Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

everlast75

jooksavage wrote: »

It's usually decent. Jacob Weisberg left a few months ago which was a shame because he was a really good presenter. He's gone off doing some stuff with Malcolm Gladwell. His replacement, Yascha Mounk is finding his feet and turning out to be a pretty good host.

Some people find main presenter Virginia Heffernan a bit annoying. I think she's grand. Some of her attempts at wordplay and poetic flourishes during her monologues are a bit corny but she's a fine interviewer and a very amiable host.

The podcast isn't as single-minded about its topic as you might think. Recent episodes have covered topics like Fox News, the state of the Democratic Party and white nationalism.

100%. Jacob is missed. But the latest one is excellent.

Mueller she wrote is a good pod. Once a week is enough though. They have daily pods for patrons but the weekly one is good as they go through the stories of the week so you are up to speed. AG is the main host and is very knowledgeable as a government employee and ex-military, the other two ladies provide more comedic value (although AG is a comic too).

Talking Feds is very good (Harry Litman), All the President's men and On Topic with Renato Mariotti. Stay Tuned is excellent (Preet Bahara) and Lawfare is very good but heavy. I also listen to Maddow, O'Donnell, Nicolle Wallace and Melber on occasion. The last few I skip through on occasion. I don't need to be told Trump is an a hole. I know that already. I want to know what is happening and why so.

Quin_Dub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

What are your qualifications?

dinorebel wrote: »

Trump University at a guess.

##Mod Note##

Not Constructive..

No more of this kind of stuff please.

Thanks

relax carry on

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Reading over the last posts there is so much confusion between what you personally want and what is right from a business perspective
So many posters questioning my knowledge regards audits
I work in tax specifically tax avoidance
I know what audits are
Can even one poster here tell me they work in tax or a related field
If so I would like us to discuss the issue here
I cannot possibly respond to so many posters who are attacking my knowledge and yet They themselves offer no real alternative
Their chants are similar to lock her up or produce your birth
I am open to a poster here and me debating this issue if they are qualified to
Also the guy whose family farm was audited you do understand A farm is a just a tad small fish compared to a billion dollar audit.

While I'm no longer a Revenue Auditor, I was in the past. Not dealing with multinationals around tax avoidance schemes as that's quite a specialist area but covered IT/CT, VAT, PREM etc.

You might have missed my question earlier, so here it is again.

"Wouldn't the IRS already have his tax returns on record? How would releasing his tax returns allow the IRS to use something it already has against Trump?"

This is assuming the when everyone is asking for his tax returns to be released, they are talking about his personal tax returns not his company's. It would be highly unusual and quite frankly baffling to be in a state of perpetual audit. Like Revenue, the IRS would carry out their interventions based on risk. How can the risk exist year after year and not be addressed one way or the other is baffling.

Anyway his personal tax returns when they are released won't be the smoking gun that finally ends him, at least I don't think. You'd need to see his personal and his company's tax returns, accounts and bank statements to unravel what he has done and where the source of his income is.

Interesting article here about what might be in his personal returns.

https://www.accountingtoday.com/articles/whats-in-trumps-tax-returns-maybe-nothing-but-fools-gold

eire4

batgoat wrote: »

We have it solely on Trump's word that he's being audited, he has previously lied that he can't legally release them. So seems fair to not trust him on anything tax related.

I would tend to agree with you about not being able to believe him about being audited. Although I think it is common practice for the IRS to audit presidents during their term in office so he probably is being audited now if I am correct in that. Not 100% sure maybe someone else can confirm if that is indeed common practice.

jooksavage

everlast75 wrote: »

100%. Jacob is missed. But the latest one is excellent.

Mueller she wrote is a good pod. Once a week is enough though. They have daily pods for patrons but the weekly one is good as they go through the stories of the week so you are up to speed. AG is the main host and is very knowledgeable as a government employee and ex-military, the other two ladies provide more comedic value (although AG is a comic too).

Talking Feds is very good (Harry Litman), All the President's men and On Topic with Renato Mariotti. Stay Tuned is excellent (Preet Bahara) and Lawfare is very good but heavy. I also listen to Maddow, O'Donnell, Nicolle Wallace and Melber on occasion. The last few I skip through on occasion. I don't need to be told Trump is an a hole. I know that already. I want to know what is happening and why so.

I must have a listen to MSW again. I sort of zoned out for a while. Got a bit tired of host AG mentioning she has a PhD. Also, Jaleesa always seemed a kinda out of her depth compared to the other two, which was a bit jarring. Saying that, the way they manage to cover everything from Tom Barrack and the inauguration fund through to the Qatari Investment Authority is impressive - really gives you an idea of the jaw-dropping scope of ongoing investigations.

everlast75

jooksavage wrote: »

I must have a listen to MSW again. I sort of zoned out for a while. Got a bit tired of host AG mentioning she has a PhD. Also, Jaleesa always seemed a kinda out of her depth compared to the other two, which was a bit jarring. Saying that, the way they manage to cover everything from Tom Barrack and the inauguration fund through to the Qatari Investment Authority is impressive - really gives you an idea of the jaw-dropping scope of ongoing investigations.

Indeed - even more impressive when you take into account they are amateurs.

jooksavage

eire4 wrote: »

I would tend to agree with you about not being able to believe him about being audited. Although I think it is common practice for the IRS to audit presidents during their term in office so he probably is being audited now if I am correct in that. Not 100% sure maybe someone else can confirm if that is indeed common practice.

This is correct. Most presidents get audited during their term. https://money.cnn.com/2017/04/17/news/economy/president-audit-trump/index.html

Outlaw Pete

Seems the calculated and disingenuous distractions drummed up by the left so far during Trump's tenure have had little impact on those who gave him their vote.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1115694726815068161

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/current_events/politics/prez_track_apr10

Professor Moriarty

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Seems the calculated and disingenuous distractions drummed up by the left so far during Trump's tenure have had little impact on those who gave him their vote.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1115694726815068161

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/current_events/politics/prez_track_apr10

It's Rasmussen. It's an outlier.

jooksavage

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Seems the calculated and disingenuous distractions drummed up by the left so far during Trump's tenure have had little impact on those who gave him their vote.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1115694726815068161

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/current_events/politics/prez_track_apr10

Come on man. Rasmussen is trash. They factored in a 10% margin of error in the midterms (which is flat out insanity) and still failed to hit the mark. But fine - if Trump wants to boast about approval ratings based on flawed polls, more power to him: it'll help ensure Democrat voters turn up to vote.

jooksavage

While we're on Rasmussen - what's the point of consistently overestimating the Republican approval rating? How does it help them? I just don't get it. Surely this would hurt their campaign strategizing. Do they actually use Rasmussen polling data for anything except puffing up Trumps ego?

rossie1977

jooksavage wrote: »

Come on man. Rasmussen is trash. They factored in a 10% margin of error in the midterms (which is flat out insanity) and still failed to hit the mark. But fine - if Trump wants to boast about approval ratings based on flawed polls, more power to him: it'll help ensure Democrat voters turn up to vote.

Yeah they are really bad. I remember when they said Romney was going to win easy enough in 2012 http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_michael_barone/going_out_on_a_limb_romney_beats_obama_handily

Battleground poll out today has it 43% approval
Morning consultant 40% approval
iBD/TIPP Monday 41% approval
The Hill Saturday 46% approval
Politico last Wednesday 42%
Economist/YouGov 43%
Reuters/Ipsos 42%

TomOnBoard

jooksavage wrote: »

It's usually decent. Jacob Weisberg left a few months ago which was a shame because he was a really good presenter. He's gone off doing some stuff with Malcolm Gladwell. His replacement, Yascha Mounk is finding his feet and turning out to be a pretty good host.

Some people find main presenter Virginia Heffernan a bit annoying. I think she's grand. Some of her attempts at wordplay and poetic flourishes during her monologues are a bit corny but she's a fine interviewer and a very amiable host.

The podcast isn't as single-minded about its topic as you might think. Recent episodes have covered topics like Fox News, the state of the Democratic Party and white nationalism.

I find many of these podcasts very useful for a deeper dive into an issue/topic than you'll get in a typical printed newspaper piece without having to read a full book on a subject. That said, finding the time to keep up to date is quite a challenge. Some presenters, while presenting useful info/ commentary give me ear pain, like Virginia Heffernan, which I find very off-putting.

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Seems the calculated and disingenuous distractions drummed up by the left so far during Trump's tenure have had little impact on those who gave him their vote.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1115694726815068161

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/current_events/politics/prez_track_apr10

C'mon Pete. You're smart enough to know that Trump regularly tweets out the Rassmussen polls for the obvious reason that they are outliers that exaggerate his popularity. He even tweets other favourable mystery polls without a source.

Surely you've learned by now that Trump isn't very honest and that his statements should be taken with a pinch of salt. Or are you one of those people who still thinks Trump is just "tellin' it like it is"?

TomOnBoard

jooksavage wrote: »

While we're on Rasmussen - what's the point of consistently overestimating the Republican approval rating? How does it help them? I just don't get it. Surely this would hurt their campaign strategizing. Do they actually use Rasmussen polling data for anything except puffing up Trumps ego?

I'd say its designed to keep Trump's marginal supporters in the fold, by portraying Trump as being more of a winner than he actually is. Trump has seen ratings as being hugely important all his life and he has sold that metric to his followers. Rasmussen simply plays to that and Trump presents their 'findings' as fact to his people, keeping them happy to follow him blindly.

mcmoustache

rossie1977 wrote: »

Battleground poll out today has it 43% approval
Morning consultant 40% approval
iBD/TIPP Monday 41% approval
The Hill Saturday 46% approval
Politico last Wednesday 42%
Economist/YouGov 43%
Reuters/Ipsos 42%

Whatever about the actual approval ratings, it's remarkable that he sees such a rating as something worth bragging about.

It's like some of his followers who get incredibly impressed when he signs a document or shows up at an event or does something else that every other president did as a matter of routine. They post in here with such excitement that I'm tempted to post about how I must be the best software developer ever just because I fixed a null-pointer exception that I probably caused myself.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

Whatever about the actual approval ratings, it's remarkable that he sees such a rating as something worth bragging about

He bragged about the crowd at the inauguration.

That set the bar pretty low.

Gbear

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I find many of these podcasts very useful for a deeper dive into an issue/topic than you'll get in a typical printed newspaper piece without having to read a full book on a subject. That said, finding the time to keep up to date is quite a challenge. Some presenters, while presenting useful info/ commentary give me ear pain, like Virginia Heffernan, which I find very off-putting.

Preet Bharara's was one of the few places I heard from that understood the context of Barr's summary and wasn't tripping over themselves to parrot White House talking points, because he and his guest, Anne Milgram, on the paywalled pod Cafe Insider, which they release a snippet of every week, are trained lawyers and aren't easily hoodwinked and know how to pick through the spin.

It took a lot of other places, including the likes of Vox and the 538, a week to pull their heads out of their arses.

Midlife

So it appears that finance legislation in the states is being reinterpreted so now foreign governments can give as much as they want provided it's done through a candidate or political figure's companies.

More core US values on display from Trump!

In a time where it's been proven foreign governments are trying to influence American politics, they're actually changing the interpretation of the legislation so elected officials can take more.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

trump has a highest approval of 45 and lowest approval of 35 - thats a high low of 10 which is excellent.
the key here is the lowest approval rating is in line with obama bush junior clinton and reagan who were all reelected.
bush senior and carter have lowest approval of in the twenties and they were voted out after one term.
So trump is in good shape, now add in the compete lunatics that are the democrat hopefuls and that he seems to be made completely of teflon and and we all know he is going to win.
Like it or not it will take a miracle for trump to lose in 2020

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating

batgoat

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

trump has a highest approval of 45 and lowest approval of 35 - thats a high low of 10 which is excellent.
the key here is the lowest approval rating is in line with obama bush junior clinton and reagan who were all reelected.
bush senior and carter have lowest approval of in the twenties and they were voted out after one term.
So trump is in good shape, now add in the compete lunatics that are the democrat hopefuls and that he seems to be made completely of teflon and and we all know he is going to win.
Like it or not it will take a miracle for trump to lose in 2020

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating

You're ignoring what is the biggest historical loss in midterms since Nixon.

Christy42

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

trump has a highest approval of 45 and lowest approval of 35 - thats a high low of 10 which is excellent.
the key here is the lowest approval rating is in line with obama bush junior clinton and reagan who were all reelected.
bush senior and carter have lowest approval of in the twenties and they were voted out after one term.
So trump is in good shape, now add in the compete lunatics that are the democrat hopefuls and that he seems to be made completely of teflon and and we all know he is going to win.
Like it or not it will take a miracle for trump to lose in 2020

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating

Why do you take the lowest approval rating as the most important metric as to whether or not he will be re elected? Why not the highest approval rating?

I am also not sure why you feel such a consistent high low is something to brag about. He is consistently terrible.

While he is hardly beaten saying it would take a miracle to beat him is overstating it entirely. The core base for both parties is untouchable. Trump's certainly is, there is little point in any attempt to appeal to them for democrats. However it is all about the purple states and a few swing voters there.

mcmoustache

Just on the "Can't release tax returns while being audited" lie by Trump that gets swallowed whole and repeated by his supporters:

IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig confirmed at a House Appropriations Subcommittee on Tuesday that there is "no rule that would prohibit the release of a tax return because it's under audit," in reference to an ongoing effort by House Democrats to obtain President Trump's tax returns.

Link here.

I know that this has been debunked before but a direct quote from an IRS commissioner under oath and in front of a congressional committee should be somewhat authoritative.

NBC also reported another exchange:

Rep. Bishop: "If anybody's tax return is under audit, is there a rule that would prohibit that taxpayer from releasing it?"

IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig: "I think I've answered that question. No."

So, the "Can't release tax returns while being audited" excuse is nonsense and anyone promoting it shouldn't really be taken seriously.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Firstly is trump even being audited? Has this been debunked? No
Secondly has I have posted here many times if the audit is still ongoing why would he?

Can posters here deal with these questions honestly

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Christy42 wrote: »

Why do you take the lowest approval rating as the most important metric as to whether or not he will be re elected? Why not the highest approval rating?

I am also not sure why you feel such a consistent high low is something to brag about. He is consistently terrible.

While he is hardly beaten saying it would take a miracle to beat him is overstating it entirely. The core base for both parties is untouchable. Trump's certainly is, there is little point in any attempt to appeal to them for democrats. However it is all about the purple states and a few swing voters there.

The lowest approval is what they have in common
If you can see any other metrics which they have in common let me know

trump is portrayed as a Buffon a liar a sexual fiend a traitor and much more
That is why his high low is excellent

Brian?

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Firstly is trump even being audited? Has this been debunked? No
Secondly has I have posted here many times if the audit is still ongoing why would he?

Can posters here deal with these questions honestly

Why wouldn't he? Can you answer that? It's been asked a few times now. What material effect would it have on the audit?

Thargor

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Reading over the last posts there is so much confusion between what you personally want and what is right from a business perspective
So many posters questioning my knowledge regards audits
I work in tax specifically tax avoidance
I know what audits are
Can even one poster here tell me they work in tax or a related field
If so I would like us to discuss the issue here
I cannot possibly respond to so many posters who are attacking my knowledge and yet They themselves offer no real alternative
Their chants are similar to lock her up or produce your birth
I am open to a poster here and me debating this issue if they are qualified to
Also the guy whose family farm was audited you do understand A farm is a just a tad small fish compared to a billion dollar audit.

relax carry on wrote: »

While I'm no longer a Revenue Auditor, I was in the past. Not dealing with multinationals around tax avoidance schemes as that's quite a specialist area but covered IT/CT, VAT, PREM etc.

You might have missed my question earlier, so here it is again.

"Wouldn't the IRS already have his tax returns on record? How would releasing his tax returns allow the IRS to use something it already has against Trump?"

This is assuming the when everyone is asking for his tax returns to be released, they are talking about his personal tax returns not his company's. It would be highly unusual and quite frankly baffling to be in a state of perpetual audit. Like Revenue, the IRS would carry out their interventions based on risk. How can the risk exist year after year and not be addressed one way or the other is baffling.

Anyway his personal tax returns when they are released won't be the smoking gun that finally ends him, at least I don't think. You'd need to see his personal and his company's tax returns, accounts and bank statements to unravel what he has done and where the source of his income is.

Interesting article here about what might be in his personal returns.

https://www.accountingtoday.com/articles/whats-in-trumps-tax-returns-maybe-nothing-but-fools-gold

Did you miss this question again or something?

everlast75

https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/1115984086223478789?s=19

Any trump supporter want to step up and try defend this utter hyperbolic and dangerous nonsense?

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Thargor wrote: »

Did you miss this question again or something?

Sorry I did miss it

The irs have been accused of being political
The irs have his returns and if the audit is still ongoing then it is safe to say the irs and trumps lawyers are still in discussions if you have carried out audits for revenue on any multinationals you must admit they are complicated by the international aspect
The irs have his tax returns and if they are released before the irs and trump agree the audit is over and if there is fines penalties and interest due then the narrative is trump is a tax dodger when you must admit many businesses through error and misjudgment face the same issues

We dont How trump personally is paid. He might be an employee or a company who charges management fees. He might live off a charity
When you say release personal taxes he probably has minimum but pays payroll taxes corporation taxes and others

I have never of a Business owner audited by revenue individually it’s not possible the audit would have to include the companies

Leroy42

But the IRS have stated that there is no law to stop Trump publishing his own tax returns.

I mean, think about it? The guy has retweeted loads of stuff without checking but suddenly he cares about this?

So the real question is why any of his supporters support him in hiding stuff from them?

As was previously stated, he could easily produce his tax returns up to a certain point. It can't be right that his tax returns from 2015 are still under audit. How is he tax compliant if the IRS are still auditing him?