Supreme Court hears arguments on Trump's Tax Records

[BWK]

The ruling should be a slam dunk against Trump. No one is above the law.

What law would that be?

Breaking campaign finnance laws when he paid off porn stars, didn't report the money. Which is what Michael Cohen went to jail for. Helping Trump commit that crime.

Nope, that is not what he went to jail for.

That's exactly what Cohen went to jail for. Cohen arranged this crime with Trump's blessings.

 

[Maxdeath]

I don't think you understand. Trump does not sit down at his kitchen table and do his tax returns. He has accountants that do it for him. Do you really think that they are going to take a chance that they are going to jail over his taxes? You might get one person on board with fraud but I don't think you are going to have a number that are going to do that even if they had to quit. If they did quit I would think at least one would have stepped forward to say something.
Mueller and his team also had accountants on board.

I think accountants have pretty well established they will do whatever their clients want since the client will simply hire a competitor if they don't. Enron had no problem finding pliable bean counters, so I don't think Trump would find it difficult to get the legal/accounting opinions he desired.

Mueller did have accountants; however, it's my understanding he did not cross Trump's "red line" around his personal and business financial records. For all the propaganda about his integrity and honesty, Mueller has been a life-long Republican fixer for most of his adult life. There are some serious questions of his handling of the BCCI and 911 investigations, but there seems little chance of getting a bipartisan investigation of any of that.

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.
So now suddenly Mueller who was the crazy lefts savior. The guy that could not be wrong, the guy that was going to remove Trump is a republican fixer. He has no credibility. Flip flop much?

So tell me who in the IRS is the one that let Trump slip through?
How did he get someone entrenched on the inside before he was even talking about running for president? Even though he is president he still has to file each year. So is that same person still just letting it slide?

 

[BWK]

Is Congress saying the President is refusing to honor a Congressional subpoena? There is a law about that, I believe. But the Congress has to show good cause to want the documents, and they haven't got it, imo.

Campaign finance laws being broken is a great start.

But don't you have to have some evidence of that before issuing a subpoena? I don't know, I'm just asking.

The evidence is eye witnesses and tax records. Campaign finance laws were already broken, and Cohen went to jail for that crime. Trump isn't in jail because he's president and they are saving the indictment when he leaves office.

 

[BWK]

I don't think you understand. Trump does not sit down at his kitchen table and do his tax returns. He has accountants that do it for him. Do you really think that they are going to take a chance that they are going to jail over his taxes? You might get one person on board with fraud but I don't think you are going to have a number that are going to do that even if they had to quit. If they did quit I would think at least one would have stepped forward to say something.
Mueller and his team also had accountants on board.

I think accountants have pretty well established they will do whatever their clients want since the client will simply hire a competitor if they don't. Enron had no problem finding pliable bean counters, so I don't think Trump would find it difficult to get the legal/accounting opinions he desired.

Mueller did have accountants; however, it's my understanding he did not cross Trump's "red line" around his personal and business financial records. For all the propaganda about his integrity and honesty, Mueller has been a life-long Republican fixer for most of his adult life. There are some serious questions of his handling of the BCCI and 911 investigations, but there seems little chance of getting a bipartisan investigation of any of that.

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.
So now suddenly Mueller who was the crazy lefts savior. The guy that could not be wrong, the guy that was going to remove Trump is a republican fixer. He has no credibility. Flip flop much?

So tell me who in the IRS is the one that let Trump slip through?
How did he get someone entrenched on the inside before he was even talking about running for president? Even though he is president he still has to file each year. So is that same person still just letting it slide?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. It was not Mueller's job to remove Trump. Where did you get that idea? Mueller's job was to tell us if Trump could be indicted for crimes after he left office, and the answer was yes.

 

[Maxdeath]

I don't think you understand. Trump does not sit down at his kitchen table and do his tax returns. He has accountants that do it for him. Do you really think that they are going to take a chance that they are going to jail over his taxes? You might get one person on board with fraud but I don't think you are going to have a number that are going to do that even if they had to quit. If they did quit I would think at least one would have stepped forward to say something.
Mueller and his team also had accountants on board.

I think accountants have pretty well established they will do whatever their clients want since the client will simply hire a competitor if they don't. Enron had no problem finding pliable bean counters, so I don't think Trump would find it difficult to get the legal/accounting opinions he desired.

Mueller did have accountants; however, it's my understanding he did not cross Trump's "red line" around his personal and business financial records. For all the propaganda about his integrity and honesty, Mueller has been a life-long Republican fixer for most of his adult life. There are some serious questions of his handling of the BCCI and 911 investigations, but there seems little chance of getting a bipartisan investigation of any of that.

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.
So now suddenly Mueller who was the crazy lefts savior. The guy that could not be wrong, the guy that was going to remove Trump is a republican fixer. He has no credibility. Flip flop much?

So tell me who in the IRS is the one that let Trump slip through?
How did he get someone entrenched on the inside before he was even talking about running for president? Even though he is president he still has to file each year. So is that same person still just letting it slide?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. It was not Mueller's job to remove Trump. Where did you get that idea? Mueller's job was to tell us if Trump could be indicted for crimes after he left office, and the answer was yes.

Boy you sure are spinning things. So the whole Russia Russia had nothing to do with Mueller? Can't help but laugh at that.

 

[BWK]

What would it hurt to release the records. You want to be elected every last aspect of your finances should be made public.

His financial statements to the FEC should be sufficient.

Nope. Not even close. You clearly do not understand the nature of the investigations.

What are they investigating, then? In simple terms.

The House has two cases which have been combined into one. That's Trump v. Mazars. The House is seeking Trump's tax records so they can investigate Michael Cohen's claims that Trump lied about the values of his assets with insurance companies and the IRS. That is why Admiral Rockwell Tory's notion that Trump's FEC filings should be enough is so patently ridiculous and exposes his ignorance.

The second House investigation is into Deutche Bank and Capital One laundering money, with Trump participating in the scheme. The House is seeking the records of those banks. These are the "third parties" you keep hearing references to in the arguments today. Trump is trying to block Congress from accessing the banks' records.

Finally, there is a third investigation, Trump v. Vance. That is a case by the state of New York which is investigating Trump's payoffs to McDougal and Daniels. They want access to Trump's tax records.

So let me ask you, what did you think of Sotomeyer’s questions surrounding her believing Congress might be out of bounds with the President because the President does not have the documents and that this is investigating the President, before he was President and it has no legislative value?

The NY case I think has some merit, no so sure on the Congressional cases.

What was the legislative value of the Republican Whitewater investigation?

Very good point. I wonder why Sotomeyer brought that Congress requesting for the information was unprecedented.

I found the NPR story on the matter much more interesting. I learned that the subpoenas for Trump's financial records were not issued to Trump but rather to Deutsche Bank and Mazars USA. The two banks have not objected to complying with the subpoenas however Trump stepped in to ask the courts to block them from complying.

As far as the subpoenas go, I'm on Trump's side regarding those brought by congress for purpose of congressional oversight. However the one brought by New York state, on whether a state can subpoena a sitting president's personal records in a criminal investigation is another story. On the surface I would lean towards New York state's side of the matter. But reading that, "The subpoena issued by a New York grand jury involves a broad investigation that includes an investigation of alleged hush money payments by Trump to adult film star Stormy Daniels and another woman during the 2016 presidential campaign." I'm seeing this as a fishing expedition as well and I'm agreeing with Trump's side on the matter.

Supreme Court Hears Cases Involving Trump's Taxes, Financial Records

How the court decides these cases could dramatically change the balance of power among the three branches of government, shifting America's system of checks and balances.

www.npr.org

Good article, I actually agree with you on Congress and it’s issue, however with the NY issue, I believe they should have the power to subpoena the President’s record. I do agree it seems to be a fishing expedition and that makes the NY investigation just like the Republican’s Whitewater fiasco and will look bad in most the electorate’s eye.

All in all it is petty politics and if NY and Congress prevails, we will see these sort of petty cases reoccur more and more frequently, thus ruining the pool of those that would run for President.

There is absolutely no chance this is a fishing expedition, when we already know Trump used Michael Cohen to pay off porn stars, and that money was never reported. That's a federal tax crime. And Cohen went to jail for conspiring with Trump that made that happen. We have a criminal in the WH.

 

[BWK]

I don't think you understand. Trump does not sit down at his kitchen table and do his tax returns. He has accountants that do it for him. Do you really think that they are going to take a chance that they are going to jail over his taxes? You might get one person on board with fraud but I don't think you are going to have a number that are going to do that even if they had to quit. If they did quit I would think at least one would have stepped forward to say something.
Mueller and his team also had accountants on board.

I think accountants have pretty well established they will do whatever their clients want since the client will simply hire a competitor if they don't. Enron had no problem finding pliable bean counters, so I don't think Trump would find it difficult to get the legal/accounting opinions he desired.

Mueller did have accountants; however, it's my understanding he did not cross Trump's "red line" around his personal and business financial records. For all the propaganda about his integrity and honesty, Mueller has been a life-long Republican fixer for most of his adult life. There are some serious questions of his handling of the BCCI and 911 investigations, but there seems little chance of getting a bipartisan investigation of any of that.

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.
So now suddenly Mueller who was the crazy lefts savior. The guy that could not be wrong, the guy that was going to remove Trump is a republican fixer. He has no credibility. Flip flop much?

So tell me who in the IRS is the one that let Trump slip through?
How did he get someone entrenched on the inside before he was even talking about running for president? Even though he is president he still has to file each year. So is that same person still just letting it slide?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. It was not Mueller's job to remove Trump. Where did you get that idea? Mueller's job was to tell us if Trump could be indicted for crimes after he left office, and the answer was yes.

Boy you sure are spinning things. So the whole Russia Russia had nothing to do with Mueller? Can't help but laugh at that.

Wow, you are so uniformed about the job roles of officials, it's really embarrassing. You are inventing scenarios out of thin air, that have nothing to do with what I said. I never said what you said. You did. Mueller's job was never to convict Trump, but to report any indictable crimes he may have committed. He was never given the power to convict. That comes with Congress, not Mueller. You know nothing.

 

[Maxdeath]

I don't think you understand. Trump does not sit down at his kitchen table and do his tax returns. He has accountants that do it for him. Do you really think that they are going to take a chance that they are going to jail over his taxes? You might get one person on board with fraud but I don't think you are going to have a number that are going to do that even if they had to quit. If they did quit I would think at least one would have stepped forward to say something.
Mueller and his team also had accountants on board.

I think accountants have pretty well established they will do whatever their clients want since the client will simply hire a competitor if they don't. Enron had no problem finding pliable bean counters, so I don't think Trump would find it difficult to get the legal/accounting opinions he desired.

Mueller did have accountants; however, it's my understanding he did not cross Trump's "red line" around his personal and business financial records. For all the propaganda about his integrity and honesty, Mueller has been a life-long Republican fixer for most of his adult life. There are some serious questions of his handling of the BCCI and 911 investigations, but there seems little chance of getting a bipartisan investigation of any of that.

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.
So now suddenly Mueller who was the crazy lefts savior. The guy that could not be wrong, the guy that was going to remove Trump is a republican fixer. He has no credibility. Flip flop much?

So tell me who in the IRS is the one that let Trump slip through?
How did he get someone entrenched on the inside before he was even talking about running for president? Even though he is president he still has to file each year. So is that same person still just letting it slide?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. It was not Mueller's job to remove Trump. Where did you get that idea? Mueller's job was to tell us if Trump could be indicted for crimes after he left office, and the answer was yes.

Boy you sure are spinning things. So the whole Russia Russia had nothing to do with Mueller? Can't help but laugh at that.

Wow, you are so uniformed about the job roles of officials, it's really embarrassing. You are inventing scenarios out of thin air, that have nothing to do with what I said. I never said what you said. You did. Mueller's job was never to convict Trump, but to report any indictable crimes he may have committed. He was never given the power to convict. That comes with Congress, not Mueller. You know nothing.

So now you want to say that he was not looking for things that Trump could be prosecuted for after his terms but that he was looking for things that congress could prosecute him for. I take it you really aren't sure.

I mentioned Mueller simply because every leftist on this board while Mueller was doing his investigation was assuring everyone that he would walk Trump and his administration out of the White House. Every last one was high giving each other over he will clean them out. We still have people on here today that think Mueller found things. The last guy now claims that he was a republican fixer, as if that explains why he didn't find things.

 

[hadit]

There should be a law requiring that any and every presidential candidate must release all financial records. Why hide them?

Because they're private. Why should Obama be allowed to hide his college records? Because they're private. Why should Biden be allowed to hide his medical records? Because they're private.

 

[hadit]

What would it hurt to release the records. You want to be elected every last aspect of your finances should be made public.

His financial statements to the FEC should be sufficient.

Nope. Not even close. You clearly do not understand the nature of the investigations.

What are they investigating, then? In simple terms.

The House has two cases which have been combined into one. That's Trump v. Mazars. The House is seeking Trump's tax records so they can investigate Michael Cohen's claims that Trump lied about the values of his assets with insurance companies and the IRS. That is why Admiral Rockwell Tory's notion that Trump's FEC filings should be enough is so patently ridiculous and exposes his ignorance.

The second House investigation is into Deutche Bank and Capital One laundering money, with Trump participating in the scheme. The House is seeking the records of those banks. These are the "third parties" you keep hearing references to in the arguments today. Trump is trying to block Congress from accessing the banks' records.

Finally, there is a third investigation, Trump v. Vance. That is a case by the state of New York which is investigating Trump's payoffs to McDougal and Daniels. They want access to Trump's tax records.

So let me ask you, what did you think of Sotomeyer’s questions surrounding her believing Congress might be out of bounds with the President because the President does not have the documents and that this is investigating the President, before he was President and it has no legislative value?

The NY case I think has some merit, no so sure on the Congressional cases.

Before he was president, he was engaging in tax evasion and campaign finance violations just to get elected, and did not report that money. Cohen went to jail by helping Trump accomplish that goal. That proves that we as voters got robbed of a free and fair election. Trump committed federal crimes. He has also paid stiff fines for bogus universities and stealing money from charities. Trump is a proven criminal. He can also be indicted for obstruction of justice when he leaves office. The fact that any human being can defend someone like that, tells me him or her are no better than Trump.

You seem to really believe that because you state it like it is fact.

 

[georgephillip]

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.

Fred Trump was a crony-capitalist whose fortune depended on the federal government even more than most of his ilk. During WW II he built base housing for the military, and after 1945 he built civilian housing dependent on federally guaranteed mortgages, yet he dodged paying taxes with an almost religious fervor.

He never had to worry about fines or jail because he bribed politicians at all levels to ensure he never faced serious charges.

 

[hadit]

Agree

Rich families like Trump's have deliberately chipped away at IRS enforcement capabilities over the past few decades to such an extent the government no longer has the resources to audit all complex tax returns:

We need tax police – and they should go after the likes of Donald Trump | David Cay Johnston

"So if the Times is right and some of the Trump tactics were criminal, why weren’t they indicted?

"In the US last year, just 865 people were pursued for tax cheating that did not involve drug dealing, bribing politicians or criminal enterprise profits.

"That means the odds of being pursued were one in 377,000.

"Add in those crooks and the risk of prosecution rises, but only to about one in 100,000.

"Those figures, from the latest IRS Data Book, concern IRS recommendations for prosecution, not actual indictments. That number would be smaller, though just how much smaller is unclear."

How does a "rich family" chip away at IRS enforcement capabilities? They have no authority to do anything to the IRS. But we all knew that.

 

[BWK]

I don't think you understand. Trump does not sit down at his kitchen table and do his tax returns. He has accountants that do it for him. Do you really think that they are going to take a chance that they are going to jail over his taxes? You might get one person on board with fraud but I don't think you are going to have a number that are going to do that even if they had to quit. If they did quit I would think at least one would have stepped forward to say something.
Mueller and his team also had accountants on board.

I think accountants have pretty well established they will do whatever their clients want since the client will simply hire a competitor if they don't. Enron had no problem finding pliable bean counters, so I don't think Trump would find it difficult to get the legal/accounting opinions he desired.

Mueller did have accountants; however, it's my understanding he did not cross Trump's "red line" around his personal and business financial records. For all the propaganda about his integrity and honesty, Mueller has been a life-long Republican fixer for most of his adult life. There are some serious questions of his handling of the BCCI and 911 investigations, but there seems little chance of getting a bipartisan investigation of any of that.

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.
So now suddenly Mueller who was the crazy lefts savior. The guy that could not be wrong, the guy that was going to remove Trump is a republican fixer. He has no credibility. Flip flop much?

So tell me who in the IRS is the one that let Trump slip through?
How did he get someone entrenched on the inside before he was even talking about running for president? Even though he is president he still has to file each year. So is that same person still just letting it slide?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. It was not Mueller's job to remove Trump. Where did you get that idea? Mueller's job was to tell us if Trump could be indicted for crimes after he left office, and the answer was yes.

Boy you sure are spinning things. So the whole Russia Russia had nothing to do with Mueller? Can't help but laugh at that.

Wow, you are so uniformed about the job roles of officials, it's really embarrassing. You are inventing scenarios out of thin air, that have nothing to do with what I said. I never said what you said. You did. Mueller's job was never to convict Trump, but to report any indictable crimes he may have committed. He was never given the power to convict. That comes with Congress, not Mueller. You know nothing.

So now you want to say that he was not looking for things that Trump could be prosecuted for after his terms but that he was looking for things that congress could prosecute him for. I take it you really aren't sure.

No, that is not what I said at all. You seem to be struggling interpreting words? Not sure what your problem is? That's on you.

I mentioned Mueller simply because every leftist on this board while Mueller was doing his investigation was assuring everyone that he would walk Trump and his administration out of the White House.

And when Trump leaves office Trump will go to jail. That is what I am saying. I can't speak for others.

Every last one was high giving each other over he will clean them out. We still have people on here today that think Mueller found things. The last guy now claims that he was a republican fixer, as if that explains why he didn't find things.

Mueller reported that Trump could be indicted for obstruction of justice at his hearing. So yes, Mueller found criminality. But Mueller does not and never had the authority to remove Trump or convict Trump in this investigation.

 

[BWK]

What would it hurt to release the records. You want to be elected every last aspect of your finances should be made public.

His financial statements to the FEC should be sufficient.

Nope. Not even close. You clearly do not understand the nature of the investigations.

What are they investigating, then? In simple terms.

The House has two cases which have been combined into one. That's Trump v. Mazars. The House is seeking Trump's tax records so they can investigate Michael Cohen's claims that Trump lied about the values of his assets with insurance companies and the IRS. That is why Admiral Rockwell Tory's notion that Trump's FEC filings should be enough is so patently ridiculous and exposes his ignorance.

The second House investigation is into Deutche Bank and Capital One laundering money, with Trump participating in the scheme. The House is seeking the records of those banks. These are the "third parties" you keep hearing references to in the arguments today. Trump is trying to block Congress from accessing the banks' records.

Finally, there is a third investigation, Trump v. Vance. That is a case by the state of New York which is investigating Trump's payoffs to McDougal and Daniels. They want access to Trump's tax records.

So let me ask you, what did you think of Sotomeyer’s questions surrounding her believing Congress might be out of bounds with the President because the President does not have the documents and that this is investigating the President, before he was President and it has no legislative value?

The NY case I think has some merit, no so sure on the Congressional cases.

Before he was president, he was engaging in tax evasion and campaign finance violations just to get elected, and did not report that money. Cohen went to jail by helping Trump accomplish that goal. That proves that we as voters got robbed of a free and fair election. Trump committed federal crimes. He has also paid stiff fines for bogus universities and stealing money from charities. Trump is a proven criminal. He can also be indicted for obstruction of justice when he leaves office. The fact that any human being can defend someone like that, tells me him or her are no better than Trump.

You seem to really believe that because you state it like it is fact.

It's 100% a fact. Cohen went to jail for helping Trump commit crimes, and Trump threw Cohen under the bus.

 

[BWK]

See I have a real problem when people use things like your last little bit about Fred Trump. Obviously it was not illegal or he would have been fined or in jail. But that is used to try and create a bad impression.

Fred Trump was a crony-capitalist whose fortune depended on the federal government even more than most of his ilk. During WW II he built base housing for the military, and after 1945 he built civilian housing dependent on federally guaranteed mortgages, yet he dodged paying taxes with an almost religious fervor.

He never had to worry about fines or jail because he bribed politicians at all levels to ensure he never faced serious charges.

And you won't have to worry about any rebuttals from the Right.

 

[georgephillip]

How does a "rich family" chip away at IRS enforcement capabilities? They have no authority to do anything to the IRS. But we all knew that.

Rich families bribe politicians of both major parties for favorable tax policies, especially those whose fortunes come from real estate, finance, and insurance.

We need tax police – and they should go after the likes of Donald Trump | David Cay Johnston

"Congress, which makes tax law, has never properly supported the IRS, which I like calling the Tax Police Department.

"Since 1992, the American population has grown 27% but the IRS staff has shrunk by 34%, to less than 78,000 people.

"At the same time, Congress has added enormous complexity to the tax code.

"On top of this, the big accounting and law firms have devised all manner of complex new tax shelters.

"A few years ago, the IRS told Congress it lacks the expertise to thoroughly investigate such shelters and determine which are within the law and which are frauds that should be demolished."

 

[Rye Catcher]

There is no real reason to see any of Trump's records. He isn't accused of any wrongdoing.

IDIOT-GRAM ^^^; Variety, foolish rationalization.

Explanation: if he has done nothing wrong, he would have fulfilled his promise to release these documents.

Can you, though, justify the force of law to compel someone to keep a campaign promise?

Of course not. Campaign promises are often forgotten when the election is over.

LE can and has secured subpoenas to obtain tax records when they have probable cause that a crime has been committed. Remember, a tax document is signed under penalty of perjury, and we all know, but not all of us will admit, that Donald Trump is a know liar.

In Trump's situation there was the necessary and sufficient evidence to support a subpoena for his tax records. Trump has sued based on the sole fact that a sitting President is above the law, something which has not been supported by the Supreme Court in both the Nixon and Clinton Impeachment, when this claim was rejected 9 to 0.

 

[Zander]

Trump will prevail. Covfefe-16 sufferers will continue to wail and moan

 

[BWK]

Trump will prevail. Covfefe-16 sufferers will continue to wail and moan

So, you support criminals? You must not have an ounce of self respect?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

In Trump's situation there was the necessary and sufficient evidence to support a subpoena for his tax records

What is the evidence, fucktard?