[POLITICS] Trump Admits Tax Fraud

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

So, he's a) ignorant, b) a poor judge of character, c) poor at selecting the right candidates for the job, etc.? Great! Just who we want in the highest office in the land.

Honestly, I think the US should consider itself fortunate Trump is so inept, considering all the things he's shown about himself.

Not that it actually excuses anything, but imagine someone with Trump's ideas and aspirations, except highly competent.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Not that it actually excuses anything, but imagine someone with Trump's ideas and aspirations, except highly competent.

Dunno about "highly", but that sounds like the current VP. Who gets to be P if something happens to the P, so...

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

[tweet t=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1126078423816921092]

This is him defending why he is really bad at business, why he lost billions of dollars in his job ventures. HE LITERALLY IS ADMITTING TAX FRAUD!

Trump is guilty of all the things.

I fucking hate Trump, but im studying business right now and they are basically telling me similar things. You try to get your tax as low as you legally can with claims for losses like depreciation and such.

If Trump tried to influence law with bribes: thats scummy, if he broke the law: thats scummy, but if he found legal ways to get his tax as low as possible or even claim losses for a year and he did it legally, that is really the governments fault for not having a better system if it was wrong.

 

[RobertEHouse]

Everyone arguing about scummy practices and bribes. Give yourself at least fifteen years out of college, in the Business world. To only realize NO morality exist in it. Or in politics for that matter, then again I guess that understanding comes with age.

Not defending Trump, but he is a businessman and even if you hate the guy. He retains the same mindset of those top Owners and CEOs of million/billion dollar corps. Legal and questionable Grey loopholes exist and that mentality carried over when Trump became president. NDA's , Lawsuits, bribes are all the norm in the business world. Trump is using what he knows in the business world to make the US run the way he wants. Mix in the cherry on top of politics and its own caveats, what did anyone expect.

People may think Trump is in-confident and maybe he is in person. Still Trump was smart enough to appoint people to find those loopholes and employ tactics for his advantage. A large corporation with questionable adventures and investments is nothing new. In fact could describe 99 percent of all the major NYSE 500's.

My point is this, moralistically it's wrong, but we are not talking about a moral system in the first place. Exactly removing him from power changes what the WH? The tax loopholes still exist; Dems and GOP never want to seal them. Also impeachment trials cost money, Clinton's impeachment hearing cost the tax payer millions.While Trump's could cost us billions and legally the government can't ask for reimbursement. Ironic.

 

[Silvanus]

What 'shaky, presumptuous' basis? It's the Mueller report itself that acquitted Trump of any of those charges. The only convictions were unrelated to Trump, like Manafort's conviction for evidence tampering of his Ukranian lobby work.

I can only assume you've not actually read the report, or even an unbiased review of its contents, then. The report explicitly did not exonerate anybody, and Mueller himself has clearly stated as such.

A report wouldn't even have the capacity to acquit.

Not gibberish, perfectly reasonable. No company or financer wants to do business with a real estate developer who structurally underperforms and don't pay his suppliers. That's not how the market works. The media zooms in at periods his investments took a dive not when they did well.

Why on earth would we just assume that only beneficial, moral business goes on? Even a cursory glance across the marketplace should show that's far from the truth. Structurally underperforming businesses continue to exist in every avenue. Lots of them are financially viable.

It's not that he doesn't pay suppliers. He refused to pay contractors and employees. Other companies and financiers don't give a shit about shady business practices, so long as he can get away with them-- and he has.

I disagree. Trump could not have known in advance NYC property would boom decades later at the time he made those risky investments at a huge loss. He even said so himself to the congressional task force that property investment was 'unsustainable'. Sure, he might have had access to family wealth but still he is the one who multiplied it. How many other rich people have done the same?

Uhrm, thousands of other rich people have done the same. It's extremely common to be born into wealth and continue to make money. Money is much, much easier to make when you have seed capital and existing structures and networks.

More insinuations that are irreconcilable with the amount of people who voted for him and the companies wanting to still do business.

How is it irreconcilable? Are you genuinely just claiming that voters and companies wouldn't support him if this were true?

Because... of course they would. Obviously. People have abominably poor judgement.

If people around the world willingly support tyrants, murderers and gangsters-- and they do, frequently elevating them to high office-- then there's nothing unbelievable in people supporting a manipulative, abusive businessman as well.

 

[Saelune]

Not defending Trump, but

You're saying what he is doing is ok, because it is ok to be terrible.

Yes, we are talking about the morals of this. It is immoral. If everything Trump is doing is legal, then the law is immoral.

 

[Kwak]

[tweet t=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1126078423816921092]


If Trump tried to influence law with bribes: thats scummy, if he broke the law: thats scummy, but if he found legal ways to get his tax as low as possible or even claim losses for a year and he did it legally, that is really the governments fault for not having a better system if it was wrong.

And scummy.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

[tweet t=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1126078423816921092]


If Trump tried to influence law with bribes: thats scummy, if he broke the law: thats scummy, but if he found legal ways to get his tax as low as possible or even claim losses for a year and he did it legally, that is really the governments fault for not having a better system if it was wrong.

And scummy.

+1 Just because something has not been made illegal yet does not mean it is okay to do. Things are not harmful because they are illegal, instead it is things become illegal over time because they are harmful. Regardless of legality status, the actions are still harmful to society and yes, scummy to participate in.

 

[Seanchaidh]

So, he's a) ignorant, b) a poor judge of character, c) poor at selecting the right candidates for the job, etc.? Great! Just who we want in the highest office in the land.

Better that than if he was knowledgeable, an efficient manager, and good at effectively delegating authority, other things being equal.

 

[Agema]

Not that it actually excuses anything, but imagine someone with Trump's ideas and aspirations, except highly competent.

Better that than if he was knowledgeable, an efficient manager, and good at effectively delegating authority, other things being equal.

I think that's one of the big problems with Trump, though. Someone who is politically competent is going to look at Trump and see what can win and be got away with, and then won't it be fun when they're in power?

 

[Agema]

My point is this, moralistically it's wrong, but we are not talking about a moral system in the first place. Exactly removing him from power changes what the WH?

You kick the immoral out as an incentive for future incumbents to be more moral.

Morality does exist in the system, in places: it exists because people strive to make it happen. If you don't try to make it happen, it never will. The most basic start point in politics is your vote.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Not that it actually excuses anything, but imagine someone with Trump's ideas and aspirations, except highly competent.

Better that than if he was knowledgeable, an efficient manager, and good at effectively delegating authority, other things being equal.

I think that's one of the big problems with Trump, though. Someone who is politically competent is going to look at Trump and see what can win and be got away with, and then won't it be fun when they're in power?

That has been my biggest concern since day 1 with this. It shows the entire world how easy it is to take over the US and how vulnerable the US really is. Extremely malignant people see Trumps election and think "If an idiot like Trump can become president, so can I". It is encouraging the worst of the worst to become the commander of the most dangerous military in the world. That should be disturbing to everyone.

My point is this, moralistically it's wrong, but we are not talking about a moral system in the first place. Exactly removing him from power changes what the WH?

You kick the immoral out as an incentive for future incumbents to be more moral.

Morality does exist in the system, in places: it exists because people strive to make it happen. If you don't try to make it happen, it never will. The most basic start point in politics is your vote.

If his behavior is left unchecked, then his behavior becomes the new standard of what is acceptable. Why should we have an ethical and moral government if those without ethics and morals can be elected regardless? If people are willing to accept Trump's behavior, then behaving better than that will cease to be a requirement for public office. Trump getting a free pass gives all future officials a free pass as well.

 

[Thaluikhain]

If his behavior is left unchecked, then his behavior becomes the new standard of what is acceptable. Why should we have an ethical and moral government if those without ethics and morals can be elected regardless? If people are willing to accept Trump's behavior, then behaving better than that will cease to be a requirement for public office. Trump getting a free pass gives all future officials a free pass as well.

Yeah, Trump never crosses a line where his supporters says "this far, and no further", because as much as people say there is a line, it keeps not appearing. Anything Trump does becomes acceptable and normal.

 

[Saelune]

If his behavior is left unchecked, then his behavior becomes the new standard of what is acceptable. Why should we have an ethical and moral government if those without ethics and morals can be elected regardless? If people are willing to accept Trump's behavior, then behaving better than that will cease to be a requirement for public office. Trump getting a free pass gives all future officials a free pass as well.

Yeah, Trump never crosses a line where his supporters says "this far, and no further", because as much as people say there is a line, it keeps not appearing. Anything Trump does becomes acceptable and normal.

Too many people want to believe we live in a world where Nazi Germany is a fictional monster, not a glowing example of how entire nations can succumb to Sauron-level evil.

 

[stroopwafel]

I can only assume you've not actually read the report, or even an unbiased review of its contents, then. The report explicitly did not exonerate anybody, and Mueller himself has clearly stated as such.

A report wouldn't even have the capacity to acquit.

Whether he was legally acquitted or not is kind of moot at this point. Do you honestly believe if there was any incentive in the Mueller report to prosecute or impeach Trump they wouldn't have done so? It's not like the manipulative Hillary Clinton is any more sincere in her intentions than Trump with her disdain for the voting public and fatally incompetent foreign policy screw-ups.

Why on earth would we just assume that only beneficial, moral business goes on? Even a cursory glance across the marketplace should show that's far from the truth. Structurally underperforming businesses continue to exist in every avenue. Lots of them are financially viable.

A company with a continuous decline in profit is definitely not financially viable, that is what structurally underperforming is. And how does a company sustain itself? By creating value for someone. Unlike eg government that just takes your money and largely wastes it without any repercussion.

It's not that he doesn't pay suppliers. He refused to pay contractors and employees. Other companies and financiers don't give a shit about shady business practices, so long as he can get away with them-- and he has.

That is largerly a caricature made by the media, most serious companies and financers just want to comply with the agreement. Whether there is poor management is another matter, but that people don't get paid because companies 'can get away with it' is largely ridiculous. It happens for sure and those companies definitely need to be held accountable but saying Trump refused to pay his employees when all you have is some example from over 3 decades ago might not even make your own example indicative of this.

Uhrm, thousands of other rich people have done the same. It's extremely common to be born into wealth and continue to make money. Money is much, much easier to make when you have seed capital and existing structures and networks.

That sounds more like you are just envious of success. I'd say for every rich person there are thousands who are passive and think they are entitled to another person's money.

How is it irreconcilable? Are you genuinely just claiming that voters and companies wouldn't support him if this were true?

Because... of course they would. Obviously. People have abominably poor judgement.

If people around the world willingly support tyrants, murderers and gangsters-- and they do, frequently elevating them to high office-- then there's nothing unbelievable in people supporting a manipulative, abusive businessman as well.

You know how the saying goes: ''every country gets the leader it deserves''. If people share your sentiment they can vote Trump out with the next elections.

 

[Silvanus]

Whether he was legally acquitted or not is kind of moot at this point. Do you honestly believe if there was any incentive in the Mueller report to prosecute or impeach Trump they wouldn't have done so? It's not like the manipulative Hillary Clinton is any more sincere in her intentions than Trump with her disdain for the voting public and fatally incompetent foreign policy screw-ups.

This entire paragraph doesn't address what was written. You said the report "exonerated" him, which is factually untrue.

A company with a continuous decline in profit is definitely not financially viable, that is what structurally underperforming is. And how does a company sustain itself? By creating value for someone. Unlike eg government that just takes your money and largely wastes it without any repercussion.

...no, "structurally underperforming" does not mean the same thing as continuously declining profits. A company can be profitable and be structurally underperforming. You don't actually understand what these terms mean.

That is largerly a caricature made by the media, most serious companies and financers just want to comply with the agreement. Whether there is poor management is another matter, but that people don't get paid because companies 'can get away with it' is largely ridiculous. It happens for sure and those companies definitely need to be held accountable but saying Trump refused to pay his employees when all you have is some example from over 3 decades ago might not even make your own example indicative of this.

Of course most companies and financiers comply with payment obligations; who on earth is claiming otherwise? This doesn't mean it's not a widespread problem.

It's not "one example". There are over 60 lawsuits featuring unpaid employees and contractors, and 24 citations for violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. This has been covered not only be political opponents such as the Wall Street Journal, but by allies like Fox, or more respected institutions like Reuters. Trump himself defended the practise of refusing to fully pay contractors during the Presidential debates.

That sounds more like you are just envious of success.

Uh-huh.

This is the same lazy ad-hominem that gets trotted out whenever corporate abuse is detailed.

You know how the saying goes: ''every country gets the leader it deserves''. If people share your sentiment they can vote Trump out with the next elections.

Yes, I'm aware how elections work.

I'm also aware that in order for elections to work healthily, people should discuss the issues with eachother-- and that includes pointing out abusive, manipulative behaviour when it occurs.

 

[Saelune]

You know how the saying goes: ''every country gets the leader it deserves''. If people share your sentiment they can vote Trump out with the next elections.

Hillary got more votes, less than half of the country voted, and less than half of voters who did vote voted for Trump.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Whether he was legally acquitted or not is kind of moot at this point. Do you honestly believe if there was any incentive in the Mueller report to prosecute or impeach Trump they wouldn't have done so?

No, of course they would not prosecute or be able to impeach Trump at this point regardless of crimes he has committed.
1)The department of Justice is controlled by Trump currently via Trump's " stooge" Barr, who has now lied to congress to protect Trump. Barr lied to the american people and to congress about the contents of the report according to Mueller and the other people who created the report. It would be Barr's job to prosecute Trump for federal crimes, and he will not so do because he is another one of Trump's " yes men".

2)You have to have both houses of congress to be able to successfully impeach Trump. Republicans still control the Senate and as long as McConnell is the Senate Majority leader he will not allow Trump to be impeached and has made that clear regardless of any crimes Trump has committed. The house should not move towards impeachment unless they take the senate, otherwise it is just a waste of time.

3) Once Trump is out of office, " executive privilege" no longer applies and he can be charged with his crimes. I see this as being the best option for now because he will no longer be in a position to interfere with the cases against him. Trump loses his ability to fire , demote or replace people in the FBI that are investigating him. Trump loses his ability to hire people for the purpose of protecting him as he has already done and Trump then loses his leverage over members of congress and the courts to manipulate them into protecting him at that point. Trump has had people appointed already that have expressed beliefs that sitting presidents cannot be indicted. As long as you have people who believe this in power, it will be difficult to do anything while he remains in office. Everything can move forward however as soon as he is out of office.

 

[RobertEHouse]

My point is this, moralistically it's wrong, but we are not talking about a moral system in the first place. Exactly removing him from power changes what the WH?

You kick the immoral out as an incentive for future incumbents to be more moral.

Morality does exist in the system, in places: it exists because people strive to make it happen. If you don't try to make it happen, it never will. The most basic start point in politics is your vote.

Yep, morality does exist in the system with the low tier paper pushers and fed employees. Not though with the big wigs at the nation's helm. How can we say we trust the voting process when people here complained about the "Electoral College"?. How can we justify morality when people fall for the repeat lies candidates use to get elected?. It is all rinse and repeat every four years.

 

[RobertEHouse]

Not defending Trump, but

You're saying what he is doing is ok, because it is ok to be terrible.

Yes, we are talking about the morals of this. It is immoral. If everything Trump is doing is legal, then the law is immoral.

It is not based on the concept of morality what you or I think is right. It is based upon business seeing nothing earnestly wrong with what they are doing.The men and women at the helms of these corps are not people who actually care. Simply because it's very competitive, stressful world where pay checks can be in the hundreds of millions. A whole different mindset to exist in that world, if anything Trump succeeds in that.

Yep, laws need to be changed, still who is going to actually change them. No matter the party , many of those tax loopholes have existed since the 50's. Finding those loopholes and actually getting congress /senate approval to close them would be next to impossible. Sigh.