 
     |
| Decade in the Red: Trump Tax Info Shows Over $1 Billion in Business Losses 1985-1994. (Page 18/20) |
|
randye
|
OCT 04, 06:54 AM
|
|
|
It's amazing how Leftists so willingly bounce from one Fairy Tale hoax to the next. [This message has been edited by randye (edited 10-04-2020).]
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
OCT 04, 10:50 AM
|
|
Most people pay way too many taxes anyway. Roll back government agencies and the taxes on people.
The lifetime criminals in Congress getting their family rich and enriching themselves is one reason Trump was elected (like Pelosi's husband as an example). But he's not an effective President. He's a businessman and I don't want my government run like a business. It's not supposed to profit and grow more powerful like a business. He needs to ball-gag Ivanka and boot Jarrod and find quality replacements. Boot Barr while he's at it.
I don't care what Trump paid in taxes under a system legistated by someone else. Warren Buffet said he paid less than his secretary, I believe.
|
|
|
Boondawg
|
OCT 04, 11:49 AM
|
|
|
It’s amazing how blind the “right” can be to lying, cheating, & stealing when they think that lying, cheating, & stealing is benefiting them.
|
|
|
Boondawg
|
OCT 04, 11:51 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by sourmash:
Most people pay way too many taxes anyway. Roll back government agencies and the taxes on people.
The lifetime criminals in Congress getting their family rich and enriching themselves is one reason Trump was elected (like Pelosi's husband as an example). But he's not an effective President. He's a businessman and I don't want my government run like a business. It's not supposed to profit and grow more powerful like a business. He needs to ball-gag Ivanka and boot Jarrod and find quality replacements. Boot Barr while he's at it.
I don't care what Trump paid in taxes under a system legistated by someone else. Warren Buffet said he paid less than his secretary, I believe. |
|
Sounds sensible to me!
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
OCT 04, 12:10 PM
|
|
Speeders generally irritate me because of a lot of them have arrogance thinking their speed overrules everyone else's right of way, but what can be done about rectifying their flaws? I do it until I'm in the clear. But try not to cause someone else a harm.
I try not to watch what is presented as news today (corporate, for-profit news), but when I see some issue discussed it's always with a leftist angle. Today it's people being arrested and jailed for defending themselves for standing up for normal behavior while the perps aren't charged for violent attacks
There's too many laws about stuff the government shouldn't be involved in. I'm not a progressive and not a liberal. Unless it's being a classical liberal meanng I don't care if you want to grow personal items for your own use on your own land. In fact I should be able to grow my own corn, produce alcohol to fuel my car on public roads.
Wait, I'd be a tax cheat. Think I'm ok with that.  [This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 10-04-2020).]
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
OCT 04, 12:47 PM
|
|
What "blackrams" and others here are looking away from is the reality that this is not a criminal trial of "New York Times V Donald J. Trump" that requires the presentation of a prosecutor's case that is convincing of guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.
This is politics. This is a national elections cycle.
What has President Trump ever said or done to dispel or cast serious doubt on the veracity of this New York Times reporting?
Where's the transparency from Trump's side? The publication of the relevant documents, including (likely) tax returns, banking records and other balance sheets that would dispel the reporters' description of the President as a literal "Human Conflict of Interest" with loan obligations that are conspicuously outsized, relative to the revenues and assets that are comprised by his international business empire?
There is no legal requirement for President Trump to be transparent about his business enterprises, his personal wealth and his financial exposure in terms of loan obligations.
Just as there is no legal requirement for anyone to vote for him or otherwise aid in his reelection campaign, and no legal requirement for anyone to refrain from opining about him in this one obscure little corner (Pennock's) of the Internet world.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 10-04-2020).]
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
OCT 04, 12:54 PM
|
|
|
Is it wrong that I'd like to see Trump and Biden in a winner take all WWE Smack Down event? A tag-team one with Pence and Harris too.
|
|
|
Boondawg
|
OCT 04, 02:43 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by sourmash:
Is it wrong that I'd like to see Trump and Biden in a winner take all WWE Smack Down event? A tag-team one with Pence and Harris too. |
|
Ok, but you gotta give me odds, because one side cheats, and the other side whines. 
Give me 2-1 on Biden to win (Biden’s old & feeble, but just like most bullies, Trump’s a pussy. Hit him once and he’ll go right to sucking his thumb in the corner.
The Pence/Harris fight card is a little tougher.
Pence is a Religious Zellot just crazed enough to pull it off, but I think Harris’s natural hatred of men could really play hell on a set of balls.
I’ll take Pence to win. It’s hard to beat crazy.
Bush/Clinton should be the announcers, with their wives as the ring girls.
“Let’s get ready to reeeeeeegergitate!” 
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
OCT 04, 03:11 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
What "blackrams" and others here are looking away from is the reality that this is not a criminal trial of "New York Times V Donald J. Trump" that requires the presentation of a prosecutor's case that is convincing of guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.
This is politics. This is a national elections cycle.
What has President Trump ever said or done to dispel or cast serious doubt on the veracity of this New York Times reporting?
Where's the transparency from Trump's side? The publication of the relevant documents, including (likely) tax returns, banking records and other balance sheets that would dispel the reporters' description of the President as a literal "Human Conflict of Interest" with loan obligations that are conspicuously outsized, relative to the revenues and assets that are comprised by his international business empire?
There is no legal requirement for President Trump to be transparent about his business enterprises, his personal wealth and his financial exposure in terms of loan obligations.
Just as there is no legal requirement for anyone to vote for him or otherwise aid in his reelection campaign, and no legal requirement for anyone to refrain from opining about him in this one obscure little corner (Pennock's) of the Internet world.
|
|
A fine example of fake news, fake logic and the age old ploy of children.....he did this.....with no proof.
Fakery, chicanery.......liars spreading lies if there is no proof.
|
|
|
|
Raydar
|
OCT 04, 04:26 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
What "blackrams" and others here are looking away from is the reality that this is not a criminal trial of "New York Times V Donald J. Trump" that requires the presentation of a prosecutor's case that is convincing of guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.
....
|
|
Seriously?! You're using that to defend the Slimes?
It's a hatchet job. And that's all that it is.[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 10-04-2020).]
|
|
|
|