I've unfortunately had some experience with it. When they talk about following the money, a tax return amounts to a spot on the money trail. The returns themselves won't show shadiness other than tax fraud schemes, but they can raise questions about sources and uses of funds requiring further inquiry.

For a private entity like The Trump Organization they are the most detailed accounting of the business's activities available. There's a reason that you have to provide 3 years of tax returns to a potential lender when applying for a major loan like a mortgage, you know. This stuff isn't new, or particularly hard to understand, which is I suppose why you revert back to your usual haughty one liners (or one worders), trying to give the impression that you have access to information hidden from the rest of us.

What makes you think the article is stupidity? Do you somehow have access to information for example that the Trump Organization behaves differently than they assert? Or is it easier for you to revert to your condescending responses that do nothing more than name calling, then to try to actually refute anything?