BloggeRhythms

Aside from media analysis regarding the results from Monday night’s presidential debate, another indicator suggests that Trump fared quite well. 

Joseph Weber writes @FoxNews.com: “The Donald Trump campaign’s massive $18 million, 24-hour fundraising haul this week was orchestrated by some of the biggest names in politics, Wall Street and philanthropy -- including New York Jets owner Woody Johnson and Hollywood producer Steve Mnuchin.” 

While a number of influential figures are now involved in Trump’s accelerating fundraising: “About one-third of the money reportedly came in the form of relatively small, online donations. The remainder was solicited during a phone-calling blitz during which more than 100 top fundraisers went to Trump Tower in New York City to make calls.” 

At the same time, one more non-traditional event took place that is not only a first, but may very well forebode future Democrat woes. 

FoxNews.com reported : “Congress on Wednesday overwhelmingly rejected President Obama’s veto of a bipartisan bill letting families of Sept. 11 victims sue the Saudi Arabian government, in the first successful veto override of Obama’s presidency. 

“Marking a significant defeat for the White House, the House ensured the bill will become law after voting 348-77 to override Wednesday afternoon. This followed a 97-1 vote hours earlier in the Senate.” 

The votes came “[d]espite last-ditch warnings from the Obama administration that the legislation could hurt national security and was “badly misguided,” lawmakers dismissed the concerns. 

Senator John Cornyn, R-Texas, responded: “This bill is about respecting the voices and rights of American victims." 

Even Schumer joined the majority as he: “pushed back hard on Saudi government objections to the legislation.” 

And then, although he’s been steadfast in his distaste, dislike and distrust for Bill Clinton’s wife, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano showed why people should always remain within the confines of their expertise.   

The judge began his column today: “In this weekly column and in my on-air work at Fox News, I have characterized former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as a crook and as the "Queen of Deception." I have argued that there is enough credible evidence in the public domain to indict, prosecute and convict her of espionage, perjury, misleading Congress, public corruption, providing material assistance to terrorist organizations and obstruction of justice. 

“I can point to five times when she lied under oath. I know of FBI agents who believe that their hands were tied by the Obama administration in the criminal investigation of her. And I know of American intelligence agents who firmly believe that Americans died because Clinton failed to keep state secrets secure.” 

In regard to the summation of Bill’s wife’s criminality, the judge is likely absolutely correct. But then he goes on to write:about both presidential candidates, as follows:   

“Neither understands the economy. Both want the government to force employers to pay higher wages, to impose higher taxes on the most productive in our society, to impose tariffs on goods we import and to increase our $19.5 trillion national debt. Aren’t those behaviors just what got us into our present precarious economic straits, where all federal tax revenue is now consumed by wealth transfers, the Pentagon and interest on the government debt, with the government being run on borrowed money and borrowed time?” 

However, Trump believes that individual states should establish wage legislation. He also seeks revision of the tax code, reducing rates and the number of brackets immediately. He wishes to use tariffs to prevent American businesses from manufacturing elsewhere while undercutting those who operate here. He also believes that continuation of unbridled national debt will soon eviscerate the U.S. economy altogether.  

So, whoever is doing the judge’s homework for him regarding the Trump platform isn’t performing very well. And if the judge himself presented his conclusions in a court of law, he’d be found guilty of perjury at least, while also obstructing justice.  

  

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

An article by Amy Chozick @nytimes.com, yesterday presents the premise that Bill Clinton’s wife did much to help herself in Monday nights debate. Going on to provide supporting detail as to how “she avoided the land mines that Mr. Trump had so effectively planted against his Republican primary opponents.” Ms Chozick also noted that, on Tuesday, Democrats “breathed a sigh of relief.“ 

Then, much farther along in the piece, an excerpt unintentionally explains why Democrats have never presided over fiscally successful terms in office. (Except for Bill Clinton who left Republican Allan Greenspan as head of the Federal Reserve for the eight years of his term.) 

Ms Chozick writes: “Democrats cheered when Mrs. Clinton accused Mr. Trump of not paying federal income taxes and he replied, playing into their hands, “That makes me smart.” And they could hardly believe their good fortune when Mr. Trump said, “That’s called business, by the way,” after Mrs. Clinton accused him of profiting from the housing crisis.” 

As a practical matter, however, what Ms Chozick nor Bill’s wife are unable to grasp is the fact that it’s government that provides tax relief incentives in the first place. And the reason for the provision of that shelter is to stimulate private investment, which in turn helps the overall economy to grow. 

What’s more, entire industry’s have grown and flourished as a result of simple tax incentives such as depreciation expense, amortization and in years past, the introduction of investment tax credit at various times along the way. 

In these cases, win/win situations are created for both investors and their customers. Lessees and/or renters get the realty or equipment they desire at far more attractive rates than other alternatives, while Lessors and rental operations retain the benefits of the underlying asset's ownership, which includes any available write-offs or incentives.  

In terms of industry size,  according to franchisehelp.com: “Last year there were approximately 210,000 companies operating in the residential brokerage and management field, which generated $200 billion in revenue; there were 35,000 companies operating in the commercial brokerage and management field, generating $35 billion in revenue.” 

And then, according to the 54rd Annual Convention of the Equipment Leasing and Finance Association Equipment Finance Industry Report: “For the first time ever, the equipment finance market is expected to surpass $1 trillion in 2015.” 

So, here we have a real estate investor, Trump, who happens to be in a business in which tax considerations are woven into its very core and structure by federal law. And on the other side, a competitor who attacks him as if success was a crime. However, that may turn out to be a huge mistake for her. 

Because, now that Trump’s aware of her intention to vilify his business record by accusing him of tax avoidance, her similar behavior is now certainly fair game. Which means that all of those issues mentioned by Judge Napolitano today can now come into play including: “enough credible evidence in the public domain to indict, prosecute and convict her of espionage, perjury, misleading Congress, public corruption, providing material assistance to terrorist organizations and obstruction of justice.” 

And that certainly leaves room for the asking again of the ongoing question: Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are you guys reading this?   

That's it for today folks.      

Adios