Again, I think the only real take away from these documents in and of themselves is what it implies about Trump's skills and/or net worth. He has claimed to be worth $10+ bn, but somehow only made 1.5% off of those assets. The average 90-day CD rate was 3.5% in 2005, and the average 12-month treasury yield was 3.6%. Either he is so incompetent as a business man that he can't generate as much money as parking it in various banks and not touching it, or he is worth 40% of what he claims (or less!).
And sadly that's news to pretty much no-one except Trump himself. (Plus his real wealth has always been in the real estate he gobbled up when his dad gave Trump some "starting out" money)
Pretty bummed how this went down because it directly feeds into Trump's narrative that the press is out to get him and should be silenced. And in a shitty way this just gives his people more opportunity to fuck with the press pool if not entirely dismantle it. Granted this is tame compared to what the right wing pundits routinely got up to during Obama's tenure, but still..whoever wrote that tweet knew full well what they were implying. And it sucks because now I have to listen to the pundits whine about this for the rest of time as a result.
I don't think anyone is claiming to have an issue with the returns being featured themselves. That's perfectly fine and a solid part of the ongoing scandal that is the Trump WH
What is drawing umbrage is the fact that Maddow announced them with BREAKING: TRUMP TAX RETURNS TONIGHT! which is downright irresponsible. It is sacrificing a step in the ongoing fight against journalism for some headlines and ratings and was a horrible decision.
Except people keep comparing them to Capone's Vault and calling it nothing.
It wasn't nothing. It just wasn't the huge scandal people were expecting from the tweet.
Real Lesson: Twitter is terrible.
That wasn't an unfair expectation though
The tweet was clearly worded to generate the most buzz possible and seem like a giant smoking gun
Its why only after the initial attention happened they walked it back with clarification
It was irresponsible journalism at the very least and I expected more from Maddow
I didn't, she's been pretty unhinged since the election
This goes with the main problem of the whole Russia thing, even if the Steele dossier was true (and there's no evidence of that), the media has been overhyping this ONE Watergate thing that will totally get Trump impeached.....that isn't coming.
"Is not fair that there's the expectation of the silver bullet". Well, who's fault is that?
Anyways, Fox News and the like get their shots in:
I don't think anyone is claiming to have an issue with the returns being featured themselves. That's perfectly fine and a solid part of the ongoing scandal that is the Trump WH
What is drawing umbrage is the fact that Maddow announced them with BREAKING: TRUMP TAX RETURNS TONIGHT! which is downright irresponsible. It is sacrificing a step in the ongoing fight against journalism for some headlines and ratings and was a horrible decision.
Except people keep comparing them to Capone's Vault and calling it nothing.
It wasn't nothing. It just wasn't the huge scandal people were expecting from the tweet.
Real Lesson: Twitter is terrible.
That wasn't an unfair expectation though
The tweet was clearly worded to generate the most buzz possible and seem like a giant smoking gun
Its why only after the initial attention happened they walked it back with clarification
It was irresponsible journalism at the very least and I expected more from Maddow
I didn't, she's been pretty unhinged since the election
I think people are overestimating how little Trump pays on his returns, comparatively speaking. He paid what, like 25%? That's slightly more than the last three presidents, IIRC.
Your problem there is you're listening to pundits. Punditry is always stupid.
Of course it is, but right wing pundits are the crucible that sets the response to these things, and none of them, or conservatism, or its devoted fans live in reality any more, so they just make shit up until something half way plausible comes along and then run with it, repeating it over and over until the entire issue becomes about whatever they made up instead of the actual issue.
And while I may be being a bit dramatic, we're past the stage where you can use a cheap flirt like this to goose your ratings and move on; we have an openly hostile, uncontrolled administration itching to curtail press in the country, if you're going to come at them, you better have your shit together.
+2
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Your problem there is you're listening to pundits. Punditry is always stupid.
Of course it is, but right wing pundits are the crucible that sets the response to these things, and none of them, or conservatism, or its devoted fans live in reality any more, so they just make shit up until something half way plausible comes along and then run with it, repeating it over and over until the entire issue becomes about whatever they made up instead of the actual issue.
And while I may be being a bit dramatic, we're past the stage where you can use a cheap flirt like this to goose your ratings and move on; we have an openly hostile, uncontrolled administration itching to curtail press in the country, if you're going to come at them, you better have your shit together.
no, bad idea.
You swing with everything you have, every bit of maybe that you can back up with solid evidence, and you keep doing it because you do not know what thing is going to be the one thing that breaks him.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I tend to think a "throw everything at them and see what sticks" approach is more likely to just desensitize the public for when you do have something.
I tend to think a "throw everything at them and see what sticks" approach is more likely to just desensitize the public for when you do have something.
Hell, that's pretty much doing Trump's job for him. Remember when "Trump eats pizza with a knife and a fork" was the talk of the news cycle?
Your problem there is you're listening to pundits. Punditry is always stupid.
Of course it is, but right wing pundits are the crucible that sets the response to these things, and none of them, or conservatism, or its devoted fans live in reality any more, so they just make shit up until something half way plausible comes along and then run with it, repeating it over and over until the entire issue becomes about whatever they made up instead of the actual issue.
And while I may be being a bit dramatic, we're past the stage where you can use a cheap flirt like this to goose your ratings and move on; we have an openly hostile, uncontrolled administration itching to curtail press in the country, if you're going to come at them, you better have your shit together.
no, bad idea.
You swing with everything you have, every bit of maybe that you can back up with solid evidence, and you keep doing it because you do not know what thing is going to be the one thing that breaks him.
No, you keep your powder dry, and you avoid crying wolf.
Your problem there is you're listening to pundits. Punditry is always stupid.
Of course it is, but right wing pundits are the crucible that sets the response to these things, and none of them, or conservatism, or its devoted fans live in reality any more, so they just make shit up until something half way plausible comes along and then run with it, repeating it over and over until the entire issue becomes about whatever they made up instead of the actual issue.
And while I may be being a bit dramatic, we're past the stage where you can use a cheap flirt like this to goose your ratings and move on; we have an openly hostile, uncontrolled administration itching to curtail press in the country, if you're going to come at them, you better have your shit together.
no, bad idea.
You swing with everything you have, every bit of maybe that you can back up with solid evidence, and you keep doing it because you do not know what thing is going to be the one thing that breaks him.
I agree to a point, there's certainly some truth in throwing constant little skirmishes at your opponent so that they're never at rest or prepared, but you have to be controlled about it; I don't think this achieved anything for anyone except Trump himself. While I want to believe the idea was that even though they knew they had nothing, they could at least get people to watch the full bits on Trump's troubling Russia ties, this smacks more of ratings greed or being first to publish. And the fact that this Whitehouse was able to preempt Maddow going live with an accurate press release, well the whole thing stinks.
I tend to think a "throw everything at them and see what sticks" approach is more likely to just desensitize the public for when you do have something.
I tend to think a "throw everything at them and see what sticks" approach is more likely to just desensitize the public for when you do have something.
Hell, that's pretty much doing Trump's job for him. Remember when "Trump eats pizza with a knife and a fork" was the talk of the news cycle?
I do. IT was ... like 4 years or something before the election. So what are you talking about again?
Y'all I am gonna close this for now. I will reopen if more tax returns are leaked/released and we need to discuss that. Not enough new info here for a whole thread unfortunately. Thank you for containing the discussion here this evening.
Posts
And sadly that's news to pretty much no-one except Trump himself. (Plus his real wealth has always been in the real estate he gobbled up when his dad gave Trump some "starting out" money)
Pretty bummed how this went down because it directly feeds into Trump's narrative that the press is out to get him and should be silenced. And in a shitty way this just gives his people more opportunity to fuck with the press pool if not entirely dismantle it. Granted this is tame compared to what the right wing pundits routinely got up to during Obama's tenure, but still..whoever wrote that tweet knew full well what they were implying. And it sucks because now I have to listen to the pundits whine about this for the rest of time as a result.
I didn't, she's been pretty unhinged since the election
"Is not fair that there's the expectation of the silver bullet". Well, who's fault is that?
Anyways, Fox News and the like get their shots in:
And a writer for The Hill says that Trump may have leaked the whole thing:
I disagree completely.
They paid $4 million before the AMT.
Of course it is, but right wing pundits are the crucible that sets the response to these things, and none of them, or conservatism, or its devoted fans live in reality any more, so they just make shit up until something half way plausible comes along and then run with it, repeating it over and over until the entire issue becomes about whatever they made up instead of the actual issue.
And while I may be being a bit dramatic, we're past the stage where you can use a cheap flirt like this to goose your ratings and move on; we have an openly hostile, uncontrolled administration itching to curtail press in the country, if you're going to come at them, you better have your shit together.
You swing with everything you have, every bit of maybe that you can back up with solid evidence, and you keep doing it because you do not know what thing is going to be the one thing that breaks him.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Hell, that's pretty much doing Trump's job for him. Remember when "Trump eats pizza with a knife and a fork" was the talk of the news cycle?
No, you keep your powder dry, and you avoid crying wolf.
I agree to a point, there's certainly some truth in throwing constant little skirmishes at your opponent so that they're never at rest or prepared, but you have to be controlled about it; I don't think this achieved anything for anyone except Trump himself. While I want to believe the idea was that even though they knew they had nothing, they could at least get people to watch the full bits on Trump's troubling Russia ties, this smacks more of ratings greed or being first to publish. And the fact that this Whitehouse was able to preempt Maddow going live with an accurate press release, well the whole thing stinks.
Just like with Clinton's emails.
I do. IT was ... like 4 years or something before the election. So what are you talking about again?