No, thats separate. He released 100 page document on his charitable giving, and like a lot of his property deals, there is bugger all of his own money in it.
The tax stuff is the speculation that a) he aint as rich as he says he is and b) he might have been rather aggressive in minimizing his tax (which is actually very standard in US, as pretty much everybody does some sort of personal tax returns in US and the norm is to get an accountant to write off as much as possible).
Trump still has to file regular financial disclosure statements with the Federal Election Commission, which contain a reasonably accurate picture of his assets etc.
His taxes are audited every year (which is normal for super rich people here) and NO attorney would allow their client to release their return while under audit.
He is plenty rich, don't worry. He gives quite a bit to charity.
I don't doubt he is rich, boasting about the size of his wealth perhaps. However, this charity thing though shows that he didn't give anywhere near what he claimed, the documents he released himself with a boast of $100 million show nothing close to that.
My point was I am surprised his opponents didn't attack him on that as it is a clear point of making a specific claim and it not standing up.
One of the reasons Trump is hard to figure out is his largesse that goes largely unreported. A couple of examples:
his limo broke down while he was on a lonely road in a western state a few years ago. A couple driving by stopped to offer to help. Much to their surprise a few months later their mortgage was paid off without explanation. It took them a while to find out it was Trump.
A US soldier was detained in Mexico, suffering from PTSD, and only freed after months of campaigning largely by Fox News' Greta van Susteren. When he was freed Trump called Greta (they've been friends for years) to find out his location and sent him a large check to help him restart his life.
Then there's this - civic responsibility and charity, though hardly unreported..
No, thats separate. He released 100 page document on his charitable giving, and like a lot of his property deals, there is bugger all of his own money in it.
The tax stuff is the speculation that a) he aint as rich as he says he is and b) he might have been rather aggressive in minimizing his tax (which is actually very standard in US, as pretty much everybody does some sort of personal tax returns in US and the norm is to get an accountant to write off as much as possible).
Trump still has to file regular financial disclosure statements with the Federal Election Commission, which contain a reasonably accurate picture of his assets etc.
His taxes are audited every year (which is normal for super rich people here) and NO attorney would allow their client to release their return while under audit.
He is plenty rich, don't worry. He gives quite a bit to charity.
I don't doubt he is rich, boasting about the size of his wealth perhaps. However, this charity thing though shows that he didn't give anywhere near what he claimed, the documents he released himself with a boast of $100 million show nothing close to that.
My point was I am surprised his opponents didn't attack him on that as it is a clear point of making a specific claim and it not standing up.
One of the reasons Trump is hard to figure out is his largesse that goes largely unreported. A couple of examples:
his limo broke down while he was on a lonely road in a western state a few years ago. A couple driving by stopped to offer to help. Much to their surprise a few months later their mortgage was paid off without explanation. It took them a while to find out it was Trump.
A US soldier was detained in Mexico, suffering from PTSD, and only freed after months of campaigning largely by Fox News' Greta van Susteren. When he was freed Trump called Greta (they've been friends for years) to find out his location and sent him a large check to help him restart his life.
Then there's this - civic responsibility and charity, though hardly unreported..
This sort of thing is what he does, usually on the quiet, without taking the charitable deduction.
I'm not a Trump booster by any means, but the lack of knowledge about the man on this site is disappointing.
All well and good but we are talking specifically about a document he released himself where the claims don't stand up. It is that simple. $100 million claimed, reality $4-5 million.
Wow that is incredibly surprising. I didn't think Chromebooks had gained much traction.
They're very popular in US education.
Oh yes, and OGH uses one to edit the site with. I was very tempted by one of these, but bottled it and went for one of these instead.
I have a Chromebook, a £200 model that I bought out of interest and now find that I use for all kinds of casual stuff. I really like it, it's a beautifully simple, well-designed platform. I'm very tempted to get a Pixel and move as much of my work to Chrome as I can.
Her Indoors has a Toshiba Chromebook which I sometimes use as a spare. it's pretty basic but works OK, except for scanning, which I've pretty given up on trying to link it to my Epson printer which works perfectly with my Lenovo Windows 10 laptop. Having read others' experiences, it seems that scanning and chromebooks simply don't mix. If however any PBers know otherwise, please let me know what I'm doing wrong.
PB has been run solely on Chromebooks for more than 4 years and I've just spent part of my Sadiq Khan winnings on one of the fastest available a Dell 13 with super fast processor and 8gb of RAM.
Only hassle on printing is that you have to have a compatible Google cloud print machine. Once that's set up then you can print with any number of Chromebooks without any extra hassle.
They start up in 6 seconds, you don't need an anti-virus software and the range of Google office apps is constantly updated and is free. Only hassle is that you always need an internet connection which with widespread 4G is almost always possible by using your phone as a hotspot.
I will never go back to a Windows.
PB is running on a laptop? Explains everything! Hamster and wheel comes to mind
Ask an attorney - no attorney would recommend releasing a return under audit.
Then he can release previous years, but he's not doing that either.
It's not like he doesn't have form for this sort of thing. After he was mocked for the failure of Trump steaks, he claimed they were still going. He even got steaks bought in and had Trump steaks labels stuck on them, but forgot to take the old labels off!
Ask an attorney - no attorney would recommend releasing a return under audit.
Then he can release previous years, but he's not doing that either.
It's not like he doesn't have form for this sort of thing. After he was mocked for the failure of Trump steaks, he claimed they were still going. He even got steaks bought in and had Trump steaks labels stuck on them, but forgot to take the old labels off!
Didn't he also perform poorly at our May 2015 General Election?
Yes but this failure is worse, the data wasn't really pointing to a Tory majority - only a few (Matt Singh, @Tissue_Price) spotted it prior to the event... and it was quite hidden.
Donald Trump had a big New Hampshire lead - one of the best indicators to GOP nominee in recent times.
Trump GOP nominee is alot clearer than Con Majority was.
Ask an attorney - no attorney would recommend releasing a return under audit.
Then he can release previous years, but he's not doing that either.
It's not like he doesn't have form for this sort of thing. After he was mocked for the failure of Trump steaks, he claimed they were still going. He even got steaks bought in and had Trump steaks labels stuck on them, but forgot to take the old labels off!
It's rather odd that Trump is insisting his VP prospects release their tax returns to the campaign (which will apparently not be made public), while Trump is not releasing his.
It is normal for candidates to release their tax returns during the campaign, although there is no legal requirement to do so. I am only aware of 2 or 3 candidates who released little or no tax information during their campaign, a couple of whom were Reagan and Bill Clinton.
To me it's not a big deal one way or the other. I have no interest in the contents of Hillary's return either. In the bigger scheme of things, it's irrelevant.
I assumed from the Pat Glass story that she'd be some hi-falutin inner London MP, but she's MP for Durham North West. She's from Esh Winning. I can't imagine the views of her constituents on immigratioo are massively different to those she encountered today.
Its a mindset among some, anybody who waves an England flag, racist...anybody who mentions immigration, racist....etc etc etc
The other mystery is that she apparently said all this on local radio - it wasn't a simple matter of private thoughts inadvertently becoming public a la Gordon Brown. Presumably she thinks that there are more votes to be gained than lost by sneering at provincial attitudes.
I think that there is intense dislike for provincial attitudes among the leadership of both the Conservatives and Labour, but they're usually sensible enough to conceal the fact.
Hillary was listed as one of the best lawyers of her generation, has a 145 IQ, was twice elected Senator for New York and was Secretary of State. People may dislike them but Trump and Clinton are probably the most experienced and capable candidates to have run for president in years (though Trump inherited much of his wealth so his business success should not be too hyped up)
I think that's an exaggeration. Most presidents are pretty smart or they don't get close to start with. The only real idiot I can think of is Harding, and he may well have been dyslexic rather than stupid.
What is true is that while both candidates have undoubted qualities, they are also deeply flawed in other ways. Trump is erratic and at times flops alarmingly into pub bore rhetoric including racism and misogyny. Clinton is rude, arrogant and intellectually lazy (and also had, oddly, a misogynist meltdown of her own this week). They are also I think the oldest average age of any two candidates.
The point is perhaps not that the two candidates are useless. They're not. But they are neither suitable to be POTUS either, so it's a poor choice for the American people.
Well you obviously have to be above average to get to be president but if you look at recent candidates none have exactly had truly outstanding careers before. Obama was a community organiser and lecturer, Dubya ran a baseball team (a post his father gave him), Kerry was a pretty average DA in Boston, Gore was a middle ranking journalist, Clinton was essentially a professional politician from a young age apart from a brief spell with an Arkansas law firm between governorships (Hillary got better grades than Bill at Yale and had a more distinguished legal career) etc. Romney is perhaps an exception but even he is not in Trump's league, he never made the billionaires' club!
Trump's financial status is subject to change. I note a golf club that he disclosed was worth $50million in campaign fillings he is now claim is worth only $1.4 million in court proceedings to reduce his tax bill.
Excellent documentary on the EU by Paxman. Showed the difference between the underlying values of each side more clearly than anything I've seen so far.
Couldn't agree more. He put the arguments for each side better in an hour than either campaign has done in 2 months. Frist class, well balanced and informative.
What was it? I might have a look.
Just got back from a vote.leave event with Priti Patel. Not my cup of tea really, but wanted to get a feel how things are going.
What were your impressions of the Patel event?
You will not be surprised that I was unconvinced.
There were about 100 there, and the usual arguments aired and the usual dodgy figures too. The discussions on here are more erudite and informed.
Priti worked the crowd well, but not much charisma, I could not see any real star quality.
The meeting was in the HQ of the masons in Leics...
Excellent documentary on the EU by Paxman. Showed the difference between the underlying values of each side more clearly than anything I've seen so far.
Couldn't agree more. He put the arguments for each side better in an hour than either campaign has done in 2 months. Frist class, well balanced and informative.
What was it? I might have a look.
Just got back from a vote.leave event with Priti Patel. Not my cup of tea really, but wanted to get a feel how things are going.
It was called Paxman in Brussels and was on Beeb 1 I think.
I suspect both sides were shouting at the TV at times but overall it was very informative and an excellent explanation of both the system and the arguments for and against.
My only slight complaint was he was unnecessarily rude to the British Commissioner Lord Hill. Even though I disagreed with what Hill was saying Paxman didn't have to be quite so dismissive of him.
I think paxman thinks it is trademark to be rude thus he must do it in any show he is on. It.is like frankie Boyle not doing any offensive jokes.
His taxes are audited every year (which is normal for super rich people here) and NO attorney would allow their client to release their return while under audit. .
If Nixon could release his tax returns while being audited I'm sure Trump can pony up.
Re Chromebooks, They are a great bit of kit. I bought Herself one by Toshiba for Christmas three years ago and I think it was the best present I ever bought her. Hastle free computing, providing all you want is basic internet sort of stuff and basic office functionality.
No good for serious computing though. You can't play Skyrim on it for a start and it certainly won't cope with a three monitor, multiple controls, set up that I find essential for my flight sims.
@chrisshipitv: NEW: @ComResPolls for @itvnews finds economy now most import issue in #euref. 38% in Feb. Now 55% say it's 1 of 3 most important factors
Comments
his limo broke down while he was on a lonely road in a western state a few years ago. A couple driving by stopped to offer to help. Much to their surprise a few months later their mortgage was paid off without explanation. It took them a while to find out it was Trump.
A US soldier was detained in Mexico, suffering from PTSD, and only freed after months of campaigning largely by Fox News' Greta van Susteren. When he was freed Trump called Greta (they've been friends for years) to find out his location and sent him a large check to help him restart his life.
Then there's this - civic responsibility and charity, though hardly unreported..
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/features/2015-09-29/a-1980s-new-york-city-battle-explains-donald-trump-s-candidacy
This sort of thing is what he does, usually on the quiet, without taking the charitable deduction.
I'm not a Trump booster by any means, but the lack of knowledge about the man on this site is disappointing.
It's not like he doesn't have form for this sort of thing. After he was mocked for the failure of Trump steaks, he claimed they were still going. He even got steaks bought in and had Trump steaks labels stuck on them, but forgot to take the old labels off!
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/03/09/qvc-trump-peddles-steaks-with-bush-brothers-label-you-cant-make-this-stuff-up-314816
£4.0m v £3.8m
It is normal for candidates to release their tax returns during the campaign, although there is no legal requirement to do so. I am only aware of 2 or 3 candidates who released little or no tax information during their campaign, a couple of whom were Reagan and Bill Clinton.
To me it's not a big deal one way or the other. I have no interest in the contents of Hillary's return either. In the bigger scheme of things, it's irrelevant.
There were about 100 there, and the usual arguments aired and the usual dodgy figures too. The discussions on here are more erudite and informed.
Priti worked the crowd well, but not much charisma, I could not see any real star quality.
The meeting was in the HQ of the masons in Leics...
Remain 52% (-1)
Leave 41% (+3)
Turnout weighted https://t.co/wjf4rvSNck https://t.co/OwoRCu10I3
https://twitter.com/Andrew_ComRes/status/733401946690838532
Given that @foxinsoxuk and @Richard_Tyndall both rate Paxman's program, that's probably worth watching too.
What's also interesting is that controls over laws, here, is of interest to 47% of voters here compared to Ipsos-Mori's 15%.
(although I don't know how they asked the question)
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD
No good for serious computing though. You can't play Skyrim on it for a start and it certainly won't cope with a three monitor, multiple controls, set up that I find essential for my flight sims.
@chrisshipitv: NEW: @ComResPolls for @itvnews finds economy now most import issue in #euref. 38% in Feb. Now 55% say it's 1 of 3 most important factors
Oh, wait...