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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New reporting today:

Good summary here. Shady AF.

[Anonymous]

POTUS loves a good shell game.

[Anonymous]

Can't read the NYT article.

So Trump diverted several million in donor money from his election campaign to his private accounts?

And is he doing the same in 2020?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can't read the NYT article.

So Trump diverted several million in donor money from his election campaign to his private accounts?

And is he doing the same in 2020?

of course he is

[Anonymous]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1314623991102005253.html

The NY Times reports that in September 2016, at the height of the presidential campaign, Trump quietly took out a $30 million bank loan in the name of an LLC that he jointly owns with billionaire developer Phil Ruffin, with Trump Tower Las Vegas as collateral.

Tax records show the LLC paid Trump over $21 million in 2016 & claimed a tax deduction on the payments. 6 weeks after obtaining the loan, Trump gave $10 million to his campaign.

Federal law requires that candidates disclose bank loans used in connection w/ their campaign.

If Trump secretly financed his 2016 campaign using an undisclosed bank loan backed by a billionaire developer, then voters have been illegally deprived of important information about the true sources of Trump's financial support.

Additionally, if the LLC took a tax deduction for the payments to Trump, it would mean that Trump secretly relied on taxpayers to help subsidize his 2016 campaign.

Disclosure to voters in 2016 would have been important, since Trump’s claim that he was self-financing his campaign was central to his message.

The NY Times also reports Phil Ruffin guaranteed the loan. Under campaign finance law, such a guarantee is treated as a contribution to the candidate, subject to legal limits and reporting requirements.

If the loan was used in connection with Trump’s campaign, then Ruffin would have made an illegal contribution to the Trump campaign, potentially valued as high as $30 million.

Trump would have violated the law by accepting an excess contribution from Ruffin in the form of a loan guarantee and failing to report it.

[Anonymous]

What’s the statute of limitations on this shit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where was the IRS? Should he have been audited multiple times? Was some politician paid off to tell IRS to look the other way until he ran for office?

It is the IRS job to look into the big outliers but they go after hard working people with legitimate deductions. Should be an investigation in the IRS, just the same for the FBI.

If we can't trust our govt institutions and IRS & FBI are the two that hold the most power - this is where you see the distrust.

Why go after Martha Stewart and not Trump?

This is actaully the greater concern for me too. And if we don't figure it out, we will have another Trump(or even worse) in the future. Our institutions suck. Were Trump not President, he would definitely have gotten away with all of this.

How come the IRS did not see glaring signs that it was not normal for this guy to pay nothing in federal taxes? His financials should have been combed through long ago.

The GOP has totally defanged the IRS over the last 40 years and they spend more energy going after poor people who claim the EITC than they do going after the rich people who are robbing us of tens of millions.

We cannot always point fingers.

When the Democrats are in power, why are these issues not central focus of their administrations/campaigns?

We are where we are because everyday people are tired of this. If the Democrats(politicians) are for the everyday people, they are not doing a very good job showing their disgust for these kinds of negligence/ineffectiveness.

Save your grievance for 1-21-2021 when Dems have some authority in the WH and likely the Senate too.

I hope they win. First we get Trump out, and then we have to do something about this system.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Jesus, what an absolute asshole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And his cult still thinks he donated his POTUS salary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s the statute of limitations on this shit?

Shockingly it’s five years for most federal crimes.

If HRC committed crimes with her email the statute of limitations has probably run out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1314623991102005253.html

The NY Times reports that in September 2016, at the height of the presidential campaign, Trump quietly took out a $30 million bank loan in the name of an LLC that he jointly owns with billionaire developer Phil Ruffin, with Trump Tower Las Vegas as collateral.

Tax records show the LLC paid Trump over $21 million in 2016 & claimed a tax deduction on the payments. 6 weeks after obtaining the loan, Trump gave $10 million to his campaign.

Federal law requires that candidates disclose bank loans used in connection w/ their campaign.

If Trump secretly financed his 2016 campaign using an undisclosed bank loan backed by a billionaire developer, then voters have been illegally deprived of important information about the true sources of Trump's financial support.

Additionally, if the LLC took a tax deduction for the payments to Trump, it would mean that Trump secretly relied on taxpayers to help subsidize his 2016 campaign.

Disclosure to voters in 2016 would have been important, since Trump’s claim that he was self-financing his campaign was central to his message.

The NY Times also reports Phil Ruffin guaranteed the loan. Under campaign finance law, such a guarantee is treated as a contribution to the candidate, subject to legal limits and reporting requirements.

If the loan was used in connection with Trump’s campaign, then Ruffin would have made an illegal contribution to the Trump campaign, potentially valued as high as $30 million.

Trump would have violated the law by accepting an excess contribution from Ruffin in the form of a loan guarantee and failing to report it.

Wait, the Phil Ruffin who is a casino magnate who married Ms. Ukraine 2005 at Mar-A-Lago?

Mob.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Times confirms what everybody knew:

Oh, dear.

Well, I'm sure that $70,000 is his limit of bad faith on taxes.

I’d argue the legitimacy of those rulings. Seriously. It is an investment function of the trade for celebrities, too. Don’t rock the boat that is riding the wave in.

And Trump is an ass.

Haircuts can’t be deducted as a business expense because you still have the haircut when you’re done working and you go out on a date or home to sleep. It’s impossible for it to be exclusively for business. If it was, every soldier, sailor, airman and marine should be able to deduct the cost of their EMPLOYER-REQUIRED haircuts.

I’m not a Trump fan, but I could see the argument being the hair is the brand, therefore allowed.

Everybody's hair is their brand, including yours. If Trump deducts his haircuts, and I were your accountant, I would use his argument for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the statute of limitations on this shit?

Shockingly it’s five years for most federal crimes.

If HRC committed crimes with her email the statute of limitations has probably run out.

Butter emails? Are you trolling or that stupid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the statute of limitations on this shit?

Shockingly it’s five years for most federal crimes.

If HRC committed crimes with her email the statute of limitations has probably run out.

Butter emails? Are you trolling or that stupid?

DP

I read PP as noting that the POTUS' obsession with HRC is literally irrelevant and just a distraction at this point.