all 14 comments

[–]Tarrock[S] 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

IF you haven't heard, there's no russian bullshit and no other shady bullshit, just Trump taking advantage of the way the tax code works.

[–]igorness 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

He overvalued his assets and debts. That's extremely illegal.

[–]Intuit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What an awful person to avoid paying more taxes than the code requires. Now, could someone help me figure out how to deduct all my driving and rent as a business expense?

[–]zyxzevn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What if we released the tax-returns of ALL millionaires (and richer)?

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In some counties everyone's tax return is a public record.

I mean the most surprising thing about these returns is that people are surprised by them, but then I work in accounts. Maybe if people were used to seeing how this stuff works then maybe they would be more realistic about it, and maybe be a bit smarter about their own finances.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

well bad thing is it shows he made no money and is in debt. so he is denying it's real.

[–]flush_the_turd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Doesn't really follow. By his own logic, him reporting on this, is illegal, and 'doxing'. The leaker may have broken the law, but reporting on these facts is not illegal in itself.

[–]CCwind 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The NYT hasn't done anything illegal, as the law as clearly established that you can't charge someone for reporting on what other give them. This is why Assange is being charged for helping Wikileaks sources get the documents that were leaked instead of being charged for publishing them. If the source for NYT is someone in the government, then they have almost certainly committed a crime as tax data is highly protected legally speaking. But if the source is a non-government person like an accountant, then the only remedy would be to sue them in civil court for something like breach of contract. Though if it was an accountant or bank, being publicly known to have released that information to the public would kill their business as they would no longer be trusted.

[–]Iam1ofMany 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It should be. Unless their is a crime there should be no reason to release this information to the public unless Trump had given his consent.

[–]Intuit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's not doxxing anyway. The POTUS address is not secret information.

[–]igorness 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They didn't release his tax returns, they reported on them. Trump lost that court battle a month ago. Even the IRS said it's OK to release them. Trump wasn't doxxed. Everyone knows where he lives and what he is. What a crock of it vid.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pfft.

Turns out they've already run this exact story before.

Guess which year.

http://imgur.com/a/ykre53o