Keep trying to make hipocrtical hay Georgie!

I bet people are a hell of a lot more interested in what's in Hillary's speeches than Bernie's tax returns!

Must be released.


EVERY SINGLE ONE.

...that all candidates are REQUIRED to file by law.

demand copies of his paid speeches? Or those of any Rethug?

No, this is a new special standard for Hillary.

While tax returns aren't required to be released, it's standard to do so.

Clinton has released numerous years of returns and financial disclosures.

Since when have speech transcripts been asked to be released since now? NEVER

I honestly don't give a damn about her speeches. I really don't care about his taxes, but I do know which ones are normally asked for and released without issue.

...and his supporters have swallowed it whole.

to ever get this far in a race for President.

Sitting members of Congress used to be able to give paid speeches, and they were free to run for President. Did anyone ever ask John Kerry to give his transcripts? Or any of the Rethugs who have ever run?

Nope, this is just a new made-up rule for Hillary.

She was initially asked about the speeches because of the huge amount of money companies like Goldman Sachs were paying her to give them. Then at one of the debates, someone (a woman, as it happens) submitted a question, which Chuck Todd asked:

even though sitting Senators and Congressman used to give them. John Kerry did while he was in the Senate.

So excuse me if I don't believe they're not moving the goal posts to go after the first woman to get this far.

And everything that happens to Hillary that has not happened before *must* be because she's a woman?

I don't think anyone has ever made an issue before of whether or not someone was the person in a photo. I guess they did that because Bernie is Jewish.

capable of being sexist? Of course.

When I was growing up, women in this sexist culture commonly would make remarks about how other women were "catty" and that they preferred men.

As for the other point, I thought that was the first call for transcripts, based on a NYT article, and also because, the way she answered it, it sounded like she was answering the question for the first time, that she hadn't been asked before. Do you actually know of any previous time she had been asked to release the transcripts?

BTW, I think this NYT article also does a good job at explaining why it is a legit question and why it became a big issue, having nothing to do with her being a woman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/mrs-clinton-show-voters-those-transcripts.html?_r=0

And they endorsed Hillary!

that he had released several years.

And why he just now filed for an extension on his simple Senate financial disclosure form. All he would have had to do is say he had the same assets as last year . . . if that were true.

Unlike speech transcripts, releasing tax returns has long been a standard for everyone in Presidential races. But somehow Bernie can't release his returns before 2014 -- though all it would require is a call to the IRS to get copies, if he lost his hard drive somehow. Very strange.

My only point here is about whether demands for transcripts are sexist. Your reply is a non-sequitur.

But re: "All he would have had to do is say he had the same assets as last year . . . if that were true. " -- So, they're probably not the same as last year. So?

Her history and how she's always tried to make her fortune is the point.

Good for her for getting paid to speak before hundreds of people. You have a problem with a woman getting well-paid to talk?

Stop with the paranoid nonsense.

Sanders not releasing the returns is shady, shifty and damn bad campaigning.

We need to ask Drumpf to disclose his taxes too. Now THAT is important. Can't do that when Sanders drags his feet on a basic simple request.

What IS the problem?

IF Clinton did this, the hounds would be baying all night.

Or that they're collecting $1/4 mil a speech for influence.

Nothing to see here, move along.

you'd do it too.

I think you posted a link once showing he and his wife have some investment income, yet when he finally released his 2014 tax return, and it was posted here on DU, there were no amounts in his capital gains, or his dividend boxes, which makes no sense because there should always be something in the dividend box if one has investments. I think he may not want people to know what he has invested in and how much he makes on those investments. Just my take on this.

Nor did they try to give in the scandal! scandal! spin you're attempting.

you don't know any good CPA's?

Sad.

I do think that he probably has Wall Street investments that are going to make his attacks on others look hypocritical.

Is this the best Hillary supporters can do to smear a good man? Really?

Does he have a good excuse for why he hasn't released his tax forms? Other than the non-excuse that Hillary didn't release transcripts of speeches she was under ABSOLUTELY NO obligation to release, that is?

That makes him look like that 1 percent he is always screaming about.

There is absolutely something he is hiding, and we'll never know what it is.

However, all members of Congress are required by law to do so. And that should remain the law.

Actually - demagogues would be more accurate. I don't think Sanders is a joke.

Is she a tax accountant?

I would never try and do my own taxes. The whole thing is too complicated and the tax laws keep changing. I want a qualified tax preparer to sign off on them.

Especially someone in his position. It is so important that your taxes are done correctly.

doing my taxes.

and it was amazing just how many forms were required just for my little pet sitting business. I would never try that by myself . I really don't want to get crosswise with the IRS.

I've done our taxes for decades, except after we moved once. The one time we used a CPA, he got it wrong. Fortunately, I caught it and was able to fix it. Since then, I have used tax software. It keeps track of the changes in tax law, which makes it pretty easy to do these days. It's just follow the bouncing ball. I've done schedule C, sale of stock, itemized deductions, etc., even before there was software. I am not a CPA. I don't find it odd at all that Bernie's wife does their taxes. No one in my family hires a CPA.

calls for full disclosure will only get louder. Is there some "Wall Street" stuff in there that could thwart the "revolution"?

....update it from the last time. Simple. Unless of course.........

I wouldn't be surprised. That would make his 2005 PLCAA vote not only bloody unconscionable, but a corrupt conflict of interest.

The Sanders are running out the clock on this.

When he concedes the pressure to disclose will be off.

What on earth is the problem? Seems so shady.

Either that or he and his campaign were unready and unprepared and he was unfit for office.

What, doesn't he know a CPA or have a family friend who could fill out the form? If Hillary was being this coy with her financial disclosures, Sanders wouldn't hesitate to use it against her. First he won't release his tax filings (save one) because, who knows, Jane misplaced the shoe box where she keeps them. Now they're too busy to do fill out a form. And he is qualified to be president because...beats me.

Does not reflect well on him or his campaign.

Those advisors and surrogates - unimpressive for many reasons.

This doesn't pass the smell test. In fifteen minutes, i could hand you six years of tax returns and in a couple of hours, I could give you returns back to 1959. The only long delay would be in xeroxing all the paper.

Keep trying to make up a scandal. Good luck.

sarcasm of the Sanders is also sickening. Blame the wife? How progressive of him. "Oh we are all so busy to bother with your silly government required forms!"

Laws only apply to others apparently.

It's trivially easy to supply the requested information for standard investments like bank accounts, stocks, bonds and mutual funds. Perhaps there is some complicated multi-currency, possibly offshore, tax-efficient investment structure here that does not lend itself to such simple analysis? Maybe some kind of complex limited partner interest?

...or whatever.

I suspect when that number finally has to be revealed, a lot of 99%-er Sanders supporters will be disillusioned.