Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Lord Dave

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 221  Next >
1
From NPR News
You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye?sc=18&f=1001

Soooo... Fake News?

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 29, 2020, 09:32:57 AM »
Also Trump getting a tax refund from a bankruptcy when he had a stake in the restructured entity is illegal and under investigation. Also has over $400M in personal debt coming due which he will have to deal with.

Funny that you think a real estate company worth billions doesn't know what its doing and that you or the journalist libs you read are authorities. Both bankruptcy and debt are part of the game of business and laws. Trump has been masterfully doing this since the 1970's.


Except, according to his tax records, he has been running at a huge loss for many years.  While he certainly has plenty of collateral, it seems to me that the income form Trump tower is not enough to offset his costs.   The question then is, does his business make enough money to be worth a loan?  And he still is paying the loans, right?  I mean, a bank isn't just going to say "ok, Mr. Trump, here's $400 Million dollars.  Pay us back in 10 years.  If you can't, just take out another loan on your tower and we'll give you another 400 Million."

Now, I'm not an expert on bank loans but in my limited experience, banks don't give money for free and refinancing is just a fancy way of saying " you still owe us monthly payments, but just at a different interest level"


Quote
Quote
$70,000 is alot of money to write off

The Apprentice ran for 15 seasons. These new tax leaks covered two decades of Trump tax returns. The best thing they could find were reasonable and legally permissible business deductions for The Apprentice? Weak and desperate.
But MGM was the company producing it.  Therefore, makeup (including hair styling) was on them, not him and certainly not Trump inc.  Unless he wishes to claim that Trump Inc. requires Trump to have excellent looking hair.  Which sounds weird for a real estate company, don't you think?
-edit-
Oh, apparently it IS weird AND not allowed.
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/28/917810562/dont-deduct-that-haircut-just-yet-tax-court-has-rejected-such-claims
Go figure, right?

Quote
Quote
No, they don't and yes it is.  Tell me, where is he "donating" his money? Also, how can he take no salary AND donate his salary.  You can't donate what you don't get.

If I work for the government and I give my salary to the National Park Service, I didn't "reallocate" my money, like "reallocating" my business investments overseas. That's a incorrect thing to think. It's called a donation.
*sigh*
Ok, lets start with the basic definition of a Donation because you clearly do not understand.
A donation is an act whereby you give a person or organization something you own (money, items, or your services) without repayment.  The key word is OWN.  Donald Trump's Salary is $1.  Therefore, he can only donate $1 of his salary anywhere and the Department of Education can't accept donations anyway.

What Trump did was move money before he got it.
He took the budget for "Presidential Salary" and moved it to somewhere else.  He did not get the money.  Therefore, he can not donate it because he did not own it.  He was entitled to it, but he changed the budget so he only got $1 instead.

It would be like if you worked for the government and told your boss "Just pay me $1 a year instead of $40,000".  Are you "donating" your money?  No, you are literally just telling your boss to not pay you what you were offered.  Trump just happens to be his own boss in that regard.  He literally just cut his own pay to $1 a year and the money originally budgeted to him was put elsewhere.  ie. Reallocated.

Wanna fight me?  Go get a list of organizations he donated to.  You know, Actual Charities.




Quote
Quote from: Lord Dave
Last I checked, cheating on your taxes is illegal.

Last I checked, no one proved that Trump did anything that was illegal and this illegality exists only in your deranged imaginations.
You are correct.  It hasn't been proven yet.  Mostly because the evidence has been hidden away at various banks out of country.  But rest assured, the IRS is investigating so something isn't right.  Don't you agree?

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 28, 2020, 10:36:48 PM »
Quote
Ummm... Except the part where he paid his dsughter to be a consultant at the company she worked at as an executive(Trump inc) and wrote that off.

Also writing off alot in hair care.

Trump is allowed to make writeoffs for The Apprentice. You are allowed to make write-offs for any business expenses, fyi. You don't think that movie studios write off makeup expenses?
$70,000 is alot of money to write off.  And naturally, Trump didn't produce his own show.  That would be the highest form of narcicism.

Oh hey, Trump has a stake in the show but it was produced by MGM.  Why is Trump writing off his hair care and not MGM?

Quote
Quote
ALSO....
Trump does not donate his salary.  You are confusing donation with reallocation.

Donation is taking your money and giving it away.
Reallocation is putting the money you would get, elsewhere.

Trump reallocates his sallary to other government branches.  He doesn't donate it.
And based in his taxes, he has a good reason to: $1 taxable income(from being president) means $0 owed to the IRS.  Legally, he could argue he's poor.

Presidents don't fund the government with their personal salaries. It's not being "reallocated".
No, they don't and yes it is.  Tell me, where is he "donating" his money? Also, how can he take no salary AND donate his salary.  You can't donate what you don't get.

Quote
Liberals must be getting pretty desperate if the best pre-debate scandal you have is "Trump has a brilliant personal tax strategy"
Last I checked, cheating on your taxes is illegal.  Which the IRS is literally investigsting him for.

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 28, 2020, 09:50:54 PM »
Lol at the economically illiterate.



Sounds like someone here wrote that. You aren't a better businessman if you pay more in taxes. That's not how it works.

This was the result of this non-story:



Ummm... Except the part where he paid his dsughter to be a consultant at the company she worked at as an executive(Trump inc) and wrote that off.

Also writing off alot in hair care.

ALSO....
Trump does not donate his salary.  You are confusing donation with reallocation.

Donation is taking your money and giving it away.
Reallocation is putting the money you would get, elsewhere.

Trump reallocates his sallary to other government branches.  He doesn't donate it.
And based in his taxes, he has a good reason to: $1 taxable income(from being president) means $0 owed to the IRS.  Legally, he could argue he's poor.

5
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/27/917523942/woman-charged-with-attempted-murder-after-driving-into-pro-trump-protesters

Oh look, Trump supporters blocking the road and being hit by a car.

Like seriously, you can't tell they weren't BLM until you saw the red hat and Trump flags.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 28, 2020, 10:15:01 AM »
Summary:
Releasing his tax records would have resulted in showing evidence if tax fraud.

I can see why he'd wanna keep em secret.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 28, 2020, 05:59:57 AM »
From NPR News
Trump Dismisses 'New York Times' Report That He Paid Little In Federal Income Taxes https://www.npr.org/2020/09/27/917566141/trump-dismisses-new-york-times-reporting-that-he-paid-little-in-federal-income-t?sc=18&f=1001

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 28, 2020, 04:25:23 AM »
Would you mind copy-pasting the article? Paywalls can suck it.

Summary:
He's paid no taxes for almost 15 years and like $750 in 2016 and 2017.
He writes off his debt due to losing alot of money every year.

9
For me it's just a nice microcosm of American attitudes towards others in their society.  "You're in my way! Fuck you!" "But I believe in something so fuck YOU!"
All things aside, I can definitely agree with that take.
Agreed.  That is oddly accurate.

10
Correct me if I'm wrong but don't pedestrians always have the right of way?

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 26, 2020, 07:21:11 AM »
Trump is having three rallies today in three different states.



Joe Biden is having three naps today.
And?  I mean, best for him to be out so he his risk of getting sick is higher than him tweeting from his office all day.

Quote
Quote
Yes, they refused to give private information to the federal government including info that is not relevant.  Like convictions, military history, social security numbers, date of birth, etc...  All of which they have anyway in other federal agencies.  So why ask for it?

Federal agencies don't have PII for voting records. To detect fraud you need to know information about who voted. There is no way to check anonymous data.
Yes.  Very useful data to know who voted and, based on the area, for who.  Makes it easy to stop them next time, right? ;)

But again, Trump already knew so .... Yeah.
Anyway, all you really need is names, DoB, and who voted.  Then check to see who voted multiple times in different areas.  Like that woman who voted on behalf of her mom. 

The issue they'll have is that any impactful fraud is going to be hard to detect.  But voter rosters are public so really all you need is that plus DoB and cross reference it with IRS records to determine if anyone on the list isn't a citizen, or dead.  Then send that list to the state and ask them to verify.  Easy peasy.  But they wanted criminal records, military status, social security bit, address.  Things they don't need.  Unless they think 3 million felons voted.

Also note: republican states also refused.  Maybe they cheat too?

Quote
Quote
Simple question: if Obama wanted that info, would you want your state to provide your info to him?

I wouldn't care if the Obama whitehouse wanted the last four digits of social security numbers for CA voting records, like Trump's white house asked for, to detect possible voting fraud. Any actionable items from them would need to be verifiably real with the state records, obviously. I would prefer that the federal government regularly checks for voting fraud in a transparent manner, rigorous enough for a court of law. I can see why the democrats would care about hiding the possible voter fraud of their constituents, however.
I'm sure something could be setup.  But Trump definitely didn't do this bipartisan and not in a 'lets check this out as a precaution'.  This was an attack because his ego was hurt.  And if Republican states didn't bow to him, maybe that should tell you something.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide
« on: September 25, 2020, 06:03:59 PM »
Tom's not wrong.  Liberalism is what helped Found America.  So naturally the founding fathers were batshit crazy.

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 09:38:52 AM »
It just sounds to me that you can't really explain to me why a politician should accept voter fraud.
If they win, why shouldn't they?  They won. 
If they lost, they would not.
Kinda easy logic there.

Quote
And some smarmy answer for the other question. The federal investigation Trump initiated proves that he did care about voter fraud. The states refused to participate and it was closed. End of.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-dismantles-voter-fraud-commission-heres-what-the-controversial-group-did

States refused to cooperate, which is different than not finding anything. Just more media dishonesty.
Yes, they refused to give private information to the federal government including info that is not relevant.  Like convictions, military history, social security numbers, date of birth, etc...  All of which they have anyway in other federal agencies.  So why ask for it? 

Simple question: if Obama wanted that info, would you want your state to provide your info to him?

Also remember: Trump HAD THE PROOF!  He had all the evidence already.  He knew 3-5 million illegals voted for Hillary.  So why would they need anything else?

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 06:03:31 AM »
I did not claim that there was voter fraud in any particular election. I asked you guys simple questions which you are unable to answer and can only deflect on.

If there is voter fraud, why should a politician accept it?

Can you list out which politicians would accept voter fraud?

Please answer directly.
Donald J. Trump.
He would accept it if it means he won.
In fact, many politicians would accept it if they won and got away with it.  Why do you think they fight so hard against such accusations?  Trump stated, as a fact, that the 2016 election had fraud yet the investigation found nothing and closed without much of a peep.

So either
A) Trump lied.
B) He found some but he and republicans accepted it.

If you aren't going to answer my questions then I can only assume that you are accepting my position. No politician is going to accept voter fraud, so faulting Trump with that is just silly and dishonest.

Why can't you guys just be honest and make good arguments that you can double down on successfullly? If you don't have a good argument in your pocket then you should just keep your mouths shut.

I did answer.  I answered who and why.  First paragraph. 

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:42:33 AM »
I did not claim that there was voter fraud in any particular election. I asked you guys simple questions which you are unable to answer and can only deflect on.

If there is voter fraud, why should a politician accept it?

Can you list out which politicians would accept voter fraud?

Please answer directly.
Donald J. Trump.
He would accept it if it means he won.
In fact, many politicians would accept it if they won and got away with it.  Why do you think they fight so hard against such accusations?  Trump stated, as a fact, that the 2016 election had fraud yet the investigation found nothing and closed without much of a peep.

So either
A) Trump lied.
B) He found some but he and republicans accepted it.

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 04:45:43 AM »
Trump said there was massive voter fraud and a rigged election in 2016.  He literally said "I will only accept the results if I win."

And despite 4 years, he never found evidence of a rigged election or wide spread voter fraud. 

Now he's doing the same thing: crying wolf without evidence.  And if he loses now, do you think he'll magically find evidence of wide spread voter fraud this time?  When he hasn't found it yet despite saying its already there?

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide
« on: September 24, 2020, 07:57:32 PM »
Business culture.  By aiming the son of the US VP was on their board, they appear both more legitimate and far reaching.  Which, for other Ukrainian business, that sounds like you're amazing and really have your shit together.  It was like taking a $30 shoe, giving it to a basketball player to wear, and selling it for $150 because "Famous basketball player wears our shoes so they must be good."

You think Hunter Biden has celebrity cache like Michael Jordan and that people will buy more Ukrainian gas because ... 'Hunter Biden'?

Gas is a global commodity. It isn't like a pair of shoes. It trades on the global markets and has a set price. You don't get more for your gas because 'Hunter Biden!'.

I fail to see how the inexperienced addition of the son of a US politician adds to your legitimacy nor do I see how your global company becomes more far reaching when people whisper in hushed tones 'Hunter Biden'.

If I was a Ukrainian Oligarch and my company was being investigated by the UK serious fraud office and all my assets were frozen ... What I'd be hoping is that by hiring the son of the US vice president, that VP might feel he owes me a favour and puts pressure on other nations and so they unfreeze my assets and the case mysteriously collapses. Which by complete coincidence is exactly what happened.
Clearly you don't understand business.

Name Dropping Biden is a big fucking deal.  Not because Hunter Biden is some kind of golden child of skill, but because he's got connections.  (or so you would think) 

And, reading further, apparently it was just that.  Not for business, of course, but to make the international community think they were super legit.  Not sure how the US VP managed to get a UK judge to rule a case was conjecture but... Ok.  I guess UK judges are super easy to manipulate.

18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide
« on: September 24, 2020, 06:45:05 PM »
So why did Burisma Holdings hire Hunter Biden, please?

Please give me your reason for this occurrence and why this Ukrainian company gave away $millions to this particular individual in exchange for zero expertise, experience or labour.
Business culture.  By aiming the son of the US VP was on their board, they appear both more legitimate and far reaching.  Which, for other Ukrainian business, that sounds like you're amazing and really have your shit together.  It was like taking a $30 shoe, giving it to a basketball player to wear, and selling it for $150 because "Famous basketball player wears our shoes so they must be good."

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide
« on: September 24, 2020, 05:26:21 PM »
Tom.

Tom.

I saw.

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide
« on: September 24, 2020, 04:34:11 PM »
Republicans found there was no conclusive proof of wrongdoing by Biden in the Ukraine.

Wow what a surprise
Kind of is a surprise. When your idiot son gets $millions for being on the board of an oil and gas company and by his own admission knows nothing about oil and gas but your father is Vice-President of the USA ... yeah, that is a surprise there is no conclusive proof. I might also say conclusive proof might be a high bar to leap. It doesn't mean you aren't defending an absolute piece of shit human who sold his country out to enrich his family.

Thork has princials.  He only takes jobs he's qualified for, no matter the pay or offer.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 221  Next >