Just so we’re clear, one candidate in this election is under federal criminal investigation for her negligent disregard for America’s national security protocols: That candidate is Hillary Clinton. The story totally dominated the headlines heading into Halloween weekend and has not lost any steam, as Dems take turns bashing James Comey and reporters wait with baited breath for details of the FBI’s new deep dive into the
But you wouldn’t know that from reading the front page of the New York Times. Their main concern?
Front page of today’s NY Times. Trump did something perfectly legal 25 years ago.
We’re watching the media crumble in real time. pic.twitter.com/djfSThy03v
— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) November 1, 2016
The headline is different on the actual story, was authored by five different reporters, and creates the impression that was Trump was doing was “legally dubious.” Over at HotAir, they call this what it is: the Times is making the bombshell accusation that Donald Trump follows the tax laws. Jazz Shaw tries to navigate the Times verbal gymnastics:
The details of this alleged, legally dubious activity are so wonky that they will probably put anyone to sleep unless they’re a CPA, but they deal with tax credits offered as a result of business losses. Trump had taken a major hit on some casino investments, losing a significant amount of money which included investment capital put in by others. As part of the negotiations which followed he was able to get some of those investors to forgive the debt, adding up to hundreds of millions of dollars. Without that tax credit, Trump would have had to treat all of the forgiven debt as personal income and pay taxes on it even though the money was gone.
You can call that dodgy if you like, but it takes the Gray Lady three paragraphs before they get around to mentioning this little detail which I’ll repeat here. (Emphasis added)
Thanks to this one maneuver, which was later outlawed by Congress, Mr. Trump potentially escaped paying tens of millions of dollars in federal personal income taxes.
Two important bits of context and spin are missing here. The first, and most obvious, is the fact that the laws were changed later so that such a tax credit could not be taken. So at the time Trump did it it was not forbidden. The second point I would note is the choice of wording employed by the Times. “Outlawed by Congress!” See? If The Donald had done that in later years he would be an outlaw! Oh, the horror. The reality, of course, is that Congress simply made yet another change to the nation’s tax codes, which are currently more extensive than the legendary Library of Alexandria. They no longer allow businesses to write off such debt forgiveness in that fashion and if you do so you will incur a penalty if you are audited.
This is simply pure, unadulterated silliness on the part of the Times. At a time when a federal investigation into Hillary Clinton is playing fast and loose with America’s national security, the Times is assigning five reporters to write pseudo exposes on perfectly legal(at the time) business practices they happen to disagree with.
Is it any wonder why many Americans no longer trust the mainstream media?
AAN Staff
The staff at American Action News are consummate professionals, who when not producing original, hard-hitting content, are scouring the internet to bring you the unfiltered news that matters to you! Our mission is to maximize your experience on our website. If we can ever be of assistance, please do not hesitate to let us know!
