Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president's tax returns

[MindWars]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

 

[BULLDOG]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
In a letter Friday, William Consovoy said the IRS is forbidden from divulging tax information without a “legitimate legislative purpose.”

The “legitimate legislative purpose” was included in the request for the returns.

 

[georgephillip]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

 

[Crepitus]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

I'm afraid that's not really applicable here as the "legitimate legislative reasons" have been under discussion in public and investigation by various agencies for months and are sure to be included in the request or subpoena.

 

[Claudette]

I wouldn't release my tax returns and neither would anyone else.

Lefty loons are bat shit crazy.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I wouldn't release my tax returns and neither would anyone else.

Lefty loons are bat shit crazy.

That

 

[theHawk]

Poor libs. Mueller came up short, now you’re back to crying about tax returns. What are you morons going to do when that goes nowhere? Cycle back to the 25th Amendment fake news fantasy? LOL.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

 

[georgephillip]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

There's ample evidence of Trump's tax cheating for anyone willing to look:

Opinion | How to Make Trump’s Tax Returns Public

"Mr. Trump lost two civil tax fraud trials over his 1984 income tax returns, on which he reported zero income as a consultant but took more than $600,000 in deductions. He had no receipts to substantiate the deductions...."

"On June 14, the New York State attorney general, Barbara Underwood, filed a civil complaint against President Trump and his three oldest children, accusing them of 'persistently illegal conduct' in using the Donald J. Trump Foundation as 'little more than a checkbook for payments from Mr. Trump or his businesses to nonprofits, regardless of their purpose or legality.'

"Ms. Underwood believes there is abundant evidence to bring criminal charges against Mr. Trump as well...."

"Ms. Underwood sent those letters, at the same time she filed the civil complaint, because New York state law does not grant her automatic authority to initiate criminal investigations...."

"The attorney general could, however, easily gain that authority.

"All that’s needed is for Gov. Andrew Cuomo, the New York State Police or the state Department of Taxation and Finance to make a request, and the authority would be granted to her. Criminal jurisdiction also rests with Cyrus Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney.

"Mr. Vance has shown no interest, so far, in investigating other complaints against Mr. Trump."

Watch Cynthia Nixon's brutal ad slamming Andrew Cuomo's refusal to return Trump campaign donations

 

[justoffal]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

Oh well looks like they decided with whatever leeway they had. Gonna have to go to SCOTUS I guess ...better hurry while Ginny is still standing .....or should I say rolling?

Jo

 

[justoffal]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

I'm afraid that's not really applicable here as the "legitimate legislative reasons" have been under discussion in public and investigation by various agencies for months and are sure to be included in the request or subpoena.

Of course they were included and have been determined not to be legitimate.

Want more action....USE the court system.
That's why it's there.

Jo

 

[Polishprince]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

The Democrat Party really doesn't have a legitimate legislative purpose at all, they do however have a legitimate partisan political purpose.


The problem the Democrats have is that Trump's tax return would only be the first. I'm sure a lot of people would be anxious to see Soros' tax return or Tom Steyers' or the Pelosi family's. These are BIG contributors to the socialist cause, and I'm sure that the socialist candidates that they support are interested in making sure their sugar daddies are corruption free.

 

[georgephillip]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

 

[Polishprince]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

Talking about someone's tax return is a deflection.

 

[georgephillip]

Attorney for Pres. Trump: IRS cannot release president’s tax returns | One America News Network
A lawyer for President Trump has bad news for congressional Democrats crusading to release the president’s tax returns.


Awww doesn't that get you democratic twats panties in a bunch. Must mean it's time to dream up some more bs lies with Russia again.

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

Oh well looks like they decided with whatever leeway they had. Gonna have to go to SCOTUS I guess ...better hurry while Ginny is still standing .....or should I say rolling?

Jo

Oh well looks like they decided with whatever leeway they had. Gonna have to go to SCOTUS I guess ...better hurry while Ginny is still standing .....or should I say rolling?

It seems like SCOTUS is inevitable in this matter:

Newt: Forget the Law, the Supreme Court Will Keep Trump’s Tax Returns Secret

"A 1924 law gives Congress the power to scrutinize the federal income tax returns of any taxpayer. Democrats in Congress have proposed numerous motions to examine Donald Trump’s returns, given his numerous conflicts of interest.

"The Republican majority has quashed every attempt.

"If Democrats win control of either chamber of Congress, they will get a chance to examine the president’s income tax returns.

"Not so fast, says Newt Gingrich. In an interview with Karen Tumulty, the former House Speaker and energetic Trump defender insists Trump has nothing to fear from congressional oversight in general.

"Asked about the tax returns, Gingrich casually batted down the possibility: 'Then they’ll be trapped into appealing to the Supreme Court. And we’ll see whether or not the Kavanaugh fight was worth it.'"

 

[georgephillip]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

Talking about someone's tax return is a deflection.

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

Trump's tax returns would be a logical starting point to acquire that evidence, no?

 

[Polishprince]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

Talking about someone's tax return is a deflection.

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

Trump's tax returns would be a logical starting point to acquire that evidence, no?

The IRS has already looked at the returns, and they are as clean as a hound's tooth.

So , no.

 

[georgephillip]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

Talking about someone's tax return is a deflection.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval

You and I would have no way of knowing what the IRS knows about Trump's taxes; congress is the appropriate venue to determine whether or not he has been laundering money for wealthy Russians for the last 25 years.

 

[georgephillip]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

Talking about someone's tax return is a deflection.

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

Trump's tax returns would be a logical starting point to acquire that evidence, no?

The IRS has already looked at the returns, and they are as clean as a hound's tooth.

So , no.

The IRS has already looked at the returns, and they are as clean as a hound's tooth.

What evidence do you have of that claim? An IRS audit would be conducted completely differently from the scrutiny of a congressional committee.

 

[georgephillip]

Why do you think a rich tax dodger is above the law?

The better question is where is your proof Trump is a "tax dodger"? Or do you think your hatred and dislike for the president who has already survived one coup justifies your claim? It does not, by the way.

Trump Lawyer Asserts President’s Right to Keep Tax Returns Private

"The little known tax code provision employed by the Democrats in demanding Mr. Trump’s returns says only that the Internal Revenue Service 'shall furnish' the information, giving it and its parent agency, the Treasury Department, little leeway in deciding how to respond."

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Hopeful suspicions, political vendettas and witch hunts are not considered legitimate under the law. I am very confident the Supreme Court will agree should they be dragged into ruling on this democrat scheme.

What you fail to note, perhaps intentionally, is the democrats may access his private information through their many partisan committees for "legitimate" reasons only.

Would you say a POTUS who laundered money for Russian mobsters would qualify as a "legitimate"target for congressional oversight?

Buyers tied to Russia, former Soviet republics paid $109 million cash for Trump properties

"Buyers connected to Russia or former Soviet republics made 86 all-cash sales — totaling nearly $109 million — at 10 Trump-branded properties in South Florida and New York City, according to a new analysis shared with McClatchy. Many of them made purchases using shell companies designed to obscure their identities."

Or does your opinion depend on whether there's an "R" or a "D" behind the POTUS's brand?

There is no proof that President Trump "laundered money for Russian mobsters" at all.

In fact, the IRS audits Trump's returns every year, and they have all earned the official Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

Talking about someone's tax return is a deflection.

Let's not be cool here, GP. The reason for this request is that the issues aren't the liberals' friends in 2020. Whether you are talking about Trump's accomplishments, the roaring stock market, the tight labor market, our tremendous foreign relations with our friends in Brazil, Israel, North Korea. Or if you are talking about the lib issues, the New Green Deal, and opening up our nations' ladies rooms to men in dresses.

The stock market is a bubble that Trump is hoping won't explode until he's out of office. Unemployment is down but that has more to do with 10,000 baby boomers going into retirement every day than with Trump's disastrous trade and tariff wars. Brazil and Israel have lurched so far to the right you would have to harbor sympathies for racist fascists in order to consider those countries as friends. Regardless of what you think about wedge issues, the fact remains Donald Trump has been a corrupt, lying con man for his entire adult life. If you're not disturbed about that, please remove your partisan blinders.