Agnostic.com

6 4

LINK Long-concealed records show trump’s chronic losses and years of tax avoidance

AGAINST THE CLAIM: It comes from the NYT and they don't reveal how they got these records, thus casting the validity of their information in doubt.

IN FAVOR OF THE CLAIM: Trump, unlike every president before him, has refused to release taxes. There was very little reason to have done this during the campaign, prior to any "witch hunt", which has always made suspicion that what the NYT is saying about his taxes is true.

WHAT TRUMP COULD DO: as a final blow to the credibility of the NYT and a affirmation of the the witch-hunt, he can produce his taxes which would soundly refute the NYT's findings.

WHAT NYT COULD DO: as a firm affirmation of their credibility, the NYT can release all the documents and how they were obtained to let independent people vet them.

TheMiddleWay 8 Sep 27
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Saw that this morning on Yahoo news. Surprise, surprise, surprise (not). And yet his supporters think it's OK to not give out his financial dealings.

0

I'm not aware of any refutations of the 2018 NYT story mostly about the "shady deals" of Fred Trump and how they enriched DJT.

Why would there be credibility issues with this reporting ?

I'm agnostic.
If I don't have access to the evidence, don't ask me to believe in said evidence.

@TheMiddleWay News orgs can't disclose sources . . .

@FearlessFly
If a priest told you that he has evidence that god exists but he can't disclose his sources, would you believe said evidence?

Not an exact analogy for I understand that disclosing sources could potentially put them in danger. But by the same token, you can't expect people to believe you simply because you say someone said so.

If the NYT were not so biased for the left, the way a priest is biased toward god, I would trust them. If the AP or Reuters said this, I would trust them. But given the bias this and other papers on both the left and right have demonstrated over the last 4 years, it makes trusting their "sources" very difficult

@TheMiddleWay . . . really bad analogy πŸ˜›

Not so far left :

[mediabiasfactcheck.com]

@FearlessFly
How do you fact check undisclosed sources?

@FearlessFly
I've no doubt on those facts that can be checked they are stellar... and I have nothing against that reporting.

But on "undisclosed sources", which has been the bulk of their reporting these past few years, I remain agnostic.

@TheMiddleWay With the entire gov't at his disposal, wouldn't DJT have done something about any disputable facts in the 2018 (eight NYT page) report ?

IMO, a lengthy piece like this gets thoroughly vetted by lawyers/editors before printing. I don't have such a problem with 'undisclosed sources' (i.e. "Deep Throat" )

@FearlessFly
What need did Trump have had to dispute the facts? Further, consider that if he HAD used the entire government to dispute the facts, he would have done himself more harm than good by using gov't resources for personal matters.

And Deep Throat said "follow the money" and they followed the money and the evidence of malfeasance was there and those tape were released for all to hear. This is radically different than the "undisclosed sources" of the past few years were they say "Donald Trump said he eats babies and wants to nuke black people" and without looking for evidence of baby bones or orders to nuke blacks, the press reports it and the public believes it. Very very different when we are asked to believe what someone is saying without corroborating evidence that what they are saying is true.

0

Wanna see my tax avoiding? I make donations 100% for the tax deductions.
It’s the American way. If you educated yourself on the US tax code, you would absolutely do the exact same thing.
And there is no requirement for him or any of us to make out taxes public.

This presumes one has enough disposable income to make said donations. And thus to those that can't make donations AND have to pay taxes, it comes off as a bit unfair that because you have more money, you get to keep more money by not paying the same taxes. πŸ˜‰

And no, there is no requirement for him to make his taxes public. But when EVERY other president has done so as a matter of course and in the spirit of transparency to the American public he is serving, his objections have raised concerns from day one.

1

September surprise...

1

trump does the slight of hand with money. Like the charity theft. Like claiming his projects come in under budget; they only come in under because he does not pay his contractors. Front running stocks is illegal but trump is KNOWN to front run stocks. I'm less concerned about the income taxes and more interested in why the Russians were so willing to loan him money when American banks would not.

2

Yes, saw it.

But didn't NYT reveal that 2 years ago with Mary Trump's help for which they got the Pulitzer? Therefore, are we beating a dead horse?

This new report is about his business; the article from two years ago seems to be more about his personal finances?

[nytimes.com]

@TheMiddleWay

But there does not seem to be a new revelation for people. People are numb and used to Trump's violations and misuse. We even tried testimonies and impeachment after the last report. Nothing worked. Trump is still breaking at 50:50 with Biden.

None of the reports have worked before or will work in the future before elections. The only thing that will work is people voting him out and stopping the Russian voting fraud last it happened in 2016.

You or I cannot guarantee any of the two will help Democrats at this stage.

Trump has become an unassailable ogre. His heart in not in him. It is somewhere at the top of a glass mountain protected by a huge snake and big curses. Nobody can reach there. And Biden is not our prince to do that.

@St-Sinner
I agree.

This is why whether they "work" or not isn't really the issue for me. That this helps, hinders, or otherwise does nothing to sway the election is less important than affirming or refuting who this person is to those interested in such things.

History will not judge him kindly and there is nothing wrong with starting to write that history now.

@TheMiddleWay

I think what can help our cause is awakening those lame and ineffective Democratic leaders in Congress who have allowed Republicans to kick our assess for decades. I think the steam should be directed at them. All of us should call and write every day. Let them know it is not just Trump we are pissed off about, it is damn no-good you.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:538365
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.