Great reporting by NY Times on Trump's finances. But it would have been nice

[StarfishSaver]

if the Times had put in even a fraction of this effort to investigating his finances a few years ago before they helped to promulgate the Trump myth.

I'm quite sure that if Hillary Clinton had gone around insisting that she was an expert pole vaulter, the media would have confirmed that she actually was before consistently referring to her in story as "Pole vaulter Hillary Clinton."

Yet they not only took Trump's word for it, they made "billionaire" his job description and virtually his first name.

So, while it's excellent they're exposing him, they are also cleaning up a mess they helped to create

[KSNY]

1. YES!

A few billion times this!
He's run the country like he ran his businesses.
Would have been nice if the media hadn't been so focused on the horse race aspect of 2016.

[StarfishSaver]

5. But her emails ...

[Wounded Bear]

2. Actually, NYAG is looking into more recent stuff...

there may be a media blackout on the newer filings.

We can hope.

[LibFarmer]

3. I totally agree with you

The media made Trump and destroyed Hillary

[JI7]

4. exactly, they all referred to him as successful businessman. even though we had

evidence then that he wasn't and was a fraud , scammer, etc instead.

[StarfishSaver]

7. Not just as a "successful. businessman" but as "Billionaire Businessman Donald Trump"

[JI7]

10. all his idiot supporters always bring up how he is a self made billionaire

as proof he knows more than anyone else no matter what is being discussed.

[pnwmom]

6. I think this effort came from a leaker who only recently brought them the IRS transcripts.

From there, the NY Times did a good job connecting the leaked records with publicly available records.

But the whole report was based on some anonymous source deciding to "share" info with them -- so they couldn't have written the story a few years ago.

[StarfishSaver]

8. They could have done a lot more research than they did

And they certainly should not have taken his word that he was a billionaire - and helped him advance his myth without any proof.

[FakeNoose]

9. The NYT would have gladly published this info years ago, if they had it

It's only coming out now because of the efforts of the AG of New York State, and the House Committee Chairmen who demanded documents from the IRS.

The reporter/author/pundit David Cay Johnston has been on this story for over 30 years, and even he couldn't get much more than rumors - until now. This is big, breaking news that just literally came out today and it confirms what we've heard in the last few years.

[StarfishSaver]

11. They didn't need to have this information dropped into their laps to stop

promoting Trump's brand without any proof other than his word.

They sure didn't have any trouble digging into Hillary's emails

[pnwmom]

12. Hillary's emails had been posted on Wikileaks. For some strange, odd,

inexplicable reason, Wikileaks never posted anything about Trump or his campaign, even though the RNC server was hacked by the Russians.

[StarfishSaver]

13. And there was plenty of evidence that Trump wasn't a billionaire and was a crook

They could have followed up and done some investigative reporting. Instead, they focused their efforts on beating the drums about Hillary's emails.

[Maven]

14. They were too busy reporting on emails and the "clouds" and "shadows" over HRC's campaign

Meanwhile, they watched while a traitor, demagogue, virulent racist and conman stole the presidency with the Kremlin's assistance.

[heckles65]

15. Another +gazillion.

I've linked this to a discussion board I participate in. Thank you!!