Search results

perhaps an audit will turn up the information you seek. Let's hope so.

Actually I can not quote anything highly specific off the top of my head, however there have been a number of detailed articles published in which it is claimed that he's not been able to obtain financing from U.S. banks -- that may relate to bankruptcies and legal entanglements, he's been...

Why are you interested in the Foundation? Their annual reports are available on the web. I'm sure the Foundation uses a large professional accounting firm. Do you have a problem with that?

Still another side are Trump's financial dealings in regard to Russian money laundering. He may not have done anything illegal under U.S. law in regard to laundering, but Oh Boy!, those tax returns!, that we've never seen. Are they sitting on a desk in the FBI somewhere? We ourselves may be...

Good question!!!

Its is important to recognize that more or less continuous deficits are the normal condition for a large country with a fiat currency which is also the reserve currency. Deficits can be too large, too small, or just right. Human fallibility, an unknown future, and political pressure create...

:rolleyes: I'll become a believer when there is a well designed test under controlled conditions. Right now all I've got is articles in Argosy Magazine I read in the Barber shop.

I think either making the single and joint filing standard deduction the same , or adopting a more reasonable ratio, maybe 2/3, would be better, more realistic, more fair. I'm fine with eliminating the personal exemption and just tacking it on to the standard deduction. That's not much of a...

Of course not! Does witching for water actually work. Of course not. But you can find water by witching (sometimes :D) .

for your 2017 return I think the personal exemption will be $4050, the same as for 2016. What's confusing is the tax bill is being reported as doubling the standard deduction to 12K. (it actually should be 12,700 to exactly double it for single filers.) For married filers, filing jointly, to...

Sorry I asked.

and a 100K fine!

Now tell us how you really feel about Clinton:D

In light of the recent spate of harassment cases, the Jones v Clinton harassment civil lawsuit becomes instructive. In that case the judge granted Clinton's request for summary judgement and the case was dismissed. The judge ruled that Jones was unable to show damages or "outrageous behavior"...

They have merit , but not in regard to my post to which he was responding. He confused the Paula Jones case which was settled, with testimony in that same case with regard to Clinton's affair with lewinski. It was the Lewinski affair testimony that got Clinton in trouble with Starr. I...

Gladly. See post #58 , also see tree frogs posts. You should also read my original post which was not about the Paula Jones case, but about the Lewinsky affair and the impeachment. Ken Starr was instrumental there because it was his grand jury that decided Clinton had perjured himself, not...

That's accurate! thank you! Although the Ivanka bit may be a stretch. ;)

This is inaccurate in that it wasn't his testimony specifically in regard to his alleged affair with Paula Jones, though he may very well have perjured himself there as well. It was during the Paula Jones case that Clinton was asked about his affair with Lewinsky, and that is the testimony...

It was perjury in the questioning of Bill Clinton in regard to the Lewinsky affair that led to the impeachment, and Ken Starr was very much in that picture. from Wiki: During the deposition in the Jones case, Clinton was asked, "Have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that...

He said Starr wasn't even in the picture. But he was very much in the picture by the time Lewinsky came along, and it was Starr who concluded that Clinton had perjured himself in answering questions about his relationship with Lewinsky. And it was that perjury, as determined by Starr, that led...