It was supposed to be the story that destroyed the Trump campaign. It won’t. In fact, the New York Times bungled it so badly, they may have helped him.
Source: JD Rucker
There are two big takeaways the NY Times and Democrats hope people take away from their “bombshell” report on President Trump’s leaked tax returns. First and foremost, they want voters to believe he didn’t pay much in taxes even though they buried massive tax bills around 4,000 words into their novella. Second, they were able to mention “Russia” a few times, though they acknowledge that they didn’t discover anything nefarious in his dealings with them. Of course, they didn’t acknowledge that into near the bottom of the article.
The ballyhooed NY Times exposé article is a giant nothingburger. There is no telling how much they paid to get the thousands of pages, nor how many thousands of man-hours they used to comb through looking for dirt, but one thing is certain: They paid enough to want to blow it up. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have spent so much extra time trying and energy trying to craft the hit piece they released. It didn’t have any bombshells in it, so they had to manufacture them.
To tax-code-junkies, this reveals a man and an organization that knew what they were doing. To economists, it showed that the American tax mechanism needed a revamp, which it got in 2018 thanks to the Republican Congress and President Trump. To some voters, it reaffirms their biases; supporters will appreciate how smart their President is and detractors will believe he cheated the system. To the vast, vast majority of Americans, it’s meaningless. It’s a 10,000 gibberish words that failed to deliver any tangible fireworks.
One thing we know for sure is why the President has been so opposed to his tax returns being released. It wasn’t because of any foreign connections that could prove he’s “owned” by Russia or anyone else. It wasn’t because he isn’t as rich as he claims, as tax returns show nothing of networth. But it demonstrates perceived losses to a populace that is largely unfamiliar with how taxes and large deductions work. That was the concern all along. He and his campaign team felt the average American wouldn’t be able to understand the complexities of billions of dollars of profits and losses balancing out, and the NY Times article proves his point.
But even with the newspaper’s massive expenditures to put together this hit piece, they failed miserably at delivering anything that could actually hurt the President. There has been so much build-up over the last four years that the underwhelming report will discourage Trump detractors and invigorate his base to fight even harder for his reelection.
Democrats and mainstream media desperately needed the tax returns to deliver a smoking gun. They needed to see hard evidence that he’s involved with foreign entities. Instead, they found out he made an extra couple of million dollars off the Moscow Miss Universe pageant. They needed to see that he made critical mistakes with his personal finances. Instead, they determined his golf courses make for great tax shelters while also being passion projects. If you’re going to lose money, you might as well lose it on something you love.
Over 10,000 words. That’s how long it took the NY Times to say… nothing. We learned President Trump is good at understanding the tax code and great at moving his money around. Nothing illegal. Nothing shady. Just great business acumen.
Reblogged this on Paul's Blog.