The Media Industry
- Thread starter texas_ex2000
- Start date
Did Trump violate tax code? The answer is no. On the other hand, the Clinton's donated to their own charity $1 million that paid their daughter $900,000 and Willy millions. Not only is the liberal portrayal of this hypocritical, it is unbelievably stupid. But it is red meat for their incredibly stupid base. You ate it too.
So at 31% effective rate, can we assume they jilted tax payers out of $310,000 with their 1 million dollar donation to themselves?
Last edited:
texas_ex2000
2,500+ Posts
Trump's big problem is how he's talking about his taxes which is playing right into what Hillary wants. Hillary went to Yale Law and unless her Alzheimers is full blown, knows how taxes work. She knows the loss and carry forward is specious.
Trump is a moron for calling himself a genius about this. I'm not even saying it's inaccurate...it's just a very dumb and unempathetic thing to say to voters. If he were just dialed back one or two notches to like Christie or three or four to Giuliani level this thing would be wrapped up.
The crazy thing is, it doesn't appear his egomania hurts him all that much. Part of that is that Hillary is the worst and part of it may be people who are still on the fence are desensitized to it by now.
I've worked in oil and gas, naval aviation, and investment baking and have met more than my share of mysogynistic egomaniacs. You know what? They worked their tails off, got stuff done, took care of their subordinates, and were faithful husbands and fathers. I grant you, they were smart enough to have a filter in certain situations - Trump lacks that, but we've all met men like that.
Trump is a moron for calling himself a genius about this. I'm not even saying it's inaccurate...it's just a very dumb and unempathetic thing to say to voters. If he were just dialed back one or two notches to like Christie or three or four to Giuliani level this thing would be wrapped up.
The crazy thing is, it doesn't appear his egomania hurts him all that much. Part of that is that Hillary is the worst and part of it may be people who are still on the fence are desensitized to it by now.
I've worked in oil and gas, naval aviation, and investment baking and have met more than my share of mysogynistic egomaniacs. You know what? They worked their tails off, got stuff done, took care of their subordinates, and were faithful husbands and fathers. I grant you, they were smart enough to have a filter in certain situations - Trump lacks that, but we've all met men like that.
I35
5,000+ Posts
It makes no sense for any Republican nominee to show their taxes. The left media wants it so they can use it to attack the GOP candidate while ignoring the Dem candidate. Like I said a few weeks ago, "The dems get to swim across the river free of harm, while the Rep have to swim across the river that has alligators."
Also the GOP has to have some balls and stand up to the group that sets up the debates. CNN blew it because of Monica Crowley in 2012 and their network should have been suspended from hosting any debates for at least a decade + 2 years. Same with NBC because of Lester Holt. There has to be consequences when Networks pull those stunts in debates. It's got to be somewhat balanced.
They are scared to death about Trump's turnout. Clinton can be swamped by Trump voters on Election Day. Here's the deal: they won't admit it till after the election. For now, it is in their interest to pretend otherwise to the voters.
Clean
5,000+ Posts
Check out The Late Show's take on the Vice Presidential Debate. It's revolting.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...s-pence-gay-giving-putin-blowjobs-conway-wont
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...s-pence-gay-giving-putin-blowjobs-conway-wont
So be mad at the tax system, not the billionaire, unless the billionaire illegally failed to pay taxes. And who creates and approves the tax code? Nameless, faceless bureaucrats and our lovely, lovely Congress.
What HRC and her media enablers refer to as a "tax loophole" has a more correct name: legal deduction.
texas_ex2000
2,500+ Posts
The media is so far down this one it disgusts me.
I think most voters can accept things like operating losses and deductions and small business owners understand NOL carryforwards. What the issue is the media incesant editorializing on "may have not paid taxes for 15 years." First, that's wild speculation. Second, the media states the defintion of NOL carryforwards (a deduction that may be claimed for certain X number of years) as if it were some sinister activity.
Third, the speculation that Trump may not have paid taxes for 15 years is extremely manipulative and defies common sense math and accounting. Notwithstanding the fact that he pays property taxes, sales taxes, and corporate taxes, his net worth has also grown multiples from 1995. So when one says he may not have paid taxes since 1995 signals to me that that person is an idiot who can't think for himself. Does he pay 40%? I would guess probably not because the vast majority his income comes from investments and real estate development - unlike the Clintons who's income comes from Wall Street speaking fees and book sales.
I think most voters can accept things like operating losses and deductions and small business owners understand NOL carryforwards. What the issue is the media incesant editorializing on "may have not paid taxes for 15 years." First, that's wild speculation. Second, the media states the defintion of NOL carryforwards (a deduction that may be claimed for certain X number of years) as if it were some sinister activity.
Third, the speculation that Trump may not have paid taxes for 15 years is extremely manipulative and defies common sense math and accounting. Notwithstanding the fact that he pays property taxes, sales taxes, and corporate taxes, his net worth has also grown multiples from 1995. So when one says he may not have paid taxes since 1995 signals to me that that person is an idiot who can't think for himself. Does he pay 40%? I would guess probably not because the vast majority his income comes from investments and real estate development - unlike the Clintons who's income comes from Wall Street speaking fees and book sales.
Last edited:
I35
5,000+ Posts
That in many ways encourages the spread of money that helps boost the economy outside of the hands of the government. You don't use the legal deductions and give the govt the money, they will spend millions of $$$ for the study of black birds. Or on things like Solyndra.
I35
5,000+ Posts
Wow, the left media are so desperate. They are just accepting anyone that's willing to put themselves in the national light to make false claims without vetting. I'm not a lawyer like some here, but this seems to have a defamation lawsuit written all over it.
I'm predicting right now that when more emails are released showing how crooked Hillary is that there will be people coming out and saying they've heard Donald use the N word and the left media will run with it trying to deflect. Mark it down!
I'm predicting right now that when more emails are released showing how crooked Hillary is that there will be people coming out and saying they've heard Donald use the N word and the left media will run with it trying to deflect. Mark it down!
I took a journalism law course in 1981 and while I can't remember enough to pass the exams, I do remember that a public figure has a hard row to hoe in a libel suit. Trump would have to prove "actual malice" that the newspapers in question published either knew or the information was false or recklessly disregarded whetherr or not it was false. Trump can sue, but he can't win. His own recorded words combined with the words of the women quoted and the independent verifications (talks with other with whom they shared the story prior to coming out publicly) meet standards of adequate care
Last edited:
I35
5,000+ Posts
Like maybe if the NY Times got their email hacked and it stated they knew it was false? I could only hope that would happen. There are no consequences anymore for anybody's actions.
He may not be able to prevail against the networks that aired it, but he could if he just sued the person saying it directly.
Statalyzer
10,000+ Posts
Agree. People saying he should have voluntarily paid more income taxes than he legally had to are loony - the sad part is most of them seriously don't even understand that they are saying "Trump is wrong for not volunteering to overpay his taxes"
I heard this claim a lot, but from what I've looked into, the latter bit seems pretty dubious.
I35
5,000+ Posts
I agree. But both candidates haven't faced any consequences even though their consequences should be much different due to the severity of one candidate. She very easily would be in jail for what she's done many times if she were anybody else. What has Trump done that would put him in Prison without naming outlandish claims?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
The outrage comes down to you have a guy that faced bankruptcy in the 90's and leveraged that loss to now claim $10B net worth and may not have paid any federal taxes? The outrage is as much at the tax system that wealthy people (like Trump) lobby to allows them to get away with avoiding taxes.
There is a civil duty argument here. Government costs. Even the most basic services (defense, infrastructure, police, etc) cost a lot. Should a billionaire real estate developer be able to avoid paying their share of that cost?
That's why I respect Warren Buffet immensely. He's advocating a fair effective tax rate from the wealthy.
Then what do you think about government giving tax CREDITS, not deductions to certain favored industries (mostly liberal ones by the way)? The whole scheme is to help create jobs. Didn't realize you are against job creation.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
I'm not anti-business but I do agree in theory with ideas like the Alternative Minimum tax. I was personally subject to AMT last year. At the basest level, it seems obscene to have anyone living a life of luxury while not paying into the system that created the conditions for the acquisition of that wealth. Donald Trump didn't "cheat" that we know of but rather used the tax system to his advantage. I'm not sure we should celebrate those values when the middle class is essentially paying for the defense of Donald Trump's wealth.
And single people pay for the defense of married people'a wealth. What's your point? Everybody plays the tax game. It's sheer hypocrisy to say that guy is a bigger abuser than someone else.
I35
5,000+ Posts
Nah that doesn't matter. Remember right before the election in 2012 when the media claimed Romney was a bully and he and a couple of friends held down a kid and cut his hair off? Mitt just stated he didn't recall ever doing anything like that. They tried to create doubt. Not sure to what level it worked but it's just a small example how they throw things at the last minute then it just all goes away after the election.
Trump has been at celebrity status for over 30 years and not once was there a claim that he was a racist or sexual predator. Then he runs for president and now the media calls him a racist over and over until it sticks. The stuff they claim he said was first repeated wrong and then what he did say was factual that some illegals are criminals and rapist. He specifically said there are good people too, but he was talking about the bad coming in and staying in sanctuary cities for protection. I agree with him on that. Then he stated we need to freeze refugees coming in from hotbed countries for terrorism. What moron would disagree with him on that? This is about our safety for our children and generations to come. Why take the chance on that? I know what the Libs want it. They want to grow their voting base even at the expense of all Americans safety. Even Hillary in the emails stated there is not way to vet them. So after that he now hates muslim accord to the left. I swear some of you that call yourself conservatives sound much more like liberals with there talking point you repeat.
So now he has never ever been accused of any sexual assaults until 3 weeks before the election. Saying words and actually doing them are a HUGE difference. One is just words and the other is actually criminal.
Fair? What is fair? LOL. 80%, 90% top rates for the rich? How do you determine that without getting into the issue of slower growth, etc. that go along with higher tax burdens? How is it fair to send funds from the hard workers to the non-contributors of society. Not every poor person is deserving. Second, I prefer a flat tax, so your question is moot to me. If the purpose of government taxation is to send funds to poor people via food stamps, housing assistance, etc., then the poor ought to pay. In this way, it forces the poor to send money to the government for the services they need instead of wasting it on smart phones and air jordans.
I35
5,000+ Posts
I think there is a vast difference in how much the system benefits somebody making $150 million a year and somebody making $15,000, not to mention there is an increased capacity to pay more and the fact that wealth in the hands of poor people gets spent and benefits the economy and wealth in the hands of rich people gets accumulated and in some cases moved to offshore accounts.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
Prediction Results Threads
