[W:1011]TRUMP’S TAXES SHOW CHRONIC LOSSES AND YEARS OF TAX AVOIDANCE

[Lutherf]

I am arguing for transparency, and voters should be allowed to punish a candidate by not voting for them for not being transparent. And if there is some individual voter somewhere amongst the electorate that assumes someone is guilty for not being transparent, more power to them. It's their right. For instance, how many Trump supporters assumed Hillary Clinton was corrupt based on nothing but Hannity's word? You didn't have a problem with that, did you?



Hold on. STOP right there. This isn't a car loan or mortgage. He owes people upwards of $400 million dollars. That's a BIG deal. Furthermore, he has interests all across the world. That's a big deal. It's not absurd to think that poses a national security risk. Your argument is absurd. It's absurd to think that owing $400 million dollars due during a potential term in office is NOT a big deal.



No no no no no no. You got it all wrong. No, this is silly. This is really, really silly. Nobody is entitled to give any candidate for office the benefit of the doubt. This isn't a thing. It's a job interview, okay? And the duty of the voter is to try to predict which candidate will do a better job. And if you're hiring someone for a job and you know they've cheated on their wife with a pornstar, screwed over their subcontractors, defaulted on debts, stiffed their business partners, committed campaign finance crimes, obstructed justice, and so on and so forth...guess what.. NOBODY in their RIGHT MIND would hire them! U.S. citizens, the voters, we are not obligated to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. Trump OWES US an explanation. Why would Trump do a good job given a, b, and c. Explain to me x, y, and z.

And when it comes to running for one of the most powerful job in the country. I'm sorry. You have to show your tax returns. And if you're not going to do it. That's fine too. But everyone else is still entitled to think you're hiding something. And that's fine. Because the job is THAT important.

And you forget one thing. You are suggesting to us all that Trump is just misunderstood and he's like the rest of us. He's not. Trump is a crook. Trump is a liar. He does not in any way deserve the benefit of the doubt. And the people that still believe him after he has lied over 20,000, are FOOLS.

I don't care why you don't vote for a given candidate. If you choose not to vote for Trump because you believe that he's a space monkey then that's your right.

Yeah, $400M is a lot of money. However, you need to look at in terms of how big it is in relation to the ability to pay it off. If it's a $400M loan against a $1B asset it isn't that much of a problem. Furthermore, this "he has financial obligations so he's a national security risk" is utter bullshit and it comes from the anti-capitalists. If you follow that kind of logic then the only people that aren't a risk to national security are the ones that don't have any financial obligations. It stems from the belief that those who provide capital to other do so only so that they can exercise control over the borrower. Basically, it's the "Capitalists are evil" argument.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Do you guys remember when Republicans were big time pro American and didn't want any corrupt politicians having financial arrangements with other countries/entities that thre American public didn't know about?

Yeah me too.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

It's not tax fraud, itemized deductions are allowed, are you saying ALL haircuts are not allowed for deductions?

I mean, I saw you said you worked in the industry....so you should know that they are allowed depending on what it is, when it is, how it's used etc. There are absolutely allowable deductions when it comes to haircuts/presentation etc, and there are some that are not, correct?

It's tax fraud.

Your political hero is a liar, a cheater, a tax cheat, and a corrupt thug.

It's not allowed:

TaxProf Blog: Tax Court Denies Deduction for TV News Anchor's Clothing Expenses

The Tax Court yesterday denied business expense deductions claimed by a TV news anchor for her wardrobe and other personal expenses and sustained accuracy-related penalties. Hamper v. Commissioner, T.C. Summ. Op. 2011-17 (Feb. 25, 2011) (citations omitted): On Schedules A of her Federal income...

taxprof.typepad.com

Former TV anchor glad she challenged IRS

Even the Internal Revenue Service acknowledged that former television news anchor Anietra Hamper kept meticulous records of the clothes and other items

www.dispatch.com

When Trump loses office he will lose all of his assets and wind up in prison for committing tax fraud.

This is the reason Trump is cheating and trying to convince you mail-in votes are somehow "invalid"

And you guys are falling for it, hook, line, and sinker.

Trumpers: do not help Trump destroy the country to save Trump from losing his assets and freedom. It's not worth it. Out of 330 million people you can find another "conservative" to lead your party who hates immigrants as much as you do.

 

[CaughtInThe]

They voted for an broke, ancient con man with a big mouth and bad hair.

That's a B movie.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Trumpers: do not help Trump destroy the country to save Trump from losing his assets...

That is literally what this election is about.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

We are talking about releasing tax returns to prove innocence. Why won't you release yours? Are you guilty? Personal attacks don't make your argument stronger.

Beefheart isn't running for office.

Trump is running for office.

We have the right to know if he's a crook.

 

[GDViking]

He betrayed our allies the Kurds, because Erdogan flexed on Trump’s outstanding debt? That needs to be exposed if true. ASAP. That’s very serious

And because of that Russia is occupying a strategically located American air base and using it as it were there own...

 

[Threegoofs]

Love to defend propaganda masquerading as news.

Always a good look.

Let me know when you move to the ‘ok it’s true but it’s all legal’ stage.

Most of the brighter Trumptards have moved there, at least.

 

[Lutherf]

The public does have the right to know if their President is a crook.

And it's in the interests of the country that we select a leader who is not a crook.

And if you don't care if a President is a crook, that doesn't matter. You're wrong.

Just because someonee is accused of being a crook doesn't mean that they are a crook. The Democrat party has made it part of their MO to spread lies about their opponents then go out and round up a shitload of formerr DoJ officials who have no skin in the game whatsoever to sign a letter saying something to the effect of, "If the claims are true then it's treason!". The left eats that shit up while everyone else sits around thinking, "Gee, if 1000 former DoJ officials agree that bigfoot is real does that mean it's true?"

 

[W_Heisenberg]

If you have a balloon payment due for $300,000 and you don't have it, it's a big problem. Trump has personally guaranteed debt of $400 million about to come due.

I agree.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

If you have $2.7M equity in the property then getting a new loan to make the balloon isn't a problem.

WRT the "personal guarantees", that's standard practice when dealing with pass-through entities and, from a tax standpoint, allows him to take the losses that are generated. Unless he has basis in the partnership then he can't take the losses.

Trump should show records of the appraisals.

But he's not going to do that.

Do you wanna know why?

That will reveal evidence of loan fraud as well.

You know Trump is a crook. Why do you keep defending a crook?

 

[W_Heisenberg]

That's fine. If you don't like the fact that he refuses to release his returns then you SHOULDN'T vote for him. That's the essence of free political will. Stealing his information and writing a 10,000 word opinion piece based on what you stole and then not releasing any of the supporting documentation you based your opinion on, however, should be criminal...don't you agree?

NO.

The case law is clear.

Sometimes public interest overrides an individual's right to privacy.

In this case, Trump's right to privacy is "trumped" by the interests the public have to that information.

The American people have the right to know if their President is a crook.

And the fact that you do not care one bit that the President is a crook, does not matter. It has no impact on this.

 

[jmotivator]

he in fact did....that is why he is being investigated by the state of NY, because he committed fraud, by falsely inflating his worth for personal bank loans.

He in fact didn't. And it is the BANK'S responsibility to assess the value of a property they are allowing as collateral. The amount of ignorance on the left for all things financial is mind blowing, albeit fully expected.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Oh cry me a river!!!

The left didn't give Trump ONE DAY of consideration! On the day after his inauguration all the ***** hat wearing women and men in the world went out to protest the guy and the mass vulgarity ensued.

Trump is a mass vulgarity.

Y'all keep talking about how Trump supporters are the worst people the world has ever seen but you won't spend a damned minute looking in the mirror.

It's 100% true. Trump supporters have sacrificed their souls for Trump.

 

[jmotivator]

It's about common courtesy on a debate forum.

Well, like all things your "courtesy" demands are meant for those you think wronged you, but not for you to apply to other people. I'm not interested in accepting stupid, hand waving, emotional, fact free nonsense as reasonable in threads outside of CT, so please show me the courtesy of keeping them out of debate threads. Thanks in advance! Until that time, just assume that anything you say that I don't respond to specifically is dismissed as stupid, hand waving, emotional, fact free nonsense.

 

[GummyVitamins]

There is something you Trumpers keep forgetting.

Trump is not entitled to anyone's vote.

And people don't have to vote for him if they think he's a tax cheat or a liar.

And people also don't have to vote for him if they don't think he's being transparent or honest. And, yes, someone running for office as a social obligation to be honest and transparent.

And if you want to vote for this fraud anyway, that's on you. You're the one that has to figure out how to sleep at night knowing you've selected someone completely unfit for the office.

I like turtles. Not sure why you quoted me as your comment has absolutely nothing to do with what you cited.

 

[GummyVitamins]

Beefheart isn't running for office.

Trump is running for office.

We have the right to know if he's a crook.

You can determine whether he's a crook from a 1040? You must be the best criminal investigator in the world.

 

[GummyVitamins]

Let me know when you move to the ‘ok it’s true but it’s all legal’ stage.

Most of the brighter Trumptards have moved there, at least.

Let me know when you move to the "everyone has a right to privacy" stage.

Most of the brighter Bidtards have moved there, at least.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

That is how loans work. How does this make Trump "vulnerable" from a national security perspective?


You don't need a loan to bribe someone. This is the least effective way to bribe a public figure and is very tortured logic.

TRump is in personal financial danger to the tune of 300m. You aren’t necessarily wrong that loans in and of themselves don’t signify security risk, to a degree, but in Trump’s case we have decades of transactional behavior. As potus he has very publicly made it clear he is open for business.

We have every right to be suspicious of specifcially Donald J Trump in this scenario.

 

[GDViking]

This is false. The President does not need "clearances" or "checking out" beyond the election to gain access to classified information.

But here we are...

Obviously in today's day and age it is necessary.

We have in office not only a clearly compromised President, but family members in positions of power that could not pass background checks...

 

[GummyVitamins]

But here we are...

Obviously in today's day and age it is necessary.

We have in office not only a clearly compromised President, but family members in positions of power that could not pass background checks...

Not sure what any of this means. You're referring to Trump or Biden?

 

[GummyVitamins]

TRump is in personal financial danger to the tune of 300m. You aren’t necessarily wrong that loans in and of themselves don’t signify security risk, to a degree, but in Trump’s case we have decades of transactional behavior. As potus he has very publicly made it clear he is open for business.

We have every right to be suspicious of specifcially Donald J Trump in this scenario.

Funny thing about real estate entrepreneurs is that they have a lot of debt. They also hold assets. Congratulations, you've uncovered that someone in the real estate business has a lot of loans.

 

[GDViking]

It's reasonable for our nation's political leaders to be subject to scrutiny.

And Donald Trump is a superb example of why it is important to do this.

And if scrutiny drives away people like Donald Trump from public office... GOOD!!!!! We don't need crooks like Trump anywhere near the government.

And if scrutiny drives away people from joining the Democratic Party...GOOD!!! We don't want them. If someone is not going to pay their taxes and pull their weight...my message for them is simple GTFO.

If Trump would be happy in a place like Russia where rich people can get away with not paying taxes. Let this punk go. We deserve a real leader. Not a crook.

Trump would have a radio active big Mack within hours of arriving.

I hear Putin is not someone you want to owe money to...

 

[foolardi]

Your post has nothing to do with the topic nor the quotation in the previous post.

One note: The debt was never mentioned under Obama? Republican deficit hawks relentlessly attacked Obama over a debt that was caused, not because of his policies, but due to the Great Recession. Do you know when Republicans stopped talking about debt? When it was them and Trump ballooning the debt.
Moreover, Obama's IRS did not play politics. To be a 502c3 not-for-profit, you can't be political. So, the IRS scanned for applicants that had "Republican," "Democratic", "Conservative", "liberal," etc. in the corp name. Lots of conservative organizations appeared (and not that many liberal ones) so the Republicans made hay falsely accusing Obama of political discrimination.

How did Obama handle that Recession.His was the Slowest recovery of a Recession
in modern history.Bush 43 inherited a Stock Market recession in 2000 and cured
it Lickety split.As did Warren Harding in 1920-21 when dealing with the Woodrow
Wilson inherited post WWI Depression.
Reagan cured the Slovenly Jimmy Carter Stagflation years.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Funny thing about real estate entrepreneurs is that they have a lot of debt. They also hold the assets. Congratulations, you've uncovered that someone in the real estate business has a lot of loans.

Weird, Bloomberg isn’t at personal risk of a few hundred million bucks.

Do ya think I could find some real estate moguls who don’t have that much debt but more money? Ya think? I think.