HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Could Rachel actually be ...

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:28 AM

Could Rachel actually be a republican?

You know.

BREAKING NEWS!! BREAKING NEWS!!!!! BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!

WE HAVE TRUMP TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And we all get excited, wow, they must have evidence that he paid nothing, they must
have something that shows he avoid paying his fare share.

There must be something juicy here.

So we wait wait and wait.

And the breaking news was that he actually paid $38 MILLION in tax.

My first reaction was, "Wow that is Huge"

The repugs reaction, would probably be the same.

I guarantee you the reaction of the independents, would've been....

"WOW THATS PRETTY STEEP"

Even Democrats are thinking "Wow he paid $38 Million in taxes????"

So why did Rachel make such a huge huge deal of it, before hand and is she in
someway related to Tom Arnold?

78 replies, 3134 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 78 replies Author Time Post
Reply Could Rachel actually be a republican? (Original post)
brettdale Mar 15 OP
scheming daemons Mar 15 #1
brettdale Mar 15 #3
WinkyDink Mar 15 #68
The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 15 #2
True Dough Mar 15 #6
oberliner Mar 15 #58
JHan Mar 15 #4
BannonsLiver Mar 15 #5
world wide wally Mar 15 #7
The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 15 #8
brettdale Mar 15 #12
The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 15 #13
Justice Mar 15 #9
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 15 #10
lapfog_1 Mar 15 #11
The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 15 #16
Hoyt Mar 15 #33
bettyellen Mar 15 #47
Hoyt Mar 15 #50
bettyellen Mar 15 #56
Hoyt Mar 15 #61
bettyellen Mar 15 #72
Hoyt Mar 15 #74
bettyellen Mar 15 #75
LineReply .
BainsBane Mar 15 #14
pnwest Mar 15 #15
CentralMass Mar 15 #17
longship Mar 15 #18
Azathoth Mar 15 #19
longship Mar 15 #20
Azathoth Mar 15 #21
longship Mar 15 #24
Azathoth Mar 15 #25
leftynyc Mar 15 #35
LanternWaste Mar 15 #55
frankieallen Mar 15 #71
Warren DeMontague Mar 15 #29
rockfordfile Mar 15 #22
caroldansen Mar 15 #23
JHan Mar 15 #26
underthematrix Mar 15 #27
JTFrog Mar 15 #28
Pachamama Mar 15 #43
Alice11111 Mar 15 #30
LovingA2andMI Mar 15 #31
OnDoutside Mar 15 #32
LovingA2andMI Mar 15 #34
OnDoutside Mar 15 #36
BainsBane Mar 15 #41
LanternWaste Mar 15 #57
LovingA2andMI Mar 15 #60
DFW Mar 15 #37
DefenseLawyer Mar 15 #38
cwydro Mar 15 #39
GWC58 Mar 15 #40
sarah FAILIN Mar 15 #42
Kimchijeon Mar 15 #44
NewRedDawn Mar 15 #45
LaydeeBug Mar 15 #46
TNLib Mar 15 #48
mcar Mar 15 #49
C_U_L8R Mar 15 #51
herding cats Mar 15 #52
Ilsa Mar 15 #53
brush Mar 15 #54
LanternWaste Mar 15 #59
jalan48 Mar 15 #62
The Wielding Truth Mar 15 #78
Dem2 Mar 15 #63
Historic NY Mar 15 #64
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 15 #65
fishwax Mar 15 #66
Squinch Mar 15 #67
frankieallen Mar 15 #69
Paladin Mar 15 #70
Hekate Mar 15 #73
Zambero Mar 15 #76
TexasBushwhacker Mar 15 #77

Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:30 AM

1. Her mistake was in hyping it 90 minutes beforehand on twitter....

....when in fact, she had nothing of real value.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:35 AM

3. True

There's been a couple of instances of doing this, one more and we have a trend.

She has never done anything truly damaging, just creating the Illusion of damage.

This was a huge miss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:16 PM

68. She Tweeted it was from 2005.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:34 AM

2. Did you pay attention to what DC Johnston said

about the Alternative Minimum Tax? $31M of that amount was paid as AMT, which Trump wants to eliminate. If it hadn't been for the AMT he'd have had to pay a tax rate of only 4%! (The AMT was created to prevent very wealthy taxpayers from taking advantage of certain loopholes so they are taxed relatively fairly.) Johnston and Maddow both made the point that the disclosure of tax returns is important for any presidential candidate so voters know what their financial situation is and whether that situation might cause them to favor changes in the tax code to benefit them personally. Now we know that almost all of Trump's tax bill was on account of the AMT, and we also know that he wants to eliminate it. That is kind of a big deal, IMO.

Oh, and what a ridiculous question - "Could Rachel really be a Republican"? Seriously? That's just insulting. Maybe you don't agree with the way she reported the story, and maybe it was over-promoted, but really...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:39 AM

6. Rachel is going to run off with Van Jones

They're going to start a brainwashing cult in Death Valley, churning out Republicans by the hundreds of thousands. Watch for the story in the National Enquirer!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:43 PM

58. Every Republican wants to eliminate the AMT

That has been a part of Republican tax proposals for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:36 AM

4. .............

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:39 AM

5. Some of these threads tonight...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:43 AM

7. Rachel is just a slave to ratings like everyone else on TV news

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to world wide wally (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:45 AM

8. It was probably hyped more than it deserved to be,

but the content was significant, if not earth-shattering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:51 AM

12. My whole point

She has a habit of doing tweets like BREAKING NEWS and GAME CHANGER.

IN the end it was nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Reply #12)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:54 AM

13. It wasn't "nothing."

Maybe it didn't warrant as much promotion as it got, but it wasn't an insignificant story. It's another little piece to add to a big puzzle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:48 AM

9. Not in a 100 million trillion years

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:48 AM

10. I believe her heart is in the right place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:51 AM

11. I am more interested in what his source of income is.

what are the tax returns of his 500+ owned entities?

Who has he borrowed money from, who has he paid back.

Why didn't he carry forward that nearly $1 Billion dollar loss from the decade earlier and write off his $36 M in 2005?

Who is he doing business with? Are there more deals like the Florida mansion that he sold to the fertilizer king of Russia? What were the details of that deal anyway?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #11)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:59 AM

16. And that's why we need the complete tax returns.

The 1040 tells how much he made and how much tax he paid. It was useful in the sense that we now know he paid a significant AMT, which he wants to eliminate. We also know that he's probably not a billionaire. But what we really need to know is where his income came from. I think Rachel did an important thing by emphasizing the need for the complete tax returns, because they could provide a link to Russian business interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #11)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 05:34 AM

33. Even then, his tax attorneys are smart enough not to name a source of income 'Russian Bribes."

I think we are putting too much hope in the tax returns. First, his supporters won't care assuming there is anything there. Second, most people -- non-DUers -- don't care either. Tax returns won't get Trump.

Should have kept hitting him on the healthcare "plan."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #33)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:39 PM

47. 74% of the public wants to see full returns....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #47)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:22 PM

50. You talking about the August 2016 poll? He still got elected, they must not cared much. Heck,

Heck the poll was probably DU'd too.

I'm sorry, there's a difference between "yeah, OK, I'd like to see his tax return, just like I'd like to see Bruce Springsteen's" and "By golly, if he doesn't release his returns, I'm not voting for him." The latter obviously didn't happen.

His hatred for minorities, deportation plans, misogyny, and worse, were a much bigger factor than his tax returns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #50)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:37 PM

56. Nope- Rachel and I are talking about why we need to see his income sources and who he's is debt to

Right now. Your spin about him winning is exactly the same as DTs. That's hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #56)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:45 PM

61. You are correct, there was also a poll in January. But he was still elected, so I will stick with

those that voted for him didn't care much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #61)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:32 PM

72. That's why Rachel did a show on why we should care, silly.

She used the nothing burger to highlight what is missing. And lots of pundits today are talking about what he is hiding again. It dovetails with the Russian investigation which will not be complete without seeing his income.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #72)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 06:00 PM

74. Would love to be wrong. But even if someone connects all those dots, Trump's supporters won't care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #74)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 06:53 PM

75. It doesn't matter what they think. It matters that there's huge support growing to subpoena his

Returns. Why anyone would want to discourage that is beyond me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:54 AM

14. .



Climb down from the ledge. It will be okay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:55 AM

15. What the wha...?

That's a helluva leap to make...have you like, bumped your head recently? Bath salts much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:04 AM

17. I'm glad that i dropped csble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:34 AM

18. Sorry that everybody didn't get a cookie.

Rachel tweeted what she had before her program. She announced at the top what is was, two pages of Drumpf's 2005 1040.

Whatta ya want? Rubber biscuit?
Here, have one:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:37 AM

19. Well, no, she only announced that after Twitter went wild over her first tweet.

BREAKING: We've got Trump tax returns. Tonight. (Seriously.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #19)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:39 AM

20. I saw it too.

No biggie.

Sorry everybody didn't get a cookie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #20)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:43 AM

21. Donald got a big cookie

His supporters are practically giddy tonight that the "libs' conspiracies" about Trump's taxes have been "disproved" by one of their own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #21)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:47 AM

24. Nice try.

I disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #24)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:56 AM

25. Eh, Trump also 'disagrees' with the CBO

Color me unimpressed.

But it's a fact that Trumpland thinks they got a big cookie tonight, and lots of Saneland agrees with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #25)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 05:50 AM

35. Adorable spin

but that's not how it's being reported. First thing they're saying is donnie released them himself as a distraction. Second, they're saying he wants to get rid of the AMT which is the only reason he didn't pay 4% and that the release didn't come close to answering the questions everyone wants answered about Russia. I'm sure right wingers would like us to forget about all that and cheer the degenerate actually paid some taxes but that's not what's being reported this morning. Who give a crap what the wingers thinK? They already voted for an amoral degenerate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Azathoth (Reply #25)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:36 PM

55. That's quite the unsupported allegation you call a fact, regardless of your impressionism...

That's quite the unsupported allegation you call a fact, regardless of your impressionism or your color.

Like tapping a phone was two weeks ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #24)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:30 PM

71. really? take a look on the internet.....anywhere

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:14 AM

29. I love that song.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:43 AM

22. This sounds like something from trumpland

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:44 AM

23. No. Give it time. Rome was not built in a day. It's the first step. Watch and wait. And keep

fighting for our side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:59 AM

26. I know folks feel some kind of way but this is the funniest thing I've read in a while.. lol . lol.

Y'all need to stop. LOL LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:06 AM

27. I just think people are not thinking about the full import

what this Maddow segment revealed. What if he claims the same level of income for all subsequent years? Trump claimed he was a billionaire but his tax filing doesn't show that. So if he is a billionaire, where is the money?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:09 AM

28. I guess it was up to someone to post the stupidest OP of the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTFrog (Reply #28)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:26 PM

43. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:32 AM

30. She suggested he leaked them himself, but she overhyped.

the story. It probably helped DT. The analysis was good though.
However, I bet my last dollar, there was a plan by DTs staff to leak it. Good strategy. It is the only thing that makes sense. Also, they announced a carefully prepared statement before she even aired the story.

He is getting really close to Congress or others going after the taxes. Get a story about how much he paid first, and "let it breathe." Obviously, he is hiding his Russia and China connections. In the campaign, his sons said that they had a lot of loans from Russia (shut down quickly...geez, they are idiots).
So, he picks out one of the best years, maybe the best, as far as his paying taxes (even if it was mostly AMT). He thinks maybe if he shows this incomplete tax return, the trumpsters will be outraged that he's being harrassed, paying a bundle in taxes (by their standards), and it was leaked (the usual bury the truth or real story by making the leak or sourse the story).
It is clearly an attempt to put the tax returns issue to rest, as well as get his base riled up to defend him, if he needs it.
Poor Donnie, so mistreated by "illegal" leaks (fuck the leaked stories), and he paid so much in taxes.

Why his returns haven't come out anyway is beyond me, as much litigation as he has had. Tax returns are requested in almost all discovery. His lawyer couldn't release them, but many others could. Settlements often have gag orders, but he litigated a lot of cases. For some suits, they may even be part of a public record, though discovery docs per se are not usually filed because of the massive amount of paper. Loans and license applications require tax returns.

Betcha anything, he's exaggerating his income for loans, and reducing it for taxes. Fraud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 05:09 AM

31. First, Get Ready To Be Attacked Just For Asking Questions...

Second, we are not watchers of Rachel for multiple reasons (too many to detail) including what occurred in this latest episode (from what we have heard).

When we're watching her (now 2 years removed -- with the exception of a video clip every now and then -- literally) she would DRAG OUT whatever the topic was in an attempt to keep you locked tight to the TV screen in front of you for the entire hour.

However, the story got repetitive and she repeats herself quite often. Way too often for our taste.

The point of this is the Tax Returns were a step up. It's obvious.

First, they're 12 freaking years old. How impactful would they be in TODAY's Crazy Times with Cheeto?

Next, it is equally obvious Trump and his Sheep Crew dropped the so-called "leak" - which wasn't - as their response was way too quick for them not to have done so.

Third, the producers should have done more FACT-CHECKING and asked MORE QUESTIONS before ever going full board press with this as the top story of their day.A great question would have been Why was this one (the '05 Tax Return) was "Leaked" and sure as Hell, Why Now?

Basically, Cheeto set Rachel up and she fell for it hook, line and sinker. Cheeto is stupid but he has more than displayed when it comes to playing the media for a fool, he's well tasked at how to do so.

Maybe next time, Rachel will ask more questions before running straight to the camera, reading a script. She got played on this one and was the only news program in the 9 pm ET hour to lead with this "leaked" story like it was for real, for real #BreakingNews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Reply #31)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 05:28 AM

32. That's a ridiculous post from someone who admits to not having watched her show for the last

2 years. Rachel is an incredibly fact based journalist, there are few better in television. She was presented with this scoop by David Cay Johnston, and did due diligence herself. From having watched the show, it is clear that both Rachel and David believe this is a Donnie/John Miller leak drop, but she presented the show in a factual layered way before leading up to the interview with David. For all those new viewers, they will have been educated in where all the Russian stuff fits into where Trump is now. Trump may have leaked this to divert attention away from his lack of evidence in the Obama non wiretap, but he may have made a mistake in giving another chink of information in the fight to expose his financial dealings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 05:46 AM

34. Huh umm....

And to go forward with a "Story" that one knows was a plant "leak" is now Journalism?

It's not journalism unless one has more than the planted leak to enhance the story, on the SAME DAY the planted "leak" is reported.

And no, CNN does a great job at 9 pm ET with Anderson Cooper, thus our TV's are turned there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 06:25 AM

36. Ummm Rachel DID enhance the story, by putting it in context, in a step by step manner. It is not

true to suggest she just put it out there. There was a long lead up to the actual leaked document, where she explained and layered the context. Just because it isn't to your gimme-all-the-info-in-30-seconds "taste", well that's your choice. When many of the other liberal commentators were wringing their hands over the last 4 months, Rachel was getting on with it, and her ratings are a tribute to her research and presentation.

And the planted leak story was offered to her by David Cay Johnston, why aren't you criticising him for even bringing it to the light of day ?

The reality, as both Rachel and David pointedly said, that this is highly likely to be a Trump Dump, and they analysed it and placed it in the correct context. This may well provide another bit of info to eventually burst the Trump Empire open, even though in the short term Donnie may think he wins.

(Re CNN, I saw Van Jones contribution to that... sad!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 08:06 AM

41. Like the DNC emails on Wikileaks?

The fact they were planted didn't stop "progressives" from using them, did it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LovingA2andMI (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:41 PM

57. Your bias is both creative and imaginative...

Your bias is both creative and imaginative... though your allegations lack any objective evidence to support them, much like a bumper-sticker. Keep on truckin', little fella!!!

I did like the "prepare to be oppressed" bit though, as irrational and lazy minds have the time and the privilege to over-dramatize mere discussion to better pretend it's still all about them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #57)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:45 PM

60. And such a "Bias"...

Will be kept with this story. And so.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 06:35 AM

37. Rachel is a Republican.....

About as much as DU is a subsidiary of Breitbart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 06:50 AM

38. I think she's a liberal who became a well paid television personality

And she'll always be a team player when it comes to boosting her ratings and keeping her gig. That's what motivates a stunt like that, not ideology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 06:55 AM

39. No, she is not. How silly.

DUers who are so anxiously waiting for the "big shoe" to drop continue to be disappointed.

And then they try to blame everyone else.

Rachel is a good journalist.

People need to grow up. The shitgibbon's downfall won't come giftwrapped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 07:39 AM

40. I have serious doubts as to weather

Rachel is a "thug."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 08:07 AM

42. She is a very firm progressive. always has been.

She likes to tease the fans is her worst (best?) trait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarah FAILIN (Reply #42)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:29 PM

44. yeah that is probably a big part of it

(the teasing/drawing out aspect) ...doesn't always play well I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:31 PM

45. 2016 returns

I know NBC correspondent Hallie Jackson addressed this. No audit if you have not filed yet. Lets see the whole 2016 pre filed return now Should be demanded by every journalist. Take away the sorry Ass audit excuse!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 02:33 PM

46. She is a member of NBC and THEY gave us Trump more than any other network. They want RATINGS

and you're giving them what they want when you watch the news that did NOT find Meredith McIver, that did NOT release those reality show edits, and that took this man's calls for free all election season.

WHAT ON EARTH makes you think they will change their MO now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:12 PM

48. No and these threads are getting ridiculous

She hyped it so people would tune in to her show. Like it or not she's a cable news reporter not a saint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:17 PM

49. LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:24 PM

51. Well, Trump is not the billionaire he claims to be

Or his income would be a lot higher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:29 PM

52. Ah, now I understand some of the other posts I've been seeing today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:31 PM

53. WTF?

I mean, really, after all the support for Hillary? WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:36 PM

54. Seems she didn't have time to review it. Must've gotten a call it was coming...

and it only ended up being two pages from 12 years ago.

After all the pre-show build up I guess she couldn't not run it.

IMO it was a set-up from someone in trump's camp.

It created a temporary kerfuffle, not enough to distract, as was intended, from the story that broke today of the Russian state hackers being arrested today for their trial run info hack with Yahoo.

trump has established a recognizable pattern now. When bad news is coming they send out a shiny object distraction to take media attention away.

Hope the journalists and the rest of us get it by now and don't fall for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:44 PM

59. Does green cheese smell better on Mercury, and is it as wonderful to bathe in as alleged?

Does green cheese smell better on Mercury, and is it as wonderful to bathe in as alleged?

My question being as serious, as sincere, and as well-thought out as yours (rationalizations aside).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:49 PM

62. She works for a huge corporate media conglomerate-NBC-which is owned by Comcast.

Her job, at least in part, is to sell advertising.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #62)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 07:24 PM

78. True. But no. She is trying to turn the world around on a string show. It was overplayed.

She was banging out stories that hit too close to Trump and she was hooked and landed by Trump or his team. She will not give up. She can not give up. I thank her for working so hard to get at the truth. This little nothing thrown her way may not contain kryptonite but it may lead to another crack in his foreign protective wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:50 PM

63. What a dumb post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:51 PM

64. She may have hyped it..but the asshole in the WH had to responded to it....

funny is that he almost expected it to come in advance it must have took a week to craft the statement

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:52 PM

65. Wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 03:52 PM

66. lol no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:14 PM

67. So shooting yourself in the foot is a GOOD thing now? You're going to dis the

best voice we have looking into the Trump/Russia connection because she reported that she had a tax return, when she had a tax return.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:21 PM

69. Ratings. They must of been Huge

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:29 PM

70. Could liberals go for more than a day without shooting themselves in the foot?

If you want to make common cause with all the trump whiners over Rachel and those tax returns, have at it. But don't go out of your way to harpoon some meaningful opposition to this filthy new regime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 04:39 PM

73. Could some DUers actually be that dumb?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 07:09 PM

76. This was not a non-story

Rachel didn't solicit the (partial) tax return. It was given to her. Those who are impatient for that elusive smoking gun should not be too hasty to shoot the messenger simply because the message might have fallen short of expectations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brettdale (Original post)

Wed Mar 15, 2017, 07:20 PM

77. She wanted to get people to watch

Yes, there was the stuff about the tax return, but the REAL story was her connecting the dots between Trump and the Russians, and no one connects the dots better than Rachel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread