In the last week it has become clear that Trump enjoyed Paris Hilton's sex tape, thought Paris was sexy at age 12, and had a cameo in a soft-core porn movie.

What a guy.

What a piece of sh*t.

Paris was probably pretty good at 12 years of age. Just imagine being a 12-year-old boy in class with Paris at the same age. He would probably be having wild fantasies about Paris instead of doing his arithmetic.

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 2:24am:

Paris was probably pretty good at 12 years of age. Just imagine being a 12-year-old boy in class with Paris at the same age. He would probably be having wild fantasies about Paris instead of doing his arithmetic.

Not a parent, eh?

mothra wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 2:33am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 2:24am: Paris was probably pretty good at 12 years of age. Just imagine being a 12-year-old boy in class with Paris at the same age. He would probably be having wild fantasies about Paris instead of doing his arithmetic. Not a parent, eh?

I'm a father, but not a "parent". My children are not with me.

I think my daughters are beautiful. One is trying to be a model. Another is studying to be a lawyer but could have a good run as a model. Saying that someone looks sexy when they are 12 years old is not creepy when said retrospectively. If someone looked at a photo of my 18-year-old and told me that she looked sexy at 12 years of age, at best, I would only be offended if it was said in a lustful fashion.

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 5:28am:

mothra wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 2:33am: UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 2:24am: Paris was probably pretty good at 12 years of age. Just imagine being a 12-year-old boy in class with Paris at the same age. He would probably be having wild fantasies about Paris instead of doing his arithmetic. Not a parent, eh? I'm a father, but not a "parent". My children are not with me. I think my daughters are beautiful. One is trying to be a model. Another is studying to be a lawyer but could have a good run as a model. Saying that someone looks sexy when they are 12 years old is not creepy when said retrospectively. If someone looked at a photo of my 18-year-old and told me that she looked sexy at 12 years of age, at best, I would only be offended if it was said in a lustful fashion.

You've no idea.

12 year old girls are not sexy.  Except to paedophiles.

12 year old boys are not consumed with what is sexy. They are just starting to notice girls.

Donald Trump is a creep.

https://pmchollywoodlife.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/donald-ivanka-trump-throwback-photo-lead-11.jpg

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 2:24am:

Paris was probably pretty good at 12 years of age. Just imagine being a 12-year-old boy in class with Paris at the same age. He would probably be having wild fantasies about Paris instead of doing his arithmetic.

Paris may well have been smokin' hot at age 12 but Trump was a grown man. His admission on the Howard Stern show was on YouTube for several years but was recently deleted but not before some people made copies. Take a look for yourself.

He also promised daughter Ivanka he would not date girls younger than herself  :o

AiA wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 2:05am:

In the last week it has become clear that Trump enjoyed Paris Hilton's sex tape, thought Paris was sexy at age 12, and had a cameo in a soft-core porn movie.

is this really what America is about when it comes to electing a Pres?....

why havent we heard this before about him??..

we all know about the smear machines you have in your country.....I guess it wont be long before Brad Pitt gets accused of ........?????..... you know what?....

I have read over time things not so good about Donald Trump but nothing suggesting this......

is this the right time to do this???.....why not before he won the nom?...save everyone the embarrassment....

in the mean time   its got nothing to do with like or dislike for me.. I wouldnt vote for either of them....

I just find this all pretty disgusting to be honest...

AiA wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 7:10am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 2:24am: Paris was probably pretty good at 12 years of age. Just imagine being a 12-year-old boy in class with Paris at the same age. He would probably be having wild fantasies about Paris instead of doing his arithmetic. Paris may well have been smokin' hot at age 12 but Trump was a grown man. His admission on the Howard Stern show was on YouTube for several years but was recently deleted but not before some people made copies. Take a look for yourself. He also promised daughter Ivanka he would not date girls younger than herself  :o

And then there are thepaedophilia and rape allegations.

One seriously creepy dude.

Creepy is right, seriously sick. YUK.


cods wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 7:12am:

why havent we heard this before about him??..we all know about the smear machines you have in your country.....I guess it wont be long before Brad Pitt gets accused of ........?????..... you know what?....I have read over time things not so good about Donald Trump but nothing suggesting this......

You must be kidding... guess you haven't been reading some of the other topics on Trump... or as I refer to him... The Creep.
You can't SEE that in The Creep, whenever he spouts off against women? Or all his young Eastern European wives?

Where have you been.? Not paying attention there Cods. :(

AiA wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 2:05am:

In the last week it has become clear that Trump enjoyed Paris Hilton's sex tape, thought Paris was sexy at age 12, and had a cameo in a soft-core porn movie.

This thread is useless without links! Lets see something besides your word.

You just want to see something salacious and prurient. I can see why you support The Creep.!


Perhaps you should look up the meaning of the words I just used, as I doubt you are smart enough to know what they mean.

Emma wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 8:47am:

You just want to see something salacious and prurient. I can see why you support The Creep.! Perhaps you should look up the meaning of the words I just used, as I doubt you are smart enough to know what they mean.

I want to see a reliable source, not some Harry Reid type of lies like last time when he accused Romney of not paying his taxes knowing the weak minded would believe it.

All the enemies of freedom support Hillary, it was easy to choose sides. If she wins 10 million illegals get amnesty and vote straight democrat from now on. More will be encouraged to come and they will get amnesty and so on and so on until we collapse.  She promised to bring in at least a million Syrian Muslims per year. She hates law enforcement, the military and the constitution.    She will appoint to the supreme court people who look for loopholes to increase government power and further restrict the rights of citizens.

So either you want to see the collapse or you are too dense to understand the danger!

Mortdooley wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 11:55am:

If she wins 10 million illegals get amnesty and vote straight democrat from now on. More will be encouraged to come and they will get amnesty and so on and so on until we collapse.  She promised to bring in at least a million Syrian Muslims per year. She hates law enforcement, the military and the constitution.    She will appoint to the supreme court people who look for loopholes to increase government power and further restrict the rights of citizens.

I want to see a reliable source.

Source not needed, Mort is correct

Bias_2012 wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Source not needed

Incorrect.


Bias_2012 wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 12:34pm:

Mort is correct

I want to see a reliable source.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Mortdooley wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 11:55am: If she wins 10 million illegals get amnesty and vote straight democrat from now on. More will be encouraged to come and they will get amnesty and so on and so on until we collapse.  She promised to bring in at least a million Syrian Muslims per year. She hates law enforcement, the military and the constitution.    She will appoint to the supreme court people who look for loopholes to increase government power and further restrict the rights of citizens. I want to see a reliable source.

https://i.imgsafe.org/21711564db.jpg

Hadn't looked at any of your posts for quite a while.....just had to look......my, my, your still the same.....here's your source......putting you back on IGNORE, so don't bother responding. https://i.imgsafe.org/d4ea7d5.gif

http://www.masterfoods.com.au/media/401685/flavoured_sauce_group5.png

mothra wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 6:35am:

You've no idea. 12 year old girls are not sexy.  Except to paedophiles. 12 year old boys are not consumed with what is sexy. They are just starting to notice girls. Donald Trump is a creep.

You being female do not realise that men have sexual attraction to females that they believe that they can mate. It usually dissipates when the child is under the age of 12. But you can't label someone a paedophile for saying that a 12-year-old looks sexy. If a man has a sexual urge to have sex with a girl aged 12 or under, then you can label it paedophilia. Otherwise, it is just a compliment to call someone "hot".

And I would tell you that 12-year-old boys going through puberty have sexual urges for their female friends and classmates. Their minds are just processing the chemical changes in their bodies. The number of times as a 12 year old I was lusting after girls, I would assume many other boys my age had the same ideas.

Actually, at 12, I was lusting after older women. Lost my virginity to an older woman at quite a young age. I can't fault Trump for making a comment that would only get blown out of proportion and context during his run for presidency.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Mortdooley wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 11:55am: If she wins 10 million illegals get amnesty and vote straight democrat from now on. More will be encouraged to come and they will get amnesty and so on and so on until we collapse.  She promised to bring in at least a million Syrian Muslims per year. She hates law enforcement, the military and the constitution.    She will appoint to the supreme court people who look for loopholes to increase government power and further restrict the rights of citizens. I want to see a reliable source.

Quote:

............Undocumented immigrants who qualify for DACA and DAPA are able to obtain work permits........... ................Supervised release instead of detention for families who don’t pose flight or public safety threats. Close private immigration detention centers......... ...........Clinton plans to defend DACA and DAPA, President Barack Obama’s plans to defer deportation for undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents and people brought to the U.S. as children............

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/15/compare-candidates-clinton-vs-trump-immigration/

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Mortdooley wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 11:55am: If she wins 10 million illegals get amnesty and vote straight democrat from now on. More will be encouraged to come and they will get amnesty and so on and so on until we collapse.  She promised to bring in at least a million Syrian Muslims per year. She hates law enforcement, the military and the constitution.    She will appoint to the supreme court people who look for loopholes to increase government power and further restrict the rights of citizens. I want to see a reliable source.

Quote:

you ever believed that Hillary Clinton’s immigration stance was driven by anything other than cynical opportunism, you may want to reconsider. Already, Clinton has adopted a Merkel-like position on immigration. During the Democratic primaries, eager to avoid the ghosts of some unsavory comments she made in 2014, Clinton espoused a doctrine of open borders. “I would not deport children,” she said in March. “I do not want to deport family members either.” In other words: If you come here with your family, you will be allowed to stay. And if you’re already here illegally, Clinton believes in creating a path to citizenship for you, with or without Congress’s consent. None of these views place her outside the Democratic mainstream, at least as it stands at the moment. But of late her immigration stance has become incoherent. She still wants immigration reform, but now it seems like a path to citizenship is all such reform entails, at least on the first go-round. In a recent interview with Ezra Klein of Vox, Clinton said she opposes a plan that would also deal with reforms to the process by which high-skilled immigrants are granted visas: Comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship would deal with a lot of these concerns, not just the 11 million people here: how we would regularize them, what kind of steps they’d have to go through. Because I believe they do have to meet certain standards if they’re going to be on a path to citizenship. But I don’t want to mix that with other kinds of changes in visas and other concerns that particularly high-value technical companies have. In fact, I think keeping the pressure on them helps us resolve the bigger problem, and then we can look to see what else, if anything, can and should be done [emphasis added]. Put another way, Hillary Clinton not only believes that visa reform for high-skilled workers shouldn’t be part of immigration reform, but also that visa reform might not be a good idea at all. Clinton has taken the exact inverse position of the subset of economists who argue that an influx of high-skilled immigration, facilitated by visa reform, is an unequivocal economic good, and that the economic effects of low-skilled immigration are less positive. For some reason, she views the issues of visa reform and a path to citizenship as mutually exclusive, rather than symbiotic. Accordingly, she would focus on a path to citizenship while consciously rejecting efforts to reform the visa system. Why is that? Because holding the sword of Damocles over the heads of the companies that rely on high-skilled immigrants is a more expedient way for her to push through her policy agenda (“the bigger problem”). It seems likely that Clinton believes she can leverage the promise of future visa reform to secure the support of tech companies for her path-to-citizenship efforts in the present. Hillary looks at the immigration issue as a surefire way to boost Latino turnout in battleground states. There’s another reason, too. It’s fairly obvious from the interview that Clinton conceives of immigration more as a political problem than as a moral one. This is not to say that she is wholly cynical and sees no moral problems with the immigration status quo; it’s just that she looks at the issue, first and foremost, as a surefire way to boost Latino turnout in battleground states such as Florida — states that might otherwise break for Trump. This shouldn’t be so surprising. In American politics, protectionism is the order of the day; thanks to Trump and Bernie Sanders, there are now whole swaths of voters on the left and the right with a visceral distrust of free trade. Clinton, faced with Sanders’s unexpectedly stiff challenge, tacked to the left on trade, coming out against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. ............

tbc

Quote:

...................against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Read a bit further in the Vox interview and it becomes clear that Clinton views her immigration stance as, in some sense, a protectionist measure designed to impede the outsourcing of jobs: I would add that one of the biggest complaints I hear around the country is how callous and insensitive American corporations have become to American workers who have skills that are ones that should make them employable [emphasis added]. The many stories of people training their replacements from some foreign country are heartbreaking, and it is obviously a cost-cutting measure to be able to pay people less than you would pay an American worker. . . . I want to see companies have to do more to employ already qualified Americans. This is more nefarious that it seems, or than it would be if Clinton were consistent in her protectionism. She doesn’t like foreign workers coming and taking high-skilled American jobs, jobs held by people who “have skills that are ones that should make them employable.” Jobs held, perhaps, by the sort of people who voted for her. The sort of people whose donations fill her campaign’s coffers. For Clinton, high-skilled jobs should — for some reason — fall into the category of jobs worth protecting. If there exists an American with the requisite skills for such a job, he should be hired and certainly shouldn’t be forced to train his own replacement. But she doesn’t maintain the same stance for unskilled jobs. Maybe this is urban disdain for unskilled workers; maybe it’s because blue-collar Americans weren’t part of the coalition that helped her beat Sanders and won’t be part of the coalition that tries to help her beat Trump. In either case, it’s a sign that Clinton does not view all jobs equally, and for reasons that aren’t entirely savory, besides. There are cultural consequences to this political stance. The jobs of the working class, the unskilled workers who have already suffered most from the effects of globalization, are viewed as far less important than those of their Silicon Valley compatriots and the supposed “rights” of people who have come to this country through a subversion of the law. This stance is likely only to make the divide between urban cultural elites and disaffected post-industrial nationalists worse. In a sense, it’s also a reminder that progressive leaders have long paid mere lip service to the class struggle that is ostensibly a core tenet of their politics. Give Clinton credit for this much, however: At least we know where her priorities lie. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437903/hillary-clinton-immigration-reform-politics

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437903/hillary-clinton-immigration-reform-politics

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Mortdooley wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 11:55am: If she wins 10 million illegals get amnesty and vote straight democrat from now on. More will be encouraged to come and they will get amnesty and so on and so on until we collapse.  She promised to bring in at least a million Syrian Muslims per year. She hates law enforcement, the military and the constitution.    She will appoint to the supreme court people who look for loopholes to increase government power and further restrict the rights of citizens. I want to see a reliable source.

Quote:

............Clinton has said that one of her immediate priorities, if elected, would be to extend President Obama's executive actions on immigration, giving a broad group of undocumented immigrants the opportunity to apply to law enforcement for a reprieve from deportation. The courts, however, have stymied Obama's most recent effort to give temporary relief to several million undocumented immigrants. Whether Clinton would be able to do any more depends on whether the courts agree that the president has the authority to do more..........

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/07/what-hillary-clinton-would-do-to-america/

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 9:36pm:

I can't fault Trump for making a comment that would only get blown out of proportion and context during his run for presidency.

The bloated orange douche bag has been accused of raping a child.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 10:02pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 9:36pm: I can't fault Trump for making a comment that would only get blown out of proportion and context during his run for presidency. The bloated orange douche bag has been accused of raping a child.

Yeah. Just recently. During a presidential campaign.

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 11:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 10:02pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 9:36pm: I can't fault Trump for making a comment that would only get blown out of proportion and context during his run for presidency. The bloated orange douche bag has been accused of raping a child. Yeah. Just recently. During a presidential campaign.

@Unsub....the PekkaHead has been sounding that lame non-issue for months now, but here in Australia....

In America it's a non-issue......I've looked far & wide, even posted to Americans on the subject.

They laughed it off as being what it is.....an election year smear campaign which is all made up by an unknown, who won't be interviewed, who the court can't even verify actually exists.

Any American in any State, if they put up the cash can post an accusation about any other American, on any issue/charge.......it happens every day, by a plethora of unscrupulous people, & it happens adjacent to election day 10 times more than at any other time......accusing a political candidate is most popular....stands to reason.

It's a typical hoax/scam.

The PekkaHead will try to smear anyone that says what I've said here as defending a child rapist, when there's no rapist to defend .... only an anonymous accuser (because the accuser has yet to come forward to the court), so the court has placed it where it deserves to be, in the almost-dead files....still on the pending listing, but deemed unprosecutable .......again.... just like 20+ years ago when the same scam first surfaced in California, where it was summarily thrown out due to lack of merit.

Panther wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 11:26pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 11:02pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 10:02pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 9:36pm: I can't fault Trump for making a comment that would only get blown out of proportion and context during his run for presidency. The bloated orange douche bag has been accused of raping a child. Yeah. Just recently. During a presidential campaign. @Unsub....the PekkaHead has been sounding that lame non-issue for months now, but here in Australia.... In America it's a non-issue......I've looked far & wide, even posted to Americans on the subject. They laughed it off as being what it is.....an election year smear campaign which is all made up by an unknown, who won't be interviewed, who the court can't even verify actually exists. Any American in any State, if they put up the cash can post an accusation about any other American, on any issue.......it happens every day, by a treasure trove of unscrupulous people, & it happens adjacent to election day 10 times more than at any other time......accusing one of the political candidates. It's a hoax/scam. The PekkaHead will try to smear anyone that says what I've said here as defending a child rapist, when there's no rapist to defend .... only an anonymous accuser (because the accuser has yet to come forward to the court), so the court has placed it where it deserves to be, in the almost-dead files....still on the pending listing, but deemed unprosecutable .......again.... just like 20+ years ago when the same scam first surfaced in California.

take a moment to consider what that says about Trump's supporters, that a serial tax-dodger's child rape allegations are not an issue ...

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 9:36pm:

mothra wrote on Oct 3rd, 2016 at 6:35am: You've no idea. 12 year old girls are not sexy.  Except to paedophiles. 12 year old boys are not consumed with what is sexy. They are just starting to notice girls. Donald Trump is a creep. You being female do not realise that men have sexual attraction to females that they believe that they can mate. It usually dissipates when the child is under the age of 12. But you can't label someone a paedophile for saying that a 12-year-old looks sexy. If a man has a sexual urge to have sex with a girl aged 12 or under, then you can label it paedophilia. Otherwise, it is just a compliment to call someone "hot". And I would tell you that 12-year-old boys going through puberty have sexual urges for their female friends and classmates. Their minds are just processing the chemical changes in their bodies. The number of times as a 12 year old I was lusting after girls, I would assume many other boys my age had the same ideas. Actually, at 12, I was lusting after older women. Lost my virginity to an older woman at quite a young age. I can't fault Trump for making a comment that would only get blown out of proportion and context during his run for presidency.

So you want the US to be run by the equivalent of a 12 yr old boy eh?  Guess your brain stopped growing around about then. You are a creepy crawly as well. You see, civilisation requires certain levels of control on OUR basest desires.
This is NOT possible for 12 yr olds, so your argument is not only offensive, but stupid.

Trump will be the next President of the United States irregardless of a lying, woman hating, female destroyer, murdering, crusty skank named Clinton.....who, on the record, got a child rapist off scot-free on a legal technicality, even though she knew he was guilty, & she even joked about knowing it......

Oh the histrionics  ::)

Your embellishments add nothing to your argument Pussy. Give it a rest.. What will be will be.

I still believe there are enough sane voters in the US to put Trump where he deserves to be,  on the losing side, and brought to account for his crimes.

AiA wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 11:37pm:

take a moment to consider what that says about Trump's supporters, that a serial tax-dodger's child rape allegations are not an issue ...

Serial tax dodger???......if one does not pay any tax in any given year due to using legal deductions prescribed by the tax law, that tax filer is not dodging tax, he/she is legally avoiding paying a tax legally.

Rape Allegations.......False allegations, a hoax/scam, made by someone that has never lived where they were claimed to live, who never owned the phone their affidavits say they owned, who's name is known to no one anywhere, & who refuses to be interviewed by the court. The exact same allegations were thrown out of California court over 20 years ago due to lack of merit, & according to court documents will eventually be thrown out again....or simply allowed to rot in a box in some dark basement.....because the unknown person, the accuser, refuses to face a judge for pertinent questioning......why, because she doesn't exist.

This is yet again another typical election year scam, that seems to only be an issue here in Australia, & Croatia. The MSM in America, who would have vested interests in something like this, doesn't even give this resurrected case any credibility. Search it out in American political forums, search it out on major search engines.....empty of anything realistically viable from a reliable, credible, main stream source.

It's not an issue.

Emma wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2016 at 11:40pm:

So you want the US to be run by the equivalent of a 12 yr old boy eh?  Guess your brain stopped growing around about then. You are a creepy crawly as well. You see, civilisation requires certain levels of control on OUR basest desires. This is NOT possible for 12 yr olds, so your argument is not only offensive, but stupid.

No. I want the United States to be run by someone who makes the right, tough, and fair decisions. Trying to drag someone's dignity through the mud over a one line comment about someone's sexual appeal when she was 12 is not something worthy of debate.

And since you seem to identify as female, what makes you qualified to say that I'm a "creepy crawly" for saying that I had sexual urges at 12 years of age? These urges started at 10 and got quite strong around 12. My sexual peak was about 19, and lasted for a good several years. I bet YOU will go through those changes, when you reach about 35 to 40 years of age. YOU will probably be looking for some young stud to bounce on because you have "I need it" type thoughts

Get some basic life experience. Or at least think back to your days growing up. Years ago, rapists were common and unpunished. You would need to have a gang of people to support the victim. Or you had to be from an upper-class society to take justice out on an alleged rapist. And if someone punched you, you either punched back, or let it slide. There was no court system to mete out justice.

At the very least, get some idea what you are talking about before you type it down.

Panther wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 12:17am:

[size=11][font=Georgia][i]Serial tax dodger???......if one does not pay any tax in any given year due to using legal deductions prescribed by the tax law, that tax filer is not dodging tax, he/she is legally avoiding paying a tax legally.

do you really think an undecided voter making USD 10.00 per hour will be fine with someone with Trump's wealth not paying taxes?

AiA wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 12:47am:

Panther wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:17am: [size=11][font=Georgia][i]Serial tax dodger???......if one does not pay any tax in any given year due to using legal deductions prescribed by the tax law, that tax filer is not dodging tax, he/she is legally avoiding paying a tax legally. do you really think an undecided voter making USD 10.00 per hour will be fine with someone with Trump's wealth not paying taxes?

No one said Trump didn't pay taxes, they claimed he didn't pay federal income taxes. They just want  everyone to believe he didn't pay any type of taxes. If you had ever filled out your own long form tax return you might understand what is deductible. I am sure Trump has paid millions every year in property taxes and as a resident of  New York his state income taxes also cost millions every year.

Rush Limbaugh moved his whole operation to Florida from New York because of it!

Mortdooley wrote on Oct 4^th, 2016 at 5:27am:

AiA wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:47am: Panther wrote on Oct 4th, 2016 at 12:17am: [size=11][font=Georgia][i]Serial tax dodger???......if one does not pay any tax in any given year due to using legal deductions prescribed by the tax law, that tax filer is not dodging tax, he/she is legally avoiding paying a tax legally. do you really think an undecided voter making USD 10.00 per hour will be fine with someone with Trump's wealth not paying taxes? No one said Trump didn't pay taxes, they claimed he didn't pay federal income taxes. They just want  everyone to believe he didn't pay any type of taxes. If you had ever filled out your own long form tax return you might understand what is deductible. I am sure Trump has paid millions every year in property taxes and as a resident of  New York his state income taxes also cost millions every year. Rush Limbaugh moved his whole operation to Florida from New York because of it!

oh dear, more splitting of hairs by the 99% to defend their overlords from paying taxes ... drug addict rush limbaugh? who cares what he does - his audience is shrinking so fast that by the 2020 election he will have zero listeners ...

I didn't think you could grasp such a simple idea as tax deductions but I had to try.

This bitch is as f@#$ing mad as a hatter.....

http://truepundit.com/under-intense-pressure-to-silence-wikileaks-secretary-of-state-hillary-clinton-proposed-drone-strike-on-julian-assange/

Like most of the rest of the world. ::)