Trump tax returns from 1985 to 1994 show $1 billion in losses - New York Times

[Sealbash]

He wrote down losses to avoid paying taxes [emoji23] wake up

True. Legally.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[pedro01]

On 5/10/2019 at 8:27 PM, candide said:

The fairy tale: Dad gave me only 1 million to start and I made a fortune out of it.

The real story: Dad gave me 100 millions and I lost 1.8 billions. ????

and then made 3.1 billion - https://www.forbes.com/donald-trump/#65f188c32899

 

2.5 billion of which is his property portfolio

 

That makes him 100% self made, right - if he lost the money his dad gave him... then clawed back on his own...

 

It's the American dream, baby

Edited May 12, 2019 by pedro01

[jcsmith]

On 5/10/2019 at 7:11 PM, spidermike007 said:

The only conceivable contender right now is Biden. He is a really good man, with scruples, integrity, and he is smart and experienced. I would trust him as a leader, and I think he could earn back the respect of so many nations, that have virtually cast the US aside, and now consider us useless. 

I think Biden or Bernie could beat Trump. Biden is the safer bet. I think Bernie's message can reach Trump supporters, but Fox will run 24/7 that he's a communist and that is worrisome.

[TigerTruck]

Great economy, low unemployment, better wages.

[pedro01]

New York Times got it right at the time...

 

[Tug]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Don't shoot the messenger but Bill Maher on Real Time has suggested that Elizabeth Warren should call "trump" -- Brokeahontas.

 

God that’s funney lol what a fraud he is don’t be a mark dump trump 2020 !!!

[ballpoint]

Trump's ego and itchy tweeting finger will get him in the end. 

Then: He wrote down losses to avoid paying taxes.

Now: People point to those losses to show that he's being somewhat disingenuous in his statements about his business acumen, and is actually a loser.

Shortly: He will tweet that he's not a loser, and actually made a yuge amount of money, and is smart for hiding that fact so therefore not paying taxes.

IRS: Hmmm... (Puts on the rubber gloves).

[spidermike007]

11 hours ago, jcsmith said:

I think Biden or Bernie could beat Trump. Biden is the safer bet. I think Bernie's message can reach Trump supporters, but Fox will run 24/7 that he's a communist and that is worrisome.

Trump will use any dirty tactic available to him, as he is not a man with a conscience, and his lifelong m.o. is to slash and burn. He is the modern day Genshis Khan of business, and politics is the same for him. But, Biden is a man of honor and great dignity, and he might be hard to beat. Remember, the deflector is coming off a massive failure with China, and the American people are starting to see how terribly ineffective he is. 

 

Trump negotiating with China, is a bit like Justin Bieber in a science debate with Stephen Hawking or Alan Guth. Or Pauly Shore negotiating with Bill Richardson, the former ambassador to the UN, and governor of New Mexico. It would be like Shia LeBoeuf or Lindsay Lohan playing chess with Boris Spassky, or Bobby Fischer. The lowliest member of the Chinese delegation would outclass Trump, Bolton, Miller, Ross, Mnuchin, Kudlow, Lighthizer, or Navarro, by 30-50 IQ points. Not to mention skill, vision, and fortitude. As is typical of this president, he always picks from the bottom of the barrel, and due to both his temperament, and his willingness to throw those loyal to him under the bus, at the first sign of challenge, he is simply not able to attract real talent and intellect. That is perhaps one of his greatest failings as a leader. Add to that the fact that the man himself cannot negotiate his way out of a paper bag, and you have a disaster in the making.

 

At least Kudrow had the integrity to expose Trumps lies yesterday, about the tariffs being good for the American economy. They are an unmitigated disaster. They are a huge tax hike on the average American, and most American corporations. Lie number 10.001 failed, as have the rest of his low quality, low class, simpleton tactics. At this stage, only his most hard core devotees, are continuing to drink the kool aid. 

[roobaa01]

what a political scharade by dum dems and hoax media for

 

1. years ago the nytimes reported about the trump losses, so obviously they dont know their own archives.

 

2. trumpy boy himself revealed in the 90s on tv his losses

 

so what is the news then ???

 

wbr

roobaa01

[lannarebirth]

51 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

But, Biden is a man of honor and great dignity, and he might be hard to beat.

 

I'm assuming you haven't followed these past 4 + decades and are only going by his inconsequential term as VP?

[Tug]

11 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I'm assuming you haven't followed these past 4 + decades and are only going by his inconsequential term as VP?

Has he done anything even 1 tenth of1% as messed up as trump?anything?

[attrayant]

12 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

1. years ago the nytimes reported about the trump losses, so obviously they dont know their own archives.

 

That's hilarious.

 

NY Times a few years ago: "Trump was deeply in debt back in the early 90s."

 

Trump: "Fake news from the failing NY Times!"

 

NY Times in 2019: "Here are the tax returns to prove it."

 

Trump: "So what?  You reported that years ago!"

 

 

12 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

2. trumpy boy himself revealed in the 90s on tv his losses

 

so what is the news then ???

 

I went looking for the source on this, and was not surprised to see it came from Breitbart.  They say he mentioned the losses 15 years ago on his reality TV show.  In that clip, his lines was "about 13 years ago I was seriously in trouble.  I was billions of dollars in debt."  This is not the same thing as $1 billion in losses.  So at best he merely hinted at the losses - on a TV show.  

 

The news is that we now have documentary evidence confirming earlier reports of Trump's ham-fisted business ability.

[lannarebirth]

15 minutes ago, Tug said:

Has he done anything even 1 tenth of1% as messed up as trump?anything?

 

I never consider what the other side does. I only consider who is best on my side. But since you asked, I don't think Trump has ever voted to send our nation to war based on spurious intelligence that he would have known was spurious.  There's other stuff too.

 

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/10/18173132/joe-biden-hillary-clinton-2020

Edited May 13, 2019 by lannarebirth

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 5:38 PM, Kieran00001 said:

 

We have already found evidence of tax evasion crimes in his past, although they are beyind the statute of limitations, we already know he is guilty if crimes, but you deperately need to set the goalposts at actual convictions not merely his proven criminal activity, right?  You're a cool guy.

we already know he is guilty if crimes,

 

but, but, but, has anyone actual proof of them? No proof, no indictment, no indictment, no court case, no court case, no conviction ????

[attrayant]

55 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

we already know he is guilty if crimes,

 

but, but, but, has anyone actual proof of them? No proof, no indictment, no indictment, no court case, no court case, no conviction

 

You know why there was no indictment, don't you?  Please say that you know why there was no indictment because we have discussed this ad nauseum. 

 

1. Mueller's hands were tied by the OLC policy. 

 

2. Had there been no evidence, Mueller would have cleared Trump. 

 

3. Mueller went out of his way to state that he was unable to clear Trump.  What does that tell you? (hint: refer back to #2)

[riclag]

19 hours ago, Sealbash said:

True. Legally.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

"Peter Morici, a University of Maryland economist, said tax losses 30 years ago should not be taken as a measure of Trump’s success when he had continued building his empire for years more".

“What they are basically trying to do is use incomplete information to draw a negative inference about Donald Trump and that’s wholly unfair". He went on to say we must see his taxes to get a complete picture, Currently their is no law that requires a President to do that!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/tax-specialists-trump-suggestion-1b-losses-were-write-offs-tells-just-part-of-the-story

Go figure the never ending hit jobs from a bias media,repeating old news over and over again to paint a picture of illegality when at the time it was legal and reported that he lost billions only to make it again  . 

 

Edited May 13, 2019 by riclag

[spidermike007]

6 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I'm assuming you haven't followed these past 4 + decades and are only going by his inconsequential term as VP?

No. His record of public service is impressive. Also, his lack of personal wealth gain, from his time in public office is too. He was one of the few senators who refused to use insider trading information to amass a fortune, as it was legal until recently. Very impressive integrity. He is the right man for the job. He just might be able to correct a quickly sinking ship. 

[mtls2005]

Brokahantas must be my favorite, trending nickname for trump.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, riclag said:

"Peter Morici, a University of Maryland economist, said tax losses 30 years ago should not be taken as a measure of Trump’s success when he had continued building his empire for years more".

“What they are basically trying to do is use incomplete information to draw a negative inference about Donald Trump and that’s wholly unfair". He went on to say we must see his taxes to get a complete picture, Currently their is no law that requires a President to do that!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/tax-specialists-trump-suggestion-1b-losses-were-write-offs-tells-just-part-of-the-story

Go figure the never ending hit jobs from a bias media,repeating old news over and over again to paint a picture of illegality when at the time it was legal and reported that he lost billions only to make it again  . 

 

Right. The reason banks wouldn't lend him money was because of his great successes.

[Tug]

4 hours ago, riclag said:

"Peter Morici, a University of Maryland economist, said tax losses 30 years ago should not be taken as a measure of Trump’s success when he had continued building his empire for years more".

“What they are basically trying to do is use incomplete information to draw a negative inference about Donald Trump and that’s wholly unfair". He went on to say we must see his taxes to get a complete picture, Currently their is no law that requires a President to do that!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/tax-specialists-trump-suggestion-1b-losses-were-write-offs-tells-just-part-of-the-story

Go figure the never ending hit jobs from a bias media,repeating old news over and over again to paint a picture of illegality when at the time it was legal and reported that he lost billions only to make it again  . 

 

Was it pt Barnum that said there is a sucker born every minute I think it’s time to show Donald the egress and be rid of him 

[riclag]

wrong thread ,sorry

Edited May 13, 2019 by riclag

[bergan]

On 5/8/2019 at 4:19 PM, TopDeadSenter said:

This has descended into pure comedy. For 3 years it's been bash bash moan whine and more bash. They said we KNOW Trump was avoiding taxes. And now it has been shown he did not avoid taxes, he in fact lost a whole heap of money. The exact 180 degree opposite of what the haters had been claiming. And yep, you know it. They will now do the bash, whine and moan because he lost money. There is just no pleasing some people. This is the 2nd nothing burger in a month after the Russia collusion hoax deflated more spectacularly than the Hindenburg.

 

 I hope Trump takes his this chance to get his ducks in a row so when he leaves office he can swell his bank accounts. I really appreciate his sacrifice taking time away from the cut and thrust of international business to Make America Great Again. If he can trouser a few dollars in the meantime so much the better. Not as if the haters are going to ask for any more tax returns!

Talk about reading an article and completely missing the point!

[Credo]

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

we already know he is guilty if crimes,

 

but, but, but, has anyone actual proof of them? No proof, no indictment, no indictment, no court case, no court case, no conviction ????

 

Let me help you.   The DOJ policy is NOT TO INDICT a sitting president, therefor for indictment, no court case, no conviction....for now.