Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And of course a conservative – and partisan – majority will rule in favor of further empowering the Imperial Presidency.
I believe the state of New York has a better legal standing than the House. The House issue will 7-2 for Trump, the New York case may wind up 5-4 Trump.
The problem SCOTUS has is it tries to appear to not be political. Roberts is keen on that. I agree, the House will probably lose. But a lower court already ruled on the NY demand for the taxes and chances are, SCOTUS will bounce it back to the lower court. In essence, NY can turn that information over to the House so the house gets what it wants anyway and more.
It's already known that most of Rumps writeoffs are rounds of golf. He is in deep trouble trying to explain that a round of golf costs 10,000 bucks or more. Yes, it was done for a Charity and the writeoff for that particular Charity event was for hundreds of thousands of dollars but claiming that each round for each participant cost over 10,000 dollars is normally Charity Fraud to anyone else. And it continues even today. Rump makes Al Capone look like a Law Abiding Citizen.
Then NY state has the right to file suit using his NY taxes. That is NOT the case at hand.
You are one dumb piece of shit if you think the IRS doesn’t perform audits.You are one dumb shit if you think people don't evade taxes and lie on their tax returns.You are one major dumb piece of shit if you think the IRS would allow anyone to get away with not paying one cent they owe.
US Supreme Court hears arguments over Trump's tax returns
The Supreme Court will rule on the president's attempts to keep his financial records secret.www.yahoo.com
From the link:
The US Supreme Court has heard arguments on whether President Donald Trump should be allowed to keep his financial records secret, in a major showdown over presidential powers.
Mr Trump declines to share documents that could shed light on his fortune and the work of his family company.
Two congressional committees and New York prosecutors demand the release of his tax returns and other information.
Mr Trump's private lawyers argue he enjoys total immunity while in office.
The judges will hear the cases remotely because of the coronavirus pandemic. The Supreme Court has a 5-4 conservative majority and includes two Trump appointees - Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
The rule of law, and a guiding principle in our nation's jurisprudence is no man is above the law. The efficacy of the Supreme Court justices to dispense justice will be judged in this matter. If they decide in favor of President Trump, it will give carte blanche to him, and to every future POTUS.
Michael Cohen described exactly how Trump did it and how to prove he committed a crime.
I think Obamagate is Trump's latest distraction technique; he knows he will likely find himself in a courtroom if he loses in November, so he will do whatever is necessary to prevent his "Individual One" moment:So, if Trump is supposed to be immune to any prosecution, and he's above the law, then why is the non-existent Obamagate being brought up by Trump then?
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.The ruling should be a slam dunk against Trump. No one is above the law.
What law would that be?
Proof of Trump's tax frauds requires an examination of his financial evidence that's beyond my ability to produce or understand. The best source I've found on this subject, David Cay Johnston, has followed Trump's career for thirty years.Bullshit. Prove it or retract.
Trump hasn't been convicted of tax fraud you simple minded shitforbrains. If he had the IRS would have seen to it years and years ago. Now sit down and STFU asshole.He just like every other American citizen has the right to be secure in his person and his papers. That means his taxes are none of yours or anyone else's fucking business. It's just that simple.
Tell that to Al Capone*** and these other persons convicted of Tax Fraud:
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-pmn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/WOYIW3XV7ZCPFAJWBOUTPYJ6GI.jpg)
15 Celebrities Convicted for Tax Evasion
Just because celebrities are rich and famous doesn't mean life is always glamorous for them. In fact, many members of the Hollywood elite have endured serious tax troubles. And while celebrities aren't necessarily more likely to break the law than their fans, they do have a far greater...www.inquirer.com
***Assistant Attorney General Mabel Walker Willebrandt recognized that mob figures publicly led lavish lifestyles yet never filed tax returns, and thus could be convicted of tax evasion without requiring hard evidence to get testimony about their other crimes. She tested this approach by prosecuting a South Carolina bootlegger, Manley Sullivan.[70] In 1927, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Sullivan that the approach was legally sound: illegally earned income was subject to income tax; Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. rejected the argument that the Fifth Amendment protected criminals from reporting illegal income.[71]
Since you raised the claim, do you have any evidence Obama violated Trump's privacy relative to his tax returns?Lol. You really don't think that 44 and his squad did just a cursory review of his tax returns? How is the air on your planet?
A POTUS whose past includes possible money laundering with citizens of a hostile state would seek to hide any evidence of his criminality, especially if he never expected to "win" the White House.Neither had a leg to stand on and that's why it's dying a slow death. You can't be guilty of lying to the FBI for a bogus interview that had the sole purpose of trying to get you to lie. Just like you can't be required to show your tax returns for the sole purpose of politics.
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:Agree
People like Trump depend on ignorant trolls like you to conceal the fact that the rich are far less likely to face an audit today than middle class tax payers:People like Trump are audited every year because of the size of their return. When you pay tens of millions in taxes the IRS is going to watch you like a hawk.
You mean other then the IRS took up looking at tax returns as a way to stifle opposition?Since you raised the claim, do you have any evidence Obama violated Trump's privacy relative to his tax returns?Lol. You really don't think that 44 and his squad did just a cursory review of his tax returns? How is the air on your planet?
There's no shortage of evidence in the public realm that alleges Trump owes much of his fortune to tax dodges and evasions.
Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father
"Mr. Trump won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help.
"But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.
"Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews show."
Trump hasn't been convicted of tax fraud you simple minded shitforbrains. If he had the IRS would have seen to it years and years ago. Now sit down and STFU asshole.He just like every other American citizen has the right to be secure in his person and his papers. That means his taxes are none of yours or anyone else's fucking business. It's just that simple.
Tell that to Al Capone*** and these other persons convicted of Tax Fraud:
15 Celebrities Convicted for Tax Evasion
Just because celebrities are rich and famous doesn't mean life is always glamorous for them. In fact, many members of the Hollywood elite have endured serious tax troubles. And while celebrities aren't necessarily more likely to break the law than their fans, they do have a far greater...
***Assistant Attorney General Mabel Walker Willebrandt recognized that mob figures publicly led lavish lifestyles yet never filed tax returns, and thus could be convicted of tax evasion without requiring hard evidence to get testimony about their other crimes. She tested this approach by prosecuting a South Carolina bootlegger, Manley Sullivan.[70] In 1927, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Sullivan that the approach was legally sound: illegally earned income was subject to income tax; Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. rejected the argument that the Fifth Amendment protected criminals from reporting illegal income.[71]
Given the amount of apparent fraud in Trump crime family history, I doubt very much if Don the Con has ever been subject to a thorough audit much less the sort of forensic analysis Congress or the Manhattan DA would apply.You mean other then the IRS took up looking at tax returns as a way to stifle opposition?
Or the fact that since he does turn in taxes each year that he was not at least given more then a cursory glance?
Progs have had power the last few decades. There was a 39% top Federal Tax rate. The loopholes could have been eliminated at any time. But for some reason they never were. Many people with money used what they could. And many were Progs also. I am not making excuses for Trump. What existed.....was to be used.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:Agree
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."
If you're saying Democrats like Clinton, Biden, and Obama were progressives, you are sadly mistaken. Along with corporate whores like Pelosi and Schumer they are as committed to serving the interests of the shareholder class (richest ten percent) of Americans as Trump is.Progs have had power the last few decades. There was a 39% top Federal Tax rate. The loopholes could have been eliminated at any time. But for some reason they never were.
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.Given the amount of apparent fraud in Trump crime family history, I doubt very much if Don the Con has ever been subject to a thorough audit much less the sort of forensic analysis Congress or the Manhattan DA would apply.You mean other then the IRS took up looking at tax returns as a way to stifle opposition?
Or the fact that since he does turn in taxes each year that he was not at least given more then a cursory glance?
Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father
"The most overt fraud was All County Building Supply & Maintenance, a company formed by the Trump family in 1992.
"All County’s ostensible purpose was to be the purchasing agent for Fred Trump’s buildings, buying everything from boilers to cleaning supplies.
"It did no such thing, records and interviews show.
"Instead All County siphoned millions of dollars from Fred Trump’s empire by simply marking up purchases already made by his employees.
"Those millions, effectively untaxed gifts, then flowed to All County’s owners — Donald Trump, his siblings and a cousin. Fred Trump then used the padded All County receipts to justify bigger rent increases for thousands of tenants."
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.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.
What was the legislative value of the Republican Whitewater investigation?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.What are they investigating, then? In simple terms.Nope. Not even close. You clearly do not understand the nature of the investigations.His financial statements to the FEC should be sufficient.What would it hurt to release the records. You want to be elected every last aspect of your finances should be made public.
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.
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
Can you, though, justify the force of law to compel someone to keep a campaign promise?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.
