The BIG ONE: 20 years of Trump taxes obtained by NYTs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Biggest Trump Financial Mystery? Where He Came Up With the Cash for His Scottish Resorts.
Donald Trump dumped $400 million into his clubs in Aberdeen and Turnberry. Now, lawmakers in Edinburgh want to investigate him for money laundering.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/08/the-biggest-trump-financial-mystery-where-he-came-up-with-the-cash-for-his-scottish-resorts/

This part is classic Trump:

Early promotional materials for Aberdeenshire carried what purported to be the Trump clan’s baronial crest—three lions under an armored fist brandishing a spear and surrounded by a flourish of red and white feathers.

It was, no surprise, a fake. Trump had cribbed the coat of arms from Joseph Edward Davies, whose wife had built Mar-a-Lago and who had legitimately been granted the crest in the 1930s. He had made only one minor change, erasing the Davies family motto of “integritas” (integrity) and replacing it with “Trump.” He had used the doctored crest for years to peddle all sorts of products—from ties to beach towels—and it was plastered across his US properties.

But that didn’t fly in Scotland.

For centuries the country has had an office devoted to making sure people do not claim someone else’s family name. And after it determined Trump was indeed displaying a stolen coat of arms, he was barred from using it. The episode foretold Trump’s subsequent misadventures in Scotland, a country particularly resistant to his brand of flimflam.

That should be GOP's epitaph.

"Replaced integrity with Trump."

Oyez, oyez!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It really comes down to this:

1. Did he really lose so much money on his real estate that it erased 427 million of income and brand licensing from hos apprentice days?

2. Did he cheat by making illegal deductions, such as paying his kids as consultants, falsifying the value of his properties, declaring that mansion an investment while living in it?

The first damages his reputation as a businessman. The second is fraud against the United States.

+1. Although, he has always had a damaged reputation as a businessman to people who truly looked at his history and mo.

[Anonymous]

What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

I don't have a problem because we are all being robbed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

Fantastical comment. You think NYT would ruin themselves forever by publishing reports like this without confidence in their truth? You may believe they're FAKE NEWS but the rest of the world continues to venerate the journalism of the Times. They're looking at a Pulitzer for this reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

Process crimes don't matter anymore.

[Anonymous]

Do you realize how hard it would be to make up 20 years of fake tax returns for business that all tie out to each other? Pretty much impossible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

I don't have a problem because we are all being robbed.

So anything gained by illegal means is ok, or just against Trump? Are the gloves off for both sides?

[Anonymous]

Literally, Trump could release one or the other of his signature pages from the two years to show he paid something other than $750 in Federal taxes, and the NY Times would be destroyed.

Why hasn't he done that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

No, because this is the President we're talking about. So much debt to an unknown entity represents a national security risk and people need to know that before they vote for his reelection. It's the single biggest concern if you love your country, PP, far above whether what he did was illegal, or whether he has a poor business sense. Obviously none of those things are qualities we look for in a President, but what's critical right now is NATIONAL SECURITY. Who does he owe money to and how much does that affect his actions as President?

Please understand that this is true about any candidate for the highest offices in the land, regardless of party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

I don't have a problem because we are all being robbed.

So anything gained by illegal means is ok, or just against Trump? Are the gloves off for both sides?

How do you know it was illegal means?

Maybe it was Trump's sister, who is a beneficiary of the Trump Org and would be privy to its receipts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

I don't have a problem because we are all being robbed.

So anything gained by illegal means is ok, or just against Trump? Are the gloves off for both sides?

He is the President. It's a national security issue (or does that only apply to Brown people, I'm confused).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

Process crimes don't matter anymore.

Too true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if this is all made up? What then? Lots of drama for nothing.

If it’s not made up, releasing them was illegal, no one has a problem with that?

Process crimes don't matter anymore.

Too true.

That's what the DOJ is arguing very eloquently right now in the Flynn case. The judge may deny their motion and save them from themselves. Or he might grant it. Which would be terrible for the DOJ and FBI. Lol

[Anonymous]

Putin might be punking Trump! All those Russian loans and Trump had to show something to them. Now Putin just wants to screw with us!