Donald Trump 2020

[Dark Horse 2291]

4 minutes ago, Bookman said:

Pussy talk not going away.

Our posts has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Vagina.

[DDD Dad 14350]

Our posts has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Vagina.

[Macanudo 13011]

Who wants to see Joe turn to Trump tonight and say.......

 

 

Take the loss, pussy.

[WhatTheBuck 28798]

"Penis, vagina! Penis, vagina! Penis, vagina!" - Hank Kingsley

[Blotto 23574]

24 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

i find it hilarious that , probably , trump was MORE embarassed about exposing the fact that he's heavily indebted, than the fact that he paid out little taxes. 

Probably?  100% certainty that he will brag of his tax avoidance as the hallmark of a savvy businessman.....very legal, very cool. 50% certainty he will complain that he hasn't  been awarded the Noble Prize in economics for it.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Blotto

[sidis 9832]

50 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

If you take on a 700k mortgage at 10% you'll offset your 70k income too. 

 

God knows im not defending Trump.  And I said explicitly I dont support the US tax code.  But why fix your crosshair only on the playa instead of the game?

Well that’s kind of the thing, his lone policy accomplishment was to further exacerbate the ridiculous tax policy that so overwhelmingly favors the ultra wealthy. who is in charge of the henhouse? That, along with serving Mitch up with Mitch’s judges was his entire role here. 

[Biff Tannen 45733]

2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

But see, Rick Gates is fake news.  Hardly knew the guy.  Just a coffee boy, nothing more. Looking to make a buck.  And who are you going to believe?  Some felon, or CNN, or me?

 

 

Yokels in Georgia reacting on CNN this morning.  Waitress went full on fake news about it.  "Well it's the New York Times."  Yeah, one of the longest running and most reputable news sources in US history.  These are the dumbest people.

[52-80 19245]

3 minutes ago, sidis said:

Well that’s kind of the thing, his lone policy accomplishment was to further exacerbate the ridiculous tax policy that so overwhelmingly favors the ultra wealthy. who is in charge of the henhouse? That, along with serving Mitch up with Mitch’s judges was his entire role here. 

all these tax policies predate him.  and is a much bigger issue than any individual or political party.  blow the whole thing up and start over.

[Continental Op 3934]

8 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

I can see why he is a former accountant. You probably shouldn't get your advice from that guy. 

Everyone should have a CPA who seems to struggle with the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.  I doubt we see @MillerEP again though.  He probably thought his article from monsterhunterinsider or whatever was some kind of mic drop even though it boils down to "HURRRRR DURRRR FAKE NEWWWS!!!!!!!!" 

[WhatTheBuck 28798]

9 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Probably?  100% certainty that he will brag of his tax avoidance as the hallmark of a savvy businessman.....very legal, very cool. 50% certainty he will complain that he hasn't  been awarded the Noble Prize in economics for it.

Well, duh. He said in the 2016 debates that it made him smart. We already knew he was a tax cheat. He never tried to deny it. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

9 minutes ago, sidis said:

Well that’s kind of the thing, his lone policy accomplishment was to further exacerbate the ridiculous tax policy that so overwhelmingly favors the ultra wealthy. who is in charge of the henhouse? That, along with serving Mitch up with Mitch’s judges was his entire role here. 

 

3 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

all these tax policies predate him.  and is a much bigger issue than any individual or political party.  blow the whole thing up and start over.

If I had to pick someone's taxes to go over with a fine tooth comb, I'd love to get a look at Steve Mnuchin's. As one wag put it, he puts the 'douche' in fiduciary. It's been reported that he's very transactional, similar to the President's view of the world. Very keen on preserving the old order of things or adapting it to tilt the advantage even more to his use. I imagine that he didn't go the fraudulent route that Trump did with respect to dodgy deductions, but even though the tax code has become so unwieldy, he's not going to budge for the average American. He's never had to deal with any. At least Warren and Co were willing to talk about income inequality in that respect, but I agree, the structure and policies are a large issue.

[Born to Run 6569]

Pussy, the term for a weak willed effeminate man, comes from the word pusillanimous and I believe predates the slang word for vagina.

Perhaps but dipshit dudes will make a pussy handsign when they they say it now with plenty of machismo disgust.

[Chuckie Finster 22730]

wrong thread

Edited September 29, 2020 by Chuckie Finster

[SquishMitten 10434]

Probably?  100% certainty that he will brag of his tax avoidance as the hallmark of a savvy businessman.....very legal, very cool. 50% certainty he will complain that he hasn't  been awarded the Noble Prize in economics for it.

Not going to dig up the exact quote, but at one of his early rallies he boasted that he didn’t pay taxes.

[dingleberryswitzer 2724]

1 hour ago, Bookman said:

Pussy talk not going away.

It seems to have grabbed some people's attention.  

[Biff Tannen 45733]

12 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I would bet my life savings that at some point Trump tries to reenact the "because you'd be in jail" moment from the Hillary debates.  

Except it doesn't work this time because he IS in charge and Biden is NOT in jail.  It's wild how he is still acting like he's not the president and is running as a first time candidate again.

[Eastwood 4394]

10 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

Not going to dig up the exact quote, but at one of his early rallies he boasted that he didn’t pay taxes.

When Hillary called him out in a debate on not paying any taxes, his response was "that makes me smart." His base ate it up.

[MillerEP 30497]

1 hour ago, Continental Op said:

Everyone should have a CPA who seems to struggle with the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.  I doubt we see @MillerEP again though.  He probably thought his article from monsterhunterinsider or whatever was some kind of mic drop even though it boils down to "HURRRRR DURRRR FAKE NEWWWS!!!!!!!!" 

No, I agree with the guy's blog. I'm assuming you didn't read it, so here's his recap:

You pay what you legally owe, and not a penny more, there isn't a real mechanism for paying it back if you do. If he did anything wrong we'd be hearing about it a long time ago. Does it seem low? Yes, but that's actually the norm. CPA's jobs are to protect their client's money, and "loopholes" exist for that reason. "Loopholes" were put there by congress over many decades to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others. So his team of accountants are paid to find whose and save him money. Also, the NY Times never actually released any documents, so nobody has any way to verify if what they said is true or not, or if we're looking at only some claims or all of them. They claim they did it to "protect their source," because as the accountant who wrote the blog says, it's a Felony for them to release them. So we only have their word over Trump's in a classic he said she said. Which "conveniently" comes out a month away from election day, so you can imagine why many would be skeptical. 

 

I encourage you to read his blog post though. It's classic Shaggy.

Edited September 29, 2020 by MillerEP

[Foosters 17886]

4 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

No, I agree with the guy's blog. I'm assuming you didn't read it, so here's his recap:

You pay what you legally owe, and not a penny more, there isn't a real mechanism for paying it back if you do. If he did anything wrong we'd be hearing about it a long time ago. Does it seem low? Yes, but that's actually the norm. CPA's jobs are to protect their client's money, and "loopholes" exist for that reason. "Loopholes" were put there by congress over many decades to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others. Also, the NY Times never actually released any documents, so nobody has any way to verify if what they said is true or not, or if we're looking at only some claims or all of them. They claim they did it to "protect their source," because as the accountant who wrote the blog says, it's a Felony for them to release them. So we only have their word over Trump's in a classic he said she said.

This is fucking embarrassing.

Are you for real?

[wildcat09 29381]

4 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

No, I agree with the guy's blog. I'm assuming you didn't read it, so here's his recap:

You pay what you legally owe, and not a penny more, there isn't a real mechanism for paying it back if you do. If he did anything wrong we'd be hearing about it a long time ago. Does it seem low? Yes, but that's actually the norm. CPA's jobs are to protect their client's money, and "loopholes" exist for that reason. "Loopholes" were put there by congress over many decades to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others. So his team of accountants are paid to find whose and save him money. Also, the NY Times never actually released any documents, so nobody has any way to verify if what they said is true or not, or if we're looking at only some claims or all of them. They claim they did it to "protect their source," because as the accountant who wrote the blog says, it's a Felony for them to release them. So we only have their word over Trump's in a classic he said she said. Which "conveniently" comes out a month away from election day, so you can imagine why many would be skeptical. 

 

I encourage you to read his blog post though. It's classic Shaggy.

You're adorable.

[Dahobbs 17682]

Just now, MillerEP said:

No, I agree with the guy's blog. I'm assuming you didn't read it, so here's his recap:

You pay what you legally owe, and not a penny more, there isn't a real mechanism for paying it back if you do. If he did anything wrong we'd be hearing about it a long time ago. Does it seem low? Yes, but that's actually the norm. CPA's jobs are to protect their client's money, and "loopholes" exist for that reason. "Loopholes" were put there by congress over many decades to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others. Also, the NY Times never actually released any documents, so nobody has any way to verify if what they said is true or not, or if we're looking at only some claims or all of them. They claim they did it to "protect their source," because as the accountant who wrote the blog says, it's a Felony for them to release them.

This isn't entirely correct. There is case law where aggressive use of structuring "loopholes" crossed the line from tax avoidance to tax evasion. A CPA that tries to get hyper technical to save his client every penny on taxes very well may be aiding tax evasion.

That guy doesn't seem to realize this, which is probably why is he isn't an accountant any longer. 

[MillerEP 30497]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

You're adorable.

Danke!

[miguelito 11308]

just felt like posting this

 

[MillerEP 30497]

14 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

This isn't entirely correct. There is case law where aggressive use of structuring "loopholes" crossed the line from tax avoidance to tax evasion. A CPA that tries to get hyper technical to save his client every penny on taxes very well may be aiding tax evasion.

That guy doesn't seem to realize this, which is probably why is he isn't an accountant any longer. 

He retired and started writing books, which is why his blog has that crazy name. I'm willing to listen if you can point out to me in his tax records where he did something illegal or incorrectly. I've been pretty clear on the board, I'm a super individual rights guy, not a Trumper or republican (I vote L most, and sometimes D, like I'll probably vote for Donna Imam). So I'm not blindly posting it as a supporter. I rarely dip my toe in the Cloak Room aside for the satire and memes page. I just happen to think it's convenient some supposed documents were leaked right before the election that none of us can see or point to, we have to take NYT's word on it, and yet it's supposed to be evidence of some malfeasance, but nobody can say what it is, other than "He's a bad man, or bad at business." I think the account brings up good points in his blog post. I'm not a big fan of taxes personally, so I'm a fan of paying as little as I can get away with legally. 

Alrighty, I'll see myself out.

Edited September 29, 2020 by MillerEP

[pyrohornIII 4820]

 

18 hours ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

I thought "suckers" were the people that died in the military defending our country.  Now they are the people that cheat on their taxes also?  This is really confusing.

I think he meant the suckers are also the ones who don't cheat at their taxes.

11 hours ago, MidTexHorn said:

Because the Russian oligarchs/mob (same thing) recognize and know how to exploit an easy Mark when they find him 60,000,000 of them?

 

[Dahobbs 17682]

12 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

He retired and started writing books, which is why his blog has that crazy name. I'm willing to listen if you can point out to me in his tax records where he did something illegal or incorrectly. I've been pretty clear on the board, I'm a super individual rights guy, not a Trumper or republican. So I'm not blindly posting it as a supporter. I rarely dip my toe in the Cloak Room aside for the satire and memes page. I just happen to think it's convenient some supposed documents were leaked right before the election that none of us can see or point to, we have to take NYT's word on it, and yet it's supposed to be evidence of some malfeasance, but nobody can say what it is, other than "He's a bad man, or bad at business."

Uh huh.

He is a bad human  being and he is bad at business. Him managing to both commit tax fraud and also lose gobs of money, an impressive feat, would not be surprising given those facts. But you're right, he could, you know, just release his taxes like every other presidential candidate since the 70's and prove the NYT wrong. Huh, wonder why he hasn't done that? 

Edited September 29, 2020 by Dahobbs

[CowboyFred 1151]

5 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

He retired and started writing books, which is why his blog has that crazy name. I'm willing to listen if you can point out to me in his tax records where he did something illegal or incorrectly. I've been pretty clear on the board, I'm a super individual rights guy, not a Trumper or republican (I vote L most, and sometimes D, like I'll probably vote for Donna Imam). So I'm not blindly posting it as a supporter. I rarely dip my toe in the Cloak Room aside for the satire and memes page. I just happen to think it's convenient some supposed documents were leaked right before the election that none of us can see or point to, we have to take NYT's word on it, and yet it's supposed to be evidence of some malfeasance, but nobody can say what it is, other than "He's a bad man, or bad at business." I think the account brings up good points in his blog post. I'm not a big fan of taxes personally, so I'm a fan of paying as little as I can get away with legally. 

I'm pretty sure paying your daughter, that you employ, a separate $700K consulting fee is decent evidence of some malfeasance.  that's just my opinion tho 

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Uh huh.

He is a bad human  being and he is bad at business. Him managing to both commit tax fraud and also lose gobs of money, which is an impressive feat, would not be surprising given those facts. But you're right, he could, you know, just release his taxes like every other presidential candidate since the 70's and prove the NYT wrong. Huh, wonder why he hasn't done that? 

1234.

[Eastwood 4394]

7 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

He retired and started writing books, which is why his blog has that crazy name. I'm willing to listen if you can point out to me in his tax records where he did something illegal or incorrectly. I've been pretty clear on the board, I'm a super individual rights guy, not a Trumper or republican. So I'm not blindly posting it as a supporter. I rarely dip my toe in the Cloak Room aside for the satire and memes page. I just happen to think it's convenient some supposed documents were leaked right before the election that none of us can see or point to, we have to take NYT's word on it, and yet it's supposed to be evidence of some malfeasance, but nobody can say what it is, other than "He's a bad man, or bad at business."

Quote

"Ms. Trump had been an executive officer of the Trump companies that received profits from and paid the consulting fees for both projects — meaning she appears to have been treated as a consultant on the same hotel deals that she helped manage as part of her job at her father's business."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/28/politics/ivanka-trump-donald-trump-tacves/index.html

That allowed his company to employ her as an executive officer and then write off her consulting fees at the same time. That isn't CPA kung fu. That's double dipping tax fraud.

[Homercles 10206]

10 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

I can see why he is a former accountant. You probably shouldn't get your advice from that guy. 

Well once he mentioned he was retired I thought ‘angry old white guy’, kept reading and wasn’t disappointed.  Target demographic.  He also said ‘I’ll keep this simple’ before rambling on.  

Edited September 29, 2020 by Homercles

[Bozo_Casanova 26549]

27 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

You pay what you legally owe, and not a penny more, there isn't a real mechanism for paying it back if you do.

No shit.

 

27 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

If he did anything wrong we'd be hearing about it a long time ago.

We did. 

 

27 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

Does it seem low? Yes, but that's actually the norm. CPA's jobs are to protect their client's money, and "loopholes" exist for that reason. "Loopholes" were put there by congress over many decades to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others. So his team of accountants are paid to find whose and save him money.

But what this post pre-supposes is that's bad. And more importantly - that's not really the problem. The problem is that if the reality is as reported, the president is at least either terrible at business and in dire financial condition and therefore subject to outside influence by creditors, or cheating on his taxes and very likely both. 
 

27 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

Also, the NY Times never actually released any documents, so nobody has any way to verify if what they said is true or not, or if we're looking at only some claims or all of them. They claim they did it to "protect their source," because as the accountant who wrote the blog says, it's a Felony for them to release them. So we only have their word over Trump's in a classic he said she said. Which "conveniently" comes out a month away from election day, so you can imagine why many would be skeptical. 

A classic "he said she said" is a situation where two people with equal credibility maintain opposite accounts of an event and no mechanism exists to determine which is true. None of those conditions hold here. 
First, the mechanism does exist - the president can release the returns as all others have, and despite his insistence to the contrary no law prevents him from doing so, assuming that he's actually under audit. He actually promised to release them repeatedly, but of course he didn't
Second - They aren't actually opposite stories - the president has had multiple and inconsistent reactions.
Third - The credibility of the two aren't the same. Do you maintain they are? I grant that it's possible the NYT was fed bad information and that fact checking failed or they ran with an irresponsible story, But if they had, don't you think the Trump team would be producing verifiable information that refute the story (see #1)? Do you think that the NYT creating the biggest story of the year out of whole cloth is equally likely as this president lying?

Look - it goes without saying that this was a hit and timed to be a hit. If not planned by the times it was planned by someone somewhere. But that doesn't bear on the factuality of the story.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[Brisketexan 105326]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

The problem is that if the reality is as reported, the president is at least either terrible at business and in dire financial condition and therefore subject to outside influence by creditors, or cheating on his taxes and very likely both. 
 

This, for the 1000th time.  Those are your choices.  He's either a criminal, or totally inept at the one thing he is supposed to be good at.  Pick. And yes, "both" is an option.

[wildcat09 29381]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No shit.

 

We did. 

 

But what this post pre-supposes is that's bad. And more importantly - that's not really the problem. The problem is that if the reality is as reported, the president is at least either terrible at business and in dire financial condition and therefore subject to outside influence by creditors, or cheating on his taxes and very likely both. 
 

A classic "he said she said" is a situation where two people with equal credibility maintain opposite accounts of an event and no mechanism exists to determine which is true. None of those conditions hold here. 
First, the mechanism does exist - the president can release the returns as all others have, and despite his insistence to the contrary no law prevents him from doing so, assuming that he's actually under audit. He actually promised to release them repeatedly, but of course he didn't
Second - They aren't actually opposite stories - the president has had multiple and inconsistent reactions.
Third - The credibility of the two aren't the same. Do you maintain they are? I grant that it's possible the NYT was fed bad information and that fact checking failed or they ran with an irresponsible story, But if they had, don't you think the Trump team would be producing verifiable information that refute the story (see #1)? Do you think that the NYT creating the biggest story of the year out of whole cloth is equally likely as this president lying?

Look - it goes without saying that this was a hit and timed to be a hit. If not planned by the times it was planned by someone somewhere. But that doesn't bear on the factuality of the story.

Can’t wait to see how the totally-not-a-Trumper  logics and reasons himself out of this.

[pyrohornIII 4820]

After everything we have had to watch this guy do, there is no way in hell you could convince me Trump didn't regularly cheat (and cheat hard) on his taxes.   I'd go further to bet that 400 of those 500 companies are shells with no other purpose than to hide tax fraud.  He sees himself as some sort of genius.  It's not genius. The only game he has is breaking the law and doing it so much, so frequently that no one can keep score.   He's a cat with a diarrhea, crapping and covering as fast as he can.

 

 

Or he thinks he's covering.   New York is about to show him otherwise.  He and his whole little family of grifters.

[Texaspython 231]

I think the better argument is the way in which it destroys the myth of Trump. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

Its the same thing he's done throughout his presidency.  So much of our system relies on people acting on the up and up.  If you literally don't care about those things, invariably some of your bad acts will slip through previously unexploited cracks.  

 

So he makes a joke of the taxes he pays, says it's the god's honest truth, and sees what flies.  He gets sued *all the time* for unpaid taxes.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/05/19/trumps-tax-troubles/84543538/

Sometimes he just doesn't get sued. His whole gamble is that his wrongs are bigger plusses for him than attorneys fees and fines are bad.

[hornmpa96 2620]

Except Trump likely didn't pay what he legally owes - Everyone is focused on the consulting payment to Ivanka and the 70k for hairstyling, but those weren't the interesting things in the NY Times piece to this CPA.

His claimed abandonment loss on his casino business which resulted in his NOL carryback and $70 MM tax refund appears highly questionable. To take that loss, he had to really abandon his interests, but in the bankruptcy, he ended up receiving shares in the restructured business after he abandoned his interest. That's a problem and why the Joint Committee on Taxation hasn't officially approved his refund. That amount could come due at any time plus interest.

Another item which raised an eyebrow was treating their NY estate as an investment property when the family basically describes it as a second home in publicly available interviews. By doing this, he creates another set of questionable deductions. Additionally, I'm guessing the conservation easement on the property is complete bullshit as those deductions are ripe for abuse.

Trump has never seen a line he wouldn't cross and has zero morals or ethics. His income taxes are no different than the rest of his miserable piece of shit life.

[Biff Tannen 45733]

3 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

His claimed abandonment loss on his casino business which resulted in his NOL carryback and $70 MM tax refund appears highly questionable. To take that loss, he had to really abandon his interests, but in the bankruptcy, he ended up receiving shares in the restructured business after he abandoned his interest. That's a problem and why the Joint Committee on Taxation hasn't officially approved his refund. That amount could come due at any time plus interest.

This, but unfortunately, you try and explain this to his rubes (and also most people in general) their eyes glaze over.  Taxes are fucking complicated and getting into the weeds isn't going to convince anyone.  I agree that the best way to play this is to point to how bad of a business man he is in reality.

[hornmpa96 2620]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This, but unfortunately, you try and explain this to his rubes (and also most people in general) their eyes glaze over.  Taxes are fucking complicated and getting into the weeds isn't going to convince anyone.  I agree that the best way to play this is to point to how bad of a business man he is in reality.

Totally agree with you on the politics of this. Biden's focus should be that the report shows Trump doesn't pay any taxes and its because he's a horrible business person. He turns millions into bankruptcy.

[Continental Op 3934]

38 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

No, I agree with the guy's blog. I'm assuming you didn't read it, so here's his recap:

You pay what you legally owe, and not a penny more, there isn't a real mechanism for paying it back if you do. If he did anything wrong we'd be hearing about it a long time ago. Does it seem low? Yes, but that's actually the norm. CPA's jobs are to protect their client's money, and "loopholes" exist for that reason. "Loopholes" were put there by congress over many decades to encourage certain behaviors and discourage others. So his team of accountants are paid to find whose and save him money. Also, the NY Times never actually released any documents, so nobody has any way to verify if what they said is true or not, or if we're looking at only some claims or all of them. They claim they did it to "protect their source," because as the accountant who wrote the blog says, it's a Felony for them to release them. So we only have their word over Trump's in a classic he said she said. Which "conveniently" comes out a month away from election day, so you can imagine why many would be skeptical. 

 

I encourage you to read his blog post though. It's classic Shaggy.

I did read the blog post.  I'm sure the IRS has been auditing Trump nonstop, even prior to his entry in the political world, because he did nothing wrong.  I'm sure Trump refuses to release his tax returns like presidents have been doing for quite some time because he's done nothing wrong.  I've forgotten more about the Internal Revenue Code than you'll ever know so any discussion with you on the topic is probably a waste of my time and yours.  

[Blotto 23574]

29 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This, but unfortunately, you try and explain this to his rubes (and also most people in general) their eyes glaze over.  Taxes are fucking complicated and getting into the weeds isn't going to convince anyone.  I agree that the best way to play this is to point to how bad of a business man he is in reality.

His entire base buys into his bullshit about how China is paying bigly due to all his tough tariffs, nevermind that  US importers and consumers actually absorb the tax. Again, none of this shit matters and it really isn't going to change the way anybody feels about Trump (pro or con). If Trumps base was interested in the truth he would have never been elected. This is all largely theatre for the media. 

[TwiceHorn 31535]

12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

On a more serious note, I think it's a valid question.

Clearly, Russia is a kleptocracy.  There are a number of such kleptocracies in the world.

But I think because Russia/The Soviet Union was a superpower not that long ago, the kleptocracy is of a more "legitimate" character and the kleptocrats more socially and internationally acceptable than in other cases.  Part of that is that the Russian economy is huge and the criminal activities that create the kleptocrats are more obscure than in a small kleptocracy, like say Venezuela or maybe some of the African countries where the criminal activity is centered around one thing, like oil.

Add in that the Russian leader is a kleptocrat and closely associated with kleptocrats so that they carry out his policies and vice versa and you have kind of an internationally insidious criminal influence.  Add in that Russia and Putin have reasons for wanting to accrue power at the expense of the US and it's pretty toxic.

Also, their main international criminal activity is money laundering and providing money to illegitimate ventures.  Their home country doesn't care about the criminal source of their money, but other countries care about its destination, at least.  Still it's hard to prosecute when the home country doesn't care.

Trump has an affinity for them because of their money.  We all know that he thinks anyone that's rich is smart and good.  He also admires Putin's autocratic tendencies. So it's just perfect for him in so many ways.

Edited September 29, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[jimmyjazz 46128]

The mind truly boggles that people (a) crow about his tax return not detailing Russian involvement and (b) believe that his ability to net out income with massive losses is not only perfectly common but couldn't possibly be illegal.

Any competent CPA willing to work for Trump is not going to list "Boris Natashakov" as a source of funds when a more complicated and seemingly innocuous path is available.  Beyond that, these people are supporting the most egregious regressive tax structure possible and essentially saying "cool, cool, I send 20% of $100K to the IRS and Trump sends 0% of $1B, man I wish I were that smart".

He actually could murder someone on 5th Avenue and 35%-40% of the country would not care.

[Neonmoon 38130]

Of course he did

 

[RomaVicta 30016]

11 hours ago, Born to Run said:

Never understand calling weak men pussies. Pussies can take all kinds of pounding, crank out babies reline themselves monthly etc x100.

Flick me in the nuts and I'm in serious pain. Nutsacks are not so durable at all.

The notion is not that you use your balls as a weapon. A bull has large balls and is terrifying in contrast to the cow. 

It's a sexist metaphor to be sure. The answer about the vagina addresses that just by pointing to the formidable women of the world. I know plenty of women smarter and/or tougher than me whom I am merely stronger than.

But the metaphor of balls is not a litteral anatomical argument. Accept the metaphor and then ask, what has balls gotten us other than a poorly run carnage fest?

Forgive the pedantic post.

[Francisco 2.0 32428]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8782463/Brad-Parscale-investigation-stealing-40M-Trumps-2020-campaign.html

 

Quote

Donald Trump's demoted campaign boss Brad Parscale is under investigation for 'stealing' between $25-$40 million from Trump's 2020 presidential campaign, well-placed sources exclusively told DailyMail.com.

The 44-year-old is also being investigated for 'pocketing' nearly another $10 million from the Republican National Committee, the insiders added.   

The revelation comes as Parscale was involuntarily committed to a hospital by Fort Lauderdale police on Sunday following a concerning episode at his $2.4 million Florida home. 

 

Quote

DailyMail.com revealed on Monday that his wife Candice Parscale was seen screaming and fleeing the home in just her bikini, telling a passerby: 'I think my husband just killed himself'. 

As many as 20 police cars and boats swarmed the waterfront property after the distraught wife told cops she heard a revolver being cocked and a 'loud boom' after Parscale began 'ranting and raving'.

Candice told police that Parscale had been 'stressed out for the past two weeks and has made suicidal comments throughout the week to shoot himself', according to an officer's report.  

A Trump insider explained to DailyMail.com that Parscale went into a tailspin after he was demoted in July and replaced by his former number two, Bill Stepien, as he's worried about the 'gravy train' ending and keeping up with his lavish lifestyle. 

 

Spoiler

Steve Guest, the RNC Rapid Response Director, said in a statement to DailyMail.com: 'This report is categorically false. There is no audit or investigation of Brad at the RNC.'  

It was widely reported that the President lost faith in Parscale after a much-trumpeted campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma drew a dismal crowd, relegating him to his previous role in digital and data strategy.

The well-placed source said just days later, Trump ordered an audit of the spending of the Republican National Committee.

The probe appeared to be geared towards examining Parscale's handling of the campaign's money, the source said, putting the 6ft 8in aide under 'tremendous pressure'. 

The source explained: 'The thing about what Parscale did with the finances of the campaign could actually be totally legal. 

'But Brad has tons of bills since his lifestyle picked up, and he sees the gravy train coming to an end.'    

Parscale seemed to try to put it out of his mind, as DailyMail.com published exclusive images of Parscale, his wife and several friends drinking beer and liquor by their pool days after his demotion.

Our source said such scenes were becoming routine for Parscale who was spotted stumbling out of bars in Fort Lauderdale, where he and his wife own three swish condos worth a combined $5 million.

The couple have at least $300,000 worth of cars - including a 2017 Ferrari, a Range Rover and a BMW X6 - while public records suggest Parscale has owned as many as eight boats. 

Their spending spree represents a remarkable turnaround for the college basketball standout who lost his family's company to bankruptcy in the mid-2000s but rebuilt his finances after working for Trump in various digital guises since 2011.

Campaign records show Parscale was making $15,000 a month as Trump's electioneering guru.

Gee, imagine that.  

Edited September 29, 2020 by Francisco 2.0

[TwiceHorn 31535]

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

The notion is not that you use your balls as a weapon. A bull has large balls and is terrifying in contrast to the cow. 

It's a sexist metaphor to be sure. The answer about the vagina addresses that just by pointing to the formidable women of the world. I know plenty of women smarter and/or tougher than me whom I am merely stronger than.

But the metaphor of balls is not a litteral anatomical argument. Accept the metaphor and then ask, what has balls gotten us other than a poorly run carnage fest?

Forgive the pedantic post.

Continuing the OT pedantry, it seems much of the world's sex/gender and sexual orthodoxy/pathology flows from the male penetrates/female is penetrated concept.

[Horn Dog 9923]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Can’t wait to see how the totally-not-a-Trumper  logics and reasons himself out of this.

Well you see, Trump is totally innocent and a great business man because.....what about Hunter Biden and Hillary?   How come none of you libtards want to talk about their taxes?  Did Hillary or Hunter take any deductions?  Yes?  Well checkmate motherfucker !  Checkmate!

[Hornius Emeritus 12487]

48 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

Trump has an affinity for them because of their money.  We all know that he thinks anyone that's rich is smart and good.  He also admires Putin's autocratic tendencies. So it's just perfect for him in so many ways.

"We have all the funding we need out of Russia."  ---- Eric Trump to a golf writer, 2014

[High Plains Drifter 11052]

@MillerEP

I would like to note that the NYT has the duty to report this. A whistle blower brings these documents to them. They vet the docs, they vet the whistle blower, if they check out, they run the story. That is their job, that is why they exist.

The motive or timing or legality of the whistle blower's actions are irrelevant to the NYT.

Just like when members of the administration leak stuff to push an agenda. Works both ways.

 

Also, the NYT does not "make stuff up." Sure they may make an error, but they print retractions. Their credibility is orders of magnitude greater than DoTarD's.

 

Finally, they also have a duty to protect their sources. In this case, that means not releasing the documents.

 

If you dispute my three points above, then you are disputing the role of the press in a democracy.

 

[Hornius Emeritus 12487]

2 hours ago, MillerEP said:

So we only have their word over Trump's in a classic he said she said.

True. But one of the actors in this he said/she said scenario could end all of this by releasing the tax returns that he, himself, said on nine different occasions before the 2016 election he would do. That would be the end of the story and really ramp up the "New York Times is fake news" meme that he keeps returning to.