Trump's tax returns

[Lurch]

Some say Trump being broke is the best wedge issue. Others, that he cheated.

I lean to the former, if the plan is to sow doubt in the MAGAhats. That Donnie cheats is a plus in their estimation; he's a rebel outside the system, doing what they'd like to do.

To stress that he's not the creature Mark Burnett built up, not the consummate winner in business that he pathologically pretends to be, well that could shake their faith in him as the man to "run the country like a business."

But word has first got to filter through the self-imposed media bubble around the cultists.

 

[turingtest]

Another Trump tweet that hasn't aged at all well-

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
@BarackObama who wants to raise all our taxes, only pays 20.5% on $790k salary. http://1.usa.gov/HFZJKH Do as I say not as I do.
1:19 PM · Apr 13, 2012·Twitter Web Client

ETA- ninja'd by Garrison.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So the NYT has given us the "eye opening revelation" (based on documents it hasn't disclosed) that Trump is no different to other 1 percenters. He has taken advantage of the complex tax laws to reduce his tax liability to practically nothing.

I'm shocked I tells you, SHOCKED!

Did that one fact stop you from noticing the rest: all the corruption and directly bilking the taxpayers?

 

[BobTheCoward]

And proving there's a trump tweet that will come back to bite him for all occasions:

Donald Trump tweet about Barack Obama’s taxes resurfaces in wake of New York Times revelations

... except he cuts taxes?

 

[JoeMorgue]

No Trump tweet has ever aged well, but that has yet to matter once.

Yes we know everytime Trump says something we can find a tweet that directly contradicts it to an almost comical degree.

Hasn't taken him down yet.

 

[Giordano]

Here is a nice list of some of the most crucial points:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ald-trump-taxes-numbers-us-president-finances

You will easily find that “they all don’t do it,” with Trump paying a total of less than 6% of the taxes from 2000 to 2007 of what the “average” percenter with equal declared earning would have paid over such a period. Trump’s average in fact doesn’t adequately show the details: in 11 of the 18 years the N.Y. Times were able to examine Trump paid zero and in 2 more years he paid $750 a year. 13 years and he paid a total of $1500 whereas a comparable percenter would have paid $3 million.

You can look over the rest for highly questionable deductions including those now under review for fraud.

I like not only the $70,000 for styling Donald’s hair but over $95,000 for styling Ivanka’s. Plus $26 million in consulting fees paid at least in part to a company owned by Ivanka.

Here is a detailed graphic list of his profits and losses helping to show what a great business man he is. Basically any business he has run has lost money:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

 

[Segnosaur]

Seems very unlikely there is criminal action before the election. At best, the NY AG or new Biden AG can extract vengeance, but Trump needs to lose first.

I agree... there won't be any criminal action before the election. Heck, given the complexity of some of this stuff, you might not even see indictments handed down until next year (after Trump is hopefully voted out of office).

Plus there is the chance that Trump won't face actual jail time, and instead just be subject to fines and certain... limitations (like the results of the Trump foundation investigation). Still, given Trump's supposedly precarious financial situation, paying some huge fines (on top of various loans coming due) could drive him further into financial ruin.

Again, none of this really impacts the House or the Democratic Party. Whether or not the NY AG is working on this is beyond our control. What should the Democrats who wield political power be doing about this news? Right now, it seems like not much.

Hard to say what they can do. They don't have the original documents so it makes it hard to do a direct investigation through congress. And even if they do investigate and verify Trump's illegal activity, there probably isn't enough time to impeach before the election anyways.

Best that can be done... use it as part of the election campaign. We've already seen some adds based on the NYT information.

 

[BobTheCoward]

No Trump tweet has ever aged well, but that has yet to matter once.

Yes we know everytime Trump says something we can find a tweet that directly contradicts it to an almost comical degree.

Hasn't taken him down yet.

You mentioned 538. Their model gives trump the same chance of winning as Biden getting over 420 electoral votes. Do you think that is accurate?

 

[Lurch]

And then he deducts it as a business expense.

The world's oldest profession, they say.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Won't make a blind bit of difference to President Trump's standing in the polls.

Give it a week and let's see.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think there is one immediate and very critical result that will come from the release of the tax returns:

no major law firm will represent him without cash up front.

I would have thought that was already a given.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In 2017 when Trump paid $750 in taxes JoeBiden paid $3.7 million.
And Biden gave $1 million to charity, Trump gave $0.

That's a lovely contrast, isn't it.

 

[JoeMorgue]

If Trump asks his followers for money he'll get it.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Looks like Barr via Graham are planning an effort to re-take the news cycle.

cough***Benghazi/her emails***cough

Lindsey Graham Hints There is ‘More Damning’ Information about the Russia Investigation to be Released

That so called damning information is more discrediting of the Steele dossier, repeating the claim the investigation into the Trump campaign team was under false premises. Psst, don't repeat the fact the dossier was not key to the initiation of the investigation.

Poor widdle Trumpy, people are so mean to him.

 

[CORed]

He's paid more to pornstars in the past 10 years than he's paid in taxes.
Ponder that for a min.

Also $70,000 on hairdressing?

He's really getting ripped off to pay that much money for such horrible results.

I still think that the attraction between Trump and Kim Jung Un was that each saw in the other's horrible hair, a kindred spirit

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You misunderstand. This is not in anyway a vindication of Trump.

We all knew that Trump was a dishonest crook long before the "startling" revelations in the NYT so this sudden shocked and outraged reaction is over the top.


From the ARTICLE:

In response to a letter summarizing The Times’s findings, Alan Garten, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, said that “most, if not all, of the facts appear to be inaccurate” and requested the documents on which they were based. After The Times declined to provide the records, in order to protect its sources, Mr. Garten took direct issue only with the amount of taxes Mr. Trump had paid.​

So not only do we don't know if the documents the article was based on are genuine, we have to rely on the NYT's interpretation of the documents.

The NYT article is almost certainly not "fake news" but otherwise, all of the numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt.

The NYT has such a record of tabloid journalism.

 

[turingtest]

No Trump tweet has ever aged well, but that has yet to matter once.

Yes we know everytime Trump says something we can find a tweet that directly contradicts it to an almost comical degree.

Hasn't taken him down yet.

Well, you know...drip, drip, drip. It isn't about any one thing taking him down, it's about how the weight of it all affects the moderate vote. Yeah, the MAGAhats will dismiss every bit of evidence for Trump's unfitness for his office, those are not minds that can be changed; my hope (emphasis on "hope") is that there are still enough truly undecided whose minds can be engaged to care to tip the vote away from him. And what ends up being a deciding factor in the election will be debatable- my personal opinion is that this tax thing won't be as bothersome to people as the demonstrable hypocrisy the GOP has indulged in with filling Ginsburg's SC seat. Taxes are more an arcane subject than simple fair play.

 

[BobTheCoward]

The NYT has such a record of tabloid journalism.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

 

[Bob001]

.....
Which is again why "OKAY BUT EVERYBODY STOP TALKING ABOUT TRUMP AND TALK ABOUT OTHER RICH PEOPLE TOO!" is a very, very, very bad idea.

It's also generally not true. Rich people benefit from favored treatment of investments, but according to this, they still pay.

The richest 400 families in the US paid an average effective tax rate of 23 percent in 2018,

https://www.forbes.com/sites/howard...han-working-people-probably-not/#f6c830b29ace

 

[Craig4]

So where might Trump have broken various laws. Lets, see, we have:

- Bank Fraud (inflating the value of assets)

- Violating emoluments clause of the constitution (use of Trump properties by foreign governments... Trump claimed he was 'giving profits to the government' but that doesn't seem to be the case.)

- Tax laws regarding gift giving (hiring children as 'consultants')

What other laws might he have broken?

(Should be noted that those are only the laws that the NYT might have uncovered.... obviously there may be many more broken laws that you would need to uncover in other ways.)

Certainly wire fraud and probably perjury. If any of the payments like the one for hair dressing turn out to be to aid his campaign, he violated criminal (as opposed to administrative) election finance laws. He may also have issues if he personally benefited from using campaign funds or inaugural funds paid to his properties.