N.Y. Senate passes bills on Trump's tax returns and pardon power

[MTAtech]

Once again, Democrats prove themselves to be the party that no longer cares about civil liberties.

Donald Trump puts kids in cages and the Democrats are the ones that don't care about civil liberties.

 

[prometeus]

I love this level of hysteria from those who are still upset that their beloved Hillary wasn't able to steal the election

You know damn well that I am not a Hillary fan and why would she need to steal anything when she had 3 million more votes, so spare me the partisan b ull crap.

I love your attitude that the millions of people who voted for Trump are all "low intellect imbeciles".

Who else would vote for a saint like Trump?

You should scream that constantly in 2020-it will only help Trump win again because many of us who voted for Trump are far far smarter than those who pretend every or most Trump voter is an "imbecile"

Yea, stupid people always think they are smarter than the other guy.

 

[beefheart]

Once again, Democrats prove themselves to be the party that no longer cares about civil liberties.

IRS owns your tax returns, not you. Its been clearly demonstrated over and over. You just want to keep covering for a crook...

 

[Fletch]

You’re putting the cart before the horse. Right now there is suspicion — suspicions that he is compromised due to his dealings with foreign powers, who may have undue influence on American policy. It also would be helpful to know for sure whether he’s a blackmail risk due to previous illegal activities, such as insurance fraud, tax evasion, etc.

There is no 'suspicion' of that other than by loony liberals. Plus, is that really how you want the justice system to work? Do you want the state to change is standard from probable cause to mere suspicion when its time to investigate you? I doubt it,

 

[Nickyjo]

I'd have to consider suggesting to my clients that they pay in whatever tax is due on their return but not actually file the return if this crap keeps up. If government, state or federal, can pull a person's tax return for purely political reasons AND if they can not protect the returns they have received from disclosure to the media then the people have no assurance that their personal information won't be similarly abused.

I don't want any of my clients to go to jail but when we see politicians pulling crap like this it's time to stop handing the hangman more rope.

The law says Congress has a right to see these returns. Trump agreed to release them, remember? Trump has economic ties to Russia and seems unwilling to take steps to keep it from further interference in our elections. Plenty to see here, unless you prefer to blindly follow dictators who lie to you.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Calling the Supreme court!

No way in the world this is a constitutional bill. Riffle thru the private papers
of a person just because he won an election that you thought he should not
have won?

Just another good reason to get out of New York state. The inmates are running the state.

 

[bearpoker]

Here we go with political overreach. When will the haters aka the NY Senate Democrats realize that they cannot weaponize the senate to go after people they don't like, and in this case, Trump?

But it's ok to go after Hillary, right?

 

[jimbo]

There is no fishing at all.

"Because a bunch of low intellect imbeciles elected a known liar and dishonest piece of crap as president and there is no other way to ascertain if he is compromised by our adversaries or he is only a crook."

Sounds like fishing to me or worse.

Out of curiosity, do you have any legal reason that these subpoena's should be honored?

 

[chuckiechan]

N.Y. Senate passes bills on Trump's tax returns and pardon power


Since N.Y. taxes are similar to federal taxes, this is an end run around Trump’s obstruction to stop or delay releasing his taxes to Congress.

This is so unconstitutional on so many levels.

And what is the end game? Re elect Trump, or elect a socialist and hope congress doesn't fall for his stupid ideas. Either way, the multinational companies are sitting on the fence licking their chops wanting a cheap deal with China, so they can go back to porking the "spoiled" American workforce. You may not like Trump but the alternatives are worse:



You might ask yourself who's side New York is on.

 

[prometeus]

You might want to look into the indictment of Andy Jackson

Take a look at the calendar, it is 2019 and the President is not getting indicted.

Nixon was facing an indictment for ordering the Watergate burglary when he resigned, knowing he would be convicted and subsequently impeached.

No, he would have been impeached, then indicted and convicted.

 

[OldFatGuy]

Is that so -- it is the job of the Justice department to investigate, not Congress? So, are you now saying that Congress had no investigative authority to investigate Hillary Clinton regarding Benghazi? How about the 911 Commission? The Assassination of JFK?

Of course, the idea that Congress has no authority to investigate is absurd and cuts against the grain of centuries of precedent. The Supreme Court determined that the framers intended for Congress to seek out information when crafting or reviewing legislation. George Mason of Virginia said at the Federal Convention that Members of Congress “are not only Legislators but they possess inquisitorial powers. They must meet frequently to inspect the Conduct of the public offices.”

There are major distinctions between investigation of matters pertaining to the crafting of legislation with executive behavior investigations. George Mason's comments did not result with constitutional authorization and granting of inquisitor powers, nor did any subsequent legislation. The supreme decision was limited to investigation for the purpose of creating new legislation.

Precedence does exist, and we need pay attention when congress acts beyond its investigative purview, one fascistic Sen. McCarthy was enough.

It is my opinion that the congressional investigations following 9/11, Benghazi and the Warren Commission were outside the powers delegated to congress.

 

[joko104]

As President of the United States, Trump intentionally targeted his 'enemies', purely out of spite. Example #1 is Barack Obama. With the stroke of his pen, he revoked and overwrote key parts of his predecessor’s domestic legacy. He has been more successful using the executive branch to undo Obama's legacy than he's had writing new legislation or working with Congress. It was much simpler for him to tear down policies than to build new ones.

Trump has proven to the entire world that he is not a leader, he is a destroyer, that's how he's been all his life. I knew it, everyone in New York and New Jersey knew it. He's a racketeer and a vindictive one at that. So please, don't get all teary eyed about how the State of NY is changing the tax laws in that State to prevent a cheating, lying, tax-evading scoundrel like Trump to ever hide their NY tax returns from anyone again.

I think this forum should probably require everyone to post their tax returns on the forum so we can be certain none are Russian operatives - no redactions or blocking out names, social security numbers or any info - until Congress passes a law that the IRS must post everyone's tax returns public to see on the Internet - along with copies of everyone's credit card transactions, banking transactions and any loans they have - just like they want with President Trump.

I want his social security number and bank account info like Congress demands, don't you? We all should have each other's social security number and bank account numbers too.

Anyone who wants to keep anything secret clearly is a criminal and probably agent of an adversarial foreign power trying to hide this.

 

[prometeus]

"Because a bunch of low intellect imbeciles elected a known liar and dishonest piece of crap as president and there is no other way to ascertain if he is compromised by our adversaries or he is only a crook."

Sounds like fishing to me or worse.

I really do not give a crap what it sounds like to you. Your blindness does not change reality.

 

[bearpoker]

It's unfathomable to me that so many people seem to believe that any and all investigation into a citizen's personal, financial, private interests is not only tolerable but NECESSARY to "protect the Constitution". I mean, it just doesn't get any more backward than that but we have LOTS of elected officials acting on exactly that premise.

When the president may be indebted to a foreign government, it is a matter of public concern. We need to know if Trump is compromised by Russia. You might not be concerned about a foreign adversary having influence over our president but most people see it differently.

 

[bearpoker]

Ever hear of the Supremacy Clause?


Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia

What federal law does New York tax law contradict?

 

[Ahlevah]

On what grounds? The Supremes don't mess with the states. They only do Federal stuff.

Huh? Stop sniffing glue. For starters, have you read the Fourteenth Amendment?

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State :shock: shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This law seems to be directly aimed at Trump. I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but I'll take a bet on the side that says this sort of selective legislation isn't permitted under our constitution.

 

[Torus34]

Has anyone yet noted that the New York Legislature is bicameral? The preceding comments may contain much conjecture which will be mooted by the upcoming trip of the bill to the lower house. This sidewalk observer of the passing parade prefers to wait a while before digging into the issue.

 

[OpportunityCost]

What federal law does New York tax law contradict?

Presidential pardons and their scope.

 

[bearpoker]

Wonder if the NY Senate will find Obama's transcripts during their investigations? Obviously the economy is so good that Trump's tax returns are now of so much interest to you. Wonder where this curiosity was with Obama and his background as a Community Agitator?

Obama's tax returns have already been made public. Obama started out an an organizer, not an agitator. Not that I expect you to understand that sort of thing, There's nothing illegal in what he did. Also he lived in Illinois, not New York. Do brush up on your geography.

 

[jimbo]

I really do not give a crap what it sounds like to you. Your blindness does not change reality.

Nothing to support your statement(s)?

 

[bearpoker]

What criminal behavior would be reported in a tax return? The man has been reported to have been audited multiple times.


So, does your tribe actually know what a tax return is?

He's lying about being audited right now. According to him he is in perpetual audit.

 

[bearpoker]

The right for a person to be secure in his papers and effects. Any other easy questions?

This does not apply in criminal investigations.

 

[JasperL]

I'd have to consider suggesting to my clients that they pay in whatever tax is due on their return but not actually file the return if this crap keeps up. If government, state or federal, can pull a person's tax return for purely political reasons AND if they can not protect the returns they have received from disclosure to the media then the people have no assurance that their personal information won't be similarly abused.

I don't want any of my clients to go to jail but when we see politicians pulling crap like this it's time to stop handing the hangman more rope.

The "for purely political reasons" is your own partisan spin on it.

What you're suggesting as a principle is that it's OK for the WH to have access to any return it wants - it does, obviously, given the IRS is under the WH but also in Sec. 6103(g) per the link below - but that the Congress, with the power to tax and spend, and oversight duties, must ask permission from the WH to see tax returns as a group, or the tax return of a person or entity. It's not defensible as a principle that I can identify.

The law is also crystal clear.

26 U.S. Code SS 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

(f) Disclosure to Committees of Congress
(1) Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Finance, and Joint Committee on Taxation
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 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.

Read the bolded. That's been the law since 1924.

Those interested can read more about the purpose of the law, why Congress gave itself the same access the President has, and more, here:

How to Get Trump’s Tax Returns—Without a Subpoena - POLITICO Magazine

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...0e57e57e05d_story.html?utm_term=.633f578cfa99

Both articles are by George Yin, a UVa law professor and expert on the subject. There's nowhere in the law that says Congress must even state a reason, and certainly nothing in there says the Secretary gets to make the call whether the stated intent is sufficient reason.

You've done taxes for a while - what part of that law appears optional to you? In my experience dealing with the IRC, "shall" means shall, and "any" means any.

 

[Fishking]

This does not apply in criminal investigations.

Ah....so a couple of questions.

1. What’s the crime?
2. Which branch of government is responsible for criminal investigations?

 

[JasperL]

Why don't you tell us why this sort of action is proper? In an ideal world, there is no income tax-which was established-not for an efficient source of government income-but rather to give the government all sorts of powers that it was not given constitutionally. But do you believe candidates should lose any and all privacy on tax issues?

What part of the law should we disregard? It's been on the books since 1924, is crystal clear - 'shall' and 'any return' - Congress has the power to tax and spend, and granted itself the same access to tax returns that is available to the President. You'll have to explain why the law as passed is unconstitutional, and some principle why Congress must first ask permission from the WH for access to tax return data.

The law also provides reasonable protection for privacy. If involving individuals, it can only be reviewed in closed session and the disclosure has to meet proper standards for being in the public interest. It would seem to me that's (disclosure) the proper place for the debate, not whether Congress should have to ask Trump - pretty please - to get tax returns from the IRS.