• 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!

Judge orders Trump Accounts to hand over info to House!

When was the last time such a subpoena was connected to a politically motivated action unrelated to any legitimate reason for it?


That will likely be the argument. Congress has to show cause. There appears to be plenty of reason to suggest the House hasn't met that legal test.

Can the house committee that issued the subpoena propose changes in the law that make the presidents and vp's tax returns public information? (Hint: The answer is yes)
 
I didn’t call you a liar I said you were lying. Yes, there is a difference. You said there was no legitimate reason for congress to demand trumps tax returns and there absolutely is. So, your comment was a lie.

There is no difference. Don't call me a liar. Ever.
 
Yes, a liberal Obama appointed Judge, no doubt shopped for a purpose.

Yes, the President needs to act quickly. We'll see.

The shame of it all is the precedent the New Democratic Party is establishing.

The next Dem in the White House is doomed, which I will be glad to do my part to insure.

Honestly the democrats have opened their own doom.

If trump wanted to he could request the tax returns and business taxes of all members of congress.
it is within his right to do so.

lets see all the illegal insider trading deals that these democrats have done to enrich themselves over the years.

these people make 100k or so a year as a congressmen. so how are they making millions of dollars?
it is all illegal insider trading back door deals.
 
There is no difference. Don't call me a liar. Ever.

I didn’t call you a liar so stop lying about that too. I didn’t call you a liar I said you were lying. There was a legitimate reason for congress to request Trumps tax returns. So please stop lying about there being no legitimate reason when even the judge agrees there is a legitimate reason.
 
Can the house committee that issued the subpoena propose changes in the law that make the presidents and vp's tax returns public information? (Hint: The answer is yes)

not according to the law.
you evidently don't know what a closed executive session means.
 
It's in the link. Perhaps you missed it, or didn't bother to actually read what was presented.

Kessler also said the newspaper has only used the word “lie” once — about Trump’s comments on Stormy Daniels hush money — and tries to distance its assessments from that word. “We are always careful to say this is a list of false or misleading statements, but I obviously can’t control how other people write about our work,” he said.

I also asked Kessler about his criticizing Trump for not including context, but not providing context in his criticism, particularly when such surrounding information would be helpful toward the president.

For example, I pointed out that, while the U.S. is not the fastest growing economy in the world, as Trump has stated, it is nonetheless the fastest in the developed world, which the Post did not point out. “Your point about growth in the developed world is a fair one and I will consider adding that context, though that is not what Trump said,” he said.​

You made the claim:
The 10,000 provable misstatement meme has already been proven to full of fake news and subjective nonsense. That has been admitted to by the fake news keepers at WaPo.

Now you, absurdly, purport that a single instance where Kessler said he would re-examine one (1) Trump untruth for context is an admission that the list of over 10,000 lies/misstatements has been debunked. Ridiculous.

And yeah, I did read the entire opinion piece. Did you miss this part?: “Even if you accept the 25% figure I come up with, and give another 5%-to-10% leeway for comments pretty close or almost true, Trump does spout untruths on a daily basis, sometimes wildly at odds with the facts.”
 
I didn’t call you a liar so stop lying about that too. I didn’t call you a liar I said you were lying. There was a legitimate reason for congress to request Trumps tax returns. So please stop lying about there being no legitimate reason when even the judge agrees there is a legitimate reason.

that is calling someone a liar.

no there is no legit reason.
the judge is an obama appointee. he should have recused himself if he was not going to rule according to law
and fish a reason to allow it.

There is no evidence by anyone that trump has done anything illegal.
this is another fishing expedition. because the losers lost on the mueller report.

now they think they can violate constitutional protections to go fishing to try and find something
that is outside their preview to do.
 
You made the claim:

Now you, absurdly, purport that a single instance where Kessler said he would re-examine one (1) Trump untruth for context is an admission that the list of over 10,000 lies/misstatements has been debunked. Ridiculous.

And yeah, I did read the entire opinion piece. Did you miss this part?: “Even if you accept the 25% figure I come up with, and give another 5%-to-10% leeway for comments pretty close or almost true, Trump does spout untruths on a daily basis, sometimes wildly at odds with the facts.”

So do all politicians what is your point?
 
Honestly the democrats have opened their own doom.

If trump wanted to he could request the tax returns and business taxes of all members of congress.
it is within his right to do so.

lets see all the illegal insider trading deals that these democrats have done to enrich themselves over the years.

these people make 100k or so a year as a congressmen. so how are they making millions of dollars?
it is all illegal insider trading back door deals.

He can request them, after writing a letter for each one and personally signing the letter...

(g) Disclosure to President and certain other persons
(1) In general
Upon written request by the President, signed by him personally, the Secretary shall furnish to the President, or to such employee or employees of the White House Office as the President may designate by name in such request, a return or return information with respect to any taxpayer named in such request.

Any such request shall state—

(A) the name and address of the taxpayer whose return or return information is to be disclosed,
(B) the kind of return or return information which is to be disclosed,
(C) the taxable period or periods covered by such return or return information, and
(D) the specific reason why the inspection or disclosure is requested.
 
that is calling someone a liar.

No, it isn't. It is calling out ONE instance of lying. That's it.

no there is no legit reason.
the judge is an obama appointee. he should have recused himself if he was not going to rule according to law
and fish a reason to allow it.

There is no evidence by anyone that trump has done anything illegal.
this is another fishing expedition. because the losers lost on the mueller report.

now they think they can violate constitutional protections to go fishing to try and find something
that is outside their preview to do.

Just because the Judge was an Obama appointee doesn't mean he is wrong. If you are going to dismiss anything outright because of who appointed him, then you open the door in the future to do the same for any Trump appointed judge. The judge even agreed there is a reason, so it is a lie to say other wise. Now, you are lying about that.
 
So do all politicians what is your point?

Not at the level Trump has done on an almost daily basis. He has lied more than the last two presidents combined in all their terms and he did it in less than one term. Trump is definitely a liar and nothing out of his mouth is to be believed outright.
 
I didn’t call you a liar so stop lying about that too. I didn’t call you a liar I said you were lying. There was a legitimate reason for congress to request Trumps tax returns. So please stop lying about there being no legitimate reason when even the judge agrees there is a legitimate reason.

What, exactly, is that "legitimate reason"?
 
What, exactly, is that "legitimate reason"?

By law, congress does not need to provide any reason nor issue a subpoena... They issued a subpoena to strengthen their legal case...
 
The question was, "Where is "for any reason" in that list".. of impeachable offenses?
And the answer is that "any reason" is wherever on that list that Congress decides it is.
:shrug:

Congress decides what constitutes an impeachable offense.

Congress decides what the rules of an impeachment trial are.

Congress decides when to impeach.

AfaIct, our govt lacks any mechanism for another branch of govt to countermand Congress in re impeachment.
 
No, it isn't. It is calling out ONE instance of lying. That's it.
Umm hello that is calling someone a liar. what part of that don't you understand?

Just because the Judge was an Obama appointee doesn't mean he is wrong. If you are going to dismiss anything outright because of who appointed him, then you open the door in the future to do the same for any Trump appointed judge. The judge even agreed there is a reason, so it is a lie to say other wise. Now, you are lying about that.

actually it does because well he ignored already established law on this ruling.
Nope i can dismiss what he says because he has no reason to be objectionable.
congress can prove no wrongdoing by trump. the only reason for the request is to try and find a crime.
that right there is beyond their scope layed out in the constitution.

congress does not have law enforcement powers. they do not have the power to fish for crimes.
if the judge was being objectionable then he would have questioned the congressional lawyers.

he actually violated trumps rights on that. trump is innocent until proven guilty and it is the state that has to
defend their position. they have no defense of their position as they have no evidence of wrong doing.

however democrats have opened the can unfortunately they can't let it go.
they should have just dropped it.

if a democrat is elected president i expect a full investigation of their entire life from when they were born
to recent. i hope they kept a financial record of every penny they made and earned. how they made every investment
that they made and sold.

I think it is nonsense and ruins this country but well when you opened the can this is what you get.
and you will have 0 room to complain about it.
 
By law, congress does not need to provide any reason nor issue a subpoena... They issued a subpoena to strengthen their legal case...

what case what evidence?
so far they have NOTHING.
 
not according to the law.
you evidently don't know what a closed executive session means.

Can they change the law? You know, a legislative purpose..
 
what case what evidence?
so far they have NOTHING.

The law does not require them to provide any evidence or reason... period... full stop...
 
By law, congress does not need to provide any reason nor issue a subpoena... They issued a subpoena to strengthen their legal case...

An assertion was made and I simply want to know why. I never claimed that a "legitimate reason" was required, but after seeing it mentioned 3X in a single post it is not unreasonable to ask WTF that poster was talking about. BTW, what "legal case" is congress trying to strengthen?
 
What, exactly, is that "legitimate reason"?

Are you having issues with Google that you are not able to look it up yourself or are you playing like you don't know how to use the internet?

Right here:

..But Democrats have said they need the records because they are examining whether foreigners are in a position to use business dealings with the president to exert hidden influence over American policymaking, and whether ethics and disclosure laws need to be strengthened.

That is a valid reason and even the judge mentioned it so:

Judge Mehta — an appointee of former President Barack Obama — said that justification was sufficient to make the subpoena valid.

“These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the committee’s actions are truly motivated by political considerations,” he wrote. “Accordingly, the court will enter judgment in favor of the Oversight Committee.”

Accountants Must Turn Over Trump’s Financial Records, Lower-Court Judge Rules - The New York Times

Now, you may not LIKE the reason, but is a legitimate reason and well within the rights of congress to request those.
 
What, exactly, is that "legitimate reason"?

You could read for yourself if you like —
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6019022/20-19-Opinion-House-v-Trump.pdf

"According to the Oversight Committee, it believes that the requested records will aid its consideration of strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, as well as amending the penalties for violating such laws. The Committee also says that the records will assist in monitoring the President’s compliance with the Foreign Emoluments Clauses. These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the Committee’s actions are truly motivated by political considerations."​


fwiw, emoluments are specifically listed in the US Constitution
 
Not at the level Trump has done on an almost daily basis. He has lied more than the last two presidents combined in all their terms and he did it in less than one term. Trump is definitely a liar and nothing out of his mouth is to be believed outright.

sorry that doesn't defend the point.

so what is the point all politicians do it.
it doesn't matter what level how often.

a lie is a lie period.

so again what is the point.
 
An assertion was made and I simply want to know why. I never claimed that a "legitimate reason" was required, but after seeing it mentioned 3X in a single post it is not unreasonable to ask WTF that poster was talking about. BTW, what "legal case" is congress trying to strengthen?

Enforcement of their power under 26 USC 6103 (f)...
 
You could read for yourself if you like —
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6019022/20-19-Opinion-House-v-Trump.pdf

"According to the Oversight Committee, it believes that the requested records will aid its consideration of strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, as well as amending the penalties for violating such laws. The Committee also says that the records will assist in monitoring the President’s compliance with the Foreign Emoluments Clauses. These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the Committee’s actions are truly motivated by political considerations."​

current investigative procedures have been fine for the past 60 years.
so no they don't have a legislative reason.

more so with all the dubious business dealings by clinton and obama.

so no they are not.
 
Back
Top Bottom