Why the surveillance memo matters

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Really.

Just look the other way … at the Clinton “Fund”.

Jeesh.
 
What is okay for a private citizen is not necessarily okay for a government employee.
 
Of course not. It is full of false information.
Really? Full? Can you provide a number of examples of false in ormation in the dossier, together with facts that support your contention that the information is false?
 
Last edited:
I have no idea what they are looking at. However, if he has loans with foreign banks, whether during the campaign period or now, I think that those are things that are okay to investigate, and more importantly, to bring forward into the public domain.
 
I have no idea what they are looking at.
Then why are you speculating?
However, if he has loans with foreign banks, whether during the campaign period or now, I think that those are things that are okay to investigate, and more importantly, to bring forward into the public domain.
If he has loans, the IRS knows about them.
Hence, they’ve already been investigated. If they are legal, then they are legal.
There’s a reason why tax returns are not in the public domain. They’re none of anybody’s business. Just like Obama’s transcripts were nobody’s business.
If he broke the law, the IRS is empowered to deal with it, or turn it over the DOJ.
 
Chicago is issuing an ID to foreign nationals that they will be able to use to register to vote. That is overt collusion with foreign nationals to impact elections.
This is simply not true. It’s just something that either you read on some right wing scare site, or you’re making up out of whole cloth.

The city of Chicago is issuing ID cards. That much is true. The cards do not confer voting eligibility, and cannot be used to prove eligibility. No one besides the city is required to accept these cards for anything.

My own city of New York issues them. I’ve got one. It isn’t accepted even as ID to buy liquor. It’s only accepted at City offices, the public library, some museums, and the like.

Non-citizens can already get driver’s licenses perfectly legally. My wife has one. I don’t hear anyone complaining about that (although I wouldn’t be surprised if someone did in response to my post).
 
There’s a reason why tax returns are not in the public domain. They’re none of anybody’s business. Just like Obama’s transcripts were nobody’s business.
Someone’s grades in a college course are one thing, and the sources of their income and the owners of their debt, and the size of that debt, are another thing altogether.

And Obama, like every other president and serious presidential candidate for the last few decades, did release his tax returns.
 
Someone’s grades in a college course are one thing, and the sources of their income and the owners of their debt, and the size of that debt, are another thing altogether.
And still none of our business. Clearly this issue did not resonate with the voters.
And Obama, like every other president and serious presidential candidate for the last few decades, did release his tax returns.
I never said it should be prohibited. If a candidate wants to release theirs, that’s their choice.
I’ve been voting in presidential elections since 1972, and a candidate’s tax returns has never influenced my vote. Policy does.
 
Shouldn’t we know if our government officials are beholden to other countries.

And just because something is legal doesn’t mean it is morally correct. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying, ‘Just because you can doesn’t mean you should’.
 
Shouldn’t we know if our government officials are beholden to other countries.
Did that cross your mind in the 2012 election when Obama made that open mic comment to Medvedev?
And just because something is legal doesn’t mean it is morally correct. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying, ‘Just because you can doesn’t mean you should’.
But you don’t even know if he did…
Something…
Anything…
 
And still none of our business. Clearly this issue did not resonate with the voters.
I disagree that it’s none of our business, but you’re obviously right, unfortunately, that it didn’t resonate with the voters. Or at least with enough of Republican voters to make a difference.

Of course, Trump was running a bit of a con, though, claiming that he’d love to release his returns, but he couldn’t because he was being audited (untrue), and that he was going to release them, someday, as soon as he could, right up until the last minute, and then he wasn’t going to release them.
I’ve been voting in presidential elections since 1972, and a candidate’s tax returns has never influenced my vote.
I’ve been voting in presidential elections since 1980, and it’s never influenced my vote, either. But then we never had a candidate like Donald Trump before. And a refusal to release tax returns certainly would have influenced my vote.
 
I disagree that it’s none of our business, but you’re obviously right, unfortunately, that it didn’t resonate with the voters. Or at least with enough of Republican voters to make a difference.
Oh, as unpalatable as Trump is, we are Very Fortunate it wasn’t Clinton, or worse, Sanders.
And that is the point. It isn’t tax returns, or Clinton’s pay to play collusion. It is policy that matters when the two candidates are as poor as these two.
Of course, Trump was running a bit of a con, though, claiming that he’d love to release his returns, but he couldn’t because he was being audited (untrue), and that he was going to release them, someday, as soon as he could, right up until the last minute, and then he wasn’t going to release them.
That’s true, though I’d like to hear it from his lawyer.
I’ve been voting in presidential elections since 1980, and it’s never influenced my vote, either. But then we never had a candidate like Donald Trump before. And a refusal to release tax returns certainly would have influenced my vote.
That’s why the have an election
 
Yes to your first question.

As for your other point, his son said that the Trump organization got most of their funding from Russian sources. President Trump has also been very open in the past about his desire to have a property with his name on it in Moscow. So yes, if we are to believe his son, President Trump has had some vested interest in Russian approval.

Please note I said had. Because we don’t know what, if any, recent financial dealings with Russia exist, it is hard to say with any certainty if that vested interest has disappeared. Neither you nor I have the information to say one way or the other. I am willing to admit I don’t know for sure. Are you?
 
Last edited:
Yes to your first question.
I didn’t he was president
As for your other point, his son said that the Trump organization got most of their funding from Russian sources
Source.
President Trump has also been very open in the past about his desire to have a property with his name on it in Moscow.
And?
That would possibly be very lucrative. A good investment. Capitalism is a good thing
 
Just because a person is President doesn’t mean he can’t be questioned. He isn’t Almighty God, he is just a fellow human being.




Not when you put personal interests against patriotic interests. Probably an old fashioned idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top