Home› Tug Tavern

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

John Bolton Trump hater on indictment

SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,963 Standard Supporter
in Tug Tavern
https://rumble.com/v2g8ilu-it-must-have-hurt-anti-trump-turncoat-john-bolton-to-admit-this-about-indic.html
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«1

Comments

  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 44,265 Standard Supporter
    LaughingBolton.gif
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,963 Standard Supporter
    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,963 Standard Supporter
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    Yeah not charged.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 106,051 Founders Club
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    Like the dossier?

    Or Joe not declaring 50k a month in rent received from Hunter?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    Yeah not charged.
    "The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme."

    sure
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,963 Standard Supporter
    Yeah that looks like a penal code section alright!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Sledog said:

    Yeah that looks like a penal code section alright!

    Straight out of yesterday's unsealed filings.

    Next dodge?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,963 Standard Supporter
    No dodge the guy with no charges based in reality didn't mention the REAL charges you just uncovered.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bob_CBob_C Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 10,633 Swaye's Wigwam
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    So are NDA settlements not tax deductible then?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,963 Standard Supporter
    Bob_C said:



    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    So are NDA settlements not tax deductible then?
    Since she has been ordered to pay Trump 600+K I wouldn't know.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bob_CBob_C Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 10,633 Swaye's Wigwam
    Sledog said:

    Bob_C said:



    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    So are NDA settlements not tax deductible then?
    Since she has been ordered to pay Trump 600+K I wouldn't know.
    Shhh, it's a trap.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Bob_C said:



    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    So are NDA settlements not tax deductible then?
    Business expense? I wish I'd thought of that before my audit.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Sledog said:

    No dodge the guy with no charges based in reality didn't mention the REAL charges you just uncovered.

    What part of "Straight out of yesterday's unsealed filings." was too complicated for you?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,242
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    For which you'd normally pay a fine and any unpaid taxes. How did I know that the Dazzler would be defending that craptastic indictment.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 20,949
    Sledog said:

    Bob_C said:



    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    So are NDA settlements not tax deductible then?
    Since she has been ordered to pay Trump 600+K I wouldn't know.
    He must be great in bed.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,242
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    No dodge the guy with no charges based in reality didn't mention the REAL charges you just uncovered.

    What part of "Straight out of yesterday's unsealed filings." was too complicated for you?
    Can you cite for me how this misdemeanor rises to the level of a felony. What's the actual crime Trump has committed here? Cite it for me.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 15,393 Standard Supporter
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    Yeah not charged.
    "The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme."

    sure
    NDA payments for sexual harassment were deductible in 2017. So, what was the scheme?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bob_CBob_C Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 10,633 Swaye's Wigwam
    WestlinnDuck said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Reasonable argument. Doesn't address the tax issues.

    What tax issues might that be? I didn't see any tax code charges. Enlighten us.
    Presenting the reimbursement as a fee for legal services has obvious income tax implications.
    Yeah not charged.
    "The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme."

    sure
    NDA payments for sexual harassment were deductible in 2017. So, what was the scheme?
    Good work. That was the trap. They aren’t deductible in 2018-current.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.