Committee Votes To Release Trumps' Taxes 24-16. Tell Me Why ThisI isn't Partisan Bullsh#T

[Skylar]

I've proven it explicitly, by using definitions and the wording of the law.

And again...what crime is Trump being investigated for? The text you just shared says that sometimes documents obtained in the course of an investigation can be made public.

What investigation is Trump under by the ways and means committee? The house rule you posted mentions evidence and testimony...of what crime?

Also, they have not demonstrated the need for public release. Regardless of what scotus says, or congress says, or the appellate court says, privacy is still protected, and there has to be a public need to release someone's personal information...and, the constitution still says that you can be secure against unreasonable search and seizure, which means they have to have probale cause and basically know what it is they are looking for.

If this really was just about trying to strengthen the audit mandate, there was no reason to make his records public, and if it is a criminal investigation (which Congress has no authority to do), then they would have to satisfy the 4th ammendment.

All this is about is a vendetta from the dems going back to 2016 when trump didn't release his taxes like he said he would, and ever since then, the dems have been, "he must be hiding something!, we have to get those returns!"....and so for 6 years, they have been fighting to get them....

Oh, also, I came across this in a yahoo news article:



Yep, they just want to see the source of trumps income...too bad..it's not any of their business. If they want to investigate a potential crime as regards to his income sources, then tell the doj to start an investigarion and use subpoena power to attain the information.

Congress does not possess the power to conduct criminal investigations, so finding out the source of his income when he was a private citizen is not in their power. The irs only has the power to do mandatory audits of his taxes while he is in office, not before, not after.

Laughing....you've invented an imaginary 'limit' to congressional authority that doesn't exist, nor is recognized by Rules of the House, nor the Ways and Means Committe nor the courts. And ignored the appellant court ruling that explicitly contradicts you...


The Trump Parties insist that the Request imposes too great a burden because it threatens to expose private financial information of the Trump Parties and will deny the Trump Parties their due process rights by interfering with an ongoing audit. These certainly are burdens on the Trump Parties. As discussed above, should the Committee find it necessary, it is possible that the information turned over to the Chairman might be made public. This is certainly inconvenient, but not to the extent that it represents an unconstitutional burden violating the separation of powers. Congressional investigations sometimes expose the private information of the entities, organizations, and individuals that they investigate. This does not make them overly burdensome. It is the nature of the investigative and legislative processes.



....and laughably insist that you know better than the Rule of the House, the Ways and Means Committee, the appellant court, and the Supreme Court that unanimously upheld the appellant ruling.

That's absolutely adorable.

Back in reality, the issue is legally settled. The Ways and Means Committee has the authority the vote to release evidence taken in executive session. The committee did vote to do exactly that. Meeting the requirements of the actual rules of the House, as affirmed by the appellant court.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Maybe we should check Obama's, since his gross grew 100%.

Hmm…Obama released his taxes every year he was president.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

With Trump yes it has. We need to go after Biden the same way.

Show us.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

We need his tax returns, and Hunter's for the past 6 years.

Biden gives his every year. Since he’s been in office since the early seventies, I’d say it’s all there for you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Who said anything about taxes..you all just set the precedent..now it's up to the repubs to take it to a new level. They think a crime must have been committed, so they need to overturn every stone until they find that crime.

That's how it works...now..

I mean, at first it will be taxes, but then that tax information, which will surely be released to the public, down to the complete history of all his income sources...but if they find anything in there that looks even slightly...off..well, that's going to spur a whole host of new investigations which will require a complete picture of his financial life, from every bank record from every account, to every piece of electronic communication, to every wire transfer, every stock transaction, every investment account, every tie he has to any business, foreign government...I mean, the information required to get this picture will be substantial. If there is a crime there..I'm sure they'll find it!

Who said anything about taxes..

Committee Votes To Release Trumps' Taxes 24-16. Tell Me Why ThisI isn't Partisan Bullsh#T​

 

[otto105]

You folks know, I am not a Trump supporter, not a party member and have stated my Independent status many times. That said, what is this action other than partisan bullsh#t? While quite aware, it has become tradition for a candidate before an election, but this crap is about him not doing it before the 2016 election and whether I liked or you liked it or not, he was elected, anyway. That was then. This is now. I am aware, the Supreme Court the Supreme Court ordered that he release the information to Congressional scrutiny. I am good with that, but they never said release it to the public, that I am aware of. This is just a spitefull, partisan action and I tend to think, public release at this point is an undue release, an invasion of privacy (even if he's an asshole) and possibly illegal. My representative is on that committee and voted against. Barring him not doing something stupid (which he doesn't have much history of) I shall vote for him again, next time he runs.

House panel votes to release Trump tax returns after multiyear Democratic quest - Washington Examiner

The House Ways and Means Committee voted Tuesday to release former President Donald Trump’s tax returns, a major win for Democrats who have been seeking the records for years. The committee voted 24-16 to release six years' worth of Trump's tax returns to the broader House of Representatives...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Since the 1970's post Nixon every US president and VP are required by law to be audited. Congress by law can ask and review any tax return for legislative reasons.

Also, those taxes show massive fraud.

 

[jknowgood]

Hmm…Obama released his taxes every year he was president.

He became a millionaire over night. He needs to be audited and all the records need to be seen by all.

 

[jknowgood]

Biden gives his every year. Since he’s been in office since the early seventies, I’d say it’s all there for you.

Not with hunter, their joint taxes need to be investigated.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

He became a millionaire over night. He needs to be audited and all the records need to be seen by all.

Umm.. ok? Huh?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Not with hunter, their joint taxes need to be investigated.

Joint taxes? W In the ever lovin F?

 

[otto105]

He became a millionaire over night. He needs to be audited and all the records need to be seen by all.

They have already douchebag.

 

[otto105]

Not with hunter, their joint taxes need to be investigated.

You're an idiot.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Laughing....you've invented an imaginary 'limit' to congressional authority that doesn't exist, nor is recognized by Rules of the House, nor the Ways and Means Committe nor the courts. And ignored the appellant court ruling that explicitly contradicts you...


The Trump Parties insist that the Request imposes too great a burden because it threatens to expose private financial information of the Trump Parties and will deny the Trump Parties their due process rights by interfering with an ongoing audit. These certainly are burdens on the Trump Parties. As discussed above, should the Committee find it necessary, it is possible that the information turned over to the Chairman might be made public. This is certainly inconvenient, but not to the extent that it represents an unconstitutional burden violating the separation of powers. Congressional investigations sometimes expose the private information of the entities, organizations, and individuals that they investigate. This does not make them overly burdensome. It is the nature of the investigative and legislative processes.



....and laughably insist that you know better than the Rule of the House, the Ways and Means Committee, the appellant court, and the Supreme Court that unanimously upheld the appellant ruling.

That's absolutely adorable.

Back in reality, the issue is legally settled. The Ways and Means Committee has the authority the vote to release evidence taken in executive session. The committee did vote to do exactly that. Meeting the requirements of the actual rules of the House, as affirmed by the appellant court.

No, they dont, for the reasons listed. The courts, nor the Congress can ignore law. You claim they have the power to release information from any session, even though I've shown you there is a difference between sessions, but you insist that when it says "executive session' that means all executive sessions, but you don't post the house rule or the law that states that, even when I have shown that house rule applies to executive session, and not closed session...there is a difference. You keep copy and pasting the same article over and over and I keep showing you where that is incorrect and I explain why, and you offer no reasoning other than to keep pointing back to the same article that I'm disputing.

The law is the law, and no court and no congress can ignore the law.

I've offered both tax law and privacy laws to explain my position, and even the 4th ammendment to the cotus. The only thing that gives the appellate court any standing here is their pointing to that house rule 11, which, if you read the laws, and the language of the laws and the rules, you'll see that they are incorrect in their assertion.

Hmm, let's see

The attorney who argued in favor for the house ways and means committee was Douglas N. Letter.

So who is Doug letter?

Pelosi Names Douglas N. Letter New General Counsel of the House

Pelosi Names Douglas N. Letter New General Counsel of the House

Until February 2018, Letter served as the Director of the Civil Division Appellate Staff at the U.S. Department of Justice, retiring this year after 40 years of distinguished service at the agency. He is now a Senior Litigator at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at the...

www.speaker.gov

well, that certainly explains why he would argue to give the committee ultimate power to release trumps tax information....

 

[White 6]

Since the 1970's post Nixon every US president and VP are required by law to be audited. Congress by law can ask and review any tax return for legislative reasons.

Also, those taxes show massive fraud.

No. Not required by law, just IRS internal rule, but followed with every president, until Trump appointed his man into the position and then (for some reason) it stopped. I am not charging corruption, but look forward to the investigation of the IRS, spurred by Trump's taxes, only hope it is down in by DOJ and not in the papers.
I think there definitely should be a law, requiring it.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Committee Votes To Release Trumps' Taxes 24-16. Tell Me Why ThisI isn't Partisan Bullsh#T​

Well yeah..but that's just the start...there's so much more to be viewed than just taxes..so, you're right, it is about taxes..but those taxes could lead to many other things...

 

[Skylar]

No, they dont, for the reasons listed.

The 'reasons listed' are your imaginary 'limits' to congressional authority.....that no one reconizes. Not the House, not the Ways and Means Committee, not the Courts.

Just you, citing you.

And your imagination isn't a legal standard.

The courts, nor the Congress can ignore law.

Ignore the law....according to who? Why, you citing yourself again.

You're literally ignoring the court ruling and insisting that your imagination trumps the Ways and Means Committee....and the courts. It doesn't.

"The Trump Parties insist that the Request imposes too great a burden because it threatens to expose private financial information of the Trump Parties and will deny the Trump Parties their due process rights by interfering with an ongoing audit. These certainly are burdens on the Trump Parties. As discussed above, should the Committee find it necessary, it is possible that the information turned over to the Chairman might be made public. This is certainly inconvenient, but not to the extent that it represents an unconstitutional burden violating the separation of powers. Congressional investigations sometimes expose the private information of the entities, organizations, and individuals that they investigate. This does not make them overly burdensome. It is the nature of the investigative and legislative processes."

Your imagination is gloriously irrelevant. The issue has been adjudicated, with the ruling upheld by the Supreme Court itself.

The Ways and Means Committee absolutely has the authority to release those docs. Says who? Says the Ways and Means Committee, the Rules of the House and the Judiciary.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The 'reasons listed' are your imaginary 'limits' to congressional authority.....that no one reconizes. Not the House, not the Ways and Means Committee, not the Courts.

Just you, citing you.

And your imagination isn't a legal standard.



Ignore the law....according to who? Why, you citing yourself again.

You're literally ignoring the court ruling and insisting that your imagination trumps the Ways and Means Committee....and the courts. It doesn't.

"The Trump Parties insist that the Request imposes too great a burden because it threatens to expose private financial information of the Trump Parties and will deny the Trump Parties their due process rights by interfering with an ongoing audit. These certainly are burdens on the Trump Parties. As discussed above, should the Committee find it necessary, it is possible that the information turned over to the Chairman might be made public. This is certainly inconvenient, but not to the extent that it represents an unconstitutional burden violating the separation of powers. Congressional investigations sometimes expose the private information of the entities, organizations, and individuals that they investigate. This does not make them overly burdensome. It is the nature of the investigative and legislative processes."

Your imagination is gloriously irrelevant. The issue has been adjudicated, with the ruling upheld by the Supreme Court itself.

The Ways and Means Committee absolutely has the authority to release those docs. Says who? Says the Ways and Means Committee, the Rules of the House and the Judiciary.

No, they dont, for the reasons listed. The courts, nor the Congress can ignore law. You claim they have the power to release information from any session, even though I've shown you there is a difference between sessions, but you insist that when it says "executive session' that means all executive sessions, but you don't post the house rule or the law that states that, even when I have shown that house rule applies to executive session, and not closed session...there is a difference. You keep copy and pasting the same article over and over and I keep showing you where that is incorrect and I explain why, and you offer no reasoning other than to keep pointing back to the same article that I'm disputing.

The law is the law, and no court and no congress can ignore the law.

I've offered both tax law and privacy laws to explain my position, and even the 4th ammendment to the cotus. The only thing that gives the appellate court any standing here is their pointing to that house rule 11, which, if you read the laws, and the language of the laws and the rules, you'll see that they are incorrect in their assertion.

Hmm, let's see

The attorney who argued in favor for the house ways and means committee was Douglas N. Letter.

So who is Doug letter?

​

Pelosi Names Douglas N. Letter New General Counsel of the House

Until February 2018, Letter served as the Director of the Civil Division Appellate Staff at the U.S. Department of Justice, retiring this year after 40 years of distinguished service at the agency. He is now a Senior Litigator at the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at the...

www.speaker.gov

well, that certainly explains why he would argue to give the committee ultimate power to release trumps tax information....

 

[JoeB131]

Really none of your business, but you loons keep this up. You're going to give Trump the Whitehouse back.

Naw, the big money donors are already walking away from him, as are the evangelicals and the GOP.

I do fully expect Trump to run as an independent in 2024, tanking your party. It will be glorious to watch.

 

[JoeB131]

I say we force all government representatives to release their tax returns. Show how they got rich off their salary.

Works for me.

Trump told his supporters to go and peacefully let their voices be heard. If that's what you call an insurrection, then Biden should be charged as an accessory to a murder.

We've been over this.

One crazy person listens to a speech, and does something crazy, that's on that crazy person.
Hundreds of people listen to a crazy speech and do something crazy, that's when you look at that speech.

 

[struth]

Haha, what a silly attempt at a defense of Trump.

Someone else started the fire. He just threw gasoline and small children on it.

nope he just asked about it….and finally got obama to provide the bc