• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump, sons sue to block House Democrats from obtaining his financial records

tres borrachos said:
The government pries into your finances all the time. Do you have your money in a bank, or in your mattress? Do you work? File taxes? Have investments? If the answers are "yes", then your finances are always being scrutinized.
Click to expand...

The government isn't constantly prying into our finances all the time out of partisanship. The House Dems, on the other hand, are doing it based solely on politics. They hate Trump. They want every iota of info they can get on him just to smear him. And they have some highly questionable ****ty law at their disposal to do it.
 
How much is he in the bag with Russia? That would be helpful to know.

Tyrants love secrecy. They build myths around themselves. They don't have any problem blabbing about other peoples' stolen personal emails. But we can't know anything about them, except what they want us to know.
 
tres borrachos said:
IMO healthcare will be the number one talking point in 2020.
Click to expand...

If this "wave after wave" crap keeps going on at our southern border, immigration will be #1. And the Dems will lose that battle.
 
Roadvirus said:
The government isn't constantly prying into our finances all the time out of partisanship. The House Dems, on the other hand, are doing it based solely on politics. They hate Trump. They want every iota of info they can get on him just to smear him. And they have some highly questionable ****ty law at their disposal to do it.
Click to expand...

One doesn't have to dislike trump to recognize that he is steeped in corruption and lies, which warrants severe oversight.

It is perfectly understandable that he wouldn't want anyone learning further about his corruption and lies. Some of his fans might have an actual breaking point. Maybe if he shot two people on 5th Avenue?
 
Roadvirus said:
The government isn't constantly prying into our finances all the time out of partisanship. The House Dems, on the other hand, are doing it based solely on politics. They hate Trump. They want every iota of info they can get on him just to smear him. And they have some highly questionable ****ty law at their disposal to do it.
Click to expand...

I guess it's good for them that they have the law on their side.
 
tres borrachos said:
I guess it's good for them that they have the law on their side.
Click to expand...

So you cheer the violation of the Constitution? Some asswipe in Congress can take a peek at YOUR taxes anytime the mood strikes them. You're down with that? Sad.
 
Roadvirus said:
If this "wave after wave" crap keeps going on at our southern border, immigration will be #1. And the Dems will lose that battle.
Click to expand...

Voters should rightfully blame Trump. Its clear that his policies are causing the problems. The only way to really address the border problem is to get rid of Trump.
 
ElChupacabra said:
I'm curious on what the GOP plans to offer in terms of healthcare reform since they've clearly not prepared. I thought with Trump they would have put something forward, but it was clear they've basically been too busy obstructing reform than coming up with an alternative to the ACA. Now that many of the poor in red states are beneficiaries of the ACA, removing it becomes much trickier.
Click to expand...

The GOP has only had 10 years to come up with a solution. You're being unfair. They need another 10 years.
 
Roadvirus said:
So you cheer the violation of the Constitution? Some asswipe in Congress can take a peek at YOUR taxes anytime the mood strikes them. You're down with that? Sad.
Click to expand...

If there is a law in place, it isn't in violation of the Constitution.

I don't care if someone in Congress subpoenas my taxes. Hell, the US government, via the Patriot Act, can peek in my underwear drawer if they want to. I don't scream about that either.
 
Roadvirus said:
If this "wave after wave" crap keeps going on at our southern border, immigration will be #1. And the Dems will lose that battle.
Click to expand...

I doubt most Americans would think illegal immigration is the most important issue in this country today. Most Americans don't see it. All Americans are alive and manage their health issues every day.
 
Chomsky said:
Source: (CNN) Trump, sons sue to block House Democrats from obtaining his financial records

It appears the 2020 election ramp-up is going to increasing fall along two divisions:

Those that desire transparency in individuals to be installed in office, and those that want privacy and/or secrecy.

I prefer the former (transparency). I don't think you can ever have too much transparency, and that it's important for the democratic process. If the truth happens to shine negatively, oh well, let it fall where it may!

Do you agree?
Click to expand...

I do disagree that any President should have to make his tax returns public, most especially when he exposes a lot of other people to public scrutiny when he does so.

Every candidate for President is required to file financial disclosure forms listing all sources of income, memberships, affiliations, and any positions/financial situations outside the USA. On his financial disclosure form, President Trump listed 168 sources of income and 515 positions held outside the U.S. government. If he failed to disclose anything that was pertinent to the disclosure form, most especially if it was something incriminating or that concealed a conflict of interest, then he should be held accountable for that. Apparently there is nothing there, however, or the haters would have trotted it out and condemned it by now.

Anybody with any sense of intellectual honesty has to know how many people who don't deserve to have their names made public would be exposed in a Trump tax return. Imagine what raw meat that would be to the paparazzi, the media, the Democrats and Trump-haters of all stripes. I think the President would be unethical to release that information unless required to do so by a Supreme Court order that is highly unlikely to happen.

Focusing on the personal side of the President instead of what he is or is not accomplishing for the country is destructive, unhelpful, wrong, at times even evil. Yes, when he is wrong or we cannot support what he is doing, we should hold him accountable for that. But he should be held accountable for REAL wrong doing and not manufactured criticism accusing him of motive or actions that he is not doing or that are not illegal or that were acceptable when a former President or Presidents did the same thing.

And the 'your side did it first' argument is getting really REALLY old. If we justify doing wrong because somebody else did it or is doing it, then nothing will ever be right. And if we judge Presidents on what party they belong to or whether we like them or not instead of what they are actually accomplishing, described honestly and accurately, nobody worth having will ever want to run for President again.
 
Chomsky said:
Not true. Unless you believe the Constitution is an "excuse"?
Click to expand...

Question #1: Where is that action justified in the Constitution? And what is the justification?

Question #2: Do you think Mueller accessed Trump's taxes? If not, why not?
 
Roadvirus said:
The government isn't constantly prying into our finances all the time out of partisanship. The House Dems, on the other hand, are doing it based solely on politics. They hate Trump. They want every iota of info they can get on him just to smear him. And they have some highly questionable ****ty law at their disposal to do it.
Click to expand...
So, your narrative is that the Dems are merely wanting Trump’s taxes for partisan reasons, not legitimate oversight or trying to find out if he’s a national security risk. Why then, didn’t Dems do the same thing to Bush, in 2007? The reason is there was no hint that Bush was a national threat. The same is not so obvious with Trump. There is indeed a reason why Trump is fighting tooth and nail to keep his taxes secret.
 
Mycroft said:
A preemptive strike against the House Dems. Good.

Anyway, I disagree. I think there IS such a thing as too much transparency. Our democratic process has been doing fine for more than two hundred years without it. Some things should stay private...especially things that ALL citizens expect to stay private. A President doesn't give up the rights that every citizen has.
Click to expand...

The IRS MUST COMPLY with a request for tax information from the Chair of the Ways and Means Committee. It's the law. RFN the IRS and the Treasury are breaking the law.
 
Bullseye said:
I agree that releasing or not releasing one's tax records is a constitutional right which the individual is free to waive should he/she choose. In November of 2020 if voters choose to weigh that into their vote I fully support them.

Caveat: IF there were a crime to which tax records could provide evidence I also support the legal procedure for the investigators to obtain them. The mindset that "Trump is a crook, he MUST HAVE done something illegal" is not a basis for violating constitutional rights.
Click to expand...
To the bolded, I'd prefer presidential candidate tax return release being mandatory, as it had been done customary during modern times until Trump. But you are right, it was up to the voters - and will be again in 2020 as you stated.

But that differs from Congressional oversight.
 
jmotivator said:
Question #1: Where is that action justified in the Constitution? And what is the justification?

Question #2: Do you think Mueller accessed Trump's taxes? If not, why not?
Click to expand...
1. Congressional oversight. The SCOTUS has affirmed that Congressional inquires are permitted to be broad, so long as there is an oversight objective.

The premise that Congress must verify that Trump is not violating the emoluments clause, and does not have a financial conflict with certain foreign national base on his business history with them, is an objective the courts will uphold.

2. No. Mueller would have to formally taken the reigns of a financial investigation into Trump's business, which he had no reason to do so, based on the nature of his scope. However, because Trump is accused of several financial crimes in NY, the US attorneys their certainly have those records.
 
Manc Skipper said:
The IRS MUST COMPLY with a request for tax information from the Chair of the Ways and Means Committee. It's the law. RFN the IRS and the Treasury are breaking the law.
Click to expand...
And should be held in contempt.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I do disagree that any President should have to make his tax returns public, most especially when he exposes a lot of other people to public scrutiny when he does so.

Every candidate for President is required to file financial disclosure forms listing all sources of income, memberships, affiliations, and any positions/financial situations outside the USA. On his financial disclosure form, President Trump listed 168 sources of income and 515 positions held outside the U.S. government. If he failed to disclose anything that was pertinent to the disclosure form, most especially if it was something incriminating or that concealed a conflict of interest, then he should be held accountable for that. Apparently there is nothing there, however, or the haters would have trotted it out and condemned it by now.

Anybody with any sense of intellectual honesty has to know how many people who don't deserve to have their names made public would be exposed in a Trump tax return. Imagine what raw meat that would be to the paparazzi, the media, the Democrats and Trump-haters of all stripes. I think the President would be unethical to release that information unless required to do so by a Supreme Court order that is highly unlikely to happen.

Focusing on the personal side of the President instead of what he is or is not accomplishing for the country is destructive, unhelpful, wrong, at times even evil. Yes, when he is wrong or we cannot support what he is doing, we should hold him accountable for that. But he should be held accountable for REAL wrong doing and not manufactured criticism accusing him of motive or actions that he is not doing or that are not illegal or that were acceptable when a former President or Presidents did the same thing.

And the 'your side did it first' argument is getting really REALLY old. If we justify doing wrong because somebody else did it or is doing it, then nothing will ever be right. And if we judge Presidents on what party they belong to or whether we like them or not instead of what they are actually accomplishing, described honestly and accurately, nobody worth having will ever want to run for President again.
Click to expand...
Trump has demonstrated himself to be a compulsive and pathological liar, who history has proven is not also afraid to falsify other records like insurance forms, so taking his financial disclosures as gospel is foolish.

If presidents with financial entanglements that can conflict with their WH duties are allowed to keep direct sources that could reveal such information secret, you can bet all kinds of highway crooks will start seeking public office to become walking bribes for special interests.
 
jmotivator said:
Question #1: Where is that action justified in the Constitution? And what is the justification?
Click to expand...
Congress has general oversight of the executive branch. Are you now saying you do not accept this, unless I do the research and provide a legal argument?

Question #2: Do you think Mueller accessed Trump's taxes? If not, why not?
Click to expand...
What's Mueller got to do with this?
 
Chomsky said:
Doesn't matter if some like yourself don't care; we need it for those that do care, and for Congressional oversight.
Click to expand...

Oversight of what. The things Trump did or did not not do BEFORE becoming president.

Sorry I have long since shed the party first concept of political thought.
 
MovingPictures said:
1. Congressional oversight. The SCOTUS has affirmed that Congressional inquires are permitted to be broad, so long as there is an oversight objective.
Click to expand...

Within the scope of oversight, sure. But he scope of Oversight granted congressional inquiries is with regard to the POTUS administration of existing law.. acts of the POTUS within the role of chief executive, not the private life of the Executive. There is a difference.

The premise that Congress must verify that Trump is not violating the emoluments clause, and does not have a financial conflict with certain foreign national base on his business history with them, is an objective the courts will uphold.
Click to expand...

Such a "premise" is a presumption of guilt, which the Constitution forbids. Before Congress can collect private documents, they will need to establish probable cause like any other policing power. Your argument is like saying the President owns a Gun, therefore he should be treated as a suspect in all shootings.

2. No. Mueller would have to formally taken the reigns of a financial investigation into Trump's business, which he had no reason to do so, based on the nature of his scope. However, because Trump is accused of several financial crimes in NY, the US attorneys their certainly have those records.
Click to expand...

Cool, so for what purpose would Congress need them, other than your previously stated presumption of guilt?
 
I will be interested to see what precedent the courts set for this. On one hand, I really don’t care about Trump’s taxes. There isn’t going to be anything in there any more incriminating than the Mueller report. I am pretty sure that the reason Trump doesn’t want them released is because it will make him look less rich than he claims to be. No, you can’t tell a person’s wealth from them but you can tell how much income they earned in that period and my guess is that it won’t the expected income of someone worth over $7B.

But on the other hand, I feel that over the decades Congress has ceded too much power to the Presidency and anything that helps move us back toward a proper balance sounds like a good idea to me.
 
Chomsky said:
Congress has general oversight of the executive branch. Are you now saying you do not accept this, unless I do the research and provide a legal argument?

What's Mueller got to do with this?
Click to expand...
If Fusion GPS has to produce banking records to Nunes, because they took money from the DNC, you can bet a judge will rule against Trump. The courts have already ruled privacy concerns are not sufficient.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon ruled Thursday that the House panel’s work appeared to be legitimate. He also rejected Fusion GPS’ claims that confidential information about its clients and sources would be in jeopardy of being leaked if the committee obtained the banking records it is seeking.
Click to expand...

Judge: House panel entitled to Fusion GPS bank records - POLITICO

This idea that Congresses oversight is only broad for the GOP can't stand.
 
GDViking said:
Wait, I thought he said he wanted to release his tax information?
Click to expand...

Chakra. Release his chakra. Later on, he'll release the hounds. Y'all need to get your releases under control.
 
Chomsky said:
Congress has general oversight of the executive branch. Are you now saying you do not accept this, unless I do the research and provide a legal argument?
Click to expand...

You seem to be fuzzy on the meaning of what you just wrote. Congressional oversight in limited to oversight of the actions of the chief executive as it pertains to the administration of the office. General oversight doesn't grant them an open door into the private life of the executive unless they have probably cause to tie him to a known crime. You can't open his private life to scrutiny to find a crime to investigate.

Why do you suppose Obama's birth Certificate was unavailable until Obama deemed fit to provide it? Or his school records? The reason it was totally up to Obama is the very same reason it is totally up to Trump on who gets to see his tax records.

the End.

What's Mueller got to do with this?
Click to expand...

Well, since Mueller was on the hunt for a crime to pin on Trump you'd assume he'd have gathered Trump's taxes at some point if it was as easy as you think to get access to them. (Hint: It isn't, and for good reason)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom