her own fault.

That's what happens when hardcore partisan ideology overcomes rational thought.
.

She simply reported it. She didn't imply anything was wrong with the return.

Slate, usually a political ally of hers, strongly disagrees: Rachel Maddow Turned a Scoop on Donald Trump’s Taxes Into a Cynical, Self-Defeating Spectacle

She blew it. It would best to admit it.
.

I watched it. I don't need someone else's opinion to know what to think about it.

Okay. Run with that then.

So will the GOP, understandably.
.

 

[miketx]

The left...scrambling to find a new narrative...this is hilarious.

Thank you, Madcow....hahaha

What's even funnier are all the moonbeam dims here spinning as fast as they can. LOL!

 

[Lewdog]

Maddow stated that they had to get Trump's tax return to make sure there were not foreign money "dumps" that would influence Trump in ways inconsistent with American interests.

How noble! Except that:

1. There is no basis for this belief; and

2. The return in question did not reveal any such thing.

By Maddow's logic we ought to take a marathon runner (a perfectly healthy person) and do open heart surgery on him because there may be some plaque buildup in his aortic arteries that may one day result in a heart attack.

No, this is NOT ok!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No that isn't quite the same thing. And do you really think if someone was trying to bury Trump that had access to his returns would pick 2005 as the one to send to a reporter?

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's fairly obvious the Trump administration leaked the the partial tax return, of one year, with Trump's blessing.

Is that why he is saying whoever leaked it broke the law? Do you think he wants to arrest himself?

That's an obvious part of the con. Faking outrage. Have you forgotten that Trump is a PROFESSIONAL con artist?