Breaking: Trump Tax Records Reveal He Could Have Avoided Paying Taxes for Nearly Two Decades

[Twilight Hue]

The emails were proven to contain classified information after the fact. They were not classified at the time. That's what RW media ignores to mention. Additionally, .01% of all the emails had confidential information (a total of 3 emails out of 30,000+). And confidential is the lowest form of classification. There was wrong doing on the people who sent those email to her, not her fault.

Of course it was her fault. She allowed it.

 

[Nous]

I haven't read much of this thread, but I didn't see where anyone mentioned that it might be that Trump's "loss" of a billion dollars in 1995 was not really his loss but he got to claim it because the bank(s) that primarily financed the project(s) that went belly-up merely wrote off their own loss. This was a loophole for real estate developers at the time, and this law has been changed.

 

[Revoltingest]

I haven't read much of this thread, but I didn't see where anyone mentioned that it might be that Trump's "loss" of a billion dollars in 1995 was not really his loss but he got to claim it because the bank(s) that primarily financed the project(s) that went belly-up merely wrote off their own loss. This was a loophole for real estate developers at the time, and this law has been changed.

I just heard an interview with one of the bankers on NPR.
(Listening to a whole lotta radio these days as I prep my Mr Van for a trip next week.)
His bank survived.
How?
Instead of forcing Trump into very public foreclosure, they cooperated with him so he'd appear financially healthy.
This benefited both the banks & the city.

They also broached an issue I'd avoided because I thought it a bit arcane.
But now it's out there....
The 'expert' said that if Trump personally claimed the loss, then this would
mean he had no fiduciary responsibility to any partners or investors.
As is common these days, this 'expert' cherry picked a partisan oriented
scenario, & failed to consider any wherein Trump might be correct.
Possibilities....
- He was a managing partner in a general (not limited) partnership.
- It was a solely personal loss, but he needed the financial benefit of the
tax deduction in order to handle commitments.

Neither the 'expert' nor I know the details.
But I find it irresponsible & perhaps dishonest to pontificate as though one does know.

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course it was her fault. She allowed it.

And she not only received sensitive emails, she sent some.

 

[columbus]

Neither the 'expert' nor I know the details.
But I find it irresponsible & perhaps dishonest to pontificate as though one does know.

You know what would have resolved this issue?
Trump releasing the information a year ago.
The fact that he keeps hiding all the information, while making the claims he does, is the big problem.
And that is a fact. He is still hiding a ton of information like there's something that needs to stay hidden.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

You know what would have resolved this issue?
Trump releasing the information a year ago.
The fact that he keeps hiding all the information, while making the claims he does, is the big problem.
And that is a fact. He is still hiding a ton of information like there's something that needs to stay hidden.
Tom

It is indeed the one factual thing about this matter, ie, he hasn't released a tax return.

 

[metis]

You know what would have resolved this issue?
Trump releasing the information a year ago.
The fact that he keeps hiding all the information, while making the claims he does, is the big problem.
And that is a fact. He is still hiding a ton of information like there's something that needs to stay hidden.
Tom

And it was the Donald who brought it all up originally by bragging about his wealth and his supposed heavy contributions to charity. Therefore, since he started it, he should put-up-or-shut-up, but fat chance he'd ever do the latter.

 

[columbus]

It is indeed the one factual thing about this matter, ie, he hasn't released a tax return.

And therefore is hiding the evidence that he is what he claims to be.
He could be a talented leech on society. Much of the information that is available suggests that. Like Trump University, and the lawsuits and political skullduggery around that.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

And therefore is hiding the evidence that he is what he claims to be.
He could be a talented leech on society. Much of the information that is available suggests that. Like Trump University, and the lawsuits and political skullduggery around that.
Tom

You say "leech" but it's a hopeful accusation because you don't know.
Moreover, he'd have paid gigantic property taxes no matter what.
Hypothetically, if someone's losses & income add up to zero, then to
pay no income tax is one's fair share. Deducting losses is the norm,
& the Clintons did it too.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Tax avoidance is the norm for people in "big business", so this shouldn't come as any surprise.

Who paid more taxes, you or Donald?

 

[ShivaFan]

The VP debate is over, and Tim Kaine has a new name. They now call him Poop Cookies. And, I swear to god, I just saw Jessie Jackson on Hannity who shows up on the floor after the debate, and Reverend Jackson is pregnant! (with his own love child?)...

Kaine, aka Poop Cookies, just blew it so bad. I mean, he looked like a creepy clown or something. He just lost the election for the Dems. And it wasn't me who called him Poop Cookies, it was Hillary. Look on the net. She gets up out of her lounge chair with some help and yells "poop cookies" as the debate ended. SHE IS PISSED!

 

[Guy Threepwood]

You say "leech" but it's a hopeful accusation because you don't know.
Moreover, he'd have paid gigantic property taxes no matter what.
Hypothetically, if someone's losses & income add up to zero, then to
pay no income tax is one's fair share. Deducting losses is the norm,
& the Clintons did it too.

If you don't owe the government income tax on top of all your other taxes, because you didn't clear any profit... that's a 'loophole' if you are Donald Trump

But claiming billions in welfare from government, no problem if you're Elon Musk

 

[suncowiam]

The VP debate is over, and Tim Kaine has a new name. They now call him Poop Cookies. And, I swear to god, I just saw Jessie Jackson on Hannity who shows up on the floor after the debate, and Reverend Jackson is pregnant! (with his own love child?)...

Kaine, aka Poop Cookies, just blew it so bad. I mean, he looked like a creepy clown or something. He just lost the election for the Dems. And it wasn't me who called him Poop Cookies, it was Hillary. Look on the net. She gets up out of her lounge chair with some help and yells "poop cookies" as the debate ended. SHE IS PISSED!

This has nothing to do with the thread. Go make a new thread called poop cakes and have at it.

 

[suncowiam]

And it was the Donald who brought it all up originally by bragging about his wealth and his supposed heavy contributions to charity. Therefore, since he started it, he should put-up-or-shut-up, but fat chance he'd ever do the latter.

And therefore is hiding the evidence that he is what he claims to be.
He could be a talented leech on society. Much of the information that is available suggests that. Like Trump University, and the lawsuits and political skullduggery around that.
Tom

Agree but only to the point that all presidential candidates should release all relevant info. Financials, legal records, anything that have been legally private.

Clinton has kept information on her end like the amount that was donated for her speeches and from whom. Is it relevant? I don't know until all these matters from all sides are made public.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you don't owe the government income tax on top of all your other taxes, because you didn't clear any profit... that's a 'loophole' if you are Donald Trump

But claiming billions in welfare from government, no problem if you're Elon Musk

Aye, few are aware of the massive subsidies he gets, especially for those spendy but unnecessary little electric toys burning up the roads.
The money he gets would go much farther if it were spent on affordable efficient cars instead of rich guys' playthings.
(I'm OK with their being rich. But I don't wanna subsidize'm.)

 

[Acim]

And you don't see any problem with releasing confidential national security information to the public?

Think hard.

Why would you ask the question that way?

I see the potential problem with releasing confidential national security information, all of which would very likely be redacted, or if not would possibly be on par with what Snowden did, as outweighed by the problem HRC manifested by trying to contain such information (all her emails) to her own private servers. I see the potential for her being engaged in illegal, nefarious activities as reason enough to go in this direction.

If Hillary is at all involved in the release of those emails, then less of a potential problem. If she is not, and hackers are in charge of the release, then potential problem is already being met with actual problem, in which HRC's decision makes her appear 100% culpable.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Why would you ask the question that way?

I see the potential problem with releasing confidential national security information, all of which would very likely be redacted, or if not would possibly be on par with what Snowden did, as outweighed by the problem HRC manifested by trying to contain such information (all her emails) to her own private servers. I see the potential for her being engaged in illegal, nefarious activities as reason enough to go in this direction.

If Hillary is at all involved in the release of those emails, then less of a potential problem. If she is not, and hackers are in charge of the release, then potential problem is already being met with actual problem, in which HRC's decision makes her appear 100% culpable.

Snowden... you mean the guy who can't return to the US because he'd be instantly arrested? That's the example you think should be followed?

Why do you want these emails released, anyway?

 

[Acim]

Snowden... you mean the guy who can't return to the US because he'd be instantly arrested? That's the example you think should be followed?

Essentially correct.

Why do you want these emails released, anyway?

To understand what Hillary is hiding, and possibly why.

I think this election is showing, along with this thread, that any information you may be hiding, for any reason may be leaked. So, all sides seem to be saying stop hiding the information and if you are going to insist on hiding it, then prepare to deal with it possibly being leaked. And at this stage of the game, it is hardly likely that around 40% of the people looking at the release of information will be shooting the messenger, while another 40% will be screaming that the messenger did something very illegal.

In this thread, you can see which is which. Are you on the side of - leaking Trump's tax information is all perfectly fine (because now the public does know at least some of what he was hiding), or the side arguing it is probably illegal and therefore shouldn't have been done?

 

[metis]

Agree but only to the point that all presidential candidates should release all relevant info. Financials, legal records, anything that have been legally private.

Clinton has kept information on her end like the amount that was donated for her speeches and from whom. Is it relevant? I don't know until all these matters from all sides are made public.

Actually Hillary's and Bill's income and source from those speeches has been made public but what she hasn't done is to make public what she said in some of those speeches.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Essentially correct.

It's nuts to expect electrd officials to commit serious criminal offenses just to satisfy your curiosity.

To understand what Hillary is hiding, and possibly why.

I think this election is showing, along with this thread, that any information you may be hiding, for any reason may be leaked. So, all sides seem to be saying stop hiding the information and if you are going to insist on hiding it, then prepare to deal with it possibly being leaked. And at this stage of the game, it is hardly likely that around 40% of the people looking at the release of information will be shooting the messenger, while another 40% will be screaming that the messenger did something very illegal.

In this thread, you can see which is which. Are you on the side of - leaking Trump's tax information is all perfectly fine (because now the public does know at least some of what he was hiding), or the side arguing it is probably illegal and therefore shouldn't have been done?

It isn't routine for an elected official to release emails to the public. Why this case and not others?

OTOH, it is routine for presidential candidates to release their tax returns.