While Democrats have never given up on getting Trump’s taxes, because THIS WILL BE THE WAY THEY FINALLY GET TRUMP yeaaarg!, with the collapse of the notion that Trump will be frogmarched out of the White House post-Mueller report getting his taxes has become an even bigger fixation among Democrats. Who are soon going to abut the notion of equal justice under the law and courts taking a very dim view of laws and abuse of power that targets one person, no matter who they are
To Get Trump’s Tax Returns, N.Y. Democrats Try a New Strategy
In an attempt to work around the White House, Democratic lawmakers in Albany are trying to do what their federal counterparts have so far failed to accomplish: to obtain President Trump’s tax returns.
Albany lawmakers are seeking state tax returns, not the federal ones at the heart of the current standoff in Washington. But a tax return from New York — the president’s home state, and the headquarters of his business empire — could likely contain much of the same financial information as a federal return.
Under a bill that is scheduled to be introduced this week, the commissioner of the New York Department of Taxation and Finance would be permitted to release any state tax return requested by leaders of three congressional committees for any “specific and legitimate legislative purpose.â€
The bill is the most recent proposal from New York lawmakers trying to cast light on the president’s personal finances and business dealings, but it could also open the Democratic majorities in the Legislature to charges of politicizing state law to embarrass the president ahead of his expected re-election campaign.
It wouldn’t open them to charges, this is exactly what they’ve been doing. What they should remember is that this extremely vague law, which will be challenged in court when it is used for a fishing expedition and leaks happen, can be used against Democrats. What if a Republican demands the taxes of Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, and others?
State Senator Brad Hoylman, a Manhattan Democrat who is sponsoring the legislation, defended the bill, saying it is designed to be “a safety valve for any attempt by the White House to block the Congress from doing this at the federal level.â€
“We’re creating a parallel track,†Senator Hoylman added.
So, this is 100% political, and will simply end up costing the state a lot of money when they are sued. Wait till a Republican demands to see the tax returns of NY Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Under the bill to be introduced on Monday, the chairperson of three committees — the Senate Finance Committee; the House Ways and Means Committee; and the Joint Committee on Taxation — could request tax returns from the New York tax department.
Ah, so only this one person can request, who just happens to be a Democrat right now. Again, this will be seen by the courts as using the tax system to penalize one specific person for politics, and courts do not like laws like this. And, really, will just give Trump more ammunition to slam Democrats as unhinged and power-mad, among others.
Teach typed: What if a Republican demands the taxes of Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, and others?
Well, according to federal law, certain Congressional committees are allowed access to tax returns.
And of course, Secretary Clinton already voluntarily released years of tax returns and the Clinton Foundation’s records are public (as are the defunct Trump Foundation – which, ironically, was found to operate illegally from its records).
Do you think the GOP-led committees accessed any tax returns??
Anyway, it’s the law. Is Secretary Mnuchin willing to go to jail for Trump?
Does the United States have a legitimate interest in determining if the US President has conflicts of interest that threaten national security? For example, how deep are his financial ties in Russia, China, Saudi Arabia etc?
Does he benefit from his own trade/tariff and tax policies?
Is he receiving benefits from foreign countries?
Perhaps the little fella would like to share the answers to his own questions.
We won’t hold our breath.
William Teach: What if a Republican demands the taxes of Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, and others?
As Elwood P. Dowd pointed out, Bill and Hillary Clinton have released their tax returns, and the Clinton Foundation‘s tax returns are open to the public. Bill De Blasio has released his tax return.
William Teach: What they should remember is that this extremely vague law …
The law is not in the least vague, saying the Treasury Secretary “shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request.â€
William Teach: Wait till a Republican demands to see the tax returns of NY Governor Andrew Cuomo.
<a href=”https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Cuomo-reveals-tax-returns-book-profits-run-out-12841889.php>Cuomo has also disclosed his tax returns.
William Teach: Again, this will be seen by the courts as using the tax system to penalize one specific person for politics, and courts do not like laws like this.
Possibly. However, there also has to be oversight of the IRS and its handling of tax returns. Congress is clearly the responsible body, and just because Congress has access to tax returns doesn’t mean they can publicly disclose it willy-nilly.
…and just because Congress has access to tax returns doesn’t mean they can publicly disclose it willy-nilly.
That’s what anonymous sources are for, kiddiez.
LOL.
Too bad they really aren’t.
This from (are you ready?) Politico.
Sad to say, SCUS has ruled that Congress can’t use its powers to delve into someone’s private financial matters unless there is a proper legislative purpose and any congressional information demand must relate to a “legitimate task of the Congress†and noted that Congress is not a “law enforcement agency†that can seek information to uncover or expose crimes.
Ya love it, right?
This just proves once again that Democrats cannot be trusted to hold political power. They simply cannot control themselves from abusing power for personal and party gain. Further, maybe Government shouldn’t have that information in the first place, since ultimately it will come down to entrusting the people running the government. If government could not harm us so much, it wouldn’t matter which party was in control.
Professor Hale: This just proves once again that Democrats cannot be trusted to hold political power.
Under IRS regulations, the president is a special case, and the president’s returns are always audited. There is evidence that Trump’s foundation was engaged in self-dealing. There is evidence that Trump was lying about his dealings with Russia during the campaign. There is evidence that foreign powers have made an effort to grease Trump’s palm through his businesses. Finally, congress has constitutional power over emoluments.
There is evidence Trump colluded with the Russian in order to influence the 2016 elections and …
Oh, wait …
Thanks, Jeff. Still not interested in anything you have to say. Name changes by you don’t change my mind.
Professor Hale: Thanks, Jeff.
We post only as Zachriel. Our argument stands unanswered.
Whatever. Once you lose credibility, you lose it about everything.
Professor Hale: Whatever.
“Whatever” is not a particularly strong argument. You might start with there is evidence that Trump’s foundation was engaged in self-dealing.
“They simply cannot control themselves from abusing power for personal and party gain.”
Does it matter to Porter Good or “Professor” Hale if Donald J. Trump is abusing power for personal or party gain?
Does the whiny little Bear have any proof of such other than speculation?
Show your work.
No, because he isn’t.
Zippy did. Willie did.
Donald Trump is a billionaire, and as such, the Infernal Revenue Service, under President Barack Hussein Obama, certainly scrutinized his obviously complicated returns for many years; Mr Trump said that his 2015 return was being audited, and I would guess that others were as well, though scrutiny by the IRS might not have been a full audit every year.
Mr Trump’s returns weren’t the result of him filing via TurboTax, but a team of accountants pouring over every detail, every year. Does anyone, other than the left, believe that those returns would contain any evidence of criminality?
What the left are really looking for is legitimate deductions that will still look bad politically, of which I’m sure there are some.
Dana: Donald Trump is a billionaire, and as such, the Infernal Revenue Service, under President Barack Hussein Obama, certainly scrutinized his obviously complicated returns for many years
IRS regulations require the president’s tax returns be audited. A law, enacted due to corruption during the Harding Administration, grants the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee the power to examine any tax return.
Dana: Does anyone, other than the left, believe that those returns would contain any evidence of criminality?
There is evidence that Trump was self-dealing through his Foundation.
Z,
You just solved the problem of the tax returns. If the president is automatically under audit for potential corruption, then the job is done and Congress and the American people don’t need the information. Congress in full of lawyers, once when I was an expert witness a lawyer had the jury thinking that I was a bad guy for working. That is how they can manipulate information.
david7134: You just solved the problem of the tax returns. If the president is automatically under audit for potential corruption, then the job is done and Congress and the American people don’t need the information.
Congress is responsible for oversight of the executive branch, including the IRS. Hence, Congress has the power to determine if the IRS is discharging its mandate fairly and effectively, including with and especially with regards the president.
Hellooo, Lois Lerner.
Z,
That answer is called pure bullshit. Yes, we are well aware of Congressional over sight. But all that Congress is doing is trolling for anything that would harm the President. That is clear from the Russian hoax, read the book The Russia Hoax. If Trump had performed any act that required Congressional action, then get everything, but this is nothing more than Dems being idiots, which they are very good at. Why don’t these folks look at Hillary and Obama, clearly criminals, read Spygate.
david7134: Yes, we are well aware of Congressional over sight.
Which refutes your claim that “the job is done”.
david7134: read the book The Russia Hoax
Well, if the blurb is accurate, then the book is contrived nonsense.
Z,
Yes, the truth is painful.
It matters to all of us if President Trump, Hillary, Zachriel, Elwood or I broke a law. But I am not willing to use the law to troll for victims. The old communist Beria who aptly stated “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”. We don’t live under communism yet so I think it behooves you leftists to keep your dicks in your pants and stop abusing the law and using the IRS as a weapon against non-communists. You’ll have plenty of time for that despotic abuse of power once you stuff enough ballot boxes with felons, illegals, dead people and sixteen year olds to actually win an election. Besides, with your propaganda wing in the media you should be able to convince enough minds full of mush to eliminate the electoral college, give DC and PR statehood and generally turn the United States into a one party state within the next 10-15 years.
I never thought I would see this amount of childish stupidity just because you guys lost one lousy election. A Three year tantrum.
Kye: I am not willing to use the law to troll for victims.
The president is obviously a special case. For decades, presidents have made their tax returns public. Trump promised to make his tax returns public, but changed his mind once he had taken power.
There has to be oversight of tax collection and the IRS. Congress is the body tasked with oversight. The law, enacted due to corruption during the Harding Administration, grants the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee the power to examine any tax return, though not to disclose it publicly.
“It matters to all of us if President Trump, Hillary, Zachriel, Elwood or I broke a law.”
Then Kye can explain why it is so important to him that Trump’s tax returns remain unexamined by Congress, which has oversight responsibility under the law.
Where have I stated that it is so important to ME that Trump’s tax returns remain unexamined by Congress? I said in my opinion people’s tax returns should be kept private. I would ask you why you think it’s so important to see Trump’s tax returns? The IRS audits Trump and billionaires like him on a perpetual basis. If he was or did do something illegal they would have known and they would have done what they do to everybody from me to Leona Helmsley: audit him, and if severe enough prosecute him.
What you leftists want is to now use tax law to reveal where he gave to charities, how much and which ones. Then you can begin your clusterf*ck about how he gave to the World Of Sports Fund which suddenly is “racist” and excludes women or some such nonsense. Or he gave to a charity endorsed by David Duke so he’s a nazi. It’s all bullshit. We’ve had enough bullshit since the election. Get the hell over it.
“Where have I stated that it is so important to ME that Trump’s tax returns remain unexamined by Congress?”
Every time Kye or another Trumpkin complains that Congress is on a “fishing expedition” in seeking access to Trump’s tax returns, they are clearly advocating that said returns should remain unexamined.
“I would ask you why you think it’s so important to see Trump’s tax returns?”
=== begin quote ===
Congress has multiple reasons to obtain and review President Trump’s tax returns — reasons that are not only legitimate uses of its legislative powers, but also urgently needed, including:
1) To determine if U.S. national security is at risk of being compromised by the president’s financial conflicts of interest
2) To determine if Trump has conflicts of interests bearing on his trade and tariffs policies
3) To determine whether the president is violating the U.S. Constitution by receiving benefits from foreign countries without Congress’ consent
4) To determine whether he is benefiting from his tax policies despite his many public assertions to the contrary
5) To determine whether the IRS is adequately auditing the president
6) To inform the consideration of additional disclosure requirements for candidates and officeholders
On Election Day 2016, the American people did not know that throughout 2015 and 2016, Donald Trump had been pursuing a Trump Tower Moscow deal that could gain him as much as $300 million in profits. The public did not know about the deal, because Trump and his campaign repeatedly lied about it. The extent of Trump’s dealings with Russia, or with other foreign governments or interests, remains unclear — and Trump’s finances in general are still murky.
Under these circumstances, it is not only appropriate but also vital to the functioning of our democracy for Congress to seek an answer to the basic question: Is President Trump working for the interests of the country, or himself? As this report explains, Congress cannot adequately answer that question without first obtaining and reviewing his tax returns.
=== end quote ===
source
Classic “fishing expedition”.
A fishing expedition is an informal, pejorative term for a non-specific search for information, especially incriminating information. It is most frequently organized by policing authorities.
Correct. Everything that starts with “to determine” is fishing. Congress’ legitimate powers are limited to oversight of the IRS, not oversight of the President of the USA. Thus, their “oversight” is satisfied by getting a report from the IRS that they are indeed auditing the President, as they are required to do. Under the separation of powers established by our Constitution, Congress and the President are co-equal branches of government. One does not get to “oversee” the other or constantly determine the fitness of the other to serve. That’s what elections are for. If the Democrats want to manufacture accusations against the President of the USA, they should not be able to use the power of the government to do it.
And from where is this quote?
Everybody saw Trump’s tax returns in ’16, so it’s all a crock, like everything else Jeffery alleges.
And, yes, Trumpkin is an epithet, so here’s another reason for him to be banned.
“And from where is this quote?”
Reading comprehension is a dead art among the Trumpkins.
“Everybody saw Trump’s tax returns in ’16”
That is, of course, a lie.
He will just change his name again. He can’t help himself.
Bill,
Trump filled out required financial statements that included all this information. So his returns are not necessary. You really don’t seem to know much about the government, elections or investing.
“Trump filled out required financial statements that included all this information.”
Since we know that Trump lied about his involvement with Russia during and after the election, there is no reason to assume that his filings are not also mendacious.
david7134 really doesn’t seem to know much about dealing with pathological liars like the current occupant of the White House.
Bill,
Provide proof that Trump did anything with the Russians except for data mining on his opponent, which is legal. And, you seem to be a pathological liar, so we have that experience. You really have nothing on Trump and it is pathetic to see your fellow liberals going nuts, especially as Trump is one of our best leaders.
First, the IRS vets Presidential tax returns, so, if there’s anything hokey, they’re going to find it.
Second, Jeffery’s link is from the Center For American Progress. Board of Directors
Sen. Tom Daschle, Chair
Neera Tanden, President
Stacey Abrams
Glenn Hutchins
Kristin Mugford
John Podesta
Tom Steyer
So take anything out of there with a grain of salt the size of Utah.
Fatty Nadless is just demanding the tax returns because it’s his witch hunt now.
And Trump should tell him to go take a flying leap for himself, as Fatty has no legal standing to look at them.
“And Trump should tell him to go take a flying leap for himself, as Fatty has no legal standing to look at them.”
This is, of course, a lie. Section 6103(f)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code authorizes Congress to request any tax return, and the IRS is required to provide that information.
Except the law is not that black and white.
Even if a congressional committee requests President Trump’s tax returns from the IRS, President Trump may have a constitutional defense to disclosure. That is, although Section 6103(f) is phrased in absolute terms — it allows tax committees and the JCT Chief of Staff to obtain tax return information, without qualification — any congressional action, including requests for information, must come within the scope of legislative powers granted by Article I of the Constitution. And a request for President Trump’s tax returns, if made for purely political purposes, may exceed legislative powers.
However, as President Trump has himself found out through litigation involving his immigration order, public comments can sometimes backfire. The many intemperate public comments that Democratic legislators have made about Trump’s tax returns could taint any request they make for them. That is, if the power balance shifts in Congress and a Democrat-controlled tax committee requests the President’s tax returns, President Trump may be able to properly disregard that request, if he correctly believes that the request is supported only by personal animus and not a proper “legislative purpose.â€Â  See Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 200 (1957).
http://yalejreg.com/nc/can-congress-get-president-trumps-tax-returns/
Except that the law does not grant the President veto power over the release of his returns. The law states that the IRS “shall furnish” the returns upon Congressional request.
As stated before, the law is not that black and white. Citations were provided. Read and learn.
“So take anything out of there with a grain of salt the size of Utah.”
source
Here’s another simple question:
Would Kye or Porter Good or any of the other Trumpkins commenting here expect Congress to do its job and examine the President’s tax returns if that President were a Democrat and was suspected of having financial conflicts of interest that might put U.S. national security is at risk?
Or are only Republican Presidents exempt from that oversight?
No. Not unless there is evidence offered beforehand. Allegations without any underlying proof are no reason for Congress to go on a fishing expedition. I don’t care which party.
What “underlying proof” would be acceptable and accepted in the case of a Democratic President?
What “underlying proof” would be acceptable and accepted in the case of Donald J. Trump?
Proof:
1 : the effect of evidence sufficient to persuade a reasonable person that a particular fact exists — see also evidence. 2 : the establishment or persuasion by evidence that a particular fact exists — see also burden of proof.
Evidence:
The law of evidence, also known as the rules of evidence, encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding.Â
Burden of proof:
The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the obligation of a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will prove the claims they have made against the other party. … The burden of proof is always on the person who brings a claim in a dispute.
Well, something more than Mule Ears’ witch hunt netted zip, so let’s see if there’s something we can find in the tax returns.
See fishing expedition.
Bill,
So I guess you are demanding that Obama be investigated for his damage to the country over his 8 years and spygate.
Obviously Porter Good is unable to answer these questions.
No surprise there.
You mean like Zippy trying to bribe Iran?
This is totally gay.
For the record I’ve made this comment on this thread and the first comment.
I do not post as Bill Bear or Zachriel. I’m not clever enough nor energetic enough for the subterfuge, and they’re both smarter than I am. You should stop insulting them by calling them ‘Jeff”.
This all would have been avoided if Trump had released his tax returns as he promised the American people.
Why didn’t he?
(We’re aware he said because of an IRS audit, but we’re also aware that that is not the reason.)
So why didn’t he release his tax returns?
He provided financial statements that have more information, so it is not necessary, why do the Dems keep trying to bring down our best president, why don’t they try passing some bills to fix our infrastructure or schools, 75% of black male students in California can not read or write but that is not a problem for liberals.
“He provided financial statements that have more information”
Where can these imaginary “financial statements” be reviewed?
What evidence can david7134 present that these statements even exist?
“Everything that starts with “to determine†is fishing.”
That is, of course, a lie. Trumpkins like Hale often invent nonsensical definitions for common words, to bolster their nonsensical arguments.
“Congress’ legitimate powers are limited to oversight of the IRS, not oversight of the President of the USA.”
That is, of course, another lie. Congress is invested under our Constitution with the power of oversight of the entire executive branch, which clearly includes the President.
Except the law is not that black and white (for the third time.)
A congressional investigation into individual affairs is invalid if unrelated to any legislative purpose, because it is beyond the powers conferred upon Congress by the Constitution. Kilbourn v. Thompson,103 U.S. 168. P. 198.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/354/178
You quoted that incorrectly, Liljeffy. It should read: A Congressional investigation into individual affairs is valid if the individual being investigated is a Republican who won an election to the consternation of the left and is well within the “tolerance for abusing political foes” section of the law.
Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime. Typical communist procedure is to keep throwing shit at the wall until something sticks then point and scream “see that’s what we were looking for all along”.
There’s a man whether out of Patriotism or hubris decided to run for President. For thirty years he was a darling of the Democrat machine in New York even attending Chelsea Clinton’s wedding and receiving dozens of awards for civic, racial and business awareness and his charity work. Now he’s a racist Nazi with homophobic undertones cause he switched to Republican and destroyed Hillary Clinton and the dirty Democrat Machine.
Let the Show Trials begin. This is how Great Nations disappear from the earth. Not glow ball warming.
Most of the quotes came from Supreme Court decision that basically denounced the HUAC investigations of the 50s.
source