Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We are talking about the NY Times writing article that says Trump didn't pay taxes for 20 years being proven absolutely wrong by Rachael Maddow.
Liberal heads are exploding. They don't know what to think. This is why they try to make argument over NYT weasel wording.
Could you share with us where exactly NYT said Trump did not pay taxes for 20 years.
The $916 million loss in 1995 carried forward could mean he would not have paid taxes. That would depend on his actual income stream over the subsequent 18 years.
The 2005 return shows negative income of $ 103.2 million. This might be a part of the 1995 loss carried forward or an incremental loss. If the latter, we are looking at more than a $ Billion in losses on just 2 returns.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretzelogik
The New York Times used to be a newspaper. Now is is nothing more than a propaganda outlet for left wing fascism.
Or maybe it's mistakenly taken for that because of right winger's alleging and believing such BS as "Remember the (NYT) published a definitive article that said Trump had not paid taxes in two decades.
" which the article in question clearly does not say.
Because this is certainly deliberately misleading. The cited NYT article says Trump could have avoided paying taxes, NOT that he didn't pay taxes.
It seems to me that the NYT was proven wrong by the 2005 tax return. Trump could not have avoided paying taxes for 18 years by carrying forward losses due to the alternative minimum tax. According to reports, Trump would have paid 4% in 2005 by carrying forward losses, but the AMT kicked in and he paid 25%. So how could have have paid no taxes for 18 years?
It seems to me that the NYT was proven wrong by the 2005 tax return. Trump could not have avoided paying taxes for 18 years by carrying forward losses due to the alternative minimum tax. According to reports Trump would have paid 4% in 2005 but the AMT kicked in and he paid 25%. So how could have have paid no taxes for 18 years?
Good question that Trump should answer but doesn't.
The Mexican owned blog called the New York Times is eating yet more crow. Remember the published a definitive article that said Trump had not paid taxes in two decades.
According to your own link they said:
"“Donald Trump Tax Records Show He Could Have Avoided Taxes for Nearly Two Decades, The Times Found.”
"Could have" means what is means, and not what you claim. Why won't he release his tax returns like he promised, so people won't have to try to figure it out without the hard data?
Why won't he release his tax returns like he promised, so people won't have to try to figure it out without the hard data?
Possibly because he knows that the liberal media will spin legal write-offs into something perverse.
and "could have" is wrong if the alternative minimum tax prevents him from paying no taxes for 18 years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
