Trump...Tax Fraud? Say it ain't so!

[s0me0nesmind1]

No matter how much I explained this earlier in this thread, everyone keeps moving from thread to thread saying that this or that is going to be the next "gotcha!" for Trump to go away into pound me in the ass prison.

It's pretty hilarious, like watching kittens chase laser pointers. I don't have the heart to tell them that they are wrong and will be disappointed - it's just cute watching them continuously living in self-delusion that they think Trump will be going to prison.

 

[fskimospy]

No matter how much I explained this earlier in this thread, everyone keeps moving from thread to thread saying that this or that is going to be the next "gotcha!" for Trump to go away into pound me in the ass prison.

It's pretty hilarious, like watching kittens chase laser pointers. I don't have the heart to tell them that they are wrong and will be disappointed - it's just cute watching them continuously living in self-delusion that they think Trump will be going to prison.

Haven’t you humiliated yourself enough in this thread so far? Why make yourself look even dumber?

s:‘Trump won’t get prosecuted because of the statute of limitations has expired’

Everyone else: ‘this offense has no statute of limitations’

s: ‘I DONT CARE THIS DOESN’T COUNT ARGLEBARGLE’

 

[Greenman]

I thought this was clear, can you explain your confusion? Likely tax fraud means there is evidence of tax fraud. That’s why he’s being investigated, his tax returns show a lot of things that are probably crimes!

1) that’s not hearsay.
2) hearsay is only relevant during a trial attempting to obtain a criminal conviction.
3) public statements from people are absolutely grounds to subpoena information! Think how insane our legal system would be if they weren’t.

So despite losing literally every other case about authorities getting his tax returns you think Trump is going to stage a heroic comeback here? Can I ask what your basis is for this?

I wasn't aware that he'd been forced to hand over his returns.
I don't much care about Trump, but I care a lot about proper legal protection from spurious accusations.

 

[fskimospy]

I wasn't aware that he'd been forced to hand over his returns.
I don't much care about Trump, but I care a lot about proper legal protection from spurious accusations.

He continues to appeal the decisions but he has lost every one where a decision has been made. Every single one. Do you have any particular reason why you think this outcome

So to be clear you believe law enforcement should not be able to subpoena current tax returns when credible evidence of past tax fraud is revealed? That’s what your arguing against, after all.

To me the greatest threat here is that the executive can abuse the legal system to avoid accountability. The actual scandal is that the tax returns weren’t turned over the day of the request, especially to congress as this was in violation of the law. Do you have any concerns about this violation?

 

[Sunburn74]

I wasn't aware that he'd been forced to hand over his returns.
I don't much care about Trump, but I care a lot about proper legal protection from spurious accusations.

The only difference between a spurious accusation and a real one is vetting.

You'd think if he were innocent he'd just hand over the tax returns and save the millions in legal fees fighting these losing battles , yet for reasons unclear he continues to pay good money to fight them because obviously he believes in burning money and has nothing to hide at all and is completely innocent.

I mean just ask yourself, if the attorney general of your state wanted your tax returns for a tax fraud investigation would you spend millions fighting it?

 

[fskimospy]

The only difference between a spurious accusation and a real one is vetting.

You'd think if he were innocent he'd just hand over the tax returns and save the millions in legal fees fighting these losing battles , yet for reasons unclear he continues to pay good money to fight them because obviously he believes in burning money and has nothing to hide at all and is completely innocent.

I mean just ask yourself, if the attorney general of your state wanted your tax returns for a tax fraud investigation would you spend millions fighting it?

I mean the NYT released information about all sorts of tax shenanigans that Trump has been engaged with where it appears likely that he committed crimes. In response to this NYS and NYC have said 'well, let's find out if he's still committing crimes'.

Greenman apparently thinks that this is not only something they shouldn't do, but the judiciary should step in and prevent law enforcement from finding out if he's still committing crimes! This is absolutely insane - partisanship has gotten so bad that people are now attempting to undermine the basic tenets of criminal law enforcement.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

The only difference between a spurious accusation and a real one is vetting.

You'd think if he were innocent he'd just hand over the tax returns and save the millions in legal fees fighting these losing battles , yet for reasons unclear he continues to pay good money to fight them because obviously he believes in burning money and has nothing to hide at all and is completely innocent.

I mean just ask yourself, if the attorney general of your state wanted your tax returns for a tax fraud investigation would you spend millions fighting it?

Lololol liberals giving us a speech of "If you're innocent why dont you hand it over. Have something to hide?" Narrative.


Apparently you've never talked to any lawyer worth a shit, because all of them will tell you: Never ever give authorities any information. It will never serve your interests, it only serves them.

 

[woolfe9998]

Lololol liberals giving us a speech of "If you're innocent why dont you hand it over. Have something to hide?" Narrative.


Apparently you've never talked to any lawyer worth a shit, because all of them will tell you: Never ever give authorities any information. It will never serve your interests, it only serves them.

Yes that is the typical advice. The typical tax payer, however, isn't POTUS and/or running for POTUS.

 

[blackangst1]

The only difference between a spurious accusation and a real one is vetting.

You'd think if he were innocent he'd just hand over the tax returns and save the millions in legal fees fighting these losing battles , yet for reasons unclear he continues to pay good money to fight them because obviously he believes in burning money and has nothing to hide at all and is completely innocent.

I mean just ask yourself, if the attorney general of your state wanted your tax returns for a tax fraud investigation would you spend millions fighting it?

I would tell them as soon as they provide a subpoena I will.

 

[fskimospy]

I would tell them as soon as they provide a subpoena I will.

So you think Trump should have complied then?

 

[blackangst1]

So you think Trump should have complied then?

As long as they werent tied up in other things, yes. But I still think its a stupid request.

 

[fskimospy]

As long as they werent tied up in other things, yes. But I still think its a stupid request.

Why is it a stupid request? We have strong evidence he committed crimes in the past, wouldn’t it be stupid to not see if he’s still doing it?

 

[blackangst1]

Why is it a stupid request? We have strong evidence he committed crimes in the past, wouldn’t it be stupid to not see if he’s still doing it?

And the IRS is incapable of of those "tax crimes"?

 

[fskimospy]

And the IRS is incapable of of those "tax crimes"?

The IRS is run by the person committing the crimes, so no they are not, lol.

Regardless, the IRS doesn't prosecute NYS tax crimes, but federal tax data would clearly be relevant in the investigation into NYS tax crimes. I think that clearly establishes this request is both smart and appropriate.

 

[blackangst1]

The IRS is run by the person committing the crimes, so no they are not, lol.

Regardless, the IRS doesn't prosecute NYS tax crimes, but federal tax data would clearly be relevant in the investigation into NYS tax crimes. I think that clearly establishes this request is both smart and appropriate.

I dunno man. I dont buy that conspiracy. He wasnt in charge prior to becoming POTUS. Unless youre implying he started his tax fraud AFTER becoming POTUS?

 

[fskimospy]

I dunno man. I dont buy that conspiracy.

What conspiracy exactly? Is your argument that the agency which is currently illegally withholding Trump's tax returns from investigation by Congress should be trusted to impartially and effectively investigate those same tax returns on their own? Just want to make sure I understand your argument.

Also, can I assume you are acknowledging that because the IRS cannot investigate or prosecute state tax crimes that the request by the state for IRS data is entirely smart and appropriate?

EDIT: To respond to your edit, it is public knowledge that to the best of my knowledge is not disputed by anyone that the IRS lacks the resources to adequately police tax fraud, especially among high net worth individuals so the fact that they miss tax crimes is not only plausible, it's just a generally accepted truism. So the idea that because the IRS didn't prosecute him before means there were no crimes to prosecute is facially false and everyone knows it.

 

[blackangst1]

What conspiracy exactly? Is your argument that the agency which is currently illegally withholding Trump's tax returns from investigation by Congress should be trusted to impartially and effectively investigate those same tax returns on their own? Just want to make sure I understand your argument.

The conspiracy that the IRS wont cooperate because...uh...Trump is their boss.

And seeing how SCOTUS already ruled on this, yes.

Also, can I assume you are acknowledging that because the IRS cannot investigate or prosecute state tax crimes that the request by the state for IRS data is entirely smart and appropriate?

Sure. If the audit requires it. Not just because they say they want it though.

EDIT: To respond to your edit, it is public knowledge that to the best of my knowledge is not disputed by anyone that the IRS lacks the resources to adequately police tax fraud, especially among high net worth individuals so the fact that they miss tax crimes is not only plausible, it's just a generally accepted truism. So the idea that because the IRS didn't prosecute him before means there were no crimes to prosecute is facially false and everyone knows it.

I highly disagree.

 

[fskimospy]

The conspiracy that the IRS wont cooperate because...uh...Trump is their boss.

And seeing how SCOTUS already ruled on this, yes.

It’s weird that you think the thing that is literally happening today and about which err have been numerous news stories and court cases is a conspiracy theory.

The IRS is literally not cooperating because Trump is their boss...today.

Sure. If the audit requires it. Not just because they say they want it though.

What do you mean audit? This is a criminal investigation.

I highly disagree.

You should talk to the IRS then as they seem to think so.

 

[hal2kilo]

You're really going to take the position that congress had credible evidence of collusion with the Russian government and decided not to act on it? Is anyone on the planet dumb enough to believe that?

The Republican have become traitors to our democracy. Pay attention.

 

[MrSquished]

Don't run for president if you have any potential shady financial deals in your past, no matter what size. Look at Clinton and Whitewater.

 

[Maxima1]

I dunno man. I dont buy that conspiracy. He wasnt in charge prior to becoming POTUS. Unless youre implying he started his tax fraud AFTER becoming POTUS?

Why would it be unlikely that there are tax crimes in the past? Manafort? Dr. Dino? Chauvin? All going back several years. Could do this all day.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I wasn't aware that he'd been forced to hand over his returns.
I don't much care about Trump, but I care a lot about proper legal protection from spurious accusations.

Trump would have filed NY taxes and financials and this is being handled as a state case. No pardons here.

 

[blackangst1]

Why would it be unlikely that there are tax crimes in the past? Manafort? Dr. Dino? Chauvin? All going back several years. Could do this all day.

Why are you asking me?

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Trump would have filed NY taxes and financials and this is being handled as a state case. No pardons here.

No matter how much morons here would try to make you believe otherwise, there is still statue of limitations.


Again - let me reiterate this for you laser-pointing focusing kittens. Nothing will come of this.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

No matter how much morons here would try to make you believe otherwise, there is still statue of limitations.


Again - let me reiterate this for you laser-pointing focusing kittens. Nothing will come of this.

Where can I find this statue and how does it apply to the case of Trump tax fraud NY is talking about? Apparently this statue has the power to dispell all legal cases NY can bring. Impressive, most impressive.