I suppose I learned something new. When I was young, I was taught that illegally doing or avoiding something was what got one in trouble. One more thing I was told wrong. Legally avoiding is what gets one in trouble now. Once again, I thank the Old Gray Whore for educating me.
Every liberal progressive that takes one deduction is a hypocrite. They should take the standard deduction and that’s it.
So? The operative word is “legally”.
How dare Donald Trump follow the lws!
How unnuanced of him!
What kind of role model for the young ferals?
Understand, though, that THIS is how the Left wins. The “Look Over There” strategy of deflecting their own mountains of corruption by pointing to a speck of dust on the opponent’s side. They win not by defending their own sins but by arguing points that are easier to argue.
Here’s what I wish Donald would hit back with on this subject over and over:
Doesn’t the gov’t spend approximately 10 billion a day?
Even if he gave up his ENTIRE fortune of 3.7 billion it wouldn’t fund the gov’t for half the day!!
So if he had paid the exact amount of taxes the liberals think he should have it does not matter.
The NYT keeps trying, but all they do is throw spit balls.
To whom it may concern: Please point out what Trump did ILLEGALLY.
What we need to see is a list of all the taxes Mr. Trump paid that year!
Pathetic LOSER Krooked Klintons busy deducting their used underwear as charitable donations in the 1980’s
Who donates used underwear to charity?
1995 wasn’t “almost two decades ago.” It was 12 years ago. Wild swings in income aren’t uncommon in real estate.
During the 1990s, Trump’s properties in Atlantic City forced him to the wall. In Ch, 11 reorganizations, he surrendered his 50 percent ownership in Taj Mahal and two other properties. He also took a big hit on the Plaza hotel in New York City. In these reorganization, he sold off a number of properties and businesses, including his yacht and Trump airlines, and was put on a strict budget.
It took him some time to regain his stride. He himself talks about all this in his book The Art of the Comeback.
As for losing $900 million, there aren’t that many people who are in a position to lose $900 million, no less come back even stronger, amassing $10 billion in net worth.
I don’t know how much of the $10 billion represents unrealized capital gains, but, it is probable he has already reported more than $900 million in income since 1995, and so has already exhausted his loss-carryforwards.
So, Trump played the field the way it was striped. THIS is somehow illegal? Oh, wait...liberal ‘logic’. Right.
What should be a concern is who let out confidential information on a private citizen.
And, just who was it that was in charge of the IRS and its tax-code used by Trump in 1995?
Hillary and Bill get paid exorbitant amounts for a speech. They ‘donate’ the money to their Foundation. Basically taking out of the right pocket and moving to the left pocket.
They take a tax deduction for the charitable ‘donation’ and get to crow about how much they ‘donate’ to charity.
And then get to spend the money on
anything they can get away with as a business expense. Reported to be about 80-90% of all ‘donations’.
And then have the balls, with the MSM as backup, to complain about Trump’s legal deductions.
Trump has a Net Operating Loss Carryforward. The horrors! How dare he!
So he MAY have LEGALLY paid no taxes. The evidence is partial information from 1995. This is supposed to be an issue?
There is no reason for presidential candidates to reveal their taxes to allow fishing expeditions or manipulation of public ignorance and envy. If presidential candidates should reveal their taxes, so should candidates for all offfces. And so should members of the news media, so that all will know to whom they contribute.
Clintons Claim Tax Deduction For Used Underwear Donated To Charity BILL CLINTON'S GREAT SKIVVIES GIVE-AWAY Washington Post By Lloyd Grove Dec. 28, 1993
It's that time of year again, Mr. President.
Time to celebrate the lingering Yuletide spirit and the bright promise of the year to come. Time to savor the companionship of friends and family.
Time to donate your underpants to a charitable organization so you can later claim a deduction on your 1993 tax return.
If the recent past is any guide, Bill Clinton and his wife, First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, have been spending the past few months gathering up unwanted belongings -- from old shoes to shower curtains to jogging shorts to, yes, apparently used underwear -- carefully enumerating each item alongside dollar amounts on handwritten lists, and giving the lot to such worthy causes as the Salvation Army and Goodwill Industries.
The Clintons' tax returns over the past decade -- which "obviously were prepared with an eye toward being released," according to White House press secretary Dee Dee Myers -- are rife with detailed supporting documents that may someday prove a rich boon to historians and psychohistorians studying the forces that shaped the Clinton presidency.
As political figures are wont to do, particularly those with White House aspirations, the Clintons have over the past few years thoughtfully disclosed their tax returns, providing citizens with a fascinating window on a heretofore unexamined aspect of their lives.
Several experts were consulted about Clinton's tax-deductible donations, especially of underwear. Paul Offenbacher, a longtime Washington-area tax accountant, said it is highly unusual to take an itemized deduction on donated underwear; indeed, he had never heard of such a thing. Adelphi University psychology professor George D. Goldman, a New York-based psychoanalyst who studies the unconscious symbolic meanings in human behavior, said the donations are, at the very least, fodder for intriguing speculation.
"Obviously I can't tell you what Clinton's individual symbols mean; all I can do is give you my own analysis -- which is that he's airing his dirty wash or maybe trying to take his dirty wash and make it cleaner," Goldman said. "I'm a lifelong Democrat, and I voted for him, but there's something, let's say, grandiose, both too personal and a bit inappropriately intimate, to give your underwear away for someone else to wear, and then to think that your underwear is worth giving this sort of a valuation to."
How many of these reporters sign the “front” of their paychecks? Scum!