That's right. Trump was free to do whatever he liked in his own personal life and avoid much meaningful scrutiny for how he did it.
He and his surrogates seem to think that he should be allowed to run for President without subjecting his life to the sort of scrutiny that other presidential candidates have been held to -- and the very standard that he insists upon from those he questions in the political sphere.
The only thing that might outstrip Trump's hypocrisy is his narcissism.
At that, I continue to be flabergasted that anyone would actually believe that Trump is in any way, shape or form "for the little guy" or outside the establishment. Neither of those things is even remotely true, and that's not even a subjective view of things. His history shows that he'll gladly screw the little guy if it means a few more bucks in his pocket, and anyone who uses his fortune to peddle influence at any level of government isn't an "outsider;" he's just not been elected.
And the notion that a President can make change because he's the President is absurd, too. As the last 4 years of the current Administration pretty readily demonstrate, the President can offer change and urge it, but he can't insist upon it. The idea that Trump, who doesn't even enjoy much more than begrudging support from his own party, can waltz into Washington, completely change the way that DC operates, and mandate change would be a reasonable belief if you were convinced that Trump would scrap the Cons ution and appoint himself King, but he can't do that. As a President his broadly stated (and largely impractical and wildly unprincipled) ideas depend upon the will of Congress and it's fair to wonder if he'll be able to accomplish anything given his scorched earth political style to this point.
It works the same way. If he invested a billion dollars of his personal money that he had already paid taxes on and lost 900 million he has a legitimate net loss carry forward of 900 million. Do you really think the IRS didn't check to see if it was legitimate?
It is hypocritical of Hillary to call out Trump on using carried losses when she herself is using it. I'll give you his narcissism.
It's strange to hear you all rail against these (bankruptcy/tax) laws that are rigging the system - well, Hillary's been there forever (can't tout all that experience and not take responsibility for what happened under your watch) but most of you are gonna vote for this corrupt person who takes millions from countries which are anti-women, anti-gay, etc and vote for things that are detrimental to Americans.
Ditto for Hillary and her free tuition/health, forgiveness of college debt, and whatever she's promising these days.
A billionaire that avoids as much tax as posible. Imagine that
Are american ppl this stupid donthey not know how billionaires become billionaires?
EVERYONE avoids as much tax as posible. Imagine that
I noticed all of the idiot zealots avoided this very truthful post
I'm not comparing Hillary to Trump; I'm comparing Trump to Trump -- and Trump has been riling crowds by saying he's going to make certain people (hedge fund managers, for instance) "pay their fair share," but he's unwilling to do that himself, with regard to taxes OR his obligations to creditors. That's his own hypocrisy and it's the very thing that informs the view that anyone thinking Trump is for the little guy either has a red team blindspot or is pretty badly uninformed. And that's my ultimate point with respect to the tax issues.
I'm not railing against bankruptcy or tax laws. Trump rigs the system for himself in a lot of different ways that make him anything but an outsider. Whatever fortune he's grown, from whatever its source and whatever loopholes he's exploited to gain it, has put him in a position to use his wealth to influence officials, move policy, and to gain benefits from government that most Americans could never obtain. And the idea that his Presidency (should it ever come to pass) won't be significantly aimed at ensuring that whatever else changes in Washington, nothing of that change meaningfully affects him or his wealth is ludicrous. So, essentially, he's an "outsider" who's used his wealth to gain influence and is now trying to use that wealth to protect his own interests.It's strange to hear you all rail against these (bankruptcy/tax) laws that are rigging the system - well, Hillary's been there forever (can't tout all that experience and not take responsibility for what happened under your watch)
What? Like requiring the rich to actually pay a representative amount of taxes relative to the rest of Americans?but most of you are gonna vote for this corrupt person who takes millions from countries which are anti-women, anti-gay, etc and vote for things that are detrimental to Americans.
but most of you are gonna vote for this corrupt person who TOOK millions from countries which are anti-women, anti-gay, etc and WHO VOTED for things that are detrimental to Americans.
The original thinking behind the law is exactly as you put it ... to allow a small business to invest in its early days, take initial losses and continue to sustain itself through to eventual profitability.
However, Trump's M.O. is different: take on a large amount of debt ("other people's money / OPM" as he calls it), file for bankruptcy, screw over the creditors who lent you money and the contractors who supplied you, take the loss on your books and then use it to avoid taxes on future income.
So a law that aims to reward risk-taking and entrepreneurship is instead being used by the likes of Trump to reward debt. No wonder he likes to call himself the "king of debt". And the punchline to this sad joke is his tweet from 4 years ago:
That's not how it works. You can't take losses on debts that bankruptcy court relieved you from.
Get real.
He thinks the IRS would let anyone get away with double dipping? They are like hawks - not one little runaround gets by them.
It is the Clinton Foundation which received money from Saudi Arabia, not Clinton herself. And 88% of the foundation's money is used on actual programs. Whether the work done on those programs is being awarded to Clinton cronies or not is a different question - one that can be answered by genuine investigative journalism rather than repeating mindlessly from Trump's twitter account and Breitbart.
True, normally when debt is forgiven, it becomes equivalent to income from a tax perspective. However if Trump's debt exceeded his assets, he may not have reported the forgiven debt as income. Also, being a real estate developer, the "losses" that he can show on paper include depreciation of assets. So Trump can aggressively write down the value of a failed casino and write off the entire capital investment in the property.
If he releases his tax returns for the last 2 decades, this matter would become clearer. However, you know that's never going to happen.
What programs? Like requiring the rich to actually pay a representative amount of taxes relative to the rest of Americans?
Whatever the sources of funding the Clinton foundation may have tapped, Hillary Clinton's actual policy positions aren't anti-woman, anti-gay, or anti-little guy. I'm not worried about where her foundation gets its funding (though I would say that if some of the treasure of de able regimes is used to make life better for people in the world, that's not exactly a bad thing by itself); I'm concerned with the policy positions of the two major candidates.
One has an agenda that is pro himself and riles up the fears of a diminishing majority that has lost part of its grip on power; the other has an agenda that is largely in keeping with things that a large portion of the country agrees with.
The IRS would love to be an unerring hawk like you say. In practice, they are systematically underfunded, and the result is that they have a hefty "tax gap" - the difference between how much tax should be paid vs how much is actually paid. This gap has been consistently around $450 Billion per year. They don't have the bandwidth to go after everyone, or to overcome the array of lawyers that the big fish are able to deploy.
"systematically underfunded"
As part of the BLATANT VRWC/Repug strategy to up govt, the Repug House, (House controls spending) has cut several $100Ms, for years, from the IRS budget, severely undermining enforcement.
For every $1 spent on enforcement, $7 are recovered.
How Donald Trump Turned the Tax Code Into a Giant Tax Shelter
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/03/bu...er=rss&emc=rss
New York State Attorney Serves Trump's foundation a cease and desist order.
We get what you're saying loud and clear. We're just pointing out the amount of mental contortions you have to go through to justify your voting for him, when it's clear your vote goes the guy with the (R) next to him.
I didn't defend Shillary (at least I have no intention to), but two wrongs doesn't make a right.
"He's not Shillary" is a perfectly valid reason to vote for him. I'm just saying, it's a lot less twisted than "at least we know what he thinks"...
The Church of Trump.is.now.closedNew York State Attorney Serves Trump's foundation a cease and desist order.
Remember when George McGovern was just destroyed for wanting to end our involvement in Vietnam….Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale were too liberal to be President of the USA…Republicans would vote for those three in a heartbeat today…
do you think Trump was ever "risking" going "out of pocket" $916M? I bet it was "other people's money", or some other kind of ethereal "money".
and WaPo article says his bankruptcy auditors allowed him $450K/year for living expenses while bankrupt.
He stiffed his investors in has casinos by mis-managing the casinos into bankruptcy (his casino employee tell stories about his horrible management), while paying himself $160M salary.
He's ING GRIFTER, a fraud and scam artist.
http://www.wcpo.com/news/national/tr...torney-general
James Sheehan with the attorney general's office says failure to stop immediately and answer demands for all delinquent financial reports within 15 days "shall be deemed a continuing fraud upon the people of the state of New York."
Delinquent.
adulterer Julie Annie sliming everyone as adulterers, to justify Trash's adultery
Giuliani to Chuck Todd: ‘Everybody’ Has History of Infidelity
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/giuliani-...of-infidelity/
.... replaces baseball as America's Favorite Pastime, as told by America's Mayor.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote