BloggeRhythms

In an article this morning @FoxNews.com, Trump “dismissed a published copy of an IRS filing that showed he used the U.S. tax code to take a nearly $1 billion operating loss in 1995, saying Monday the news media is “obsessed” with a decades’ old return and that he, in fact, “brilliantly used the law” to salvage his real estate empire.”

Trump's position is clearly within the realm of what any sophisticated business operator would do, whereas grasping current tax code is part of managerial responsibility. And the fact that he applied that code to his advantage is appropriately admirable. However, he should have left it at that.

There’s no need for him to go on to pat himself on the back by adding that he “brilliantly used the law,” because all that’s required to accomplish what he did is an ability to hire an attorney that can read basic English.

As a practical matter, however: “Trump's reported loss was purportedly the result of his Atlantic City hotels suffering amid the resort’s declining casino-gambling industry, a failed airline venture and the purchase of the Plaza Hotel on Central Park in Manhattan.” And that’s where Trump’s real opportunity to help himself really centers.

Because instead of bragging like a ten year old in a school yard, he could simply make a valid, professional, comparison to others. Such as the POTUS, whereas when he took office in January 2009, the total national debt stood at $10.6 trillion. Which means the debt will have very nearly doubled during his eight years in office, and there is much more debt ahead with the abandonment of “sequestration” spending caps enacted in 2011.

And thus, the loss of a billion is a drop in the bucket compared to an administration that threw 10 trillion taxpayer dollars out the proverbial window due to incapability, mismanagement and fiduciary irreponsibility.

In the meantime, all of the back and forth mudslinging doesn't seem to be affecting Trump very much negatively at all in current polls. 

As reported @rasmussenreports.com, this morning: “The latest Rasmussen Reports White House Watch national telephone and online survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows Clinton with 42% support and Trump with 41%. 

“Eighty-three percent (83%) of voters now say they are certain how they will vote, and Clinton has a statistically insignificant 48% to 47% lead among this group.” 

However, while the majority of voters claim they’ve already decided: “Among the voters who still may change their minds, it’s Trump 31%, Clinton 27%, Johnson 32% and Stein 10%.” 

Which means that the advantage overall, currently belongs to Trump. 

That probability is confirmed once again by the USC Dornsife/LA Times Presidential Election Daybreak Poll today which shows Trump at 46.6% and his rival at 42.7%. 

And then, an almost hidden sidebar from yesterday’s backfiring of the New York Times attempt to smear Trump is a truly laughable comeuppance for the continually diminishing leftist news outlet. 

According to Wesley Pruden @washingtontimes.com: “There may be a rest of the story. Federal law prohibits publishing an unauthorized tax return, with offenders risking five years in federal prison. Mr. Baquet and his newspaper can seek refuge in the First Amendment, and probably will, but newspapers and the men and women who edit them get no immunity in the Constitution for breaking the law, and the Donald has mean and expensive lawyers, too, and an appetite for litigation.” 

And, should that happen, it would surely be the perfect squelch. Whereas, if a suit were lost to Trump, New York Times personnel would be required to pay restitution which could then be used by Trump to help pay off the losses the newspaper was so gleeful about in the first place.   

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

According to her website, the last time Bill’s wife spoke about Obamacare was January 6, 2016. At that time, she confirmed her continual belief in government provided healthcare, including the program currently in place, as follows:    

“I've fought for quality, affordable health care my entire career. As president, I'll defend the Affordable Care Act, build on its successes, and go even further to reduce costs. My plan will crack down on drug companies charging excessive prices, slow the growth of out-of-pocket costs, and provide a new credit to those facing high health expenses. 

“What we have to do, I think, is defend the Affordable Care Act and fix it,” Clinton said in a campaign video Tuesday. 

Reading about her support for the program led to the thought that, whereas both Clinton’s lead separate private lives, perhaps they don’t always know each others positions on various subjects. Because, in this case, Bill presented a totally different opinion about the ACA than that of his spouse. 

According to FoxNews.com yesterday: “Bill Clinton, on the campaign trail for Hillary Clinton, told voters in Michigan on Monday that the legislation has created a “crazy system” where millions more people have health care but those unable to qualify for subsidies are getting “killed.” 

“The people … out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half,” Clinton said. “It’s the craziest thing in the world.”  

“The comments come as Republican and Democratic administrations at the state level all grapple with fresh complications from the law, as insurers threaten to leave the ObamaCare exchanges amid financial concerns and customers face the prospect of rising premiums for the plans available.   

“Clinton’s comments in Michigan follow officials in nearby Minnesota recently agreeing to huge price hikes in order to convince insurers to stay. Commerce Commissioner Mike Rothman announced Friday that individual market plans could raise rates as high as 67 percent next year. The jump in cost follows this year’s hike of 14 percent to 49 percent.” 

So, here again, Bill’s wife is caught between her public utterings and the truth of a matter, which her own husband finds fault with. Following right on the heels of her attempt to degrade Trump for applying the same Federal tax relief loss applications that she did. 

All of which confirms the continual uncertainty of her qualifications to be a leader of anything, much less the greatest nation on Earth. It also brings up the ongoing question again: 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