Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Ouze wrote: The last 3 or 4 pages have really encapsulated what is wrong with the OT, to be honest.
Spoiler:
I learned how to do something new in Sony Vegas, at least.
This is not meant to be hostile-You're not required to read nor post in the OT. Mayhaps you should take a break along with me and politely argue about the efficacy of using marine codexes for chaos.
More than 70 Republicans have signed a letter to the party's National Committee head urging him to stop helping Donald Trump's campaign. They said Mr Trump's "divisiveness" and "incompetence" risked drowning the party in November's election. The letter said that the party should instead focus on protecting vulnerable candidates in elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives. Former members of Congress are among the signatories of the letter. The enigma that is Donald Trump Fear and anger in Trump-land "We believe that Donald Trump's divisiveness, recklessness, incompetence, and record-breaking unpopularity risk turning this election into a Democratic landslide," said a draft of the letter obtained by Politico.
Options for anti-Trump Republicans Hope he quits: Mr Trump leaving on his own accord would be the cleanest way to replace him on the ballot, but he is unlikely to do this. Find another candidate to rally round: Without Mr Trump leaving the race, a replacement is impossible under party rules. Some are considering endorsing Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, but this would split the Republican vote. Force him out, using an obscure rule: Some are thinking of declaring Mr Trump "not of sound mind", under a Republican National Committee manoeuvre that has not been used before. But this means calling a man chosen by more than 10 million party members insane - a bold move. Sit and wait: Some disaffected Republicans think their best option is to just denounce Mr Trump and hope for better luck next time. Put your head down and hope he wins: Others hope that he moderates his rhetoric, so that once he is elected mainstream Republicans can right the ship. However Mr Trump may have done lasting damage to the brand to stop the party's slide. Can Republicans really dump Trump? "Only the immediate shift of all available RNC (Republican National Committee) resources to vulnerable Senate and House races will prevent the GOP (Republican Party) from drowning with a Trump-emblazoned anchor around its neck." The letter added: "This should not be a difficult decision, as Donald Trump's chances of being elected president are evaporating by the day." Reacting to the move, Mr Trump said he was not concerned that the party could cut him off. "All I have to do is stop funding the Republican Party," the billionaire said. Time Magazine on Thursday reported that RNC Chairman Reince Priebus had threatened to withdraw funding from the Trump campaign, and instead direct it to Congressional campaigns. Mr Trump denies that this conversation ever took place. The Republican presidential nominee has endured 10 days of negative headlines after a string of controversial comments. In recent weeks, several leading Republicans have deserted Mr Trump over his outspoken attacks. Polls suggest support for the embattled candidate has been falling in key battleground states in recent weeks.
you sure can pick'em America.
To borrow a Obama phrase: "Let me be clear" America didn't pick Trump. A small subset of people picked Trump (there are argument s about how many belong to the Republican Party). Don't blame the rest of us for this mess.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/08/12 11:33:28
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
AS has the Democratic Party. If the Republicans weren't running Mr. Pants on His Head, it would be nonstop stories about Chicago style corruption right now between the Clintons, the Clinton Initiative, and the Clinton Foundation.
Even CNN is reporting on it between the daily Trump cray cray coverage.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Man, the false equivalency makes one's head spin. Repubs did a bad thing, but so do Dems so let's ignore it.
Clinton is probably one of the more boring candidates and is comparable to George Bush (the original). Intellectual, not terribly personable, and has low level scandals. Pretty average politico. It's just that Republicans have gone full blown reactionary and try to use whatever they can to justify their extremist positions. Those that actually make a semblance of trying to get things done are derided as RINOs, etc. If they had someone with the Charisma and broad appeal of Bill Clinton in '92, I think they would probably take the presidency. Their last successful presidential candidate ran as a uniter, after all. But, they have chosen someone who seems intent as coming of as a lunatic, so the boring moderate will win and trying to blow molehills up as mountains will just underscore the Republican disassociation with reality.
If the Republicans could step away from their donor class a bit and embrace a bit more egalitarian policy, they would likely do better. But so long as they are run by their radical, anti-intellectual, nativist, exclusionary elements and support economic policies tailored for the top, it is not hard to see why they will struggle nationally.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/12 13:01:23
Frazzled wrote: AS has the Democratic Party. If the Republicans weren't running Mr. Pants on His Head, it would be nonstop stories about Chicago style corruption right now between the Clintons, the Clinton Initiative, and the Clinton Foundation.
Even CNN is reporting on it between the daily Trump cray cray coverage.
The Democrats have been going crazy? That's some world class projection there.
As I said before, the problem here is that the the right wing in America seem to have lost any frame of reference for normality, falling further and further into a right wing media bubble. Look at their reaction to Obama. They're convinced a Muslim Kenyan who founded ISIS was elected by the left, therefore *anything* they do is perfectly OK in trying to defeat the left wing. Even the the ones who don't believe the most outrageous stuff are affected, as the Overton window is pulled far enough over to make extreme seem normal. They'll go "ok, I'm not one of the crazy ones, he was probably born in America, and didn't actually found ISIS, but he still acts like a dictator who has crushed the economy and wants to ban all guns", ignoring that these ideas are still goddamn nuts and only seem sane because of the crazy idiot yelling nagger next to him.
And it's not just the base, look at the candidates they elect, and the madness that has been the last three republican primaries. If you look at the way both parties have navigated their various primaries, and you see no difference in how debate, policy and reality is treated by each party... well, then you're simply an example of someone who has lost their frame of reference.
More than 70 Republicans have signed a letter to the party's National Committee head urging him to stop helping Donald Trump's campaign.
They said Mr Trump's "divisiveness" and "incompetence" risked drowning the party in November's election.
The letter said that the party should instead focus on protecting vulnerable candidates in elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Former members of Congress are among the signatories of the letter.
The enigma that is Donald Trump
Fear and anger in Trump-land
"We believe that Donald Trump's divisiveness, recklessness, incompetence, and record-breaking unpopularity risk turning this election into a Democratic landslide," said a draft of the letter obtained by Politico.
Options for anti-Trump Republicans
Hope he quits: Mr Trump leaving on his own accord would be the cleanest way to replace him on the ballot, but he is unlikely to do this.
Find another candidate to rally round: Without Mr Trump leaving the race, a replacement is impossible under party rules. Some are considering endorsing Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, but this would split the Republican vote.
Force him out, using an obscure rule: Some are thinking of declaring Mr Trump "not of sound mind", under a Republican National Committee manoeuvre that has not been used before. But this means calling a man chosen by more than 10 million party members insane - a bold move.
Sit and wait: Some disaffected Republicans think their best option is to just denounce Mr Trump and hope for better luck next time.
Put your head down and hope he wins: Others hope that he moderates his rhetoric, so that once he is elected mainstream Republicans can right the ship. However Mr Trump may have done lasting damage to the brand to stop the party's slide.
Can Republicans really dump Trump?
"Only the immediate shift of all available RNC (Republican National Committee) resources to vulnerable Senate and House races will prevent the GOP (Republican Party) from drowning with a Trump-emblazoned anchor around its neck."
The letter added: "This should not be a difficult decision, as Donald Trump's chances of being elected president are evaporating by the day."
Reacting to the move, Mr Trump said he was not concerned that the party could cut him off.
"All I have to do is stop funding the Republican Party," the billionaire said.
Time Magazine on Thursday reported that RNC Chairman Reince Priebus had threatened to withdraw funding from the Trump campaign, and instead direct it to Congressional campaigns.
Mr Trump denies that this conversation ever took place.
The Republican presidential nominee has endured 10 days of negative headlines after a string of controversial comments.
In recent weeks, several leading Republicans have deserted Mr Trump over his outspoken attacks.
Polls suggest support for the embattled candidate has been falling in key battleground states in recent weeks.
Hillary Clinton's recent surge in the polls is being fueled in part by a demographic that President Obama lost handily four years ago — white, college-educated voters.
"In over a half-century, no Democratic presidential candidate has carried white voters with a college degree," said Michelle Diggles, a senior political analyst with the center-left think tank Third Way, who described the split between the white working class and whites with a college degree as "the most underreported story of this year."
GOP nominee Donald Trump is hoping that white working-class voters can fuel his own victory. But his climb becomes doubly harder as he is far behind Clinton in the demographic bloc that is usually reliably Republican.
Trump is even starting to lose the base in an attempt to appeal to as likely voting groups. If there is one thing Karl Rove taught me it is that you MUST MOBILIZE THE BASE.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote: AS has the Democratic Party. If the Republicans weren't running Mr. Pants on His Head, it would be nonstop stories about Chicago style corruption right now between the Clintons, the Clinton Initiative, and the Clinton Foundation.
Even CNN is reporting on it between the daily Trump cray cray coverage.
The Democrats have been going crazy? That's some world class projection there.
As I said before, the problem here is that the the right wing in America seem to have lost any frame of reference for normality, falling further and further into a right wing media bubble. Look at their reaction to Obama. They're convinced a Muslim Kenyan who founded ISIS was elected by the left, therefore *anything* they do is perfectly OK in trying to defeat the left wing. Even the the ones who don't believe the most outrageous stuff are affected, as the Overton window is pulled far enough over to make extreme seem normal. They'll go "ok, I'm not one of the crazy ones, he was probably born in America, and didn't actually found ISIS, but he still acts like a dictator who has crushed the economy and wants to ban all guns", ignoring that these ideas are still goddamn nuts and only seem sane because of the crazy idiot yelling nagger next to him.
And it's not just the base, look at the candidates they elect, and the madness that has been the last three republican primaries. If you look at the way both parties have navigated their various primaries, and you see no difference in how debate, policy and reality is treated by each party... well, then you're simply an example of someone who has lost their frame of reference.
Same could be said of the elected Democrats. The partisanship divide between the tow parties is drifting further apart.
Obama, has actually been held in checked (for the most part), so the results of his "wishes" have been left-of-center. Left unchecked, he'd be almost in Bernie Sander land.
For what it's worth, Hillary Clinton would drag her party more towards the center once elected, if the GOP retains control of at least one of the houses in Congress.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: AS has the Democratic Party. If the Republicans weren't running Mr. Pants on His Head, it would be nonstop stories about Chicago style corruption right now between the Clintons, the Clinton Initiative, and the Clinton Foundation.
Waste of time Fraz... folks don't want to waste time and money investigating/prosecuting someone who's obviously immune and can't ever be wrong.
Even CNN is reporting on it between the daily Trump cray cray coverage.
What sane person is "okay" sending US CITIZEN to Guantanimo for a military tribunal.
Plus, he recently triple downed his claim that Obama CREATED ISIS. For the record... ISIS was spawned from AQI (by the Zaraqari dude??)... then, sometime later they were kicked out/spinned out of AQI for being too cray-cray for AQI.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/12 13:40:22
Indeed, they forget that an avowed Socialist (with capital S) and nonmember of the Democratic Party almost won the nomination.
For what it's worth, Hillary Clinton would drag her party more towards the center once elected, if the GOP retains control of at least one of the houses in Congress.
Yes, she might even be called and old style Southern Democrat, if it weren't for her Second Amendment stance. Other than that I am just leery of her interventionist bent.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/12 13:56:09
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
jmurph wrote: What is her "second amendment stance"? She seems to advocate greater regulation, but has never advocated abolishing the 2nd.
On interventionism, she is clearly hawkish which, ironically, puts her in line with a lot of Republicans and is not so popular with the liberal wing.
She is lining up to be more to the right than Obama, who was pretty centrist/ hawkish.
But isn't every President's second amendment stance the same?
After all, they do take a vow to protect the constitution, and it could be easy for Clinton to deflect the issue by vowing to keep her vow
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've said it before, I'll say it now, and I'll probably say it again before November
Your average voter, who only cares about politics once every 4 years, is going to weight up the candidates.
Yeah, Clinton is low level corruption, and you might get another Iran-Contra when she's in office, but most Americans can live with that...
With Trump, the bat gak goes up to 11, the USA becomes a laughing stock at best, and mistrusted and ignored at worst...
For that reason, despite Clinton's problems, I think most people will adopt a better the devil you know approach...
but then again, that's what they believed before the EU referendum...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/12 14:13:55
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
jmurph wrote: What is her "second amendment stance"? She seems to advocate greater regulation, but has never advocated abolishing the 2nd.
You don't need to abolish it to eviscerate it. She was an advocate for the Clinton bans previously, and has stated her support for implementing Australia's defacto bans and confiscation, as is occurring in California NOW.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
To be honest, the same type of piecemeal roadblock legislation that red states have tried on Abortion, would probably work just as well as a strategy against the 2nd amendment
"We're going to do do all we can to make it as hard as possible to exercise that right, but not actually take it away, only just"
I'm actually kindof shocked how much support the gop has with well educated white voters, the GOP has been a party of ignorance for a while
Now I have nothing against people owning guns, but having a private arsenal, or the kind of guns that are able to be bought are a bit much.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/12 14:43:16
So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
d-usa wrote: So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
Business as usual?
You say potato, I say potatoe. You say business, I say dementia.
d-usa wrote: So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
Business as usual?
Sounds about right.
He can't ever walk back... no... it just work like that in Trump land.
d-usa wrote: So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
Business as usual?
Sounds about right.
He can't ever walk back... no... it just work like that in Trump land.
An oligarch wannabe, surrounded by income-dependent family and sycophants, who has lost the ability to maintain any sense of objectivity or grasp on reality. It's an orange boy in the bubble situation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/12 15:35:05
d-usa wrote: So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
Business as usual?
Sounds about right.
He can't ever walk back... no... it just work like that in Trump land.
An oligarch wannabe, surrounded by income-dependent family and sycophants, who has lost the ability to maintain any sense of objectivity or grasp on reality. It's an orange boy in the bubble situation.
d-usa wrote: So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
Business as usual?
Sounds about right.
He can't ever walk back... no... it just work like that in Trump land.
An oligarch wannabe, surrounded by income-dependent family and sycophants, who has lost the ability to maintain any sense of objectivity or grasp on reality. It's an orange boy in the bubble situation.
Yes-men and constant positive feedback from the chunk of working-class white voters he actually has managed to mobilise. Trump is not trying to lose. He just has no idea how to win outside the group of people who like his rather loony demagoguery.
Tweets from his official twitter account come from two devices, on iPhone and on Android. The angry, crazy "Obama is ISIS!" stuff from the Android, the more reasonable "Go Team USA!" stuff from the iPhone.
Trump has an Android phone. So, the guy says it like it is. And how it is, is bigoted, rude, and fearful.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
d-usa wrote: So on Day 1 Trump said Obama is the founder of ISIS, on Day 2 he doubled down on it and stopped anyone from trying to correct him, and today on Day 3 he says it was all just sarcasm and nobody understands him.
Business as usual?
You say potato, I say potatoe. You say business, I say dementia.
Wolf Blitzer confronted a Donald Trump-supporting Republican member of Congress tonight whose defense of Trump was to say he’s not very articulate.
“You’re treating Donald Trump’s words,” Duncan Hunter said, “like he is the most articulate person who’s ever graced our ears with his words, and that’s not true. He is not a politician. He is not a person like you who’s very articulate, very well-spoken. He’s a businessperson who’s running for president.”
“Let’s say he was an English professor with a PhD in grammar, then I think we could go through it this way and dissect what he said literally based off the sequence that he said it. I’m not doing that with Mr. Trump because you can’t!”
TBF it's clearly ludicrous to expect the potential POTUS to able speak coherently and have an understanding of what he's actually saying.
also : Wow, Wolf Blizter is still going huh ?
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
WrentheFaceless wrote: I'm actually kindof shocked how much support the gop has with well educated white voters, the GOP has been a party of ignorance for a while
I know this thread is primarily about a national race, but you have to keep in mind that at a more local level you see less of the wedge issue stuff from the GOP and more about taxes and such.
Taxes have been such a winner for the GOP for so long...it's kinda amazing that we've hardly heard anything on that front from them to this point during the presidential race.
Hillary Clinton's tax return shows $10.6 million in income, 31% rate -- and puts pressure on Donald Trump
by Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney August 12, 2016: 12:09 PM ET
Hillary Clinton's economy speech in 3 minutes
Your move, Mr. Trump.
After hammering Donald Trump on the campaign trail for refusing to reveal his tax returns, Hillary Clinton released her latest federal income tax return Friday, showing she and Bill paid roughly a third of their multi-million dollar income to Uncle Sam.
Hillary and Bill Clinton pulled in $10.6 million in 2015, much less than the nearly $28 million they made the year before.
Their tax return showed that they paid $3.24 million in federal income taxes.
That means their effective tax rate -- a measure of their income tax burden -- was 30.6% based on their adjusted gross income. That's on par with their 32% effective rate in 2014.
It also means Hillary Clinton and her husband would have satisfied the Buffett Rule she'd like to impose if elected. Under that rule, anyone with adjusted gross income over $1 million would have to pay a minimum of 30% of their income in taxes.
Et tu, Trump?
Her opponent Donald Trump has yet to release any tax returns, a fact she brings up regularly.
Trump says he's not releasing them because he's under audit and said he would when the audit is complete. In fact, there is nothing preventing him from doing so during an audit.
By not releasing them during the campaign, he is breaking with a 40-year bipartisan tradition of transparency expected of presidential nominees.
Powered by SmartAsset.com
TAX CALCULATOR BY TAX CALCULATOR BY
The fact that he won't release his taxes has raised questions about the actual size of his fortune and some of his businesses connections.
And it's also led to his critics alleging he pays very little in income taxes. Without seeing his returns it's impossible to say.
Related: Hillary Clinton slams 'Trump loophole'
But tax experts note that as a real estate investor he's entitled to a bevy of tax breaks that can greatly reduce his tax bill.
Some of the most advantageous ones: writing off the interest paid on loans financing the properties and a favorable depreciation schedule to account for a property's wear and tear.
"You can recover the cost of the building over time, even though they typically appreciate in value," said Steve Rosenthal, a tax lawyer and senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.
But one of the biggest breaks of all, Rosenthal said, is what's called a like-kind exchange. That lets real estate developers swap one property for a very similar one without having to pay capital gains taxes on the original property. It also lets them escape taxation if they sell a property and put the money in trust so long as it's designated to acquire a similar property in the near future
WrentheFaceless wrote: I'm actually kindof shocked how much support the gop has with well educated white voters, the GOP has been a party of ignorance for a while
I know this thread is primarily about a national race, but you have to keep in mind that at a more local level you see less of the wedge issue stuff from the GOP and more about taxes and such.
Taxes have been such a winner for the GOP for so long...it's kinda amazing that we've hardly heard anything on that front from them to this point during the presidential race.
It can be a mixed bag even at local levels. The Republican majority state legislature here in NC did a nice job simplifying the state income tax codes but they've been total clown shoes on social issues especially with HB2 the surprise legislation that nobody was asking for that's designed to solve nonexistent problems. Plus their gerrymandering screw ups and doing inane gak like cancelling early voting as part of the voter ID law.
He's going to hide his worth. As others have speculated, I too think he's worth a lot less than he claims he is, and as a result releasing his returns would significantly undermine the entire foundation of his campaign - that he's a super successful businessman.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
He's going to hide his worth. As others have speculated, I too think he's worth a lot less than he claims he is, and as a result releasing his returns would significantly undermine the entire foundation of his campaign - that he's a super successful businessman.
Agreed, at this point he has built himself up so much with people if they realized he was not the best and greatest, it might collapse his backing. Releasing his tax returns can only hurt him at this point.
Multiple FBI investigations are underway involving potential corruption charges against the Clinton Foundation, according to a former senior law enforcement official.
The investigation centers on New York City where the Clinton Foundation has its main offices, according to the former official who has direct knowledge of the activities.
Prosecutorial support will come from various U.S. Attorneys Offices — a major departure from other centralized FBI investigations.
The New York-based probe is being led by Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. Bharara’s prosecutorial aggressiveness has resulted in a large number of convictions of banks, hedge funds and Wall Street insiders.
The official said involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York “would be seen by agents as a positive development as prosecutors there are generally thought to be more aggressive than the career lawyers within the DOJ.”
Bharara’s official biography notes that he, “has applied renewed focus on large-scale, sophisticated financial frauds by creating two new units – the Complex Frauds Unit and the complementary Civil Frauds Unit.
“The Civil Frauds Unit has collected close to $500 million in settlements since its inception, including multi-million dollar settlements with Deutsche Bank and CitiMortgage for faulty lending practices and other fraudulent conduct.”
Nicholas Biase, a spokesman for Bharara, said he would “decline comment.” Similarly, FBI spokeswoman Samantha Shero said, “we do not have a comment on investigative activity.”
Bharara is best known for securing convictions of prominent political figures, including former New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. Silver had a seemingly intractable grip on power in the state for decades. He was convicted of accepting $4 million in exchange for helping a cancer researcher and two real estate developers.
He also secured the conviction of New York Republican Majority Leader Dean Skelos, who was sentenced to five years in prison for corruption.
The former official said the investigation is being coordinated between bureau field offices and FBI managers at headquarters in Washington, D.C. The unusual process would ensure senior FBI supervisors, including Director James Comey, would be kept abreast of case progress and of significant developments.
The reliance on U.S. attorneys would be a significant departure from the centralized manner in which the FBI managed the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server and email addresses.
That investigation was conducted with agents at FBI headquarters, who coordinated with the Department of Justice’s National Security Division (NSD).
The Clinton email probe was considered a “small cell” investigation, with FBI agents and NSD attorneys frequently conferring. Comey short-circuited the effort in early July by announcing that “no reasonable prosecutor” would try Clinton for the “careless” handling of classified material.
“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” he announced in a July 5 press conference.
Comey, however, wouldn’t answer questions about any ongoing FBI investigation of the Clinton Foundation.
Before a July 7 congressional hearing about his decision not to recommend prosecution of Clinton, Comey told House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz, “I’m not going to comment on the existence or nonexistence of other investigations.”
“Was the Clinton Foundation tied into this investigation?” Chaffetz persisted.
“I’m not going to answer that,” Comey replied.
In its 15 years of operations, the Clinton Foundation, formally known as the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, has collected up to $2 billion from donors, according to The Washington Post. The donors include a wide range of the world’s wealthiest people: Eastern European tycoons, Arab Sheiks, African mining magnates, hedge fund billionaires and Wall Street firms.
The Post reported that the couple brought in $3 billion when campaign contributions are included in the total. “The Clintons’ fundraising operation — $3 billion amassed by one couple, working in tandem for more than four decades — has no equal,” the Post reported in a wide-ranging investigation into the sources of the couple’s funds.
In a related development Thursday, CNN reported that earlier this year, Justice Department officials in three different field offices “were in agreement a public corruption investigation should be launched” of Clinton Foundation activities.
The probe was sparked by a bank notifying the FBI of “suspicious activity” around a foreign donor to the Clinton Foundation, according to Pamela Brown, CNN’s Justice Department reporter.
Had it been launched, that investigation would have looked at conflicts of interest between requests by foreign donors and official acts by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. CNN did not identify the bank or the foreign donor.
Brown reported the FBI and Justice Department officials met but there was “disagreement” whether to launch such an investigation. In the end, the investigation was killed.
A separate investigation was approved, however, focusing on Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who was a member of the Clinton Foundation’s board of directors for most if its existence.
Preet Bharara!
Any NY'er want to comment on this? Isn't he known as THE TERMINATOR in NY?!?
He took down Sheldon Silver (D) and Dean Sekla (R)... who were one of 'The Big Fish' in NY poltics.
He's going to hide his worth. As others have speculated, I too think he's worth a lot less than he claims he is, and as a result releasing his returns would significantly undermine the entire foundation of his campaign - that he's a super successful businessman.
Agreed, at this point he has built himself up so much with people if they realized he was not the best and greatest, it might collapse his backing. Releasing his tax returns can only hurt him at this point.
He should release his 2015's returns, like Clinton... then demand that he'll release more if Clinton releases her Wallstreet/Goldman Sachs transcripts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/12 18:04:01
3000
4000 
