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?
Well if you are right that is a good question. Thanks for that feedback. I will keep it in mind.
But I do tend to trust reporting that indicates method and describes it's own limitations. We all have to come to some level of trust in reporting and experts in order to participate in society. I dont need to declare guilt but I can at least make evaluations of trust.
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..
What bias do you claim I have?
Your following sentences suggest greater bias.
I don't need his tax returns at all...except for discussion purposes here.
They don't affect any policies he'll favor or oppose.
And that is what matters to me.
I don't think that was really called for, nor do I think you choice of words ("naïve/gullible") particularly reflective of where I'm coming from.
When I first meet someone, my first instinct is not to try and hide my wallet, cower in fear because I suspect they're planning something nefarious, refuse to shake their hand because they might take my rings, or put up my guard against anything they say. My first instinct is to at least give them a chance, and that (while admittedly having its risks) allows for the possibility of establishing a mutually beneficial relationship. I can decide how that is going as the relationship proceeds, but to decide before it begins is to deny the possibility altogether, probably without cause.
You are, of course, free to mistrust everyone who ever enters your presence (which I'm beginning to suspect you might do), but my own feeling is that that is likely to lead to a lonely, possibly miserable existence.
Is there risk in trusting? Of course, because there's risk in everything. But there's also very little to be gained without taking a risk, here and there.
I agree. I think that the best policy is to assume the best regarding anyone new, but don't naively risk your trust until through experience one gains confidence in an individual. Repeated interactions determine character and fill out, even unconsciously, a scorecard that one can rely on given one's own inevitably biased attitude. At some point one may learn a hard lesson in that but that is how we must operate.
I think some propagate the anti-Trump rhetoric just to watch Republicans respond and get upset. Others may be doing it because it is literally their job. Remember when the DNC was found out to be paying Internet Trolls to Troll forums and political topics? The rest may just buy the Democrat garbage because they believe what they're told watching non-credible Liberal bias news outlets like CNN and MSNBC. And as we know, CNN has admitted to broadcasting fake news.
When Trump wins in 2020 what then? I doubt they will realize their smear campaign, defamation and slander agenda against Trump didn't work. Rather, I think they'll see it as another opportunity to spend 4 more years lying about Trump as they continue to be eat up with hate. The forum Trolls will have four more years of paychecks. And the deluded believers in Left wing propaganda reporting will remain numb above the eyebrows. And guaranteed there will be another resurrection of the, Trump is just like Hitler, slur.
I will admit that with Trump in office I have become much more aware of political drama. I hear about some of the earlier scandals with Democrats and realize this. So I take it as a point of edification for myself. Trump scares me and so I scrutinize more than I have before. I do listen to considered critiques and try and make room for my own biases to give room to other opinions. So I appreciate the references to past issues and will keep it in mind.
However, past bad actions don't make room for current ones unless we want to intentionally lower the bar for our public officials conduct...
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.
I just want to interject randomly here to say that I trust your opinion Revoltingest even if we sometimes deeply disagree on things. Your character forces me to listen to ideas that might run counter to my biases.
The leading democrats who have entered the 2020 race have produced their tax returns because it's the smart thing to do. Are you implying that you wouldn't? If you ran for office and did not many voters would assume you had something to hide. That isn't very smart.
From his unwillingness to release his returns I assume Trump has something to hide. But I don't care if we ever see them. There's ample other evidence that our president can't be trusted. I've made it a rule in business never to enter into a contract with someone I would not be willing to trust on a handshake. I would never enter into a deal with Donald Trump no matter how profitable the numbers looked.
Trump supporters don't care enough about the integrity issue so they voted for him despite not releasing his returns and other evidence of weak character. We'll find out in 2020 whether character matters to most American voters or not.
I just want to interject randomly here to say that I trust your opinion Revoltingest even if we sometimes deeply disagree on things. Your character forces me to listen to ideas that might run counter to my biases.
Trump supporters don't care enough about the integrity issue so they voted for him despite not releasing his returns and other evidence of weak character.
Some of us saw a lack of character in both major candidates.
And we voted based upon which we thought was better or worse.
Seeing tax returns & complaining about snatch grabbing matters
most to anti-Trumpettes these days.
But for some of us there are more important issues...
War
Economy
Regulation
Civil liberties
Supreme Court nominees
Sure, sure, Trump is a boor, a cad, untrustworthy, & less than thoughtful.
But Hillary is dishonest, a domestic abuser, corrupt, & less than competent.
So both have personal traits which should've prevented their ever winning
their party's nomination. But it didn't work out that way.
To the Republicans' credit, they tried to prevent Trump's ascendancy to power.
But Democrats rigged their primary process to anoint Hillary, despite Bernie's
greater initial appeal.
Some of us saw a lack of character in both major candidates.
And we voted based upon which we thought was better or worse.
Seeing tax returns & complaining about snatch grabbing matters
most to anti-Trumpettes these days. But for some of us there are more important issues...
War
Economy
Regulation
Civil liberties
Supreme Court nominees
Sure, sure, Trump is a boor, a cad, untrustworthy, & less than thoughtful.
But Hillary is dishonest, a domestic abuser, corrupt, & less than competent.
So both have personal traits which should've prevented their ever winning
their party's nomination. But it didn't work out that way.
To the Republicans' credit, they tried to prevent Trump's ascendancy to power.
But Democrats rigged their primary process to anoint Hillary, despite Bernie's
greater initial appeal.
We agree that Hilary was a worthless candidate. We won't agree on politics in general because you lean right and I'm so far left I start by quoting Karl Marx. But I put in bold the one sentence of your post that is the main difference between us: But for some of us there are more important issues (than character)...
I don't think there is anything more important than character in an election -- and never has been.
I put myself in the shoes of foreign leaders. I know that if I want to bamboozle Donald in a deal I start by telling him how wonderful I think he is like the leaders of Russia, China and N. Korea have done. Those tactics were predictable if you understand the man's personality and lack of character. That's why Putin wanted to see him elected.
America is at a minimum very close to that, but the choice may not be up to America to make. Who does Putin want in the White House? Probably Trump. That may be the deciding factor. As I've argued in the past, if Putin has the means and motivation to tamper with the election, he should be expected to do so. There is evidence that that occurred in 2016. Manafort was convicted in part of delivering voter registration data to the Russians.
Evaluating Trump's successes and failures in business are not the reason for wanting Trump's taxes. His taxes are part of the documentation necessary to do the forensic accounting needed to evaluate him for financial crimes such as tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering. A few other embarrassments may ensue, such as showing that Trump lies about his wealth, taxes paid, and charitable contributions made.
We have a pretty good idea of what kind of a businessman he is. He probably began with relatively good intentions to make an honest living as a real estate developer, but unlike his father, who amassed a large fortune, Trump just kept losing money and accumulating bankruptcies. This came through in a documentary I watched on the life of Donald Trump. He was a much mmore likeable man when he was younger.
Eventually, American banks wouldn't loan him money, at which time he likely turned to shady financial sources such as the Saudis and the Russian mob, and has likely been sustaining himself dishonestly since. He also tried making money outside of real estate with the Trump brand and assorted lesser ventures like Trump University, and to remake himself as a celebrity.
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.
I don't think it's been confirmed that Mueller ever saw Trump's taxes. And we'll probably find out what Mueller concluded when he testifies. He and his team have been disagreeing with Barr's pronouncements about it.
The case is done when the Democrats, federal prosecutors for SDNY and EDVA, and state level prosecutors say it is. As long as there are ongoing investigations and potential prosecutions, nothing is shut or done.
I suspect that the Republicans are going to regret prodding the House to conduct its own more thorough investigation. I'll bet that eventually the Republicans offer up as much of the Mueller report as is legal in an effort to get them to call off the dogs once they see where the Democrats are headed.
But it's unlikely that the Democrats, recognizing that they are the only entity with any interest in protecting America from a rogue president, an indolent Republican party failing in its role in oversight, and a foreign adversary with malicious intent for America, will back off until this matter is resolved.
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.
If the Democrats rejected it, it's because they had their reasons. They owe Trump and the Republicans absolutely nothing, including any form of compromise, cooperation, or even cordiality if it serves their interests to do otherwise..
One only need repeat the facts from history, and Trump's life smears him.
The man is an admitted serial sexual predator and serial adulterer. He has been convicted of multiple types of business fraud including his Trump University conviction and the multiple lawsuits he has lost or settled for failing to pay employees and contractors, not to mention the recent improprieties uncovered in what was being called a charitable organization, but turned out to be a way for Trump to funnel money.
He mocks the handicapped. He's deliberately disrespectful to political adversaries such as "Nancy" and "Little Adam Schiff." He appears to be in Putin's pocket and holds secret meetings with him. He's damaging America on the world stage. He wrested children from their mothers and puts them in cages to feed the hatreds of his base, there has been rumbling about defunding the Special Olympics, and Trump allowed Puerto Rico to languish in his indifference to brown skinned people following a devastating hurricane.
What an utterly deplorable person this is.
Trump is also a huge security risk with his unsecured phone line and secret conversations with Putin, as well as his and the Republican party's indifference to American election fraud from foreign entities. How about giving security clearances to the likes of Kushner against the advice of security professionals. These are the main dangers to US security, not ragtag caravans of powerless people seeking asylum. The invaders aren't at the southern border. They're in America's computers.
America is also at risk for having its systems hacked, which can result in banking chaos, shutting down power grids, choosing America's "elected" officials for it, air traffic disasters, American nukes tampered with, hijinx in low earth orbit (satellites), and more. It's only a matter of time if effective defenses aren't instituted, and Trump isn't interested in diminishing risk because Putin isn't. Trump's relative indifference to this problem makes him the friend of America's enemy, and makes living in America that much riskier.
And Trump has got his hand in the tax-payer's pocket to line his own with hotel, restaurant and golf cart fees paid to his business interest for a large retinue of secret service agents and assorted other personnel. The man can't open his mouth without lying to the extent that an interview with him under oath is being called a perjury trap, as if he could be made to perjure himself against his will. He lied throughout his campaign about releasing his taxes, another fraud, and he lied about having Mexico pay for his wall fantasy, yet another fraud.
He's already precipitated trade wars, an unstable stock market, and a government shutdown. And now he's in full tin-horn dictator mode trying to suppress transparency and the separation of powers in government.
This man is a disaster for America. Some people in America still object to such things and find such a person deeply unacceptable.
Is this what you mean by a smear? I'd call it a sincere criticism based in evidence, one demanding investigation to resolve. I'd call what people who defend Trump do failing in one's civic duty to be informed, to be vigilant, and to defend American values and traditions from an assault on them.
The Democrats are dealing with it. My guess is that they'll have to give up on the Mueller report and do their own thorough investigation from scratch. It appears that Mueller didn't investigate Trump for financial crimes, which the Democrats appear to be preparing to do. That's what the taxes are for. As I indicated to @Revoltingest , in conjunction with banking records and private financial records, it will be possible to investigate Trump for tax evasion, banking fraud, and money laundering, which is almost certainly what all that casino money represented.
The House can probably get more done than Mueller did, and do it faster. One committee can specialize in investigating obstruction of justice, another in conspiring with the Russians including violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, another on violations of campaign financing laws, another investigating financial crimes, etc..
Schiff appears to be preparing cases to turn over to federal prosecutors. From a few days ago. Schiff is arming for bear:
"Earlier this week the Daily Beast reported that Adam Schiff and the House Intel Committee has hired a former FBI financial crimes chief to investigate Trump. Then last night Rachel Maddow reported that Schiff has also hired three former U.S. Attorneys and an investigator who speaks Russian. Schiff is a former prosecutor himself, so it’s not surprising that he would want to assemble this kind of prosecutorial firepower.
"But these specific details help point to where this is headed. Various House committees are probing various aspects of Donald Trump’s finances, but the House Intel Committee is specifically focused on Trump’s financial ties to foreign nations and foreign entities. By hiring such an A-list financial crimes investigator, Schiff is revealing that he intends to expose the money trail between Donald Trump and other nations, even though Robert Mueller apparently didn’t go there. The addition of the Russian-speaking investigator tips off that Schiff is going deep into the Trump-Russia connection.
"Meanwhile, the addition of three former U.S. Attorneys suggests that Adam Schiff is planning to build a de facto federal criminal case against Donald Trump, which could then be served up to the Department of Justice once Trump is gone so he can be prosecuted for what Schiff finds."
So yeah, the Democrats are dealing with it, but in their idiom, and not according to the recommendations of their adversaries. They aren't listening when Trump says, "Witch hunt," or Barr says "No collusion," or McConnell says "Case closed."
The next step in dealing with this appears to be to deconstruct Barr. It's essential that the Democrats bring the full force of the law on him for refusing to comply with his subpeona. If possible, they should fine him, arrest him, file articles of impeachment against him, and move to have him disbarred (no pun intended), then see how the next person who is subpoenaed responds.
The Republicans are bringing Judgment Day on themselves. My hope is that the Democrats have the integrity and power to make it swift and decisive. My conscience demands it.
How timely of you to bring this up now that there is talk of Trump refusing to leave office, another item on the checklist of dictatorial traits Trump manifests.
1. Desire for military parades
2. Browbeats the press and defines it as the enemy of the people
3. Confuses himself with the nation, calling what’s bad for him bad for America.
4. Attacks investigative committees and the intelligence community
5. Attacking vanquished political opponents
6. Attempt to control the flow of information
7. Holding rallies unrelated to campaigning
8. Calling those that disagree with him treasonous and un-American
9. Demanding adulation from his cabinet
10. Admires thuggish strongmen like Putin, Duterte, and Kim Jong Un
11. Nepotism
12. Disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law
13. Expecting government employees and appointees to be loyal to him personally rather than the nation
14. Targeting and demonizing various scapegoated groups
15. Angry nationalism and xenophobia
16. Vastly exaggerate a threat to make people afraid so that they will sacrifice freedoms to him in exchange for unneeded protection
17. The use of executive action to claim powers he doesn’t have
18. Contempt for facts and evidence
19. The destruction of political norms
20. Threats of refusal to leave office when it’s time
Trump's circumstances are different from Hitler's, not his character or impulses. Trump would love to have absolute dictatorial power, and is visibly envious of tyrants like Kim, Duterte, the Saudi king and crown prince, and Putin. He would have various political opponents and journalists executed if he could as his buddies get to do.
Now, all he can do is threaten to withdraw their press credentials, access, or licenses, and call them the enemy of the people, likely what Hitler would be doing if limited the way Trump is..
I lean both left & right, depending upon the issue.
I'm more progressive than liberals, &
more pro-small government than conservatives.
But I put in bold the one sentence of your post that is the main difference between us: But for some of us there are more important issues (than character)...
I don't think there is anything more important than character in an election -- and never has been.
I'm results oriented.
If a dirtbag offers better than a saint, then I'll vote for the bag of dirt.
I put myself in the shoes of foreign leaders. I know that if I want to bamboozle Donald in a deal I start by telling him how wonderful I think he is like the leaders of Russia, China and N. Korea have done. Those tactics were predictable if you understand the man's personality and lack of character. That's why Putin wanted to see him elected.
You've a window in to Putin's soul, eh.
I don't have that.
As for foreign relations, I don't see worse results than with Obama.
And he's doing better than Dubya, what with no new wars in coprolite-hole countries.
His taxes are part of the documentation necessary to do the forensic accounting needed to evaluate him for financial crimes such as tax evasion, bank fraud, and money laundering. A few other embarrassments may ensue, such as showing that Trump lies about his wealth, taxes paid, and charitable contributions made.
Trump's circumstances are different from Hitler's, not his character or impulses. Trump would love to have absolute dictatorial power, and is visibly envious of tyrants like Kim, Duterte, the Saudi king and crown prince, and Putin. He would have various political opponents and journalists executed if he could as his buddies get to do.
Now, all he can do is threaten to withdraw their press credentials, access, or licenses, and call them the enemy of the people, likely what Hitler would be doing if limited the way Trump is..
Windows into souls are unnecessary. Only the most cunning, ruthless, Machiavellian, contemptible jerks can rise to power in the Russian system. In our democracy, it's not guaranteed, but it's more likely we'll end up with a tall, white, glib, dimwit but one with a sense of decency.
I might, just depends on how I am asked. But don't play coy and act like "it's the right thing to do". Its voluntary, in order to stay that way that means sometimes someone will say no. If one person say no after a bunch have agreed to it and everyone freaks out and forces them to agree, then it's no longer voluntary.
Trump supporters don't care enough about the integrity issue so they voted for him despite not releasing his returns and other evidence of weak character.
I wouldn't know. I'm not a Trump supporter. Didn't vote for him, don't particularly like him tbh. But he won fair and square and he's my Pres, just like when Obama won, I didn't like Obama, but he won, he's my Pres, and I back him up.
It's the solidarity of being a U.S. citizen. Something you partisan whackos have not only forgotten, but made a mockery off.
It would be different if Trump had a voting record, or public service record, or something. But he doesn't.
His only credentials were his business dealings. And the shadiness of those dealings gave the voting public very good reasons to want more financial transparency from him than most people running for president.
Instead, he just kept up his record of lying and dissembling and bragging. That's why his records matter far more than most candidates.
Tom
But I put in bold the one sentence of your post that is the main difference between us: But for some of us there are more important issues (than character)... 
