1529
Twitter
Facebook
Fark.com Mobile
Copyright © 1999 - 2021 Fark, Inc
Last updated: Jul 07 2021 10:47:26
Contact | Report error | TOS/legal/privacy
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Full site
Copyright © 1999 - 2021 Fark, Inc
Last updated: Jul 07 2021 10:47:26
Contact | Report error | TOS/legal/privacy
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Full site
Chris Ween: Also the video was very funny.
Who would have thought that Colbert's best impression is Rachel Maddow?
close
RminusQ: Hey did anyone hear about how Maddow went about this all wrong?
Only from the people who have never watched her show.
Those who watch her regularly because they find her well-informed and articulate have already moved on.
close
close
neenerist: Stay the course. A solid record of success in the Senate, House and Oval Office back that leftist tact if you happen to be GOP.
You were pretending to be a progressive Bernie supporter in primary threads. What are you pretending to be today?
close
Chris Ween: Ok tax lesson time. Is the AMT being repealed going to reduce d income tax for that person to next to nothing? My understanding is that the AMT is a way to pay taxes on certain amounts over a certain threshold. And you compare which is the higher rate AMT or regular tax.
So, if my recollection is right, then the amount he paid under the AMT would still be taxed just t a lower rate. Not the 3% rate though.
/Never paid the AMT but have had to run the numbers both ways a few times. Maybe I'm way off.
AMT is, in effect, a flat tax for folks who make a lot of money are are good at deductions.
close
Then she has the big reveal, that she has his 2005 returns, and while he did pay 25%, if not for the alternative minimum tax (which he wants to abolish), his percentage would've dropped to around 3%. A rate that USA fraction of what middle class Americans are paying.
If not for the lack of balls, my Aunt would be my Uncle.
close
close
Oysterman: It quickly got over hyped, and looking back, you can tell she realized this. I don't think she spent so long setting it up for context or stalling, but because she and the show realized that they had nothing and possibly got played. So instead, she tried to detract from the tax return itself and instead use it to emphasize the significance of Trump not releasing all (or more recent) returns and why we need to see them.
It was doomed to fail by the time the show started, but an attempt was made.
close
fark account name: hobbes0022:
Then she has the big reveal, that she has his 2005 returns, and while he did pay 25%, if not for the alternative minimum tax (which he wants to abolish), his percentage would've dropped to around 3%. A rate that USA fraction of what middle class Americans are paying.
If not for the lack of balls, my Aunt would be my Uncle.
Are you sure?
close
Metastatic Capricorn: Chris Ween: Ok tax lesson time. Is the AMT being repealed going to reduce d income tax for that person to next to nothing? My understanding is that the AMT is a way to pay taxes on certain amounts over a certain threshold. And you compare which is the higher rate AMT or regular tax.
So, if my recollection is right, then the amount he paid under the AMT would still be taxed just t a lower rate. Not the 3% rate though.
/Never paid the AMT but have had to run the numbers both ways a few times. Maybe I'm way off.
AMT is, in effect, a flat tax for folks who make a lot of money are are good at deductions.
which is why Trumpito wants it gone
close
fark account name: hobbes0022:
Then she has the big reveal, that she has his 2005 returns, and while he did pay 25%, if not for the alternative minimum tax (which he wants to abolish), his percentage would've dropped to around 3%. A rate that USA fraction of what middle class Americans are paying.
If not for the lack of balls, my Aunt would be my Uncle.
And is your Aunt pushing for a sex-change operation?
close
gadian: Look, like it or not, what she did and the way she did it made Trump the nice guy in all of this. She did. She also made it infinitely harder for reporters with actual breaking news on Trump's idiocy to be taken seriously. Context is great. The point, though, was something the people who will ever care about it already knew. Trump will hack and slash every regulation that is prohibitive to his wealth and, to a lesser extent, those of his friends. Yes, yes, but did he do anything illegal? No? Then don't clickbait it. Pose it as "you've seen this information, but let's look at it from this perspective". Otherwise, you make yourself seem unhinged and took the wind out of the Trump anti-corruption sails.
Yup. She ended up giving Trump a lot of free, positive publicity. Trump keeps laughing all the way to the bank.
close
I, like millions of people who don't follow Maddow on Twitter, did not know it was going to be information from one measly year's 1040 forms. How can we be expecting too much from these proclamations? Besides, the little information that it does provide was already known last year.
The time for symbolic gestures is 100% f*cking done. Donald Trump and the scumbag, heartless conservatives are on a warpath to ensure that only the rich get astronomically richer with a little fascism sprinkled in. They quite literally don't give a damn who dies or how many die in the process. This horseshiat brand of journalism does nothing to help the situation.
close
Unfortunately Meadow fell for it and its really damaged her credibility
If you notice every time the press gets too close to the Trump Russia story somehow something comes along to distract from it. Im Disappointed that Meadow and her team took the bait, they are smarter then that. But something like Trumps Tax Returns is really juicy
close
The Bestest: OtherLittleGuy: FTFA:
"I hold in my hand something very significant. It is a joke. A joke that we have confirmed has been heard by Donald Trump. We believe this is the first time any joke connected to Donald Trump has been released," Colbert, in front of a backdrop meant to resemble Maddow's, deadpanned while waving pieces of paper.
"This is an old joke, from before he was President. We obtained this joke legally. The First Amendment gives us the right to tell this joke.
"The joke in question: why did the chicken ... but first, a word on chickens."
Stephen, call me if you need a Set-Up Guy. EIP.
/and buy some TotalFark for Drew
Heh, I was actually going to go digging for your post and let you know Colbert (or his writers) are clearly stealing from Fark.
After going back to the last Maddow thread, I think I found Stephen Colbert's FARK Handle
close
AteMyBrain: RminusQ: Hey did anyone hear about how Maddow went about this all wrong?
Only from the people who have never watched her show.
Those who watch her regularly because they find her well-informed and articulate have already moved on.
You have to admit, he did a pretty good impression of her style.
I don't watch her regularly because, like that segment, on the occasions I have watched her she spends 20 minutes explaining what informed people should already understand and I find it somewhat tedious. I think she is a smart woman and I agree with most of her politics (as far as I understand them) but I just can't bring myself to watch other than highlight clips that make it onto my horizon via other methods (fark, facebook, etc ...)
close
Tr0mBoNe: Pocket Ninja: Maddow does deserve mockery and scorn for that shiatshow. A lot of it.
We are in a post-context society, apparently.
The fact that she tried to put things in context is not the issue. The way she did it was pathetic. It was targeted to preteens in terms of sophistication. It rehashed things that anyone who had paid any attention already knew. And it dragged it on and on and on while indulging in sensationalist rhetoric. But I get it, it probably seemed good if you were really stoned.
close
close
gadian: Look, like it or not, what she did and the way she did it made Trump the nice guy in all of this.
No, she didn't. Trump is still the same evil shiatstain on our nation that he was the day before her television program. Trump still needs to hand over all the information on his financial dealings to prove he isn't Putin's rent-boy.
close
OtherLittleGuy: FTFA:
"I hold in my hand something very significant. It is a joke. A joke that we have confirmed has been heard by Donald Trump. We believe this is the first time any joke connected to Donald Trump has been released," Colbert, in front of a backdrop meant to resemble Maddow's, deadpanned while waving pieces of paper.
"This is an old joke, from before he was President. We obtained this joke legally. The First Amendment gives us the right to tell this joke.
"The joke in question: why did the chicken ... but first, a word on chickens."
Stephen, call me if you need a Set-Up Guy. EIP.
/and buy some TotalFark for Drew
You're farking brilliant.
close
Hyjamon: dammit, some farker in the past week of threads had a nice parody paragraph of Maddow explaining something pedestrian but really nailed it in that I could hear it in her voice. and of course I cannot find it again. anyone else know what I am talking about or can link it?
never mind, it was three posts above mine.
close
Befuddled: gadian: Look, like it or not, what she did and the way she did it made Trump the nice guy in all of this.
No, she didn't. Trump is still the same evil shiatstain on our nation that he was the day before her television program. Trump still needs to hand over all the information on his financial dealings to prove he isn't Putin's rent-boy.
She certainly made him more sympathetic to the low-moderate information crowd and feeds into the right wing narratives of unwarranted suspicion and harassment about the man. All of that and it wasn't even illegal. Of course a businessman pays as little tax as possible and he would pay less if he could. That's a positive for these people! Stop giving them good things to say about the man.
close
gadian: She certainly made him more sympathetic to the low-moderate information crowd and feeds into the right wing narratives of unwarranted suspicion and harassment about the man. All of that and it wasn't even illegal. Of course a businessman pays as little tax as possible and he would pay less if he could. That's a positive for these people! Stop giving them good things to say about the man.
Do you pay as little as possible?
close
close
ItchyMcDoogle: If you notice every time the press gets too close to the Trump Russia story somehow something comes along to distract from it.
Oh, honestly.
Investigative journalism isn't like Ludo. You don't have to start all over every time there is a distraction. If they were "close" before the distraction they are still in the same place once the distraction is over. The distraction didn't rifle through their files and shoot their sources.
Rachel Maddow is close to nothing. Any actual investigative journalist who is "close to something big" on Trump is not going on TV every night hysterically ranting about conspiracy theories, they're either quietly beavering away to get all their ducks in a row before publishing, or they're dead.
close