No. of Recommendations: 25
Trump, along with his sleazy offspring - Uday and Usay - are suing Congressional democrats in order to continue hiding his financial records. Whatever is lurking in the scumbags' finances is surely something they do not want anyone to see.

Trump just continues to lower the bar.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Trump just continues to lower the bar.

I actually think he excels at "acting guilty".
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Trump just continues to lower the bar.

I thought that bar had hit rock bottom a few months ago, but Trump and his cult have brought out explosives and excavation equipment to bury the moral and ethical bar deeply under the earth.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
but Trump and his cult have brought out explosives and excavation equipment to bury the moral and ethical bar deeply under the earth.

And yet they still manage to get under it.

I'm reminded of the villain introduced at the end of the movie, "The Incredibles." In his own words:

Behold! The Underminer! I am always beneath you, but nothing is beneath me!"

Wait ... need the link ... here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkhwlcVAClk

--Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I actually think he excels at "acting guilty".

Cool.
I'm a federal judge in real life. I'm going to order you to surrender your social media history even though I don't have a pending case in front me. I want to review it just because.

When can I expect it? I want all of it, by the way.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<Trump, along with his sleazy offspring - Uday and Usay - are suing Congressional democrats in order to continue hiding his financial records. Whatever is lurking in the scumbags' finances is surely something they do not want anyone to see.

Trump just continues to lower the bar.>>



I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.


He is probably taking a good deal of satisfaction in suing those who have been baseless tormenting him for two years now.

Those poor babies in the House!


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.
No one here is the President; Our representative to the executive office.
When the President (Trump) gives hand-picked Russian oligarchs a pass on sactions we want to know if he's benefitting financially.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.

If he wanted to keep them private he should have been honest and said that.

But he didn't. He lied, saying he would show them.

And you're defending his lies just like Sarah Huckleberry Hound.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.

Nope. The law was passed in the 1920s, so it was law when he was born--and still is today.

In addition, Spankie does NOT have a valid claim to stop or interfere with the IRS or Congress complying with the law. The law is specific: The IRS *shall* provide the tax return of *any* tax filer to the specified Congressional individual(s) on written request of the specified individual(s).

Nowhere does the law allow the taxpayer to intervene. After all, the *filed* tax returns were properly completed--RIGHT? LOL !!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Tuscon all in for congress abusing their powers...making a mockery of the constitution...showing us the left will stop at nothing to get their way including using the constitution to wipe their hands after doing the deed.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Funny how Demos are in love with the IRS.

The larger the government, the happier they are.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Tuscon all in for congress abusing their powers...making a mockery of the constitution...


1947 NATIONAL SECURITY ACT
Sec. 501. [50 U.S.C. §413]

(a)(1)The President shall ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently informed of the intelligence activities of the United States, including any significant anticipated intelligence activity as required by this title.
(b) The President shall ensure that any illegal intelligence activity is reported promptly to the congressional intelligence committees, as well as any corrective action that has been taken or is planned in connection with such illegal activity.
(e) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authority to withhold information from the congressional intelligence committees on the grounds that providing the information to the congressional intelligence committees would constitute the unauthorized disclosure of classified information or information relating to intelligence sources and methods.


https://www.dni.gov/index.php/ic-legal-reference-book/nation...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
what does that have to do with congress abusing their powers in demanding Trump's tax returns
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<Trump, along with his sleazy offspring - Uday and Usay - are suing Congressional democrats in order to continue hiding his financial records. Whatever is lurking in the scumbags' finances is surely something they do not want anyone to see.

Trump just continues to lower the bar.>>



I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.

Well, Trump has gotten a great many things wrong in his life. This is just another case.



He is probably taking a good deal of satisfaction in suing those who have been baseless tormenting him for two years now.

Not baseless at all, but he brought on the fight quite deliberately. Trump takes a good deal of satisfaction looking in the mirror, or voiding his bowels, or whatever makes a mentally ill person like him feel satisfied. Life torments him more than any person could. He wants to be a great man, and desperately wants to be loved and adored.

Those wants shall forever go unfulfilled. Thats why he is such miserably unhappy person.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That’s great.

Too bad it has nothing to do with your fishing expedition.

Now. Hurry up and turn in your social media postings. All of them. I also want your tax and financial records. Plus everything from your medical practice.

You’re guilty of something. You owe it to everyone else to come clean now.

</sarc> <—- this should be obvious
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Nowhere does the law allow the taxpayer to intervene. After all, the *filed* tax returns were properly completed--RIGHT? LOL !!!>>



You have evidence to the contrary?

Or is this another empty accusation that Trump conspired with the Russians to win the 2016 election?


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<< including using the constitution to wipe their hands after doing the deed.>>



Hands?



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<No. of Recommendations: 1
I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.

Nope. The law was passed in the 1920s, so it was law when he was born--and still is today.

In addition, Spankie does NOT have a valid claim to stop or interfere with the IRS or Congress complying with the law. The law is specific: The IRS *shall* provide the tax return of *any* tax filer to the specified Congressional individual(s) on written request of the specified individual(s).>>


I don't claim to be an Xpert on obscure parts of Federal tax law ----are you?


Democrats have delighted in delaying Trump's ability to enforce laws with lawsuits. Now they get the fun of being on the receiving end of that tactic. We'll probably get a final decision on that from the Supreme Court ----in about ten years.


Enjoy!


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Good,

Congress can continue wasting their time and resources on nonsense
instead of concentrating on 2020 and the elections.

Hardly anyone is paying much attention to the field of dem candidates running for president.
Who the heck are they anyways? No one cares. They're hardly in the news.
The dems have no platform except massive giveaways.
Nancy Pelosi has lost control of her flock.
Since the dems have taken control of Congress they have accomplish practually nothing.

The American people are concentrating on protecting our Borders and for
comic relief the dems three ring circus, impeach, impeach, impeach.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 17
what does that have to do with congress abusing their powers in demanding Trump's tax returns

They are doing their jobs. Its the law. Trump isn't a king. By refusing the request, he IS in violation of federal law. He is doing something illegal. It's a crime.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I don't claim to be an Xpert on obscure parts of Federal tax law ----are you?

I'm not sure what make stills law "obscure", or why that is even relevant. It is the law. It is quite clearly written, and there seems to be no other interpretation aside from the one we have heard.

...
Section 6103(f)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) reads:

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 [of the Treasury] 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.4
...

"In short: The Treasury Secretary, which, for practical purposes, means the IRS as the relevant agency within the Treasury Department, “shall furnish” each of the tax committees with “any return or return information” requested in writing by its chairman. “Return information” includes related information such as the status of any IRS audits and the files containing documents produced in the process of audits.5 As law scholar Harry Litman explains, the term “shall” means exactly what it says: “The language [‘shall’] is the well-established norm, across a range of legal settings, used to denote an absence of discretion on an official’s part. It leaves no room for quibbles.”6 As Litman notes, Congress’ power to obtain tax returns parallels prosecutors’ ability to inspect tax records upon an ex parte order from a court, derived from Section 6103(i). In that context, “The practice is entirely routine and swift, usually taking less than a week,” Litman writes. “I know of no attempt by the secretary of treasury ever even to argue discretion not to comply.”


https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2019...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Litman writes. “I know of no attempt by the secretary of treasury ever even to argue discretion not to comply.”

Another low for this administration.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
They are doing their jobs. Its the law. Trump isn't a king. By refusing the request, he IS in violation of federal law. He is doing something illegal. It's a crime.

_________________________

NO!!! They are not doing their job. They are obstructing!

Congress has done diddly poop since they took control.
The dems have spent their time salivating over the Mueller report and
came up with a big bust. They don't have the brains to give it up and
concentrate on the coming elections.
The dem candidates are still raving...IMPEACH!

That's a good thing for the GOP, Republicans and President Trump.
While the dems are wallowing in their impeach swamp and free stuff for all
President Trump and Republicans are getting their message out about
the great economy, jobs and accomplishments the left ignore.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<< By refusing the request, he IS in violation of federal law. He is doing something illegal. It's a crime.>>


I suppose a Federal court will decide that issue.

Democrats have filed hundreds of lawsuits against Trump, and it's delayed him enforcing immigration and other laws. I guess Democrats will simply have to wait until a lawsuit over this issue is processed.

Might be years, of course --- SO many immigration claims need to be processed! No doubt they get a priority, I suppose.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<I don't claim to be an Xpert on obscure parts of Federal tax law ----are you?

I'm not sure what make stills law "obscure", or why that is even relevant. It is the law. It is quite clearly written, and there seems to be no other interpretation aside from the one we have heard. >>
'




Who knows? A judge might improve on your lawyering skills.


I don't doubt that Trump will comply with any final and binding decision of a Federal court. SORRY if this takes awhile. It's like delays in enforcing other laws that have been put on hold when Democrats filed lawsuits.

I suppose those will have to be decided before more recent cases can be processed.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I don't doubt that Trump will comply with any final and binding decision of a Federal court.

I doubt it very much. He will ignore the courts and say that the courts can't do anything about it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I doubt it very much. He will ignore the courts and say that the courts can't do anything about it.

Lulz.

Have any of you people ever heard of the 4th Amendment? Even once?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So how long will it take for Trump to provide his tax returns after the courts tell him to do so?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<<I doubt it very much. He will ignore the courts and say that the courts can't do anything about it.>>>

Here we go with the mind reading, again.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
So how long will it take for Trump to provide his tax returns after the courts tell him to do so?

Let's post the 4th Amendment, since none of you have ever heard of it:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] 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.

https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment4.html

Where's the warrant? Where's the probably cause? Just because you know he's guilty means...nothing.

liberals are fascists.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I don't claim to be an Xpert on obscure parts of Federal tax law ----are you?

Show me where the law allows Spankie to do ANYTHING about a request for ANY tax filer's return by the appropriately specified Congressional committee chair(s).

Remember: They are NOT asking Spankie for anything. Their request is to the IRS.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Trump ... [is] suing Congressional democrats in order to continue hiding his financial records.

That's just SOP for Trump. When someone does something you don't like, sue 'em. He did it constantly in business. It's his go-to bully tactic. And since he was usually the one with the deeper pockets, he could keep the lawsuits going longer than most opponents.

Unfortunately for him, that's not going to work this time. His opponent has the same pocket as he does - the US Treasury. And Congress is not known for backing down in a legal fight.

--Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So you agree with me. Trump has no intention of following the court order should they rule against him.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 17
Where's the warrant? Where's the probably cause?

Where's the search?

A subpoena does not authorize entry into a person's place of business or home - it is an order to the person to deliver records or appear before Congress (or a court or grand jury) to provide testimony. Congress has the power to subpoena all relevant information and records necessary to its legislative and oversight functions - its subpoena power, just like that of a court, is not limited to instances where probable cause of a crime exists.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So you agree with me. Trump has no intention of following the court order should they rule against him.

So you think that the courts get everything right and rule over us all, eh?

Suppose a federal judge rules that Paganism is the religion of the land. Are you planning on heading to the forest to worship some trees?

(I don't expect you to come back with an actual answer, BtW).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Where's the search?

A subpoena does not authorize entry into a person's place of business or home - it is an order to the person to deliver records or appear before Congress (or a court or grand jury) to provide testimony. Congress has the power to subpoena all relevant information and records necessary to its legislative and oversight functions - its subpoena power, just like that of a court, is not limited to instances where probable cause of a crime exists.


Sure. Anybody can subpoena anything. And Trump can and should tell them to take a flying leap.

Congress can ask for whatever it wants. If it asked for *my* tax returns just because some Representative had it in for me, I wouldn't comply either.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<I don't claim to be an Xpert on obscure parts of Federal tax law ----are you?

Show me where the law allows Spankie to do ANYTHING about a request for ANY tax filer's return by the appropriately specified Congressional committee chair(s).

Remember: They are NOT asking Spankie for anything. Their request is to the IRS.>>



Why are you so sensitive about Trump filing a lawsuit to protect his rights?


Democrats have done that many times to prevent Trump from enforcing laws. Where does it say that only Democrats can do that?


Indeed, it's plausible that those actions of Democrats gave Trump the idea of doing it himself. I'll bet he takes enormous satisfaction from doing that, just as Dems have!


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Unfortunately for him, that's not going to work this time. His opponent has the same pocket as he does - the US Treasury. And Congress is not known for backing down in a legal fight.

--Peter>>


No doubt Trump will comply with any final and binding decision of the Supreme Court. Of course, that may take a few years.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 21
TheDope1: Where's the warrant? Where's the probably cause? Just because you know he's guilty means...nothing.

liberals are fascists.



To quote Andy Dufresne: How can you be so obtuse?

The Constitution calls upon the House, along with the Senate, to enact legislation and to oversee whether those laws are faithfully executed. And Congress gave itself the right to review any return or return information way back in 1924 when Andrew Mellon continued to own many business interests while serving in government. You know, just like president Trump today, who refused to transfer his business interests to a blind trust.

The president, through his businesses, derives income from foreign governments and their lobbyists.

The president reportedly intervened personally to block the FBI from moving its headquarters in order to benefit his downtown Washington hotel.

The president has boasted that he has paid little or no tax for many years and Michael Cohen has testified that he has done so illegally.

To fulfill its constitutional oversight responsibility, Congress can demand the president’s personal and business tax returns that were open for audit at the time he assumed office and the 2017 returns filed since his election (and whichever returns they choose) because, as president Nixon said, “People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook.”

SPOILER ALERT: Trump is a crook.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<So you agree with me. Trump has no intention of following the court order should they rule against him.>>



Oh, I think the courts are able to deal with 4th amendment issues as part of the lawsuit, don't you think?


Democrats have filed a huge number of lawsuits to prevent Trump from enforcing laws, but we don't have an Imperial House of Representatives, either.

Perhaps you should listen to a couple of minutes of Edward R Murrow explaining the abuses of Congressional investigations dating back to Joe McCarthy's abuse of Congressional investigations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEvEmkMNYHY


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 28
Sure. Anybody can subpoena anything. And Trump can and should tell them to take a flying leap.

Congress can ask for whatever it wants. If it asked for *my* tax returns just because some Representative had it in for me, I wouldn't comply either.


And you'd go to jail. You don't get to just ignore a Congressional subpoena.

The President is about to learn that the Executive is not the only governmental body that the courts will defer to in decision-making. In defending his various limits on visas for travelers from selected countries, the President argued - successfully - that the courts can't look behind the government's stated claims that the actions served a legitimate Executive function and seek out a hidden motive. The same is going to be true of Congress - that regardless of whether you think that the real reason they're asking for the information is because they have it in for you, the court is not going to ignore the subpoena if it is for a facially valid purpose.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

Suppose a federal judge rules that Paganism is the religion of the land. Are you planning on heading to the forest to worship some trees?

(I don't expect you to come back with an actual answer, BtW).


Nope. I'm don't possess the level of stupidity needed to answer that question.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Nope. I'm don't possess the level of stupidity needed to answer that question.

Sure.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<< The same is going to be true of Congress - that regardless of whether you think that the real reason they're asking for the information is because they have it in for you, the court is not going to ignore the subpoena if it is for a facially valid purpose.

Albaby>>



We shall see ---- and perhaps you are right. But I see no reason why Trump shouldn't challenge the subpoena in court if he wishes to do so.


After all, we don't have an Imperial House of Representatives, either.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Oh, I think the courts are able to deal with 4th amendment issues as part of the lawsuit, don't you think?

I'm sure they will. But that's not relevant to Trump abiding by the court decision should it go against him.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
And you'd go to jail. You don't get to just ignore a Congressional subpoena.


Then I'd go to jail. Although I don't recall anything happening to Eric Holder (found to be in contempt of Congress). Of course, we have 2 sets of rules in this country, one for little people and one for prominent politicians, don't we? On my way to prison I'd quote some lines from Hyman Rickover (some of the most entertaining Congressional testimony you'll ever hear in your life, and the model for how to treat Imperial Congresscritters).


The President is about to learn that the Executive is not the only governmental body that the courts will defer to in decision-making. In defending his various limits on visas for travelers from selected countries, the President argued - successfully - that the courts can't look behind the government's stated claims that the actions served a legitimate Executive function and seek out a hidden motive. The same is going to be true of Congress - that regardless of whether you think that the real reason they're asking for the information is because they have it in for you, the court is not going to ignore the subpoena if it is for a facially valid purpose.

Trump can invoke Executive Privilege and moon Congress while he's doing it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Suppose a federal judge rules that Paganism is the religion of the land. Are you planning on heading to the forest to worship some trees? >>



Paganism IS the religion of the land ---you guys call it "environmentalism." It';s nature worship.


You guys love the "church of the outdoors," "cathedral forests" and such don't you?

You have your sacred groves of redwoods and such.


SAVE THE -----whatever the biological entity that serves your political needs might be.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<<SPOILER ALERT: Trump is a crook.>>>

Thank you. That should save a lot of legal fees.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<Oh, I think the courts are able to deal with 4th amendment issues as part of the lawsuit, don't you think?

I'm sure they will. But that's not relevant to Trump abiding by the court decision should it go against him.>>



He hasn't refused to do so, has he?


Perhaps you guys want to impeach Trump for what he MIGHT do?


After all, it was just days ago that you guys thought Muller was going to indict the whole Trump family.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
He hasn't refused to do so, has he?

He will. And you will support him for doing so.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<<He will. And you will support him for doing so.>>>

Another mind reader?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 10
Trump can invoke Executive Privilege and moon Congress while he's doing it.

I think Trump can refuse to comply with a subpoena without risking a lot of consequences. I don't think that any of these private third parties that have possession of his tax and business records can do that.

If Trump can't convince a court that these materials aren't appropriate for a Congressional subpoena, he's probably not going to be able to stop it.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I think Trump can refuse to comply with a subpoena without risking a lot of consequences. I don't think that any of these private third parties that have possession of his tax and business records can do that.

I don't think Congress can go around Trump by forcing his accountant to turn over his financial records. IIRC that would be like forcing your attorney to violate privilege.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I don't think Congress can go around Trump by forcing his accountant to turn over his financial records. IIRC that would be like forcing your attorney to violate privilege.

If there was an accountant-client privilege that was as broad as the attorney-client privilege, then sure. But there isn't.

There is a federal statutory privilege for accountants, but it's rather narrow. It wouldn't apply to a Congressional subpoena, and it wouldn't override the express statutory grant to Congress to obtain tax returns. And it probably doesn't apply to tax returns, which are expressly prepared for (and subsequently provided to) a third party.

Albaby

Some states have a statutory privilege as well, but that wouldn't be relevant to a congressional subpoena
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I don't think Congress can go around Trump by forcing his accountant to turn over his financial records. IIRC that would be like forcing your attorney to violate privilege.

Which your attorney can be forced to do under certain circumstances.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
If there was an accountant-client privilege that was as broad as the attorney-client privilege, then sure. But there isn't.

There is a federal statutory privilege for accountants, but it's rather narrow. It wouldn't apply to a Congressional subpoena, and it wouldn't override the express statutory grant to Congress to obtain tax returns. And it probably doesn't apply to tax returns, which are expressly prepared for (and subsequently provided to) a third party.


Then this is all grandstanding.
If there's no statute protecting accountants, then Congress can just haul them in front of whomever's committee and be done with it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
Then this is all grandstanding.
If there's no statute protecting accountants, then Congress can just haul them in front of whomever's committee and be done with it.


It's not grandstanding. That's exactly what they're doing. Subpoenas are the mechanism by which Congress "hauls them in front of whomever's committee." Congress issues a subpoena for either testimony or documentation, and the witness is supposed to comply.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Congress issues a subpoena for either testimony or documentation, and the witness is supposed to comply.
Albaby "

Eric Holder demonstrated that these subpoenas can be ignored with no real consequences.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Eric Holder demonstrated that these subpoenas can be ignored with no real consequences.

No - he demonstrated that if you're the attorney general, and you're arguing with the House over government documents, you might be able to convince a judge not to hold you in contempt.

A private accounting firm is unlikely to be able to do the same, and they're unlikely to try. Absent an affirmative ruling from a judge telling them not to comply with the subpoena, they almost certainly will choose to comply.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<<Some states have a statutory privilege as well, but that wouldn't be relevant to a congressional subpoena>>>

Hillary showed us the value and importance of a Congressional subpoena when she shredded 33,000 subpoenaed emails and she is still walking around as free as a bird.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's not grandstanding. That's exactly what they're doing. Subpoenas are the mechanism by which Congress "hauls them in front of whomever's committee." Congress issues a subpoena for either testimony or documentation, and the witness is supposed to comply.

Has Congress subpoenaed Trump's accountants directly? It's my understand that their deadline applies to the Treasury Department and the IRS and that they have not named a private firm (i.e., whoever does Trump's taxes).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Why are you so sensitive about Trump filing a lawsuit to protect his rights?

Spankie has *no* rights in the request issued to the IRS. He can NOT claim the information is privileged or private because *he, personally* filed those taxes (or were *officially* filed on his behalf).

Why are you NOT supporting the "law of the land"? Or do you only obey the law when it is convenient for you to do so?

Where does it say that only Democrats can do that?

Hillary testified *under oath, in public* before the RWNJ Congress for 11 hours. Guess what? They *already* had her taxes. So, let's get Spankie *under oath, in public* to testify for 11 hrs. The question is NOT "Will he perjure himself". The question is "HOW MANY TIMES will Spankie commit perjury"? Where do you think the bookmakers will place the odds--and the payout ratios? Or is THAT "too hard"?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Has Congress subpoenaed Trump's accountants directly?

Yes. Of course. I assumed that's what this thread was referring to, since it was the subpoena that was issued to the accounting firm which gave rise to Trump's lawsuit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/us/politics/trump-sues-co...

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Hillary showed us the value and importance of a Congressional subpoena when she shredded 33,000 subpoenaed emails and she is still walking around as free as a bird.

Again, there's very little chance that a private accounting firm is going to refuse to comply with a Congressional subpoena if a court says that the subpoena is valid.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
They are doing their jobs. Its the law. Trump isn't a king

typical nigel response, answering a question not asked.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"They are doing their jobs. Its the law. Trump isn't a king"

typical nigel response, answering a question not asked.

It was posited that Congress was somehow abusing their power by asking for Trumps tax returns. So yes, it was asked.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 15
jah609: Hillary showed us the value and importance of a Congressional subpoena when she shredded 33,000 subpoenaed emails and she is still walking around as free as a bird.


Your making a false claim does not make it true.

A Platte River Networks employee who managed the server deleted the email.

The FBI "found no evidence that any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them."

The FBI also found that Clinton did not "instruct anyone to delete her emails to avoid complying with FOIA, State or FBI requests for information."


https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
A Platte River Networks employee who managed the server deleted the email.


Oh, so this employee deleted emails with out Clinton's direction...I have ocean front property to sell you. Call me.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It was posited that Congress was somehow abusing their power by asking for Trumps tax returns. So yes, it was asked.

LOL you are digging deeper and deeper...so much fun to be had with you!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Facts don’t matter. Nobody hates like a Rightie.

Ken
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Thanks for the link:
The lawyers are also seeking a court order blocking the accounting company, Mazars USA, from handing over the information, which it says would “expose plaintiffs’ confidential information.”

I thought they had just set a deadline for the IRS and Treasury. This is new info for me; thank you.

You're absolutely right. Trump can order Treasury and the IRS not to comply and cite whatever reason he wants but the Mazars USA outfit is outside of that. A judge will have to decide.

How it goes initially will depend on where the suit is filed, and then it will wind its way around the appeal system.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"what does that have to do with congress abusing their powers in demanding Trump's tax returns "

Only a nutter would consider congress doing it's job of overseeing the executive branch to be "abuse".

Do any Trump supporters believe in accountability?

Beuller?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<He hasn't refused to do so, has he?

He will. And you will support him for doing so.
>>


So that's what you see in your crystal ball?


I see Trump winning re election and Rerpublicans wining the house back and extending their Senate Majority.


Liberals will blow a fuse when the new Congress convenes, and the House withdraws the subpoena for Trump's taxes, which is still tied up in court.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"Hillary showed us the value and importance of a Congressional subpoena when she shredded 33,000 subpoenaed emails and she is still walking around as free as a bird."

LOL it is amazing just how many conservatives give false narratives about Hillary Clinton's emails despite it being all over the news and a whole FBI investigation into it.

You would think that after looking foolish over and over again they would get better sources of information. It is almost like they don't find looking dumb.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 15
"A Platte River Networks employee who managed the server deleted the email."

Actually, the Platte River Networks employee only deleted a backup of the email database that was supposed to have legally been deleted months earlier as part of a regular schedule. He did not delete any emails themselves.

No one deleted any emails that were under subpoena.

No one.

The conservative "news" sources know they can take advantage of their viewer's ignorance by confusing the fact that a Platte River employee illegally deleted a backup (to cover for his failure to do his job correctly previously) along with the fact that a law firm legally deleted Clinton's personal emails before turning over her official emails like she was supposed to.

Every conservative then repeats the lie. I have never found any conservative who has gotten the details correct. It is almost like they take pride in their ignorance of the details.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
"And you'd go to jail. You don't get to just ignore a Congressional subpoena.

The President is about to learn that the Executive is not the only governmental body that the courts will defer to in decision-making. In defending his various limits on visas for travelers from selected countries, the President argued - successfully - that the courts can't look behind the government's stated claims that the actions served a legitimate Executive function and seek out a hidden motive. The same is going to be true of Congress - that regardless of whether you think that the real reason they're asking for the information is because they have it in for you, the court is not going to ignore the subpoena if it is for a facially valid purpose."


Dope once made a comment about other people who live in their basements a acting like experts in fields they have no clue about.

I bet the irony of that comment in regards to his posts in this thread escapes him.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 19
"Trump can invoke Executive Privilege and moon Congress while he's doing it."

Executive privilege? For his private tax returns? Even for the one's that covered periods of time before he took office?

That sounds like the legal theory of a failed lawyer living in his mother's basement.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Why are you so sensitive about Trump filing a lawsuit to protect his rights?

Spankie has *no* rights in the request issued to the IRS. He can NOT claim the information is privileged or private because *he, personally* filed those taxes (or were *officially* filed on his behalf).

Why are you NOT supporting the "law of the land"? Or do you only obey the law when it is convenient for you to do so?>>



Perhaps you'll forgive me if I don't accept your claims at face value.

If Trump's lawsuit has no merit, I expect it will be dismissed. He can appeal such decisions if he wishes.


Find that frustrating, I see.


Tough.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<<HOW MANY TIMES will Spankie commit perjury"?>>>

Another mind reader (and doesn't know the name of the person whose mind he clams to be reading).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That sounds like the legal theory of a failed lawyer living in his mother's basement.

Mehhhh . . . referring to such nonsense as the talk of a failed lawyer gives the statement too much credit. This comes from the mind of someone who watched Law and Order one time on TV and now thinks they know something about the law.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<<The FBI "found no evidence that any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them."

The FBI also found that Clinton did not "instruct anyone to delete her emails to avoid complying with FOIA, State or FBI requests for information.">>>

Is this the same FBI whose Director was fired; whose top investigators were demoted before then being fired or resigning?

The same FBI that exonerated her months before interrogating her?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<<Facts don’t matter. Nobody hates like a Rightie.>>>

Have you been asleep since the Mueller Report came out?

Or, better yet, have you not read any of the leftist's posts on this board since the 2016 Presidential Election?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Have you been asleep since the Mueller Report came out?

Or, better yet, have you not read any of the leftist's posts on this board since the 2016 Presidential Election?


They're flopping around on the ground like a bunch of fish spilled out of a bucket. They've never been any good at coming up with ways to discuss issues, now that helplessness has translated into taking the other side's (accurate) description of them and attempting to flip it around.

Nobody hates like a liberal. It should be chiseled in stone someplace.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"It was posited that Congress was somehow abusing their power by asking for Trumps tax returns. So yes, it was asked."

LOL you are digging deeper and deeper...so much fun to be had with you!

My, you do struggle so. With even the simplest of things. I'm sorry.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I see Trump winning re election and Rerpublicans wining the house back and extending their Senate Majority."

You are basing this on what, exactly?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<<HOW MANY TIMES will Spankie commit perjury"?>>>

Another mind reader (and doesn't know the name of the person whose mind he clams to be reading).


Spankie has *publicly* told about 10,000 lies since he took office.

Or you could ask Spankie's attorneys about putting Spankie under oath and *then* being questioned by Congress.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/08/week-68-t...

“Trump had one overriding problem that Dowd knew but could not bring himself to say to the president: ‘You’re a f**king liar.’”
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<<Spankie has *publicly* told about 10,000 lies since he took office.>>>

When you go totally off the grid, you lose any possible acceptance, especially when you don't know who you are talking about.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
When you go totally off the grid, you lose any possible acceptance, especially when you don't know who you are talking about.

My statement is backed by a linked article. I do not see any valid links refuting it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
>> I suppose that Trump figures his tax returns should be private, as provided by law, and as yours are.


The law actually provides the opposite, that congress can examine them.

Why must you lie so often?
Print the post Back To Top