Trump Investigations

[bwframe]

[video=youtube;CO-wYBKHZmk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO-wYBKHZmk[/video]

 

[BugI02]

So.

ETA: It would be interesting to see the tax returns of career politicians from when they were born in poverty to where they have multiple houses and millions of dollars and see to whom they are beholden.

I believe Koskinen and Lerner could provide you with some of that information - as long as it's not a [STRIKE]comrade[/STRIKE] progressive or Democrat you're interested in

 

[Libertarian01]

I figure about 95.5% of the population clamoring for his taxes have no idea how to read them. They will no doubt fill boxes for each year. These are not the two, three, or four page returns most of us file.

If he ever rolled over and released them the next thing we would hear from the Dems is that he isn't releasing all of them because they can't find anything.

I am willing to bet that 100% of CPA's would have a hard time reading them!!!

The man owns over 500 companies for heavens sake. Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trump_Organization

There are tax loopholes for all sorts of things in a variety of professions. Most of us never EVER see 99% of them.

Yet here is a guy that owns hundreds of companies that may own one another, supply one another, trade wtih one another. Many may well have deductions for trading with certain countries, etc etc etc.

He probably has offshore accounts that may have special tax incentives, trusts, revocable and irrevocable that may have certain rules.

This guy isn't like most politicians that come into office. Many are lawyers. They'll have income from partnerships, personal investments and maybe(?) a couple of other things. Otherwise, very simple. In all fairness Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez probably would be the simplest of all coming from bartending.

Trump would take a forensic team of CPAs and tax lawyers to unravel his tax returns. It would be a nightmare.

Regards,

Doug

 

[2A_Tom]

I am willing to bet that 100% of CPA's would have a hard time reading them!!!

The man owns over 500 companies for heavens sake. Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trump_Organization

There are tax loopholes for all sorts of things in a variety of professions. Most of us never EVER see 99% of them.

Yet here is a guy that owns hundreds of companies that may own one another, supply one another, trade wtih one another. Many may well have deductions for trading with certain countries, etc etc etc.

He probably has offshore accounts that may have special tax incentives, trusts, revocable and irrevocable that may have certain rules.

This guy isn't like most politicians that come into office. Many are lawyers. They'll have income from partnerships, personal investments and maybe(?) a couple of other things. Otherwise, very simple. In all fairness Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez probably would be the simplest of all coming from bartending.

Trump would take a forensic team of CPAs and tax lawyers to unravel his tax returns. It would be a nightmare.

Regards,

Doug

I want to see proof that she reported ALL of her tips.

 

[T.Lex]

Trump would take a forensic team of CPAs and tax lawyers to unravel his tax returns. It would be a nightmare.

Sorry, Doug, this is absolutely untrue. Maybe his investments and how they're structured, but not his taxes. He'd get K-1s for income for his domestic investments, and there's other forms for the foreign ones. I'm sure they wouldn't be easy, but it wouldn't be a nightmare. And absolutely wouldn't take a team of CPAs.

He's had to disclose tax information in the past and it wasn't anywhere near as bad as your scenario.

(His investments could be a source for hiding income and influence, but that's a different issue.)

 

[spec4]

Other bankers can chime in, but I recalled many complicated tax returns that we simply could not figure out. Quite often revenue would be offset by various depreciations and other LEGAL deductions. I stand by what I posted earlier: the vast majority of Dems screaming for Trump's tax returns would have no idea of what the information on them shows. After over two years they really should find another tree to bark up.

 

[churchmouse]

[video=youtube;CO-wYBKHZmk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO-wYBKHZmk[/video]

The mere sight of her mug makes me violently ill......................uck:

 

[JettaKnight]

The mere sight of her mug makes me violently ill......................uck:

Me too - thanks to "quoting" her video.

 

[Leadeye]

The mere sight of her mug makes me violently ill......................uck:

Always follow the money, it's how she operates, but then she's got a lot of company in leadership.

 

[bwframe]

Forget about her looks, see is robbing us blind.

The video shows the corruption that she gets away with. She is rich and getting richer the more obnoxious of an enemy she becomes. She makes Andre Carson look like a good guy...

 

[churchmouse]

Forget about her looks, see is robbing us blind.

The video shows the corruption that she gets away with. She is rich and getting richer the more obnoxious of an enemy she becomes. She makes Andre Carson look like a good guy...

Think about what I said my friend. Seeing her nasty mug is not the only reason I get Ill....I see what she is. The nasty mug is just the icing on the cake.
They are all in bed with her at some level. Clean house.

 

[churchmouse]

Me too - thanks to "quoting" her video.

Just making a point as vehemently as possible.

 

[CBR1000rr]

The left can bring all the investigations against Trump they like.
It won't change the outcome.
They've already lost.
Think about the house.
What power do they have?
Can they impeach the president?
Yes.
They can bring forth articles of impeachment against POTUS.
Can they successfully bring forth articles of impeachment, try and remove him from office?
No.
Why?
Democrats technically have the house.
The senate, however, is responsible for trying an impeachment case.
Who has the senate?
Legally, they could bring impeachment charges and force the senate to try the case but they know they wouldn't get anywhere.
Knowing this, they have 1 more option.
Force the senate's hand by applying political pressure.
This is where Trump has proven his intellectual acuity and mastery of optics.
How would house democrats apply political pressure?
They would have to show that there is an overwhelming demand by the American public for impeachment proceedings to result in removal of the POTUS.
This is impossible at this point.
Trump has, since day 1 has been winning.
His rallies have been massive.
So massive, the media has resorted to discontinuing their live coverage.
Even Fox has stopped showing the entire rally.
Why would they not want to show his rallies?
If those who aren't in attendance see that thousands are in attendance while only hundreds attend a high profile dem rally, what will happen?
People follow.
If people feel they are in the minority, they will begin to question their position and eventually migrate to the majority.
He's kept his base engaged by communicating directly with them via social media.
More importantly, he has displayed an uncanny ability to control the news cycle.
Have you noticed that as soon as negative coverage starts to dominate, something miraculously happens to alter the course of conversation?
This late in the game, it has almost become laughable.
The most powerful tool in the democrats tool box has become a laughing stock.....
Think MSM.
The MSM has lost its power of influence.
Trump has destroyed them.
Without the MSM controlling the narrative, the democrats will never be able to apply the political pressure needed to unseat a duly elected president.

Sorry for the long winded post.
This is a huge topic.
My point is, there is nothing to worry about.
Enjoy the show.
It's just starting to become interesting.
Election fraud
[Broward county: 2016 election fraud, 2018 fraud, Parkland, mail b_mber, Esteban Santiago, Debbie Wasserman Shultz and Imran Awan]
There is so much more........

 

[Libertarian01]

Sorry, Doug, this is absolutely untrue. Maybe his investments and how they're structured, but not his taxes. He'd get K-1s for income for his domestic investments, and there's other forms for the foreign ones. I'm sure they wouldn't be easy, but it wouldn't be a nightmare. And absolutely wouldn't take a team of CPAs.

He's had to disclose tax information in the past and it wasn't anywhere near as bad as your scenario.

(His investments could be a source for hiding income and influence, but that's a different issue.)

I stand corrected. I guess it depends upon how far down the rabbit hole people want to try to delve.

Regards,

Doug

 

[T.Lex]

I guess it depends upon how far down the rabbit hole people want to try to delve.

First, in the re-reading, I was probably too harsh in my response. I'm sorry for that.

Second, that rabbit-hole issue is absolutely real, and I don't argue otherwise. But that was also true for GWB (for example). He held some fairly complicated investments and had family money before being elected POTUS. I'm not saying that everyone would be happy with Trump's tax disclosure - heck no.

For me, though, it is the minimum that should be expected. Otherwise, financially, we don't really know what ties might be binding.

 

[Libertarian01]

First, in the re-reading, I was probably too harsh in my response. I'm sorry for that.

Second, that rabbit-hole issue is absolutely real, and I don't argue otherwise. But that was also true for GWB (for example). He held some fairly complicated investments and had family money before being elected POTUS. I'm not saying that everyone would be happy with Trump's tax disclosure - heck no.

For me, though, it is the minimum that should be expected. Otherwise, financially, we don't really know what ties might be binding.

Don't worry about it. I have reasonably thick skin.

Of course, I just figured you lost a big case in court that day and took it out on me.

I'll still respectfully push back that I don't think any other elected president has had over 100 businesses they own, let alone 500. Pres Trump is YUGE in this regard.

But in reality I don't believe anyone with real estate holdings worldwide wouldn't have ties to just about everyone that is anyone! Or at the very least it would be impossible to avoid the appearance of ties. Build a building in South America and one of the tenants is a drug dealer, or related to one. WE GOTTA LINK. Property in the Middle East? Hey, a Saudi royal family rents there. WE GOTTA LINK.

Turkey? Uruguay? Hawaii? Philippines? South Korea? He owns property in all of these places. Russians love to visit Turkey. Japanese visit Hawaii. Chinese visit South Korea. And these are just his hotels.

This isn't directed at T.Lex, but I don't think it would be hard to imagine this man not having links with world leaders outside of politics and world criminals alike.

I do prefer transparency, but the Constitution does not require it of an elected official. Running for office doesn't mean we get to know all of your dirty little secrets. That is reserved for actors and musicians...

Regards,

Doug

 

[BugI02]

First, in the re-reading, I was probably too harsh in my response. I'm sorry for that.

Second, that rabbit-hole issue is absolutely real, and I don't argue otherwise. But that was also true for GWB (for example). He held some fairly complicated investments and had family money before being elected POTUS. I'm not saying that everyone would be happy with Trump's tax disclosure - heck no.

For me, though, it is the minimum that should be expected. Otherwise, financially, we don't really know what ties might be binding.

Respectfully, I don't think out of the rabbit hole lies in that direction. Anybody of even a bit of financial means will have investments in many areas and financial relationships with many types of firm (banks, insurance etc). I think tax returns and financial details only give those predisposed to find problems two dots to connect by any line they wish. Could not a line be drawn between any politician and financial firms headed only by white people and then labeled as evidence of prejudice? Could not a large margin account at a brokerage be spun as evidence the individual was beholden to that brokerage in some way? If Jared Kushner had substantial loans originated by an Israeli bank, how long would it be before his pro-Israel stance was attributed to that instead of the fact he is a practicing jew?

I know it's too much to ask for you to credit Trump with some integrity and resistance to control by his creditors (or anybody else, for that matter) but do you really want to go down that road with everybody? I think this attitude is popular on the left because until they have great experience in corruption, most of their money comes via donations whose provenance can be clouded. So actual investments in firms that provide jobs for anyone besides propagandists and spinmeisters becomes weaponized to berate and sully the other tribe. I think both tribes fall prey to the "(S)he took huge donations from insurance companies which is why (s)he votes the way (s)he does on that issue" line of 'reasoning'. For experienced politicians, its just as likely they already held compatible beliefs with those firms and the corporations direct their donations to those of compatible outlook. It's a chicken and egg conundrum open to over-simplification, especially when we are encouraged to think all politicians have zero integrity and are for sale to the highest bidder

 

[BugI02]

I'd like to see a bill brought to the floor, after the swearing in, to the effect that it " ... requires the release of tax returns and financial documents of all members of government in leadership positions down to the level of
committee chair" and see where that goes

After all, if one is worried about unseen influence co-opting our government, the President isn't the only lever of power

 

[AmmoManAaron]

 

[AtTheMurph]

You get an idea who a person owes money too, which potentially could influence behavior of the elected official that would benefit the owed business, and also himself. Conflicts of interest, gifts received, money given to charities, etc, etc.

So you aren't a tax accountant I take it?