Did you know Julian Assange said Wikileaks is working on hacking Donald Trumps's tax returns?

Yeah, right.

The average "voter" has trouble filling out a 1040EZ, the average tax preparer has trouble with anything off the beaten path with a 1040. So the average Joe is going to look at Trump's returns and know if he's being crooked. You live in Fantasyland if you believe that

So like I said. If Trump's taxes have been audited every year for the memorable past and the Executive branch hasn't charged him with tax evasion then he's clean and that's all you need to know. He's either following the laws or the IRS is corrupt. Either way it will make no difference.

As to Nixon being a crook . . . that's your conjecture colored by your political leanings. He was never charged with any crimes, let alone convicted of any. But saying that Nixon called for Presidential candidate income tax transparency and then to turn around and call him a crook anyhow tells us all we need to know about how effective that "policy" is.

I didn't know Assange made a habit of openly admitting to personally hacking anything, rather disseminating the handiwork of others. That would be a very interesting statement indeed.

I do know he has his hands on information that will embarrass, if not implicate, a great many people. But I think I'd like to see his exact statement before diving into this one as I'd be quite surprised to find him state, seriously, that "Wikileaks" is hacking or trying to hack anyone.

Political leanings? What drugs are you on?

Nixon resigned - partly at the urging of Republicans - to avoid certain impeachment. He was spared prosecution only because he was pardoned by President Ford.

A few facts of which you obviously are ignorant. A grand jury indicted seven members of Nixon's administration - HR Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, Charles Colson, Gordon Strachan, Robert Mardian, and Kenneth Parkinson for conspiring to hinder the investigation, and named Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator. The special prosecutor dissuaded them from an indictment of Nixon, arguing that a President can only be indicted after he leaves office. John Dean, Jeb Magruder, and several other members of the administration pleaded guilty. Dwight Chapin, Nixon's former appointments secretary, was convicted of lying to the grand jury. The same grand jury indicted the Republican lieutenant governor of California, Ed Reinecke, for perjury before the Senate Watergate Committee.

In total, Watergate resulted in the indictment of 69 people, with trials or pleas resulting in 25 being found guilty and incarcerated, many of whom were Nixon's top administration officials. Attorney General John Mitchell was head of the Committee to Re-Elect the President - the group that planned and executed the actual break-in.

It was proven beyond doubt that Nixon and his close aides ordered harassment of activist groups and political figures, using the FBI, the CIA, and the IRS.

Need I continue? It's all a matter of historical record. YOU are seriously delusional. Saying Nixon was never charged or convicted is akin to saying that a Mafia kingpin was never convicted.

Mr. Nixon was only the biggest crook ever elected - bar none. I've even heard Republicans say that. Political leanings indeed.

Try and stay focused here Stewie . . .

The question was about the need for tax record disclosure by Presidential candidates, not about Richard Nixon. Your obvious politically-motivated hatred for Tricky Dick aside (and your ranting has so many legal holes in it that it looks like a sieve) just what does Nixon have to do with Mr. Trump and his tax returns? Is it just a diversionary tactic on your part to draw attention from the fact that the IRS examiners haven't found anything wrong with Mr. Trump's filings to date? Or are you trying to say that the IRS is corrupt and they have left Mr. Trump off the hook for taxes he legally owes?

Yeah, right. Splitting hairs.

That's why Enron's financial statements showed a very different picture than did their tax returns. Had anyone bothered to compare the two a lot of investors would have been spared tremendous losses. Same for WorldCOM, Bernie Madoff and countless other cautionary tails as to why tax returns and financial statements often show two totally different pictures. There's a long list.

So no, it's NOT splitting hairs.

OK, so what's your point, that Nixon was innocent but for a vast left-wing conspiracy? You must be on drugs. It was all proven in the courts of law, and plenty of folks went to prison because of it.

As for Trump, I'm not accusing him or the IRS of anything. I'm just saying that all candidates should be transparent and show that they have nothing to hide. What part of that do you not understand?

Of course, the way the campaign is going, it could all be rendered moot when Clinton romps on November 8th.

It is splitting hairs. Enron was a corporation. You're comparing apples to oranges. No wonder Mr. Trump said, "I love the uneducated!" You fit right in.