FFS, AK,

Your previous post was about PT's taxes. Now you accuse me of "swerving" and not addressing interference in other countries democratic processes.

Does AK decide the "topic"? No, since he doesn't address other poster's points. This is the PT thread, not the AK "deflect, deflect!" thread.

Give responses to previous posts, or don't bother. "Swerving" won't cut it.

You could start a new discussion thread on Trump's interference in UK politics.

Good luck with that.

Coming soon via Bill Barr

Discussion > President Obama

My apologies, but I did bring up the topic of Trump's behaviour regarding interference in British politics: a behaviour abhorrent here when supposedly performed by Obama. It is also in my remit to comment when I perceive responders to my original post ducking and diving, and attempting to dilute my original comment by reference to Obama, the Prime Minister of another country and the Clintons.
Seems evident that you don't want even to acknowledge Trump's inexcusable antics. And yet you blather on about bias elsewhere. There's a plank in your eye.

Some consistency would be nice. I agree with AK that it was wrong of Trump to interfere in British politics, and I agree with others that it was wrong of Obama to interfere in British politics.

The BBC and much of the media don't seem to notice that they treated both interventions very differently.

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.

Source

Every other president for 40 years has shared their tax returns, Nixon released his whilst under audit. Trump's former personal lawyer has testified that he does not believe Trump is actually under audit. What? The president is lying? Surely not! A dozen excuses I think Trump has something he does not want made public, but we'll probably never know.

Then there's this:

President Donald Trump again asked a judge to block subpoenas directing Deutsche Bank AG and Capital One Financial Corp. to turn over his bank records, as well as those of his three oldest children and some Trump businesses.

Bloomberg

Secrets and Lies.

Trump at his best in Normandy. Very impressive speech and its delivery, paying due tribute to those who lost their lives and the debt owed to them.

Jun 6, 2019 at 10:34 AM | Phil Clarke

You rely on Mann's Hockey Stick, Bloomberg and Steele's Dodgy Dossier. Are you a reliable source?

My apologies, but I did bring up the topic of Trump's behaviour regarding interference in British politics: a behaviour abhorrent here when supposedly performed by Obama
Jun 6, 2019 at 8:06 AM | AK

Be fair, Obama did pour scorn on BREXIT, and the UK's future without co-operation from the US and EU. Hilary and Michelle have received Rockstar/Living Legend publicity from the BBC without awkward questions being asked.

The idea that Trump will remodel a hotel based on Buckingham Palace fills me with dread too.

Jun 6, 2019 at 10:34 AM | Phil Clarke
You rely on Mann's Hockey Stick, Bloomberg and Steele's Dodgy Dossier. Are you a reliable source?
Jun 6, 2019 at 5:52 PM | golf charlie

With excellent timing (but no link to Steele's Dodgy Dossier)

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/06/anti-trump-ag-sued-for-using-bloomberg-funded-attorneys-to-promote-a-climate-crusade/

Anti-Trump AG Sued For Using Bloomberg-Funded Attorneys To Promote A Climate Crusade
charles the moderator / 14 hours ago June 6, 2019
From The Daily Caller

Chris White | Energy Reporter

"A Virginia-based law firm sued Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey Monday for using attorneys financed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to engage in a climate crusade against Exxon Mobil.

Government Accountability & Oversight (GAO) filed the lawsuit against Healey for using two privately funded attorneys to focus on prosecuting oil and gas companies. The attorneys are paid through a $6 million grant from Bloomberg and have ties to the anti-Exxon campaign.

GAO, which is filing on behalf of Energy Policy Advocates (EPA), is seeking correspondence and documentation of the hiring and work of these attorneys. Healey, a Democrat, is a critic of President Donald Trump and has promised her constituents that she will work to prevent the president from opening up coasts for oil and gas drilling.

Bloomberg, a prominent Democratic donor, launched the Bloomberg Philanthropies in 2017 with a $6 million campaign to embed attorneys in AG offices to push back against Trump’s efforts to roll back environmental regulations."

Be fair, Obama did pour scorn on BREXIT, and the UK's future without co-operation from the US and EU. Hilary and Michelle have received Rockstar/Living Legend publicity from the BBC without awkward questions being asked.

The idea that Trump will remodel a hotel based on Buckingham Palace fills me with dread too.
Jun 6, 2019 at 5:58 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

As I remarked to a family member today, almost every US President is treated as being at least slightly mentally retarded by the UK media and chattering classes. Obama is the only exception in my memory, and that is almost certainly because they were concerned about being called racist if they appeared unkind towards him.

On a personal level, Trump's poor taste, and everything else the British snobbishly like to attribute to gauche Americans wealthier than ourselves, was clear to me long before his regular appearance on TV shows or entrance into politics.

I think that is why I cannot dislike him as much as so many others seem to. It is often said that you can never recapture the intense 'love' that was felt towards a partner after you finally realise that they are as human as anyone else, with very human failings.

The same is also true for hate. Having disliked Trump as the worst that America has to offer, I can no longer share in the antipathy that is expected of me by the anti-Trumpeters. He is the duly elected President of The United States of America, and should be accorded all due respect. At least our Queen seems to understand that much, so she gets a +1 from me in that regard.

"That’s an issue that was already litigated during the election. Voters knew the president could have given his tax returns. They knew that he didn’t and they elected him anyway."

https://www.axios.com/mick-mulvaney-trump-tax-returns-democrats-c352b55e-6639-4181-9990-7517e3858f81.html

The real reason some Brits don’t like Trump

Trump-bashing isn’t a political stance — it’s a snooty mocking of white-trash Americal

Trump at his best in Normandy. Very impressive speech and its delivery, paying due tribute to those who lost their lives and the debt owed to them.
Jun 6, 2019 at 1:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterAK

The uncle I never knew went down with HMS Curacoa

Ordnance Articifer, 25 yrs old. My mother was 14yrs old at the time.

Ordnance Artificer 4th Class, (redacted) FRANCIS JOSEPH

Service Number C/MX 655**

Died 02/10/1942

Aged 25

H.M.S. Curacoa
Royal Navy

Son of Hugh and Elizabeth (redacted), of Dennistown, Glasgow.

https://www.cwgc.org/find/find-war-dead

"That’s an issue that was already litigated during the election. Voters knew the president could have given his tax returns. They knew that he didn’t and they elected him anyway."

H/T Phil Clarke

Michael. I award Prince Harry a +10 for the same reason. If I had been invited to the same function I would have got a -100 because I wouldn't have gone.

On another matter, do you think "the BEAST" paid a congestion charge?

On another matter, do you think "the BEAST" paid a congestion charge?

Jun 7, 2019 at 7:56 AM | AK

I am sure that London's Mayor was happy to waive it, to discourage the use of so many helicopters. I counted seven, one was probably a film crew.

President Donald Trump and his apologists have concocted an excuse for his refusal to release his tax returns. They claim that voters, by electing Trump president in 2016, gave him a mandate to keep his returns private. The tax question “was already litigated during the election,” acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney declared in a Fox News interview on Sunday. “Voters knew the president could have given his tax returns. They knew that he didn’t. And they elected him anyway.” On Monday, Trump’s deputy press secretary, Hogan Gidley, repeated that Democrats had “litigated this in 2016” and that voters had rejected their arguments. On Wednesday, Trump said the public had cleared him. “I got elected last time with this same issue,” said Trump, “because, frankly, the people don’t care.”

Candidates for president should release their taxes regardless of public opinion, because every voter has the right to know whether the country’s most powerful officeholder has financial conflicts of interest. Trump’s vast holdings and his shady business history make that concern all the more apt. But for now, let’s stick to a simpler question: Is it true that voters gave Trump a mandate to hide his tax returns? No, it’s false. Every poll shows that Americans think he should release his returns—and that if he doesn’t, Congress should pry the returns from him.

Source

So DJT has underpaid his taxes? really? - and the IRS aren't nailing him?

You are not really that dumb. Nobody is claiming anything remotely like that. The issue is transparency, the electorate deserves to know about their president's financial interests for a variety of very good reasons - is he making policy to benefit himself or his business? Is he in hock to any lobby or country? At the moment they only have what Trump has chosen to disclose, and if anyone still trusts him to tell the truth, the whole truth etc, well, good luck with that.

Jun 7, 2019 at 10:40 AM | Phil Clarke

Are you funded by Bloomberg now?

GolfCharlie. I'm surprised, are you objecting to the contents of Phil Clarke's 10.20am post? If so, on what grounds? Or are you opposing PC just as a matter of habit?

AK, thanks for the remarks on Trump's speech.

If Trump's tax returns are released, what % of the US population is capable of understanding them?

How about transparency for all members of Congress? No, the IRS goes after the Tea Party, not the Uniparty. Then takes the fifth if challenged.

Oh I'm sure Charlie that there are many millions of Americans who pay taxes without employing stratagems to reduce their tax burden who will not need any advice, and there will be even more who will understand when it is explained to them. Half the voting population (Democrats) will only be happy to oblige.
If there are two things all Americans understand very well and condem it is rich kids avoiding the draft and those that unfairly avoid paying their taxes. If Trump is found to have immorally, let alone illegally, avoided paying taxes, there will be many who will applaud him, but IMHO many, many more who will stop backing him.
I think this might result in Trump losing the next nomination and/or election. This would be a disaster for those currently opposing the current climate mania.