• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump taxes: New York authorities examine president's tax affairs

OldFatGuy said:
Don't make accusations you can't prove.
Click to expand...
Don't post, ever. (see how that works?)

Which accusations would that be, be specific?
 
OldFatGuy said:
This isn't true. It's been said in parts of the media, but no one in law enforcement has stated specifically of any commenced investigations, indictments or lis pendens. Not even Mueller, who has expressed the opposite. Underwood has already dismissed the Trump Foundation announcement in a denouement of one of his now terminated assistant prosecuting attorneys who jumped the gun. Ain't nothin' as much fun as scapegoating a loyal patsy.Andy is thinking of running in 2020. Should he make that decision, he wants the good stuff for then. Strategic planning, if they can find something upfront. If? And Andy doesn't trust speculation.
Click to expand...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/04/new...ys-trump-caused-his-charity-to-break-law.html
This was just 4 days ago:
New York State Attorney General Barbara Underwood in a new court filing Thursday said that President Donald Trump caused his charitable foundation to break state and federal laws.
Underwood said Trump's actions in that regard, and his use of the Trump Foundation "for his own personal benefit," justified her request to ban him for 10 years from being involved in any non-profit group.
"Donald J. Trump used his control over the Donald J. Trump Foundation for his personal, business and political interests in violation of federal and state law governing charities," Underwood said in the filing in State Supreme Court in Manhattan
Click to expand...

And then this:
Her suit was followed a month later by a separate probe of the foundation opened by New York state tax officials.
Click to expand...

And this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._and_Maryland_v._Trump
Latest entry being:
On July 25, 2018, Federal District Judge Peter Messitte allowed the case to proceed; denying the Justice department's attempt to have the case dismissed.[13]
Click to expand...

Cohen was subpoenaed back in August....

So which part isn't true? Your bull**** reply, that's what.
 
Mach said:
Don't post, ever. (see how that works?)

Which accusations would that be, be specific?
Click to expand...

Exactly what I expected from a wanna be totalitarianist.

Every accusation you've laid forth. All mouth, no substance.
 
Mach said:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/04/new...ys-trump-caused-his-charity-to-break-law.html
This was just 4 days ago:


And then this:


And this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._and_Maryland_v._Trump
Latest entry being:


Cohen was subpoenaed back in August....

So which part isn't true? Your bull**** reply, that's what.
Click to expand...

That's what CNBC said, however some of us actually read the "Filing," a TP8946, a form requesting consent to examine a Not for Profit Corp.'s advance annual filings with the State Tax Commission for the following year's collections and expenditures. Commonly used as part of the data utilized by the State Tax Commission to display possible offsets against its annual advisory of income to the State House Budget Committee by Philanthropic shortfalls and goal meeting which may or may not effect its budget recommendations. You'll have to request a clarification from CNBC as to what criminal laws could possibly be effected. Failure to file a TP8946 is a minor regulatory failure, not even a violation, and is not subject to fines or even more than a warning.

I don't trust wickis, ever. Means nothing to me and I won't waste time reading it.

Cohen's subpoena(s) so far are for his own actions and not linked to Trump or his foundation. Interesting in that no one has showed a retainer link between the foundation and Cohen.

So which part isn't true? Your bull**** reply, that's what. See how that works?

Please don't have a hissy fit temper tantrum, we've had enough of that behavior over a judicial appointment. Something of import, not this childish nonsense.

I do suggest you review a real complaint commenced last week by Attorney General Barbara Underwood, long overdue. An explanation demand for a missing $18 mil from the Harlem Trust, managed by one Rev. Al Sharpton, (remember Al?) which has made no filings since 2013 at either the NYS State Dept. or State Tax Commission as required for all not for profit organizations operating in The State of NY. Not a word on CNBC, nor any wick's. But the Abyssinian Church of Harlem newsletter expressed some joy.
 
OrphanSlug said:
I’ll reserve more critical comment until there is something worthy of a charge filed. This is an investigation, among a group of you determined to set the standard for guilty until proved innocent for those you cannot stand.
Click to expand...
Unless you use the Trump crowd standard of cheering, "lock her up," without any charges filed.

One can't have a double-standard of demanding a jury determine criminality for the people one likes and the mob rule for those you don't like.
 
OldFatGuy said:
Exactly what I expected from a wanna be totalitarianist.

Every accusation you've laid forth. All mouth, no substance.
Click to expand...
The only wanna-be totalitarian is Tweeting in the White House.

The NYT laid out the case clearly, showing precisely how money was illegally funneled to Trump from his father, most often illegally evading taxes. The criminal penalties are unclear due to statute of limitations but civil penalties are not waived.
 
OldFatGuy said:
They are not fraud because they are accepted practices, recognized by the NYS AG's office, The City and State Depts of Taxation. Not cherry picking yellow journalism from NYT dishonest reporters desperate resurrecting a dying horse. You want to laugh, look at the WSJ editorial responding to this nonsense. Even more nonsensical, ignorant and dishonest than the Times.



This is why you are not an attorney, estate or otherwise. The Surrogate Judge calls the shots, not the law. One surrogate judge in each county, and they all follow long time practices. In NYS, you look hard enough at the fiduciary laws and you will find 2-3 laws for every issue that reach different conclusions.

I didn't give you a partisan answer or make excuses. This is the way it is for all major real property transactions in this city, and truthfully, not that much different elsewhere. When the law interferes with a deal, the politicians enter with work arounds, variances, and plain old lies. You don't get it. Whether or not you like Trump or not, this is the state of affairs for everyone in the industry. Including me. I just set up a package on properties I already own, about a dozen different interfering laws made buyers leery. 3 phone calls and all is cured.



I don't know anything about, nor do I care. That type of gambling is not part of my life. Now tell me, since he is long dead, will the NYT demand he be dug up and prosecuted? Or will you?

Thank me for giving you an honest picture of an industry where few tell the truth. Don't play "hey I'm stupid games."

BTW, when is Shelley Silver truly going to prison?
Click to expand...
I feel compelled to ask, why do you feel a need to shill for the Trumps? The Times outlined clear illegality. Why dismiss that outright and declare, without really knowing, that Trump is pure, blameless and innocent?
 
OldFatGuy said:
Let's put this to sleep now and move on to bigger things. Forget right and wrong, they don't apply in any instance for this discussion. The transparency of the Times to create scandal where none exists is the real issue for the moment.
Click to expand...
Yet more ad hominem attacks


The IRS is restricted by a reentry limit of six years for all non collected taxes, whether by oversight or intent....
Click to expand...
According to tax experts, it is unlikely that Mr. Trump would be vulnerable to criminal prosecution for helping his parents evade taxes, because the acts happened too long ago and are past the statute of limitations. There is no time limit, however, on civil fines for tax fraud.

Does this mean you still haven't read the article? You've been bashing it for a week now.

And you do understand that just because Trump can't be prosecuted, that does not mean that his actions were either legal or ethical?


All of this conjecture and speculation is not only a waste of time, there was never a need to justify any actions by the Trumps, their lawful entities at the time, unless requests had been received from the agencies to the tax preparers.
Click to expand...
So we've gone from "there's nothing wrong, nothing to see here" to "even if it was wrong, no one should care, because it's too old to prosecute, and oh by the way everyone does it." It doesn't matter that the President of the United States and his family may have illegally engaged in tax fraud, and lied about his financial success.

Well sorry, but it matters to me, it matters to at least some other voters, and apparently it matters to the State of New York and the City, both of which are now looking into the transactions.


The far greater issues of corruption in our political system by big money, from real property and other financial empires, was a far greater issue that should have been raised at the time of the campaigns for the election. However, that corruption is so well mired in both parties, neither could chance exposure.
Click to expand...
Yet more whataboutism.

I have no problems whatsoever with any instance of political corruption or tax fraud being investigated. However, those allegations change absolutely nothing about Trump's actions and lies.

The bottom line is that you're trying anything you can to excuse Trump. If you personally do not care, that is your choice. That does not mean that the NY Times should not have investigated; it does not prove that the Trump family did nothing illegal or unethical; it does not prove that Trump was telling the truth when he says "My dad only loaned me $1 million" when, in fact, his father was repeatedly propping up Donald's failing businesses; it certainly does not mean that no one else should care.
 
MTAtech said:
I feel compelled to ask, why do you feel a need to shill for the Trumps? The Times outlined clear illegality. Why dismiss that outright and declare, without really knowing, that Trump is pure, blameless and innocent?
Click to expand...

Not too swift. The Trumps are unimportant. On the other hand, we have a customary tradition in this nation, innocent until proven guilty. I see no convictions in courts of law. You offer unsubstantiated accusations.

Yes, I know, this nation also enjoys a tradition of Friday night lynchings you enjoy.

"J'accuse," works for you, not for me.
 
OldFatGuy said:
That's what CNBC said, however some of us actually read the "Filing," a TP8946, a form requesting consent to examine a Not for Profit Corp.'s advance annual filings with the State Tax Commission for the following year's collections and expenditures. Commonly used as part of the data utilized by the State Tax Commission to display possible offsets against its annual advisory of income to the State House Budget Committee by Philanthropic shortfalls and goal meeting which may or may not effect its budget recommendations. You'll have to request a clarification from CNBC as to what criminal laws could possibly be effected. Failure to file a TP8946 is a minor regulatory failure, not even a violation, and is not subject to fines or even more than a warning.

I don't trust wickis, ever. Means nothing to me and I won't waste time reading it.

Cohen's subpoena(s) so far are for his own actions and not linked to Trump or his foundation. Interesting in that no one has showed a retainer link between the foundation and Cohen.

So which part isn't true? Your bull**** reply, that's what. See how that works?

Please don't have a hissy fit temper tantrum, we've had enough of that behavior over a judicial appointment. Something of import, not this childish nonsense.

I do suggest you review a real complaint commenced last week by Attorney General Barbara Underwood, long overdue. An explanation demand for a missing $18 mil from the Harlem Trust, managed by one Rev. Al Sharpton, (remember Al?) which has made no filings since 2013 at either the NYS State Dept. or State Tax Commission as required for all not for profit organizations operating in The State of NY. Not a word on CNBC, nor any wick's. But the Abyssinian Church of Harlem newsletter expressed some joy.
Click to expand...

So you can't quote a single source, or refute a single source I posted? Not that I expected more from your random-word scramble posts.

My argument stands, and you apparently won't be offering even a lick of sensible debate back and forth. A pity.
 
Mach said:
So you can't quote a single source, or refute a single source I posted? Not that I expected more from your random-word scramble posts.

My argument stands, and you apparently won't be offering even a lick of sensible debate back and forth. A pity.
Click to expand...

Yadda, Yadda, let me know when you get past innocent until proven guilty. Until then, nothing you've said is of import. Don't hold me responsible for your own inadequacies. You haven't made an argument, merely superficial accusations. Dreyfus and Zola, J'accuse. Pathetic.
 
OldFatGuy said:
Yadda, Yadda, let me know when you get past innocent until proven guilty. Until then, nothing you've said is of import. Don't hold me responsible for your own inadequacies. You haven't made an argument, merely superficial accusations. Dreyfus and Zola, J'accuse. Pathetic.
Click to expand...
So you still don't have any evidence to back your claim, or to refute mine. Why are you still responding with insults? Tsk tsk.

Maybe you still haven't educated yourself on the topic, so I'll copy/paste the post that corrected you:

Mach said:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/04/new...ys-trump-caused-his-charity-to-break-law.html
This was just 4 days ago:

And then this:
And this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.C._and_Maryland_v._Trump
Latest entry being:
Cohen was subpoenaed back in August....
So which part isn't true? Your bull**** reply, that's what.
Click to expand...

Whcih part was false? You had nothing.
Also, you cried about Wikipedia. You do understand that it footnotes everything...sure you do?

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/25/6323...-trumps-business-interests-allowed-to-proceed

Oh look, it was from NPR. So we have a bunch of credible journalists vs anonymous OldFatGuy's ramblings. Why would you do it?
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
Whcih part was false?
Click to expand...

All of it from the onset. Innocent until proven guilty. Where is the proof of criminality? I have nothing to prove. We don't prove innocence.
 
OldFatGuy said:
All of it from the onset. Innocent until proven guilty. Where is the proof of criminality? I have nothing to prove. We don't prove innocence.
Click to expand...

What are you even responding to?

You won't accept the fact that there are multiple law suits against Trump Foundation right now, because...because you believe he should be proven guilty of a crime first? That's nonsensical oldfatguy.
 
Mach said:
What are you even responding to?

You won't accept the fact that there are multiple law suits against Trump Foundation right now, because...because you believe he should be proven guilty of a crime first? That's nonsensical oldfatguy.
Click to expand...

"Currently Trump is under a variety of civil and possibly criminal cases involving his finances..."

There is not one criminal case involving Donald Trump. Not one. Cases against other entities are not against him. Simple and plain.

In our litigious society, anyone can sue anyone else, or any entity, at any time. The existence of an open case means nothing without a decision in favor of a plaintiff. Since many instances of civil litigation are mere pest shakedowns, "pay me, I'll go away," they mean even less.

Three long stalled cases against the Trump Foundation, stalled by the plaintiff's, one settlement for an unknown verified amount, mean nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom