Trump Tax Returns Leaked

Mentioned on another thread, but it seems like a top-level topic.

http://nyti.ms/2dupGDz

Tax records from 21 years ago. How much is the NYT paying you to post this?

ridski said:

Tax records from 21 years ago. How much is the NYT paying you to post this?

If he hasn't paid taxes for twenty years it's a problem. How much is Trump paying you to go after his critics?

fairplay said:

ridski said:

Tax records from 21 years ago. How much is the NYT paying you to post this?

If he hasn't paid taxes for twenty years it's a problem. How much is Trump paying you to go after his critics?

A mighty rebuttal indeed. Let's just say I received far less than the four NYT reporters who gave us this;

"Although Mr. Trump’s taxable income in subsequent years is as yet unknown"

Fine reporting. The best words.

ridski said:

Fine reporting. The best words.

Everyone is saying so.

I don't think Trump's taxes matter, really. If somebody is still considering Trump after all that has been revealed about his true character, then I can't imagine why taxes would matter one way or the other.

How anybody could think of voting for a man who can't walk away from a old kerfuffle with a beauty queen without displaying an ounce of grace is quite beyond me. What will he to when Putin hurts his feelings?

Well, I guess no one at NYT can get the vapors of outrage and high dudgeon if there's a Hillary leak before the election.

His tax records indict the system more than him. Nothing illegal, but terrible nonetheless.

I loathe Trump as much as it's possible to hate somebody you've never met, but I'm having trouble grasping why this is supposed to be such a scandal. Do people really think he should have donated hundreds of millions to the US government out of the goodness of his heart? If he didn't owe taxes, he didn't owe them. Hard to see why anyone would think he should have behaved any other way. Obviously the tax system is revoltingly unfair, but if you made a list of the top million people to blame for that, Trump would not be on it.

imonlysleeping said:

if you made a list of the top million people to blame for that, Trump would not be on it.

Sure he would. Top 100, no, but 1M for sure.

What was Trump's role in creating the current tax system?

ridski said:

The best words.

Who knowingly pays any more taxes than they legally have to?

If it's no big deal, as most posts on this thread suggest, than why has Trump tried to hide his tax returns, unlike any other Presidential candidate for the last forty years? The taxes reflect his poor business judgment, and his solid membership in the top 1 percent, taking advantage of huge loopholes while the vast majority of most people pay through the nose. He may complain about crumbling infrastructure, but is quite impressed with himself for avoiding taxes to improve the infrastructure situation.

tjohn said:

How anybody could think of voting for a man who can't walk away from a old kerfuffle with a beauty queen without displaying an ounce of grace is quite beyond me. What will he to when Putin hurts his feelings?

Temper tantrum and sulking in the White House basement with the nuclear launch codes in front of him?

imonlysleeping said:

I loathe Trump as much as it's possible to hate somebody you've never met, but I'm having trouble grasping why this is supposed to be such a scandal. Do people really think he should have donated hundreds of millions to the US government out of the goodness of his heart? If he didn't owe taxes, he didn't owe them. Hard to see why anyone would think he should have behaved any other way. Obviously the tax system is revoltingly unfair, but if you made a list of the top million people to blame for that, Trump would not be on it.

Sure the tax code is unfair.

But lets not be a hypocrite criticizing our infrastructure when he did everything possible to avoid for it. But then, he really doesn't care about our infrastructure. He just used that to blast Washington as incompetent, an incompetence that only an outsider like him can fix.

Jasmo said:

If it's no big deal, as most posts on this thread suggest, than why has Trump tried to hide his tax returns, unlike any other Presidential candidate for the last forty years? The taxes reflect his poor business judgment, and his solid membership in the top 1 percent, taking advantage of huge loopholes while the vast majority of most people pay through the nose. He may complain about crumbling infrastructure, but is quite impressed with himself for avoiding taxes to improve the infrastructure situation.

Would you make the same argument for Hillary's detailed medical records? That because she's not releasing them she has something to hide? If not, why?

Do you disagree with the Clinton Foundation fighting donor information releases in court? Do you feel their unwillingness to release this information shows they have something to hide, as Trump's unwillingness to release his tax returns does? Why or why not?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-foundation-official-requests-state-lunch-invitation-special/story?id=41695275

I just want to understand if this spirit of openness applies to both candidates.

Jackson_Fusion said:

Jasmo said:

If it's no big deal, as most posts on this thread suggest, than why has Trump tried to hide his tax returns, unlike any other Presidential candidate for the last forty years? The taxes reflect his poor business judgment, and his solid membership in the top 1 percent, taking advantage of huge loopholes while the vast majority of most people pay through the nose. He may complain about crumbling infrastructure, but is quite impressed with himself for avoiding taxes to improve the infrastructure situation.

Would you make the same argument for Hillary's detailed medical records? That because she's not releasing them she has something to hide? If not, why?

Do you disagree with the Clinton Foundation fighting donor information releases in court? Do you feel their unwillingness to release this information shows they have something to hide, as Trump's unwillingness to release his tax returns does? Why or why not?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-foundation-official-requests-state-lunch-invitation-special/story?id=41695275


I just want to understand if this spirit of openness applies to both candidates.

Comparing the release of tax returns and health records is comparing apples and oranges.

Tax returns have been released over the last 50 years by presidential candidates. Its the standard. Unlike detailed medical records. The Clinton's have released their tax returns. You can download the PDF's. Unlike Trump.

So anytime someone claims another candidate is sickly, as Trump tries, you expect that other candidate to bend over and release their detailed health records? Maybe Trump can set an example and release his. He can show us how its done. He did look sickly in the debate.

What I would like to see is an independent body examine all the candidates and let us know what we're getting. We expect HS athletes to do urine tests. I'm sure our nuclear bunker missile operators are psychologically screened and physically tested. Shouldn't expect the same for those who can activate the national nuclear release codes?

ps - When Trump was medically deferred from the Vietnam conflict due to bone spurs. Yet, now he's claimed by his physician to be the healthiest candidate ever. How did the bone spurs disappear? Prayer? Secret surgery?

Which is one reason why a universal draft will not really be fair. The elite will get preferment. Such as a medical exemption or an MOS typically leading leading to an assignment in base club inventorying the liquor.

ridski said:

fairplay said:

ridski said:

Tax records from 21 years ago. How much is the NYT paying you to post this?

If he hasn't paid taxes for twenty years it's a problem. How much is Trump paying you to go after his critics?

A mighty rebuttal indeed. Let's just say I received far less than the four NYT reporters who gave us this;

"Although Mr. Trump’s taxable income in subsequent years is as yet unknown"

Fine reporting. The best words.

I'll begin by acknowledging that the NYT does pay me, though not to post on MOL. This I do on my own time. It helps alleviate the vapors of outrage that trail me from the office.

I don't have much to say here about the article itself. Readers can judge its importance, or irrelevance, for themselves. But either way, I think it's harder to argue that publishing the story wasn't in the public interest. Whether or not it's a scandal, it is news. If any news outlet had been given the tax forms -- or in the future receives, say, Hillary Clinton's health records -- I'd expect (and want) them to be reported even at the risk that the public decided they were no big deal.

DaveSchmidt said:

I don't have much to say here about the article itself. Readers can judge its importance, or irrelevance, for themselves. But either way, I think it's harder to argue that publishing the story wasn't in the public interest. Whether or not it's a scandal, it is news. If any news outlet had been given the tax forms -- or in the future receives, say, Hillary Clinton's health records -- I'd expect (and want) them to be reported even at the risk that the public decided they were no big deal.

I would agree that the article is very much in the public interest, as the issue of Trump refusing to release taxes, unlike generations of Presidential candidates before him, raises red flags as to why. The NYT took a huge risk here, from that perspective, as publication appears to violate federal laws and is considered a felony. In addition, a lawsuit for damages by Trump could be potentially devastating. The Times will have to assert some sort of First Amendment defense, similar to the Pentagon Papers, but it is on shaky grounds legally. It should be interesting to play out, although I am quite concerned.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/02/the-new-york-times-risked-legal-trouble-to-publish-donald-trumps-tax-return/?wpisrc=nl_most-draw6&wpmm=1

BG9 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

Jasmo said:

If it's no big deal, as most posts on this thread suggest, than why has Trump tried to hide his tax returns, unlike any other Presidential candidate for the last forty years? The taxes reflect his poor business judgment, and his solid membership in the top 1 percent, taking advantage of huge loopholes while the vast majority of most people pay through the nose. He may complain about crumbling infrastructure, but is quite impressed with himself for avoiding taxes to improve the infrastructure situation.

Would you make the same argument for Hillary's detailed medical records? That because she's not releasing them she has something to hide? If not, why?

Do you disagree with the Clinton Foundation fighting donor information releases in court? Do you feel their unwillingness to release this information shows they have something to hide, as Trump's unwillingness to release his tax returns does? Why or why not?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-foundation-official-requests-state-lunch-invitation-special/story?id=41695275


I just want to understand if this spirit of openness applies to both candidates.

Comparing the release of tax returns and health records is comparing apples and oranges.

Tax returns have been released over the last 50 years by presidential candidates. Its the standard. Unlike detailed medical records. The Clinton's have released their tax returns. You can download the PDF's. Unlike Trump.

So anytime someone claims another candidate is sickly, as Trump tries, you expect that other candidate to bend over and release their detailed health records? Maybe Trump can set an example and release his. He can show us how its done. He did look sickly in the debate.

What I would like to see is an independent body examine all the candidates and let us know what we're getting. We expect HS athletes to do urine tests. I'm sure our nuclear bunker missile operators are psychologically screened and physically tested. Shouldn't expect the same for those who can activate the national nuclear release codes?

ps - When Trump was medically deferred from the Vietnam conflict due to bone spurs. Yet, now he's claimed by his physician to be the healthiest candidate ever. How did the bone spurs disappear? Prayer? Secret surgery?

Which is one reason why a universal draft will not really be fair. The elite will get preferment. Such as a medical exemption or an MOS typically leading leading to an assignment in base club inventorying the liquor.

I believe all of this information should be released by both candidates.

While you took issue with my comments regarding medical records, in some detail, I note you had no comment on my contention that Clinton should stop litigating against the release of her foundation's finances and pay to play investigations. If there's nothing to hide, why hide?

Additionally, the campaign should publicly condemn the contempt of congress behavior of prior employees who, having been given immunity from prosecution (losing ability to take the 5th) refuse to testify before congress despite subpoenas. Surely getting all of this in the open will eliminate the issue.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/3248b019982b4c628189bbc4ddcbd7d7/republicans-call-tech-experts-testify-clintons-server

It should all be out in the open. All of it. They're not applying for a job as a Walmart greeter.

With all due respect none of you seem to get it.

It is not what is revealed about Trump. It is how he reacts.

So what that he had a problem with a Miss Universe's weight gain 20 years ago. It's his extreme over reaction that hurts him. Now his reaction to the Times story is to suggest Hillary Clinton cheated on Bill Clinton.

Hillary's problem is that she is perceived to be secretive. So its the revealing of secrets that hurts her. It reinforces the perception. But she knows how to react to lesson the impact. Trump doubles down.

LOST said:

With all due respect none of you seem to get it.

It is not what is revealed about Trump. It is how he reacts.

So what that he had a problem with a Miss Universe's weight gain 20 years ago. It's his extreme over reaction that hurts him. Now his reaction to the Times story is to suggest Hillary Clinton cheated on Bill Clinton.

Hillary's problem is that she is perceived to be secretive. So its the revealing of secrets that hurts her. It reinforces the perception. But she knows how to react to lesson the impact. Trump doubles down.

Lost, you make a good point, however, adding that "none of you get it" tends to alienate your audience rather than opening them up to listening to you. Ironically, it creates a similar dynamic to Trump needing to one-up and devalue those who disagree with him or challenge him.

The real issue here is this: Trump has labeled himself, and his followers, the anti-establishment candidate. They want to rid Washington of all the corrupt politicians who have made our country un-great. What nobody seems to point out is that it has been mainly the Republican party -- the party he currently belongs to and represents -- that has historically done everything to stall any meaningful legislation -- and Supreme Court nominations -- leaving us in the predicament we're in.

Additionally, Donald Trump (and others) have legally taken advantage of all of the laws and tax loopholes that the "corrupt Washington politicians" have promulgated over the years. So how do you say with a straight face that you are opposed to everything they stand for, while you have taken advantage of these "corrupt" laws? How can anyone believe that, once elected, Donald Trump will change all of these tax loopholes and laws that he has greatly benefited from?

This, I believe, is what HIllary and her surrogates have to get across to the public. Not the gossip about his tax returns, but how he speaks with forked tongue about ridding Washington of the very people he so smartly benefits from.

Jackson_Fusion said:


I believe all of this information should be released by both candidates.

While you took issue with my comments regarding medical records, in some detail, I note you had no comment on my contention that Clinton should stop litigating against the release of her foundation's finances and pay to play investigations. If there's nothing to hide, why hide?

Is someone suing the Clinton foundation to get the donor list released? Has the foundation opposed the lawsuit in court? What court? Do you have a link to what was submitted to the courts?

There can be legal and fiduciary reasons why charities and foundations do not release donor lists.

LOST said:

With all due respect none of you seem to get it.

It is not what is revealed about Trump. It is how he reacts.

So what that he had a problem with a Miss Universe's weight gain 20 years ago. It's his extreme over reaction that hurts him. Now his reaction to the Times story is to suggest Hillary Clinton cheated on Bill Clinton.

Hillary's problem is that she is perceived to be secretive. So its the revealing of secrets that hurts her. It reinforces the perception. But she knows how to react to lesson the impact. Trump doubles down.

With all due respect it revealed nothing. Trump's BS and reactions to news he doesn't like are well known and are not the story.

The question is, since what he did was legal should he be required to divulge his tax returns?

Hillary is secretive. So, along with JFs comments should we all also be demanding she publish her remarks that earned her $750,000.00 for several speeches? What is she hiding?

See his wacko (more than usual) rally in PA yesterday where he was off script and all over the place. This stuff gets under his skin. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/02/as-news-of-trumps-taxes-broke-he-goes-off-script-at-a-rally-in-pennsylvania/

BG9 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:


I believe all of this information should be released by both candidates.

While you took issue with my comments regarding medical records, in some detail, I note you had no comment on my contention that Clinton should stop litigating against the release of her foundation's finances and pay to play investigations. If there's nothing to hide, why hide?

I don't have enough information to be able to comment on that.



Is someone suing the Clinton foundation to get the donor list released? Has the foundation opposed the lawsuit in court? What court? Do you have a link to what was submitted to the courts?


There can be legal and fiduciary reasons why charities and foundations do not release donor lists.

The article has most of the information you seek or a running head start for that it doesn't. Plaintiff and defendant, venue, issue, etc. For the rest, now that you've been made aware of the issue, given the value of your vote it's best you do your own homework.

I would be appreciative of and interested in your perspective afterwords, thank you.

I don't have a problem with Trump taking advantage of legal loopholes, but I do wonder why he is constantly under audit when so many of his super rich pals are not. Clearly the IRS smells something fishy there.

I think there are other issues at play, aside from loss carry-forwards (which were perfectly legal). I think the real reason for stalling lies in in his K-1s. What is he deeply invested in? What are his income streams from Russia?