Key House Democrat Formally Asks For Trump's Tax Returns

[Fern]

No, it would be contempt of court. The Secretary is required by law to provide Trump’s returns to congress. If he refuses to then congress will take him to court and the court will order him to do it. If he still refuses then the court can fine or imprison him to make him comply.

Ah, I see, but that's assuming the DoJ does something. But yes, I agree, a judge can put them in jail ASAP.

Fern

 

[VRAMdemon]

So...Mulvaney is proudly asserting that the IRS head is Trump's creature, and that Trump is above the law.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Ah, I see, but that's assuming the DoJ does something. But yes, I agree, a judge can put them in jail ASAP.

Fern

It appears there may be no way for the Feds to bury this.

We have top men working on it, Top... Men.

 

[Fern]

Lap it up.

What are you babbling about?

Fern

 

[Fern]

You posit conjecture as fact. If a report totally exonerated such a President then there would be no basis for redactions other than those agreed to by congressional committees.

You know this is incorrect; why do you post it?

Fern

 

[soulcougher73]

No, it would be contempt of court. The Secretary is required by law to provide Trump’s returns to congress. If he refuses to then congress will take him to court and the court will order him to do it. If he still refuses then the court can fine or imprison him to make him comply.

That would be awesome if he was so vain about his tiny finances that he would rather be imprisoned than show how bigly he isn’t to the world.

 

[kage69]

You know this is incorrect; why do you post it?

Fern

I'm not curious about the first part, that was established in the Dubya days IIRC.

What is it about the total exoneration part there that you take issue with?

 

[kage69]

So...Mulvaney is proudly asserting that the IRS head is Trump's creature, and that Trump is above the law.

Bluster from a toad of man. Amazing what he'll spew for a guy he admitted is a terrible human being. Once again, just imagine what the reaction would have been had Obama or his people asserted that.

Every day they make this country just a little more ridiculous, every day a little closer to a true banana republic.

 

[Fern]

I'm not curious about the first part, that was established in the Dubya days IIRC.

What is it about the total exoneration part there that you take issue with?

The AG does not have the authority to release the full report because:

1. Grand Jury material cannot be released (I think there is a limited exception and it requires the judge to do so, not the AG)

2. It was a counter-intelligence investigation. Thus there will be classified info that cannot be released.

3. The Special Counsel rules written by Congress under Janet Reno forbid it.

These restrictions on the AG are all from laws passed by Congress. Some of the current longer-term members passed these laws.

(A possible 4th would be Exec Priv, but I understand that will not asserted.)

As regards "exoneration". Investgators/prosecuters do NOT exonerate. They charge or don't charge. No where along the line in our criminal justice system is anybody ever exonerated. You are charged or not charged; you are indicted or not indicted ("true bill" or no "true bill): you are guilty or not guilty.

Fern

 

[kage69]

Jhhnn specified necessary edits by Congress, this of course covers things relating to national security and ongoing intel ops/investigations.

It's funny you mention Reno, was taking a peek at 64 FR 37038 over at the GPO, hmmmm...

(c) The Attorney General may determine that public release of these
reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release
would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of
information by any Department of Justice employee, including the
Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special
Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental
guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal
investigation, and relevant law.''



Isn't that what we're talking about?

 

[ivwshane]

The AG does not have the authority to release the full report because:

1. Grand Jury material cannot be released (I think there is a limited exception and it requires the judge to do so, not the AG)

See my response below.

2. It was a counter-intelligence investigation. Thus there will be classified info that cannot be released.

Congress has the right to see classified information. You are confusing a public release with a release to Congress.

3. The Special Counsel rules written by Congress under Janet Reno forbid it.

And yet the information was still released (see my response below for how).

These restrictions on the AG are all from laws passed by Congress. Some of the current longer-term members passed these laws.

(A possible 4th would be Exec Priv, but I understand that will not asserted.)

As regards "exoneration". Investgators/prosecuters do NOT exonerate. They charge or don't charge. No where along the line in our criminal justice system is anybody ever exonerated. You are charged or not charged; you are indicted or not indicted ("true bill" or no "true bill): you are guilty or not guilty.

Fern

You are right, the AG doesn't have the power to release grand jury information however, take a guess at who has that power and how one would get permission to release such info. Ask yourself this; how was it that the AG in charge of the Watergate investigation was able to release grand jury information to Congress? How was the AG in charge of the white water investigation able to release grand jury information?

I'll answer for you; they were able to release grand jury information because they asked the judge if they could and the judge allowed it.
Guess who hasn't even bothered asking the judge yet, 17 days after the investigation was officially ended?

 

[fskimospy]

The AG does not have the authority to release the full report because:

1. Grand Jury material cannot be released (I think there is a limited exception and it requires the judge to do so, not the AG)

2. It was a counter-intelligence investigation. Thus there will be classified info that cannot be released.

3. The Special Counsel rules written by Congress under Janet Reno forbid it.

These restrictions on the AG are all from laws passed by Congress. Some of the current longer-term members passed these laws.

(A possible 4th would be Exec Priv, but I understand that will not asserted.)

As regards "exoneration". Investgators/prosecuters do NOT exonerate. They charge or don't charge. No where along the line in our criminal justice system is anybody ever exonerated. You are charged or not charged; you are indicted or not indicted ("true bill" or no "true bill): you are guilty or not guilty.

Fern

This is a straw man though as literally no one is arguing for the entirety of the report to be made public, classified information included. I’m unaware of a single, solitary federal political figure who has said that. Your argument relies on assuming that and I’m very confident you know it is nonsense.

Barr can and should release Mueller’s findings and Mueller’s unclassified summaries in their totality. He is absolutely empowered by the special counsel regulations to do so. If he does not it is because he CHOOSES not to, at which point we owe it to ourselves to have congress compel him to.

The special counsel statute was written for the express purpose of investigating criminal behavior in the executive branch, the president in particular. Congress not only has the right but the duty to see what he found without political interference from the president’s own appointees.

 

[Vic]

Mulvaney said today the Democrats will never see Trump's tax returns and that's because the law protects privacy. Of course he pays no attention to the real law which says that the President and the Executive Branch have no say in the matter and there is no exemptions. Time for the House to man up and give two weeks to the IRS to comply or arrest and imprison those who do not do their lawful duty.

It's not 'the Democrats' asking to see Trump's tax returns, it is the People of the United States asking to see Trump's tax returns through their lawfully elected representatives in Congress.
And the reason why is obvious to anyone who isn't a MAGA, and that is that the President is corrupt and blatantly in violation of the Constitution, namely the Emoluments clause.
As there is no right to be President of the United, Trump can retain his right to privacy by resigning. Otherwise, he holds that Office by the grace of the People, who are represented by the Congress.

 

[Vic]

The AG does not have the authority to release the full report because:

1. Grand Jury material cannot be released (I think there is a limited exception and it requires the judge to do so, not the AG)

2. It was a counter-intelligence investigation. Thus there will be classified info that cannot be released.

3. The Special Counsel rules written by Congress under Janet Reno forbid it.

These restrictions on the AG are all from laws passed by Congress. Some of the current longer-term members passed these laws.

(A possible 4th would be Exec Priv, but I understand that will not asserted.)

As regards "exoneration". Investgators/prosecuters do NOT exonerate. They charge or don't charge. No where along the line in our criminal justice system is anybody ever exonerated. You are charged or not charged; you are indicted or not indicted ("true bill" or no "true bill): you are guilty or not guilty.

Fern

Why not release the report? What are they hiding? What are they afraid of? What would you have said if the Starr Report had been withheld, or had been heavily redacted?

 

[fskimospy]

It's not 'the Democrats' asking to see Trump's tax returns, it is the People of the United States asking to see Trump's tax returns through their lawfully elected representatives in Congress.
And the reason why is obvious to anyone who isn't a MAGA, and that is that the President is corrupt and blatantly in violation of the Constitution, namely the Emoluments clause.
As there is no right to be President of the United, Trump can retain his right to privacy by resigning. Otherwise, he holds that Office by the grace of the People, who are represented by the Congress.

Also, as I mentioned before this law exists in large part because of previous scandals involving widespread corruption within the executive branch. The law is there specifically because it is the job of congress to police the executive and knowing what financial conflicts of interest exist is oversight 101.

Trump should have turned his taxes over to begin with. Since he refused it’s now time for congress to make him turn them over. The American people deserve it.

 

[darkswordsman17]

It's not 'the Democrats' asking to see Trump's tax returns, it is the People of the United States asking to see Trump's tax returns through their lawfully elected representatives in Congress.
And the reason why is obvious to anyone who isn't a MAGA, and that is that the President is corrupt and blatantly in violation of the Constitution, namely the Emoluments clause.
As there is no right to be President of the United, Trump can retain his right to privacy by resigning. Otherwise, he holds that Office by the grace of the People, who are represented by the Congress.

Damn straight.

 

[woolfe9998]

That would be awesome if he was so vain about his tiny finances that he would rather be imprisoned than show how bigly he isn’t to the world.

You're assuming that's the only reason he doesn't want us seeing them. I strongly doubt that.

 

[hal2kilo]

We're fighting a losing battle when it comes to auditing the uber wealthy. (Thanks to the GOP).
Strangled agency has little resources against the wealthy A depressing and long story.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Trump, a guy who grievance tweets CONSTANTLY - And according to him, is someone who is under audit for "more than ten years by the IRS" never grievance tweets about that, and indeed never mentioned it until the election as an excuse for not making his tax returns public. Never bitched and moaned about it. Never claimed victim-hood at the hands of an easy target like the IRS in any speech, rally, interview, etc...

From the beginning and even through these 10 days, one thing remains clear: these are not the actions of an innocent man! Innocent people do not act or talk like he does. Guilty people will try to claim exoneration or discredit the information altogether. Trump still attacks the people who exonerated him. He's getting away with doing anything he wants, and no one is fighting him. People who are supposed to protect the United States are just quacking.

 

[kage69]

We're fighting a losing battle when it comes to auditing the uber wealthy. (Thanks to the GOP).
Strangled agency has little resources against the wealthy A depressing and long story.

Republicans and their greed will be the undoing of this country. Positively Roman, this desire to advocate for wars and expensive projects while at the same time doing all they can to remove themselves from being taxed.

The IRS needs a make over, with enhanced eyes and teeth.

 

[Fern]

This is a straw man though as literally no one is arguing for the entirety of the report to be made public, classified information included. I’m unaware of a single, solitary federal political figure who has said that. Your argument relies on assuming that and I’m very confident you know it is nonsense.
-snip-

You need to watch the news, and I previously gave you an example of a member of Congress calling for a copy of the unredacted report.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

You need to watch the news, and I previously gave you an example of a member of Congress calling for a copy of the unredacted report.

Fern

Right, we already talked about this. You’re relying on the fact that by ‘unredacted’ they mean criminal exposure of classified information. No sane person would think someone was implying criminal behavior there. Can you find me a single source outside of conservative media that indicates federal political officials are advocating for this? I bet you can’t.

Remember, conservative media lies professionally and they are counting on you not to question it. They think you are stupid. I know you’re not stupid so don’t validate them.

 

[IronWing]

Time to find the Treasury Secretary in contempt of Congress?

 

[UNCjigga]

Meanwhile, Trump's sister just retired from the federal bench amidst an inquiry into possible judicial misconduct (she was allegedly an enabler in Trump tax dodging schemes.)

https://www.thedailybeast.com/marya...retires-as-a-judge-during-conduct-inquiry-nyt

Future SCOTUS nominee??

 

[soulcougher73]

Meanwhile, Trump's sister just retired from the federal bench amidst an inquiry into possible judicial misconduct (she was allegedly an enabler in Trump tax dodging schemes.)

https://www.thedailybeast.com/marya...retires-as-a-judge-during-conduct-inquiry-nyt

Future SCOTUS nominee??

Shocked. Shocked i say.