Trump...Tax Fraud? Say it ain't so!

[feralkid]

Trump.
Jr.
Himself.
Released.
It.

Donald Trump Jr. releases email chain on his Russian meeting

President Donald Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., agreed to meet with someone he believed to be a "Russian government attorney" last summer.

www.cnn.com

I simply cannot believe this is still being argued.

You can lead a horse to water...

 

[VRAMdemon]

It's amazing the hoops that people will jump through to convince others that - Trump, a criminal his whole life - Is not a criminal and would never commit tax fraud.

 

[fskimospy]

It's amazing the hoops that people will jump through to convince others that - Trump, a criminal his whole life - Is not a criminal and would never commit tax fraud.

It is baffling that people are in essence arguing that although we have extremely strong evidence Trump committed extensive tax fraud earlier in life and faced no consequences for it he just decided to stop one day.

 

[Moonbeam]

It is baffling that people are in essence arguing that although we have extremely strong evidence Trump committed extensive tax fraud earlier in life and faced no consequences for it he just decided to stop one day.

I would call it morally unprepared, psychologically ignorant, unaware that denial or self deception is based on shame and guilt, and that going down that road requires the development of a greater and greater need and thus greater skill at being able to deceive oneself. The first order of business for those who hate themselves, and we should all easily be able to see this, the phenomenon being universal, is to find some alternative to real self respect when lost, and that would mean ego identification with one or another or more of the typically offered isms to which membership appears to confer mutual respect. Church, political party, any of the millions of isms people lose themselves in. In this manner we anoint ourselves as tin horn gods because we worship at the alter of the golden calf. In this way we collect ourselves into self congratulatory herds where we can't be singled our and picked off easily. And into and behind such isms we will find our psychopaths pulling the strings, the cunning who despise the stupid and see them as prey.

And as the evidence of who Trump really is begins to scream in their ears so does the dread their real feelings of worthlessness will surface, having been played as they have for fools. The only way out is to double down or feel their ancient pain, the latter not being a very popular path.

 

[nakedfrog]

Need I remind you - the IRS themselves have stated they don't go after rich folks because... well... they have lawyers and they have accountants.

The IRS Admits It Doesn't Audit the Rich Because It's Too Hard

Only poor people have to pay back unpaid taxes.

www.gq.com

.

Remember when someone said they couldn't release their tax returns because they were being audited?
Pepperidge Farms remembers.

 

[blackangst1]

"might"...could"....we'll see. If charges brought and convicted Im all for the fullest punishment by law.

 

[cytg111]

You're really going to take the position that congress had credible evidence of collusion with the Russian government and decided not to act on it? Is anyone on the planet dumb enough to believe that?

Apparently you are to not believe it. I get it, your news feed dont show you these facts. Sucks to be you.
Senate was "Yea he guilty but he learned his lesson, will not convict".
So yea, guess you are that stup.... uninformed.
Mitch cancelling the sanctions that allows Rusal into Kentucky's back yard? You dont know any of this shit?

 

[cytg111]

"might"...could"....we'll see. If charges brought and convicted Im all for the fullest punishment by law.

Thats mindbending dishonest. Be better than that.

 

[hal2kilo]

Apparently you are to not believe it. I get it, your news feed dont show you these facts. Sucks to be you.
Senate was "Yea he guilty but he learned his lesson, will not convict".
So yea, guess you are that stup.... uninformed.
Mitch cancelling the sanctions that allows Rusal into Kentucky's back yard? You dont know any of this shit?

He apparently didn't figure out the fix was in from his party to support Trump no matter what.

 

[Brainonska511]

"might"...could"....we'll see. If charges brought and convicted Im all for the fullest punishment by law.

The grand jury is trying to see if charges are warranted. However, Trump keeps trying to block subpoenas of his tax returns to inhibit the investigation

 

[nickqt]

The grand jury is trying to see if charges are warranted. However, Trump keeps trying to block subpoenas of his tax returns to inhibit the investigation

His "reasonable conservative" speak translated is, "Trump will never be brought up on charges, and if he is he won't be convicted, and if he is it will just be a political hit job".

He might as well have said that 2 + 2 = yellow. It would reflect reality in the same way as his previous statement reflects reality.

 

[blackangst1]

Thats mindbending dishonest. Be better than that.

No actually its not. Its truth. Coulda woulda Shoulda.

 

[blackangst1]

The grand jury is trying to see if charges are warranted. However, Trump keeps trying to block subpoenas of his tax returns to inhibit the investigation

So? Wouldnt you do the same?

 

[Brainonska511]

So? Wouldnt you do the same?

In said hypothetical, where I was some sociopathic, unethical slug of a failed business man, I certainly would. Can't let people see proof of my sketchy and likely fraudulent tax filing practices.

 

[cytg111]

No actually its not. Its truth. Coulda woulda Shoulda.

You declare that

"If charges brought and convicted Im all for the fullest punishment by law. "

You want points for "If charges brought and convicted Im all for the fullest punishment by law. " ?
Negate the sentence. You want points for supporting the law? Alternative being that ""If charges brought and convicted I am NOT for the fullest punishment by law. "?
Congratulations on reaching the level of bare minimum of being a participant in society? I guess?

 

[cytg111]

So? Wouldnt you do the same?

Its almost as if you had a third eye to lose.

If I was a drug dealer and someone ratted me out, I'd have to put stitches in snitches. Yea.
Thank god I am not a drug dealer. Nor Trump.

 

[Shamrock]

I'll leave his $26 million in tax write offs here.

New York authorities investigating millions in tax write-offs from the Trump Organization

New York authorities investigating the Trump Organization have expanded their inquiries to include tax write-offs involving millions of dollars in consulting fees, according to people familiar with the investigation.

www.cnn.com

 

[Fenixgoon]

I'll leave his $26 million in tax write offs here.

New York authorities investigating millions in tax write-offs from the Trump Organization

New York authorities investigating the Trump Organization have expanded their inquiries to include tax write-offs involving millions of dollars in consulting fees, according to people familiar with the investigation.

www.cnn.com

Damn I came to post this but you beat me!

 

[TheVrolok]

Boy do I hope the SDNY gets aggressive.

 

[kage69]

Why wasn't Trump impeached for colluding with Russia? It was demonstrated in "authoritative" reports, the evidence must exist.

As for the current issue, if they have a credible accusation then there should be an investigation. That investigation will almost certainly start with the CPA firm that handles Trumps finances. Or take whatever they have right now and present it to a grand jury, let them decide.

That's an impressive display of cognitive dissonance green, you rarely disappoint these days. Trump was impeached.

Google Andriy Derkach, perhaps share with the class why a known Russian agent is helping Rudy with Trump's political problems. The collusion you refuse to see is still transpiring, and you still look like a chump for denying it. Piss poor American too. You should work on that.

 

[fskimospy]

"Might have grounds to investigate". That's what the fellow said. The exact same thing can be said about every single person in the US that files a return. All they have to do is get all of Trumps tax records (the same tax records the IRS already has), go through them, investigate every line item, and hope to find evidence of a crime. This is a fishing expedition.

So to be clear investigating someone for tax fraud who has already been shown to have previously committed likely tax fraud is a fishing expedition?

Can you explain this baffling logic?

 

[fskimospy]

I'll leave his $26 million in tax write offs here.

New York authorities investigating millions in tax write-offs from the Trump Organization

New York authorities investigating the Trump Organization have expanded their inquiries to include tax write-offs involving millions of dollars in consulting fees, according to people familiar with the investigation.

www.cnn.com

But I was told if he had committed tax fraud they would have already caught it.

 

[Greenman]

So to be clear investigating someone for tax fraud who has already been shown to have previously committed likely tax fraud is a fishing expedition?

Can you explain this baffling logic?

Can you explain this baffling sentence?
There is actionable evidence of fraud or there isn't. There is no crime called "likely tax fraud".
In the article I was commenting on, the fellow is using evidence from public statements made by others as grounds for obtaining Trumps tax returns. That information is called "hearsay".
It will be up to the judge to decide if that information meets the standard required to force the IRS to turn over Trumps taxes. My guess is it won't, but there could be other information such as sworn testimony that would lend credence to moving forward.
As presented in the article, it's political grandstanding.

 

[brycejones]

Can you explain this baffling sentence?
There is actionable evidence of fraud or there isn't. There is no crime called "likely tax fraud".
In the article I was commenting on, the fellow is using evidence from public statements made by others as grounds for obtaining Trumps tax returns. That information is called "hearsay".
It will be up to the judge to decide if that information meets the standard required to force the IRS to turn over Trumps taxes. My guess is it won't, but there could be other information such as sworn testimony that would lend credence to moving forward.
As presented in the article, it's political grandstanding.

Did you attend the same "law school" as humblepie?

 

[fskimospy]

Can you explain this baffling sentence?
There is actionable evidence of fraud or there isn't. There is no crime called "likely tax fraud".

I thought this was clear, can you explain your confusion? Likely tax fraud means there is evidence of tax fraud. That’s why he’s being investigated, his tax returns show a lot of things that are probably crimes!

In the article I was commenting on, the fellow is using evidence from public statements made by others as grounds for obtaining Trumps tax returns. That information is called "hearsay".

1) that’s not hearsay.
2) hearsay is only relevant during a trial attempting to obtain a criminal conviction.
3) public statements from people are absolutely grounds to subpoena information! Think how insane our legal system would be if they weren’t.

It will be up to the judge to decide if that information meets the standard required to force the IRS to turn over Trumps taxes. My guess is it won't, but there could be other information such as sworn testimony that would lend credence to moving forward.
As presented in the article, it's political grandstanding.

So despite losing literally every other case about authorities getting his tax returns you think Trump is going to stage a heroic comeback here? Can I ask what your basis is for this?