Deutsche Bank confirms it has Trump's tax returns...and will release them

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
It's what you call "rumor".
I’m a horrible person. I think the Oligarchs backing those loans happened at Deutsche Bank via secret internal bank methods. I don’t see them co-signing in any way that couldn’t be kept off public record. Deutsche Bank is a criminal interprise.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
I'm just hoping that the 28th amendment will require all Presidential candidates, regardless of party affiliation, to make full financial disclosure and, if elected, require that the President-elect place any assets that might pose a conflict of interest into blind trusts prior to assuming office.

Meanwhile, the hypocritical Useful Idiots will continue to support the President's corruption because of their fear of looking wrong, and even though we all know that they would fucking flip if a Democratic President didn't release their tax returns.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,936
5,560
136
I’m a horrible person. I think the Oligarchs backing those loans happened at Deutsche Bank via secret internal bank methods. I don’t see them co-signing in any way that couldn’t be kept off public record. Deutsche Bank is a criminal interprise.
The problem is that no one can confirm that there was a loan. Someone reported it, Trumps attorney said we're suing you for defamation, story was retracted.
This isn't journalism, it's rumor mongering.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
The problem is that no one can confirm that there was a loan. Someone reported it, Trumps attorney said we're suing you for defamation, story was retracted.
This isn't journalism, it's rumor mongering.

No doubt you prefer 'journalism' that falsely claims uranium was sold to Russia or that there's a child sex ring in the non-existent basement of a pizza parlor. Or what about the guy who was murdered supposedly to cover up the DNC hack?

At least honest journalism actually issues retractions, unlike conservative media, which just lies and doesn't care.

BTW, in order to sue for defamation here, Trump would have to provide proof that he doesn't have a loan with DB. Which he couldn't do without providing the very financial disclosure that he's trying to avoid. So.. empty threat.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I doubt the veracity of the Russian co-signer bit. There are other ways to achieve the same ends, like an understanding they'll buy Trump's debt when it's securitized using their laundered money borrowed from Russian banks. The possibilities are endless.

I hope it's a useful study in real life mega-rich tax avoidance methods for our Reps. The worst part is that it's probably all perfectly legal in ways Congress never imagined.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
The problem is that no one can confirm that there was a loan. Someone reported it, Trumps attorney said we're suing you for defamation, story was retracted.
This isn't journalism, it's rumor mongering.
This is a variation on the boy who cried wolf theme. Here, the boy cried wolf and it was a wolf that everybody ignored so many times that when he cried wolf and there was no wolf it made international news.

Trump is a criminal. He just hasn't gone to jail yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trenchfoot

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,936
5,560
136
This is a variation on the boy who cried wolf theme. Here, the boy cried wolf and it was a wolf that everybody ignored so many times that when he cried wolf and there was no wolf it made international news.

Trump is a criminal. He just hasn't gone to jail yet.
You left out "in my opinion". Critical piece of information.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
You left out "in my opinion". Critical piece of information.
I don't think it is my opinion. I think Mueller proved it. Similarly, I think the world is round not flat because I trust in the pictures I have seen of it from space, but I have never been in space to see it myself.

I am all for honesty and fair play and giving people the benefit of the doubt, but I would shoot somebody in a second who threatened the life of somebody innocent around me and that was the only way to stop them. Trump is doing enormous damage to my country and I want him stopped and I will give him exactly the respect he gives others, none at all. He is a piece of shit and a criminal.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
the dude won by ~70k votes spread across 3 states. 70k votes. That is statistically below margin of error territory (even though that isn't possible, but let's just have fun with it).

Say this information does come to light, or was available then, do you think it could have made a difference in at least 70k strategic votes out of the 62.5 million that voted for this criminal?

I think so.

again...70k votes. Deniers like to claim that no amount of the known Russian interference could have been significant enough to sway the vote with so many cast. .....70k people is less than the population of the vast majority of counties across the country--of nearly all cities. That's such a tiny amount of votes that became undemocratically significant, that yes: all of these things matter in the end.

Trump has already lost a shit-ton of support from people that voted for him in 2016. It seems that his only strategy now is to speak directly to his unwavering base, and them only. ...obviously that's a terrible idea, because he is going to need way more than that, but every little piece of information effects those voters that are obviously swayable.

Remember that the disinformation campaign was so thoroughly widespread that year, here on these forums and at rallies we had actual so-called humans repeating proven Russian propaganda (Hillary is deathly Ill! Hillary is weak on Russia! Hillary ....blah whatever!) as their reason for voting for Trump. "I hate Trump, but this [lie about Hillary!]"

People routinely admitted that their vote was influenced by proven Russian propaganda from fake Russian accounts, like the shit OrroRoRoroROROOs constantly posts on here, with zero shame. And they still do. Handwave away proven, facebook FWD FWD FWD Russian propaganda that seems to have informed enough stooges that Trump was their guy, as not being an influence on their votes, but it is literally what happened. And we absolutely know that it took less than a figurative handful of votes to make it significant.

You're bringing up a counterfactual "if this information was known he might have lost in 2016." My point was that now in 2019 in our timeline/multiverse where he actually was elected and not your imaginary one where he wasn't, that bringing it to light now isn't going to force him from the presidency or have a huge impact on his reelection bid. There's plenty of reasons for people to vote against him and adding some random bit about "see, he's only worth $50mm and not a billionaire!" isn't going to be what finally changes minds after all this time and so much misbehavior on his part.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
You're bringing up a counterfactual "if this information was known he might have lost in 2016." My point was that now in 2019 in our timeline/multiverse where he actually was elected and not your imaginary one where he wasn't, that bringing it to light now isn't going to force him from the presidency or have a huge impact on his reelection bid. There's plenty of reasons for people to vote against him and adding some random bit about "see, he's only worth $50mm and not a billionaire!" isn't going to be what finally changes minds after all this time and so much misbehavior on his part.

That's not the point & never has been. We just want to see how he makes his money & how he admittedly pays virtually no federal income taxes. It's a thing of beauty, I'm sure.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
That's not the point & never has been. We just want to see how he makes his money & how he admittedly pays virtually no federal income taxes. It's a thing of beauty, I'm sure.
Yaknow, it's funny. There's never been a question that the public has the right to know if a public official has potential conflicts of interest, until now.
Many of our Senators and representatives in Congress were successful businesspeople who sold their businesses and/or put their assets in blind trusts just so they could serve in public office. I wonder how they feel seeing Trump, brazenly as corrupt as Huey Long and not having to give a shit because his supporters are literally that stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trenchfoot

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,424
136
Yaknow, it's funny. There's never been a question that the public has the right to know if a public official has potential conflicts of interest, until now.
Many of our Senators and representatives in Congress were successful businesspeople who sold their businesses and/or put their assets in blind trusts just so they could serve in public office. I wonder how they feel seeing Trump, brazenly as corrupt as Huey Long and not having to give a shit because his supporters are literally that stupid.

On the bright side, when Democrats take back the government, I look forward to using the phrase, "shut the fuck up, you supported trump", whenever righties start bringing up stuff they completely dismissed that trump did.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
On the bright side, when Democrats take back the government, I look forward to using the phrase, "shut the fuck up, you supported trump", whenever righties start bringing up stuff they completely dismissed that trump did.

the chuds dont care. They will bring it up anyhow.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
On the bright side, when Democrats take back the government, I look forward to using the phrase, "shut the fuck up, you supported trump", whenever righties start bringing up stuff they completely dismissed that trump did.
I don't think that's a good idea. We just need to close up some of the loopholes and issues that Trump has exploited. We need to require that the President disclose their financial interests, as I said a few posts back. We need to address the issue of gerrymandering on a federal level. And yes, we need to address the issue of immigration in an open and reasonable manner, and work for compromise. And what we also really need to do is address the problem of rural poverty.
 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
6,338
1,215
126
7734d50ce96b7d5124a6509777eacbfc.jpg

Some names were conveniently redacted, but you can guess who they're referring to when they mention "immediate family".
Let's ask Lawrence O’Donnell what he thinks.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,485
2,363
136
On the bright side, when Democrats take back the government, I look forward to using the phrase, "shut the fuck up, you supported trump", whenever righties start bringing up stuff they completely dismissed that trump did.
LOL riiiight... We've seen that play out with Bush Jr. They'll just say they never supported him and therefore all their future concerns during democratic presidency are 100% valid.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
You mean Mr. Barack "Oceans levels are rising but pay no attention to my new beachfront house" Obama?
The concept of insurance escapes some people. Probably the same kind of people who think they're fighting corruption in govt by supporting a President who won't disclose his many conflicts of interest.