That's exactly how English comprehension works lol

Things have connotations and implications, not just strict dictionary definitions.

If I say "They're X, well, maybe some are Y" the implication is that most are X and Y is the exception.



Yes, saying some are good people means they're the minority, meaning he's saying most are bringing drugs crime and rape.

If he said said "They're people fleeing poverty and seeking jobs and hope, but some are bringing rape drugs and crime" then your point would stand, but the way he phrased it crime is the rule, and good people are the exception.



The point is, he started his campaign with this shit, so your claim that the media started attacking him before he made controversial comments is wrong. You're letting your feeling of being attacked cloud your judgement on very obvious things.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Sep 28 2020 11:22am

also wasnt the subject of that centered on illegal immigrants? media loves just to leave tidbits like this out


what a joke, did John Stewart pay more then legally required? he is worth $120M he can donate all his assets to the IRS if he wants

1. Issue isn’t legally dodging

2. How is this a wormhole, it was bad to dodge taxes in 2012 by conservatives alike. now it’s a good thing

More google translation from national french tv:


five facts to take away from the revelations of the "New York Times" on Donald Trump's taxes


1. An income tax of $ 750 in 2016 and 2017
2. No income tax for eleven years
3. A drawback of $ 72.9 million
4. Personal expenses on the account of his companies
5. Hundreds of millions of dollars in debt


I will only push it on 4 & 5 :


Another method used by the billionaire, the support of his personal expenses by his companies. Her properties, her plane and even her hair-styling expenses - over $ 70,000 [60,180 euros] for her TV show "The Apprentice" - or her daughter Ivanka's makeup are on her corporate accounts. The New York Times points to the example of a property near New York classified as an investment as it serves as a second home for the Trump family. A sleight of hand that allows you to wipe out $ 2.2 million (1.9 million euros) in property taxes.


If his candidacy and his victory for the presidential election have allowed some of his business to revive - his private club in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, has earned him since 2015 nearly $ 5 million (4.3 million euros ) per year - and have opened up opportunities for him abroad - a $ 3 million (2.6 million euros) real estate project in the Philippines - Donald Trump's finances are fragile.

Deprived of the income from his television program, the American president got into debt, in particular by mortgaging the commercial space of the Trump Tower in New York. He must reimburse $ 100 million (86 million euros) by 2022 in this case, to which could be added a possible reimbursement of the 2010 rebate if the IRS succeeds. In total, according to the New York Times, Donald Trump has personally committed an amount of $ 421 million (361.8 million euros), to be repaid over the next four years. "If he were re-elected, his creditors would be in the unprecedented position of asking for the seizure of the assets of a president in office," the newspaper observed.




==> Basically the genius is probably ready to do anything to save his ass now

The level of the deduction is certainly interesting though

I don’t think I can deduct 70k on hair expenses and get away with it. Maybe I should try lol. I’ll let u know from jail if they let me Jsp from there

oh come now, you won't go to jail, you'll just get audited and pay interest

People routinely deduct thousands per year on pet expenses and call them gaurd animals for their businesses.

Spend a few years preparing tax returns. This isn't coming that's just common among the ultra rich it's done by all levels of wealth.

The only time you're stuck with minimal deductions is if you're just an employee that works on the businesses premis and has no use of personal assets for business purposes.

In any group which contains tens of thousands of human beings, you will have some good and some bad guys, you will have rapists and murderers. At face value, from a standpoint of formal logics, the statement that there are rapists or criminals among them is a null statement. It only has a meaning if it is understood in the sense of "the share of rapists/murderers/criminals among them is higher than among the native population". And this is exactly what the the subtext of Trump's statement was, and his supporters clearly interpreted it this way.

We need to sticky a tax deduction guide

They attack AOC for a haircut this guy does this. Clear hypocrites.