So two freaking pages from a 2005 return are leaked showing that Trump paid 11% in taxes. Big ****ing deal. (probably was leaked by one of Trump's staff as further deflection) How about the 10 years since then? He admitted during one of the debates that he paid zero taxes in 2015. And he also implied he's paid nothing for years.

But, really, how much he's paid has become secondary to where (and from whom) does he derive his income from. Can't wait to hear the FBI report later today.

Oh, and looks like the gig is up on this one. Will Trump apologize to the past President for accusing him of a crime?

GOP Intel Chair:

The depreciation rules need to be changed. Each year he gets to write off massive amounts for each building he owns (and he owns a LOT of them) simply because the buildings are a year older.

I don't get to do that on my home.

See only the rich get to benefit from it cause it's usually the wealthy people that own those types of buildings.

Pretty sure he has full equity on all those buildings though.

I've heard this floated around quite a bit but I honestly don't think that's the case tbh. Not every quasi-positive story about Trump is a conspiracy.

Nah, Obama's a grownup, he can handle dumb toddlers.

But then why only the two pages that show his income and what he paid? Kind of convenient that that's all that was leaked. And why from 11 years ago instead of something more recent?

Do you have any evidence beyond a conspiratorial mindset and bafflement over how "convenient" this is for Trump? It would have had the same effect if it was released at any other time tbh.

Yeah I'm all for higher taxes on the rich and closing loopholes, but making 100k on the 1mil is kind of ridiculous.

Totally. That 100k could be used to help people who need it, that ****'s way too high.

Explain that. Is that not 90% of 1 billion (making 100mil for 1bil)?

Just an opinion. As noted, the heat's been turned up lately again on his returns because of the possible Russian connections that may be contained within. Does seem to make for a nice deflection, no?

http://i1058.photobucket.com/albums/...ssvklbtwe.jpeg

Malik >>>

Malik is a straight up marketing G. Nobody would've known about him if he didn't act as an anti-Obama.

Trump's revised travel ban blocked nationwide just hours before it was going to go into affect.

Just saw a clip from Trump's upcoming rally tonight in totally Red Tennessee and the crowd looked to be pretty damn small compared his campaign rallies.

:tramp:

First recuse, now this?

Give an older dude a break. Also, you never let me know what you thought about that David Gilmour distortion affect pedal.

If Trump doesn't legalize DMT I'm going to organize a women's march.

Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K To End US Sanctions On Russia | The Daily Caller

Sorry if this has already been posted, and I tried to find a source like the BBC or another left leaning site. But this is super fun.

Might as well post a link from The National Enquirer. The Daily Caller is ****e news. They published that story over a week ago and not a single major news outlet has picked it up?

The Trump Dictionary

Obama wiretapped MY phones at Trump Tower.

Definition: Someone, working with some agency, may or may not have run survelience on some member of my campaign staff at some point.

http://i64.tinypic.com/15ea4h3.png

Hard to have much faith in a website with such poor copy-editing ('think' and non-possessive Clintons and Podestas). I also loved the use of the term 'super-lobbyist' what with Trump's cadre being all about 'draining the swamp'.

Skimmed the article - the links don't make the strong case the article thinks they do (for instance, the fourth link takes you to a search bar - Podesta, Sberbank, Tony Podesta return no results, I don't know what I should be searching for). And without pointing the reader to exactly what they should be understanding from those links, it's pretty clear the jargon is there to obfuscate things.

We're also forgetting some of the context here. I don't think Tony Podesta was employed by the Clinton campaign. Lobbying on behalf of Russian banks (also, Cyprus and Luxembourg, but it's not as sexy to call those out) probably immediately puts you in a moral grey area, but it's hard to see the straight line from this behavior to excusing Manafort or Flynn's interactions as implied and definite, respectively, representatives of the State.

If there is something in this article I'm not getting, please point it out. Always willing to take a look at something from another perspective.

Why is BBC left leaning? I'm curious.

It's always been that way. As Frownland pointed out a day or so ago, their reporting can be great. But in terms of editorials and general viewpoints given out on TV/Radio/other platforms, they always tend to lean left - and often quite heavily.

There was a study done: http://www.cps.org.uk/files/reports/...9cb1-303547657

But I would look more into the editorials and general punditry than what the study hints at.

Brilliant!!!!!!!!!

Looks familiar......

https://bearingdrift.com/wp-content/uploads/trump1.jpg

Irony? Double standard? Hypocrisy? Insanity?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c3ca7cbe7acc

Yet....

Trump Tower Security Costs: NYC Spending $150K Per Day To Protect Melania And Barron - Midtown Manhattan, NY Patch

The centre is the centre. The average body weight in the USA has changed. That doesn't change what a healthy body weight is.

^ Add on the cost of Trump's constant out-of-town weekends, coupled with his disdain for Camp David, and I'm sure you have the most expensive First Family ever.

(Posted a few days back, in case you missed it: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...lago-taxpayers)

The American people are -and will be for years- paying a lot of tax dollars to suit the life-style whims of a president who has vowed to cut unnecessary government spending, so "Yes" to all of Chula's questions:-


P.S. I didn't click on rostasi's link, but I suspect it should be labelled NSFA :"Not Suitable For Anyone"

Fixed. :p:

Trump and Merkel joint press conference today. When asked about the debunked wire-tapping claim, Trump made the comment, while gesturing at Merkel, "At least we have something in common", referring to Snowden hacking Germany.

This was Merkel's response:

http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/as...xlarge-169.jpg

He then goes on to say "All I did was quote a report from a very well esteemed Fox News legal analysist." So don't ask me, ask Fox.

Fox is already scrambling to distance themselves from Napolitano, who also pissed off England in the process, which Shawn Spicer had to apologize for. Trump pretty much denied the apology today too.

Dissing on Germany and England in the same week?

*shakes head*

I don't think anybody takes this administration seriously anymore.

What a bunch of whiny bitches.

*I'm talking about Trump, England, and Germany ftr. Ki and elph are whiny bitches but not at the moment.

You also wouldn't see Obama on twitter at midnight or early hours talking nonsense. But that's what we have.

What's that about?

They are a bunch of

US makes formal apology to Britain after White House accuses GCHQ of wiretapping Trump Tower

UN.

F*CKING.

BELIEVABLE.

Reports are that Spicer crossed paths with a British official today in Washington and they had a very heated exchange with Spicer 100% on the defensive.

Spicer resigns in 5... 4... 3... 2...

Just curious Chula, when does something become believable? We all kow this administration is a joke. Saying their actions are unbelievable seems like a cop out.

It's the precedent he's setting that's unbelievable. Not the news itself.

Those that voted for him wanted an "outsider". Well they sure got one. Kinda like, "Hey, you know what? Instead of having turkey again for Thanksgiving, like we've always done in the past, let's go crazy and have dog food this year."

I love that analogy. Nicely done Chula. I agree with you.