Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[ati87]

Trump dodging taxes is somewhat unique to what he does. Most businesses don't find that many loopholes. You have to remember that Trump largely is able to steal from people because big government helps him do it, not the other way around. If eminent domain didn't exist he would be fucked in a lot of cases. That doesn't have anything to do with the IRS but still.

If you increased funding and oversight for the IRS maybe you would be able to squeeze a bit more tax money by closing loopholes but it is trivial compared to what an actual tax increase by law would be able to attain. Not that I want either of those things since I'm anti-tax and anti-IRS.

From the top of my head their is a good return when you fund tax agencies like the IRS. Sure closing loopholes will help if you could get republicans to agree on that but no reason not to do both

[Orlong]

There is no proof at all that Trump is worth billions of dollars beyond his word; in fact, his extensive history of filing bankruptcy despite continuously claiming how much he is personally worth significantly puts that into question. What would actually demonstrate how much he is worth would be his tax returns, although considering that he is allegedly under investigation for five years of returns at a minimum there's a good reason to believe that he is cheating on those as well.

Trump does NOT have an extensive history of filing bankruptcy. He has NEVER filed personal bankruptcy. his companies have filed bankruptcy 5 times out of hundreds of companies. Its less than 1%of his companies and it was never a chapter 7 bankruptcy. They were chapter 11 which are used to restructure debt and not cancel it. And really does it matter if he is a billionaire? Maybe he doesnt have one billion in cash, but he would definitely have a billion if he sold all of his hotels/resorts/golf courses/office buildings

- - - Updated - - -

I really and truly have no idea where this whole idea came from originally. I know many people have said that it's because he's rich and doesn't need money and thus can't be bought -- but since when have rich people stopped pursuing money? I mean...it's almost their entire psyche in some cases -- I might even argue that people who are rich are almost more suspect for corruption because not only do they desire even more, but they also feel untouchable.

Trump has also blatantly admitted he's been on the pay side of the pay-for-play game. Why on earth would you expect someone who skips about buying off politicians left and right to magically get principle when on the other side of it? The more that comes out about Trump the more it's fairly obvious that he's in it for himself. From his stiffing of contractors and employees to his use of both his foundation and his campaign to enrich himself and his businesses...it's clear Trump is in the for Trump. There is no reason to expect he'd magically change if he was president.

He has said himself that because he played the game he knows where the loopholes are, and how to close them so they cannot be exploited anymore. If the loopholes are there, why wouldnt he or anyone else use them.

- - - Updated - - -

Not how contract law works. Dissatisfaction (particularly Trumpian bad faith dissatisfaction) is not a basis to void a contract. Why do you think Trump has been in 3500 lawsuits? Because he stiffs people and they have to sue him for settlements. I know you want to spin for Trump. But all your "don't pay if you don't like it" spinning won't change how contract law works. You sign a contractor to do work, you don't get out of paying because you don't like it.

Sounds like being a contractor is a great job then, just promise the moon, sign the contract, deliver a shit job and get paid!!

- - - Updated - - -

In the course of not denying the gist of the original Times story, Trump's campaign also threatened legal action against the Times. Is this a legit threat? Big picture: no.

This is actually a topic I know something about from years of running a news organization and working with media lawyers to do it. As a general matter, if documents fall from the sky into your lap, you are pretty much free to do anything with them you want - even if bad acts were involved as they made their way to you. It's a very different matter, or can be, if you were in communication with or working with the person who committed the bad acts prior to their commission. This is an area where journalists need to be very careful. You can easily get into a situation where the bad actor becomes your 'agent' and you become complicit in the bad acts. Your 1st amendment rights give you very, very little protection if you commit crimes in the process of getting your material. If we take the Times account at face value (and there's no obvious reason not to), this is clearly not the case. So if crimes or civil wrongs were committed in acquiring the documents, that's not the Times problem.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/...es-blockbuster

From TPM on the subject of handing out info that shows up in the mail. If NYT just got the docs, with no actions on NYT part, then NYT can't be prosecuted. NYT needs to do something. From the facts we have, an envelope from Trump Tower showed up and revealed the whole deal.

Funny how the NYT accuses him of paying no taxes over 20 years ago and yet the NYT paid no taxes just 2 years ago.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreyd.../#2b06f1b86577

… for tax year 2014, The New York Times paid no taxes and got an income tax refund of $3.5 million even though they had a pre-tax profit of $29.9 million in 2014. In other words, their post-tax profit was higher than their pre-tax profit. The explanation in their 2014 annual report is, “The effective tax rate for 2014 was favorably affected by approximately $21.1 million for the reversal of reserves for uncertain tax positions due to the lapse of applicable statutes of limitations.” If you don’t think it took fancy accountants and tax lawyers to make that happen, read the statement again.

[Breccia]

And really does it matter if he is a billionaire?

Because he says he is. His only qualification to be President is claiming to be a successful businessman. 5 bankruptcies hurts that claim. Not having as much money as he says he does makes it worse. Losing $916 million in one year hurts that claim.

He has said himself that because he played the game he knows where the loopholes are, and how to close them so they cannot be exploited anymore. If the loopholes are there, why wouldnt he or anyone else use them.

a) It's which loopholes he used, such as losing $916 million in a single year, that points to him being a bad businessman.
b) He's running on the pledge to fix those loopholes, yet his tax plan on his website doesn't address the issues that help him the most -- such as the one that means he pays no taxes for 18 years because he so colossally fucked up at least once. And, based on Forbes' assessment of his worth, multiple times.

Sounds like being a contractor is a great job then, just promise the moon, sign the contract, deliver a shit job and get paid!!

If Trump had hired someone fo fix the job he said was poor, you might have a point.

If Trump had not paid at all from the outset, you might have a point.

But remember, Trump's been brought to court, and lost, because of a case where
a) he made partial payments, then suddenly decided to stop, and
b) used the property as is with no modifications.

So I don't think you can say that's what happened here all those times. Trump has been sued by over 60 people he didn't pay. There were over 250 subcontractors who he didn't pay in full/on time on one property alone. Either he's shorting people on purpose, or he's horrible at picking "the best people'. Pick one. Neither trait is endearing.

Funny how the NYT accuses him of paying no taxes over 20 years ago and yet the NYT paid no taxes just 2 years ago.

Funny how you missed the part about Trump losing $916 million in one year. And not paying taxes for eighteen years.

Also, the New York Times isn't running for President under a campaign promise to change tax laws, except those that benefit them. Trump is.

[ati87]

Funny how the NYT accuses him of paying no taxes over 20 years ago and yet the NYT paid no taxes just 2 years ago.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreyd.../#2b06f1b86577

Whats your point? Seriously what are you trying to proof now?

Is the New York Times going bragging how much money they are worth and how they are winning? You know what would have been a winning strategy a good businesses move? Making a billion instead of bloody losing a billion.

[Orlong]

Whats your point? Seriously what are you trying to proof now?

Is the New York Times going bragging how much money they are worth and how they are winning? You know what would have been a winning strategy a good businesses move? Making a billion instead of bloody losing a billion.

Im saying they shouldnt be pointing out something that someone did as wrong, when they themselves do it too

[Breccia]

This piece on CNN is critical of Trump, but it's actually moderately constructive criticism.

"Donald Trump's tax controversy and his self-destructive lack of discipline threaten to drain the Republican nominee of something he can't afford: time. "

- - - Updated - - -

Im saying they shouldnt be pointing out something that someone did as wrong, when they themselves do it too

But the situations aren't even all that close.
a) the story doesn't say the NYTimes lost money.
b) the story doesn't say that the NYTimes could put any form of loss against other years' income.
c) the NYTimes is not campaigning to change tax loopholes (especially ones that don't affect them)
d) the NYTimes released their taxes.

[FeedsOnDevTears]

wait...what? I'm absolutely no Trump fan by any stretch but I'm pretty sure he hasn't said this. Unless you mean banning refugees which would put/leave them in danger. Which is a far cry from saying he wants to kill them. We don't need to resort to really extreme rhetoric to expose Trump for being an incompetent douche.

This is something I think we need to discuss more publicly -- Trump is calling his supporters to go out on election day and "guard against fraud." It doesn't take much thought to see how extremist supporters can easily turn that into voter intimidation at the ballot box. I really hope the election officials are keeping a keen eye for bad behavior.

Donald Trump on terrorists: 'Take out their families'
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politi...ists-families/

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.

You can find the quote on Youtube easy enough, too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-D8U0nOHy60

And that's bad enough that he should be in jail for conspiracy to commit war crimes right fucking now, but don't forget that Trump doesn't know who or what ISIS even is. He thinks that ISIS has been around for decades, and he considers all Muslims terrorists. So yeah.

[Breccia]

And that's bad enough that he should be in jail for conspiracy to commit war crimes right fucking now

Okay I'm going to ask you politely to dial that down a bit. Trump is allowed to speak his mind without being jailed, as his words right now reflect only his opinion and are not law. Besides, he can ask his generals to murder civilians until he's less orange in the face, they still won't do it.

[Naxere]

Good on Trump for figuring out how to not pay taxes legally.

[Breccia]

Not that bringing up Trump's miserable $916 million loss and damn near heretical levels of hypocrisy by hinting Hillary Clinton cheated on Bill isn't loads of joy, but the story of how he did business with an Iranian bank from 1998 to 2003 should probably be kicked around as well. Granted, he bought the building in New York in which they already resided, and he might not have bothered to check ahead of time. That'd just be standard issue incompetence. But there was a financial embargo to Iran at the time, so doing business with them afterwards is at the minimum shady behavior. At worst, and yes this is the worst so a pretty big stretch because Trump has good lawyers, Trump might not have gotten the right forms to do business with a special exception to the embargo with Cuba -- shit! I meant Iran! -- and would have broken international law.

Trump never evicted the Iranian bank that the feds identified as being a state-run pupped in 1999. Trump owned that building for four years afterwards and the bank paid half a million per year.

Trump's campaign has refused to comment on this, probably because they're ashamed to admit it, even in the likely case it was 100% legal -- like not paying taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

Good on Trump for figuring out how to not pay taxes legally.

You do know he lost almost a billion dollars, right? How much taxes did he save by losing nearly a billion dollars? Was that really the best way to not pay taxes, by losing even more money than you would have paid?

He lost $916 million. Assuming he would have paid 40% taxes on his next $916 million in earned income and capital gains (which is well over the maximum rate, so no, he wouldn't), he came out $550 million in the hole total. Realistically, he did even worse.

[Naxere]

You do know he lost almost a billion dollars, right? How much taxes did he save by losing nearly a billion dollars? Was that really the best way to not pay taxes, by losing even more money than you would have paid?

He lost $916 million. Assuming he would have paid 40% taxes on his next $916 million in earned income and capital gains (which is well over the maximum rate, so no, he wouldn't), he came out $550 million in the hole total. Realistically, he did even worse.

Not the best way to go about it, sure. Still, that's not the line of attack people are going with are they? It's all "Trump didn't pay his taxes!" and not "Trump lost a bunch of money!"

[Trump]

Good on Trump for figuring out how to not pay taxes legally.

So very true. That is the only part of this story that is even worth mentioning, that Trump hires the best tax attorneys to scrutinize the tax code and legally save every penny that he can (which is just another reason to vote for him.) The people that are upset by this are just jealous that they don't have the same resources that Trump does.

The other thing worth mentioning is that this is not even a federal return, it is a state return, and it shows nothing about the actual loss. Everyone is just purely speculating what the loss was due to. Talk about conspiracy theories!

[May90]

So very true. That is the only part of this story that is even worth mentioning, that Trump hires the best tax attorneys to scrutinize the tax code and legally save every penny that he can (which is just another reason to vote for him.) The people that are upset by this are just jealous that they don't have the same resources that Trump does.

The other thing worth mentioning is that this is not even a federal return, it is a state return, and it shows nothing about the actual loss. everyone is just purely speculating what the loss was due to. Talk about conspiracy theories!

Donald, why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person?

[Lenonis]

He has said himself that because he played the game he knows where the loopholes are, and how to close them so they cannot be exploited anymore. If the loopholes are there, why wouldnt he or anyone else use them.

I already addressed this. If you are going to jump in the conversation it would be better to do so at the start of this topic, which isn't really that far back.

[Dug]

Not the best way to go about it, sure. Still, that's not the line of attack people are going with are they? It's all "Trump didn't pay his taxes!" and not "Trump lost a bunch of money!"

Trump didn't pay his taxes because he lost a lot of money. That's what I've been hearing everywhere so idk where you get your news

[Lenonis]

Sounds like being a contractor is a great job then, just promise the moon, sign the contract, deliver a shit job and get paid!!

Everyone seems to be ignoring that legally binding contracts were signed that Trump then ignored. Which means one of two things -- either Trump doesn't actually have any consideration for contract law (or thinks he's above it) or he's really terrible and drawing up contracts that give him recourse for work not done well.

He's also terrible at picking out contractors apparently.

So he either ignores the law or is bad at business. Pick one.

- - - Updated - - -

Im saying they shouldnt be pointing out something that someone did as wrong, when they themselves do it too

There is a huge chasm of difference between corporate taxes and personal income taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

Donald Trump on terrorists: 'Take out their families'

Ahhhhhhhhhhh. I see what you mean now. To be fair, you are misrepresenting what he said -- but his desire to commit war crimes by going after innocent civilians is very awful -- and should be attacked.

[LilSaihah]

Donald, why are you referring to yourself in the 3rd person?

Trying a new debate strategy. If he can convince the audience that Trump is in fact a different person, he will be able to disavow all knowledge of anything!

[zenkai]

This popped in my news feed, I thought the video was funny.

http://www.fury.news/2016/09/hillary...s-piggy-story/

[Lenonis]

Everyone is just purely speculating what the loss was due to. Talk about conspiracy theories!

Uh...it's pretty well established what the losses are due to. The mid 1990s had a recession that nearly collapsed the casino empire he built.

And, once again, the issue at play here is that if Trump can not pay taxes for nearly two decades then his entire taxation policy stance is a fraud. You can't claim the rich are taxed too much if they can pay no taxes. Unless you think writing checks to the wealthy is a viable tax plan.

[Felya]

Trump's policy page has been updated. His tax plan now includes thus:

Ensure the rich will pay their fair share, but no one will pay so much that it destroys jobs or undermines our ability to compete.

Gone is his tax bracket break down. Gone is "make loopholes redundant by making taxes that low". Check the new Trump policy page here (you need to click the drop down now):

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/tax-plan/

- - - Updated - - -

So very true. That is the only part of this story that is even worth mentioning, that Trump hires the best tax attorneys to scrutinize the tax code and legally save every penny that he can (which is just another reason to vote for him.) The people that are upset by this are just jealous that they don't have the same resources that Trump does.

The other thing worth mentioning is that this is not even a federal return, it is a state return, and it shows nothing about the actual loss. Everyone is just purely speculating what the loss was due to. Talk about conspiracy theories!

You can do it as well and pat your self on the back. Get a bunch of kids, never get a job, get on welfare and you are as much a genius as Trump. In just weeks, you will be buying your malt liquor in a brand new Cadillac, paying with foodstemps of course...

I'm as jelous of the wellfare queen that does it, as I am of Trump.