Yes, The Democrats Can Legally Access The Pres's Tax Returns, & Yes, The Info Will Be Made Public

[Jitss617]

Lol it will be in courts for 10 years trump will be 82 haha

Go away democrats

 

[BULLDOG]

If you want to argue the law that has been in effect since 1924 is unconstitutional, then go ahead. All the Ways and Means Committee has to do is request the information, and the IRS is required to supply it.

Ha ha ha, you completely ignored the 4th amendment and the doctrine of Probable Cause.

You MUST have a legal reason to get personal/privileged information first, before you can get them. Democrats have NOT provided a legal reason to do that.

Have you so little regard for privacy protections?

The request has nothing to do with that. Read the request. It outlines the exact reason for the request, and it perfectly matches the purpose of the law they are using to request the information

You mean THIS request, that you never read?

That Letter to the IRS commissioner doesn't show any legal reason for getting that information. It is an obvious politically motivated fishing exercise.

Go read it, the SCOPE of the request is STAGGERING!

Yep, that's the one. It's nothing more than is allowed in 6103(f)
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

Gee you are too stupid to realize that the objection are based on the LACK of PROBABLE CAUSE. There has to be a reason why you can TAKE personal/privileged information from anyone.

It is clear you don't care about the rule of law that protect people from overbearing actions of people in power:

"Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

=====

What about PROBABLE CAUSE?

"In United States criminal law, probable cause is the standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal or the issuing of a search warrant. It is also the standard by which grand juries issue criminal indictments. The principle behind the standard is to limit the power of authorities to perform random or abusive searches (unlawful search and seizure), and to promote lawful evidence gathering and procedural form during criminal arrest and prosecution. The standard also applies to personal or property searches.[1]"

LINK

bolding mine

=========================
That 1924 law requires that FIRST there is a legal reason to use it, that is the part you keep ignoring over and over.

The Democrats are investigating him, for the purpose of investigating him. There are no actual crime of indictment involved here, just investigate anything, it is normally called legal harassment.

Sorry if you don't get that there are specific laws being used here. Oh well, Your ignorance is not my problem.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Ha ha ha, you completely ignored the 4th amendment and the doctrine of Probable Cause.

You MUST have a legal reason to get personal/privileged information first, before you can get them. Democrats have NOT provided a legal reason to do that.

Have you so little regard for privacy protections?

The request has nothing to do with that. Read the request. It outlines the exact reason for the request, and it perfectly matches the purpose of the law they are using to request the information

You mean THIS request, that you never read?

That Letter to the IRS commissioner doesn't show any legal reason for getting that information. It is an obvious politically motivated fishing exercise.

Go read it, the SCOPE of the request is STAGGERING!

Yep, that's the one. It's nothing more than is allowed in 6103(f)
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

Gee you are too stupid to realize that the objection are based on the LACK of PROBABLE CAUSE. There has to be a reason why you can TAKE personal/privileged information from anyone.

It is clear you don't care about the rule of law that protect people from overbearing actions of people in power:

"Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

=====

What about PROBABLE CAUSE?

"In United States criminal law, probable cause is the standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal or the issuing of a search warrant. It is also the standard by which grand juries issue criminal indictments. The principle behind the standard is to limit the power of authorities to perform random or abusive searches (unlawful search and seizure), and to promote lawful evidence gathering and procedural form during criminal arrest and prosecution. The standard also applies to personal or property searches.[1]"

LINK

bolding mine

=========================
That 1924 law requires that FIRST there is a legal reason to use it, that is the part you keep ignoring over and over.

The Democrats are investigating him, for the purpose of investigating him. There are no actual crime of indictment involved here, just investigate anything, it is normally called legal harassment.

Sorry if you don't get that there are specific laws being used here. Oh well, Your ignorance is not my problem.

No it is YOU who keeps ignoring Constitutional protections from UNREASONABLE SEARCHES and SEIZURES.

You have not once addressed the concept of Probable Cause, you have not once addressed the lack of legal justification in that Letter you still haven't read. You have not once provided the LEGAL GROUNDS for this request at all. It is a REQUEST for Tax information and nothing more. You have not provided LEGAL REASON to compel this disclosure either.

You have no argument at all.

 

[BULLDOG]

The request has nothing to do with that. Read the request. It outlines the exact reason for the request, and it perfectly matches the purpose of the law they are using to request the information

You mean THIS request, that you never read?

That Letter to the IRS commissioner doesn't show any legal reason for getting that information. It is an obvious politically motivated fishing exercise.

Go read it, the SCOPE of the request is STAGGERING!

Yep, that's the one. It's nothing more than is allowed in 6103(f)
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

Gee you are too stupid to realize that the objection are based on the LACK of PROBABLE CAUSE. There has to be a reason why you can TAKE personal/privileged information from anyone.

It is clear you don't care about the rule of law that protect people from overbearing actions of people in power:

"Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

=====

What about PROBABLE CAUSE?

"In United States criminal law, probable cause is the standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal or the issuing of a search warrant. It is also the standard by which grand juries issue criminal indictments. The principle behind the standard is to limit the power of authorities to perform random or abusive searches (unlawful search and seizure), and to promote lawful evidence gathering and procedural form during criminal arrest and prosecution. The standard also applies to personal or property searches.[1]"

LINK

bolding mine

=========================
That 1924 law requires that FIRST there is a legal reason to use it, that is the part you keep ignoring over and over.

The Democrats are investigating him, for the purpose of investigating him. There are no actual crime of indictment involved here, just investigate anything, it is normally called legal harassment.

Sorry if you don't get that there are specific laws being used here. Oh well, Your ignorance is not my problem.

No it is YOU who keeps ignoring Constitutional protections from UNREASONABLE SEARCHES and SEIZURES.

You have not once addressed the concept of Probable Cause, you have not once addressed the lack of legal justification in that Letter you still haven't read. You have not once provided the LEGAL GROUNDS for this request at all. It is a REQUEST for Tax information and nothing more. You have not provided LEGAL REASON to compel this disclosure either.

You have no argument at all.

Probable cause is not a requirement for the request, so doesn't matter in this case.

 

[The Original Tree]

If you want to argue the law that has been in effect since 1924 is unconstitutional, then go ahead. All the Ways and Means Committee has to do is request the information, and the IRS is required to supply it.

Ha ha ha, you completely ignored the 4th amendment and the doctrine of Probable Cause.

You MUST have a legal reason to get personal/privileged information first, before you can get them. Democrats have NOT provided a legal reason to do that.

Have you so little regard for privacy protections?

The request has nothing to do with that. Read the request. It outlines the exact reason for the request, and it perfectly matches the purpose of the law they are using to request the information

You mean THIS request, that you never read?

That Letter to the IRS commissioner doesn't show any legal reason for getting that information. It is an obvious politically motivated fishing exercise.

Go read it, the SCOPE of the request is STAGGERING!

Yep, that's the one. It's nothing more than is allowed in 6103(f)
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

Gee you are too stupid to realize that the objection are based on the LACK of PROBABLE CAUSE. There has to be a reason why you can TAKE personal/privileged information from anyone.

It is clear you don't care about the rule of law that protect people from overbearing actions of people in power:

"Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

=====

What about PROBABLE CAUSE?

"In United States criminal law, probable cause is the standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal or the issuing of a search warrant. It is also the standard by which grand juries issue criminal indictments. The principle behind the standard is to limit the power of authorities to perform random or abusive searches (unlawful search and seizure), and to promote lawful evidence gathering and procedural form during criminal arrest and prosecution. The standard also applies to personal or property searches.[1]"

LINK

bolding mine

=========================
That 1924 law requires that FIRST there is a legal reason to use it, that is the part you keep ignoring over and over.

The Democrats are investigating him, for the purpose of investigating him. There are no actual crime of indictment involved here, just investigate anything, it is normally called legal harassment.

WINNER
WINNER
WINNER
WINNER

 

[SmokeALib]

These worthless leftist traitor hacks will be harassing Trump thru 2024 when he leaves office. It's what they do.

 

[Edgetho]

Good to see mental midget-wrestling so early in the morning. Coffee. Check. Bagel and schmear. Check. Mental-midget-wrestling? Serendipity.

More please.

Go find a spin-cycle, witch

 

[jwoodie]

It is officially the authority of the Treasury Secretary to decide if those tax returns are released or not.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The Treasury Secretary should not release those tax returns unless there is a legitimate basis for the request.

The Dems are getting more desperate by the day.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Bulldog incredibly writes:

"Probable cause is not a requirement for the request, so doesn't matter in this case"

=============================

Wow your lack of critical thinking skills are obvious here, now I will ask you the OBVIOUS question:

WHY are the Democrats requesting a massive amount of Tax related documents?

WHY?

Snicker......

 

[easyt65]

It is officially the authority of the Treasury Secretary to decide if those tax returns are released or not.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^The Treasury Secretary should not release those tax returns unless there is a legitimate basis for the request.

The Dems are getting more desperate by the day.

I agree, but what I posted is spelled out in the law.

If I were the US AG I would stipulate that once the tax returns are handed over to the House Ways And Means Committee Chairman - and make this stipulation mandatory for the release of the information, HE OWNS THEM AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE MEDIA & TO PREVENT THEM FROM BEING LEAKED. ANY LEAK OF INFORMATION WILL RESULT IN HIS BEING BROUGHT TO JUSTICE / BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE. Make sure no matter who releases the information after it is given to HIM, if it gets leaked HE will be held accountable, becoming someone's 'girlfriend' in prison.

 

[BULLDOG]

It is officially the authority of the Treasury Secretary to decide if those tax returns are released or not.

THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^The Treasury Secretary should not release those tax returns unless there is a legitimate basis for the request.

The Dems are getting more desperate by the day.

I agree, but what I posted is spelled out in the law.

If I were the US AG I would stipulate that once the tax returns are handed over to the House Ways And Means Committee Chairman - and make this stipulation mandatory for the release of the information, HE OWNS THEM AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE MEDIA & TO PREVENT THEM FROM BEING LEAKED. ANY LEAK OF INFORMATION WILL RESULT IN HIS BEING BROUGHT TO JUSTICE / BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE. Make sure no matter who releases the information after it is given to HIM, if it gets leaked HE will be held accountable, becoming someone's 'girlfriend' in prison.

So you just want to make up laws? Sounds like some stunt Trump would try to pull.

 

[M14 Shooter]

...and YES, their doing so is completely politically motivated, no matter what they and their surrogate fake news media cohorts claim.
26 U.S. Code § 6103:
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

(f) Disclosure to Committees of Congress
(1) Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Finance, and Joint Committee on Taxation
Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure.

If any tax information makes it out of that executive session, those in that session are in violation of the law and subject to civil and/or criminal penalties.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And we’ll find out so much more

If YOU find out anything, its because someone broke the law...
And when you find nothing to whine and cry about, you'll whine and cry about finding nothing.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Democrats keep harassing Trump at every angle without substance. Keep it up. They are putting all their efforts into “get Trump” with no policy alternatives of their own.

 

[BULLDOG]

Democrats keep harassing Trump at every angle without substance. Keep it up. They are putting all their efforts into “get Trump” with no policy alternatives of their own.

Until recently, repubs were able to protect Trump from any real investigation into his actions. It's about time the facts are finally revealed.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Democrats keep harassing Trump at every angle without substance. Keep it up. They are putting all their efforts into “get Trump” with no policy alternatives of their own.

Until recently, repubs were able to protect Trump from any real investigation into his actions. It's about time the facts are finally revealed.

What facts? What are you charging him with aside from him winning the Presidency? You exhausted Russian Collusion charge to the point of buffoonery. There was more substance and smoke with Hillary and Benghazi and she was exonerated. Shit or get off the pot.

 

[M14 Shooter]

-- It is officially the authority of the Treasury Secretary to decide if those tax returns are released or not. The President will undoubtedly 'pressure' the Treasury Secretary NOT to release them, appropriately pointing out the request is politically motivated....

Trump won't do this, for he knows if he does, the Democrats will try to impeach him for obstruction.

 

[percysunshine]

Yeah sure... like Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress and then turned over all the documents ... sure

Nice spin / lie. Eric holder was caught committing Felony Perjury before Congress in an attempt to keep the President's Fast and furious Scandal covered up. His being Censured by a Bi-Partisan Congress had nothing to do with delaying the release of documents and everything to do with his Perjury and the President's protection of him from indictment.

That went way over your head....

 

[HenryBHough]

The first truly sincere demand for President Trump's tax returns will be noted through its inclusion of a .pdf file of the poster's own IRS documents.

All of them.

 

[Lesh]

If they refuse they will be in contempt of Congress