Recently, the New York Times received by mail a copy of the front pages of Trump's state tax returns for New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. These pages showed that Trump claimed a huge, $900 million plus loss for 1990. 1990 was just after Trump lost a ton of borrowed money in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The problem is, if Trump claimed money that he borrowed and lost and failed to repay as a personal loss, he lied. This can not be legal. If it were, federal income tax payment would be voluntary and not mandatory. Anyone can borrow money, fail to repay it, and then claim it as a personal loss. If your creditors threaten to sue just do what Donald Trump did and declare bankruptcy. The bankruptcy courts have shown by allowing Trump to declare bankruptcy a whopping six times, that repayment of creditors is voluntary and not mandatory. Apparently, anyone can declare bankruptcy anytime they want and stiff their creditors. After Trump declared bankruptcy many times, all the US and British banks cut him off from further loans. So where is he getting the money to finance his vast commercial empire? Probably from other foreign banks or from the Russian oligarchs. Putin may be the richest man in the world. He is worth a reported $200 billion. That is not a net worth; that is a GDP. Note that Trump refuses to release not only his current returns, but past returns too. The man has no sense of shame. All the Russian oligarchs are fabulously wealthy. When the Russian empire collapsed in 1991 and Communism with it, all the senior officials of the former Soviet Union ended up in ownership of the huge state enterprises that the Russian state used to own. These former Communist Party officials figured out how to translate vast political power into vast economic power.

To swing the election, it was not necessary for Russian Intelligence to swing all 50 states, they only had to swing three - Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. All 17 Intelligence Agencies have stated unequivocally that Russian Intelligence was waging cyber-warfare against the United States of America before and during the Presidential election. So why wouldn't you expect Russian Intelligence to hack the computers that were used as voting machines in these three states? Of course they did, how could they have resisted. All they had to do to have a major impact on world political affairs was to hack a few computers. Note that in California, it is illegal to use computers as voting machines, but the County Election Commissions in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin did not care - they went ahead and used computers as voting machines anyway despite the clear and present Russian cyber-warfare. Any computer can be hacked or misprogrammed to say pretty much anything that you want it to say. How exactly do you perform an audit on a computer that generates no paper ballots? And yet two of the three states in question claim that they did do an audit. What did they do exactly? No one knows. Note that downloading the alleged election results a second time is NOT an audit. Why would you expect a computer file to differ the second time that you download it from the first time? The determination that a computer has been hacked can be made only by qualified cyber-experts like the FBI or the NSA or Crowdstrike Inc. The County Election Commissions lack this expertise and qualifications. Note that no cyber-experts were ever permitted to examine the computer voting machines in question. New York Magazine has reported that Trump did dramatically better in those counties in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin that used computers as voting machines that they did in those counties in those three states that used paper ballots or mark-sense reader paper ballots. ALL the major polls showed Trump losing in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and yet the alleged election returns showed Trump winning all three of these states. In 2016, the major polls are highly scientific and highly sophisticated. It is just not credible that ALL the major polls were that wrong in all three states. Note that the Commission on Presidential Debates relies on the major polls to determine whom to invite to the Presidential Debates.