Trump's Complete Failure as a Business Man

[Subduction Zone]

Oh come now, it was high enough for it to happen the first time. And that's because irredeemable smelly Walmart shoppers know better than to trust their country to a Democrat traitor.

Now, now, he won because the Democrats picked the worst candidate ever. She was hardly a traitor. Quit drinking the Kool-Aid

 

[Revoltingest]

I do believe that Trump has as much admitted to trying to disguise the perceived values of those over the years. I can't remember the source but he said something that amounted to trying to make the IRS think that he does not have as much as he has and trying to make his creditors think That he has more.

We'd need reliable figures.
But even unreliable ones would still show a trend.
While tax records would require expert analysis
to adjust them to real world significance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We'd need reliable figures.
But even unreliable ones would still show a trend.
While tax records would require expert analysis
to adjust them to real world significance.

Where could we get those from?

 

[Revoltingest]

Where could we get those from?

Anyone with commercial loans at banks (& I assume other
lenders) must submit yearly financial statements. I do.
So Trump would have such a record likely at multiple banks.
(I recommend skepticism about his accuracy.)

 

[Windwalker]

On what legal grounds?

Whatever legal grounds. Truth is truth, and we should know the facts.

His tax returns showed no evidence to suggest he conspired with Russia.

Are you on crack? What tax returns???

So there is no legal grounds to release his tax returns to an unrelated matter, legally speaking.

You mean the ones you just said showed no evidence, should not be release to show no evidence? Ooops.

 

[Shad]

Is Trump the greatest ever con man in American history? Has he ever made a significant profit in his business dealings? Has he ever done more than squander the vast wealth he has had thrown at him since day one of his life?

The Trump revelation we've been waiting for: The emperor had no dough (Opinion) - CNN

How much money Trump has only matters to Trump and his detractors.

Also this is about 15 years old news.

 

[Enoch07]

Whatever legal grounds.

I don't think that's a legal statute. I could be wrong though...

Are you on crack? What tax returns???

That is what the thread is about.

You mean the ones you just said showed no evidence, should not be release to show no evidence?

Yes, they were acquired so that Mueller and his team could analyze them to look for a possible connection to Russia, to try and establish conspiracy. Obviously none was found because Mueller concluded Trump did not conspire with Russia.

Open and shut it's done. With executive privilege issued, Congress will be tied up for years trying to get these documents. Trump will be well past his 2nd term before these documents will be available to Congress, if ever. I don't see any legal ground Congress has to pursue this any further. The DoJ already compromised and allowed any in Congress to go view a less redacted Mueller report. To my knowledge only 2 Republicans viewed it, and 0 Democrats. That was a fair compromise considering the legality of it all. The DoJ didn't even have to do that. They did it in good faith it would put the issue to rest. Meanwhile Congress has made no compromises and such it shall be reflected during the court case and count against them in judgment.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Anyone with commercial loans at banks (& I assume other
lenders) must submit yearly financial statements. I do.
So Trump would have such a record likely at multiple banks.
(I recommend skepticism about his accuracy.)

Especially since we have heard of him boosting his supposed wealth when it helps him:

Trump Exaggerated His Wealth in Bid for Loan, Michael Cohen Tells Congress

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think that's a legal statute. I could be wrong though...



That is what the thread is about.



Yes, they were acquired so that Mueller and his team could analyze them to look for a possible connection to Russia, to try and establish conspiracy. Obviously none was found because Mueller concluded Trump did not conspire with Russia.

Open and shut it's done. With executive privilege issued, Congress will be tied up for years trying to get these documents. Trump will be well past his 2nd term before these documents will be available to Congress, if ever. I don't see any legal ground Congress has to pursue this any further. The DoJ already compromised and allowed any in Congress to go view a less redacted Mueller report. To my knowledge only 2 Republicans viewed it, and 0 Democrats. That was a fair compromise considering the legality of it all. The DoJ didn't even have to do that. They did it in good faith it would put the issue to rest. Meanwhile Congress has made no compromises and such it shall be reflected during the court case and count against them in judgment.

Do you really think that America is that stupid and that greedy and that immoral to reelect this fool?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Do you really think that America is that stupid and that greedy and that immoral to reelect this fool?

Sadly, yes. Especially if the Democrats refuse to field anyone with better qualifications than "it's my turn" and/or name recognition.

Never mind the fact that Trump (or his handlers) are already laying the groundwork to ignore an election loss.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...sts-hes-owed-overtime/?utm_term=.355485e12f17

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you really think that America is that stupid and that greedy and that immoral to reelect this fool?

It would depend upon who runs against him.
Ameristan wasn't "that stupid and that greedy and that immoral" as to elect Hillary.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It would depend upon who runs against him.
Ameristan wasn't "that stupid and that greedy and that immoral" as to elect Hillary.

I have always stated that Hillary was a terrible candidate, though still preferable to Trump.

 

[Revoltingest]

I have always stated that Hillary was a terrible candidate, though still preferable to Trump.

People were roughly divided about who was worse.
Will the Dems run someone better than Trump this
time....or at least no worse?
We will see.

 

[sealchan]

Apparently opinion is fact nowadays.

Objectivity is no longer important. It seems feelings are all that matters.

Yes, this was an opinion piece but it quickly summarized recent reports and featured a non-opinion video interview with one of the reporters who broke the story.

There is only the matter of trust on whether the reporters know what they are doing to piece together these financial records. But Trump's unwillingness to reveal his tax returns now has some believable motivation if this report reflects the truth.

 

[sealchan]

What's worse? He lost over a billion dollars on accident, or he lost over a billion dollars on purpose?

That's interesting...is it possible somehow that that massive loss represents a strategy? Is he being sustained entirely on Grant's or loans from others or is there some method to this "madness"?

 

[sealchan]

Interesting...I saw no specific info from the returns.
This matters because we don't know if the author's
opinion is based upon knowing how to read a return,
& how to adjust for IRS accounting oddities to determine
actual net income.

I remember a report from a few weeks ago announcing that this paper had obtained a treasure trove of data. This must be the result of what was obviously a huge effort of research and correlation. Whether we trust in its accuracy or not is undoubtedly going to be determine to a large extent by party lines. I trust it.

 

[sealchan]

Who here has actually analyzed his tax returns to see why the loss was declared?
(I searched for it during the last commercial, & didn't see it.)
One can have a profit IRL, but have a loss under IRS accounting.
(Depreciation deductions with capital gains tax treatment of recaptured
accelerated depreciation during that period created situations wherein
profitable real estate ventures showed losses. Reagan removed that treatment.)

So in your view is it possible that this report reflects facts that would indicate a profitable strategy? Does it make any difference that the apparent losses far exceed anyone elses?

 

[Revoltingest]

I remember a report from a few weeks ago announcing that this paper had obtained a treasure grove of data. This must be the result of what was obviously a huge effort of research and correlation. Whether we trust in its accuracy or not is undoubtedly going to be determine to a large extent by party lines. I trust it.

Have they released the info upon which they base their conclusion?
I ask because if Trump had lost much more money than he inherited,
then he'd gone broke long ago, & remained so. But that doesn't appear
to be the case. We see many claims, but no real data or analysis..

 

[Revoltingest]

So in your view is it possible that this report reflects facts that would indicate a profitable strategy? Does it make any difference that the apparent losses far exceed anyone elses?

Once again, tax accounting often doesn't reflect real world profitability.
So it's possible to increase one's equity while showing Schedule 1040,
E, C or K1 loses.
It's odd that we're seeing conclusions, but no analysis behind them.
Why would the NYT do that? Should we take their word on faith?

 

[sealchan]

It is illegal for the NYT to publish Trump's tax returns. But will anyone from the Left wing bias paper who's stockholders include George Soros? Who bought up $3 million dollars of NYT shares? Of course not.
I'd like to know the net worth and the liquid asset sum of CNN commentator and author of that opinion whine, Michael D'Antonio.
There are still Left wing anti-Trumpers that carp about how Trump was given a loan by his dad and Donald never repaid him. As if that would be any of our business to know in the first place.
Hate boy I tell ya, it is fascinating to watch how low Trump haters will go just to smear the man. It makes them feel accomplished I guess.
Hey Democrats, Trump is a billionaire. There's no law that says any candidate for office has to turn over their tax returns. Deal with it.

Bulverism at its finest.

Who could repay over $400 million?

It may not be a legal issue but in the court of public trust which is a huge part of public office, for better or worse, there is a clear case to be tried and a clear precedent, release of tax returns, to be followed. Maybe Congress doesnt have the right, maybe it does. I suppose that is something that will he explored.

I find it interesting that Trump's business dealing involve an unusually high amount of litigation for a real-estate magnate, let alone a president.

Legal affairs of Donald Trump - Wikipedia