Democrats to ask for 10 years of presidential tax returns in new bill

[Cardinal]

Those people all did so willingly. Trump is unwilling to do so.

There's a small chance you'd have had a case, but since 2016 developments have demonstrated that his unwillingness to do so is not itself a defense.

 

[Vadinho]

If the Democrats do this there will be hell to pay. While half of you guys will fell like you just won the lottery the rest of the country will understand the ploy as a nuke on the Constitution. They'll see it as an egregious violation of personal privacy because if Congress can do that to Trump they can do it to anybody for any reason. It will be a bright and shining example of how government tends to work for their own ends without regard for how their actions effect the fundamental principles of freedom that people expect their government to protect.

If the Democrats do this it will generally be seen as an act of political hatred directed at Trump done expressly for political purposes in in direct opposition to all the principles of individual liberty this nation was founded on. The sad part is, I kind of doubt that many Democrats will feel like that until it happens to them some day.

Trump is the only POTUS since Nixon not to disclose tax returns from my recollection. Not sure why you are not interested in knowing the background of any Presidential candidate, I sure as hell am. Why would I want a tax cheat in charge of the IRS? Why would I want a person who makes most of his money from foreign agents in charge of our national security? Once in office, it is very hard to get rid of any POTUS. Vetting them is important.

 

[Lutherf]

Feelgood Trump gotcha legislation with less than zero chance of passing. For one thing, legislation won't get it done. 35, natural born, 14 year resident. An amendment is needed to overturn an amendment. For another, even an amendment will not affect any current or past President.

Why does the left continue down this road? It's a loser. You won't get them, you couldn't read them if you did. They will reveal nothing. Especially something Russia. They've all been audited and passed by the professionals at IRS. The left would better off using the time finding someone who can beat President Trump. So far I see no one, nor any platform other than last election's loser + Trump really bad.

What we see here is one more example of how the left cares not a whit for laws or Constitutions when their goal is in sight. They abused the **** out of Kavanaugh and he only got half the treatment they've been giving Trump.

I tell you, whether you like Trump or not it would be wise to open your eyes and see what's being done against him and what the reasons are for doing it. It's a dark and dangerous path we're heading down with all this.

 

[Rexedgar]

When I was a young soldier, my job required a secret clearance. What are the present day requirements for the highest level clearance. I think the form was SF 86. Aren’t the applicant’s histories dug through, with a fine tooth comb? I would think anything pertaining to conflicts of interest would be fair game. I would think there is no higher clearance required than POTUS.

 

[Cardinal]

I disagree. If it's put out to 2024, it then effects no one currently in office. Consequently, it appears far less partisan. That's what I would do (2024).

It's something I could be okay with provided the House is ultimately successful in its ability to subpoena the current President's returns. Otherwise it's just another naked ploy to prevent his returns from ever seeing the light of day. However, I understand what's really being addressed here is the sheer practicality of seeing such a bill reach the Senate and actually be voted on.

 

[Acadia]

Did you type that with a straight face? Cuz if you did, I'm not sure how, after all the birther nonsense.

Yeah, but no. Not that I support the birther nonsense, but being a citizen is a requirement for being President. Releasing tax returns is most definitely NOT.

 

[yankintx]

If the Democrats do this there will be hell to pay. While half of you guys will fell like you just won the lottery the rest of the country will understand the ploy as a nuke on the Constitution. They'll see it as an egregious violation of personal privacy because if Congress can do that to Trump they can do it to anybody for any reason. It will be a bright and shining example of how government tends to work for their own ends without regard for how their actions effect the fundamental principles of freedom that people expect their government to protect.

If the Democrats do this it will generally be seen as an act of political hatred directed at Trump done expressly for political purposes in in direct opposition to all the principles of individual liberty this nation was founded on. The sad part is, I kind of doubt that many Democrats will feel like that until it happens to them some day.

Its called oversight, which is the Houses Constitutional duty. Trump could have avoided this if he had been good to his word and released them voluntarily. America is also well aware of that FACT. Think of this way, the Dems are insuring Trump follows thru with HIS campaign promise

 

[Cardinal]

What we see here is one more example of how the left cares not a whit for laws or Constitutions when their goal is in sight. They abused the **** out of Kavanaugh and he only got half the treatment they've been giving Trump.

I tell you, whether you like Trump or not it would be wise to open your eyes and see what's being done against him and what the reasons are for doing it. It's a dark and dangerous path we're heading down with all this.

There's literally one plausible explanation for the reflexive rage trump supporters have at the notion that Trump could be compelled to release his tax returns: they know full well that his returns contain something dirty. If they genuinely believed that his returns were kosher, they'd shrug and say, "Whatever, guys. Knock yourselves out."

 

[Mach]

If the Democrats do this there will be hell to pay.

What's the penalty, elect a moron like Trump?
Deny a Democratic president their SCOTUS nominee?
Pursue a sitting president with a partisan like Ken Starr for nonsense, resulting in a perjury charge for lying about a BJ...AND IMPEACHMENT for it?
Work with Russia to hack the DNC and win the presidency using private, damaging emails perfectly timed?

Republicans try to bring hell to the opposition all day every day, they are maxed out.

If there are no crimes, no big deal right? I don't want to see his tax returns, or hear about them, unless there is something criminal in there...

 

[Rexedgar]

Those people all did so willingly. Trump is unwilling to do so. There is no current law or Constitutional provision which would compel him to release his returns and there is no good reason for him to do so. Democrats in congress, however, want to see them and want to release them to the public so they are hellbent on creating a new law...likely unconstitutional...for the express purpose of FORCING him to release the returns.

This is the essence of Socialism. It's the whole concept of "we believe this is good for you and we will force you to accept it whether you believe it's good or not".

I disagree strongly with the bolded. I don’t think that knowing where POTUS motives are is too much to ask. Is he working in the country’s best interest or his own? Fair minded people of any political stripe cannot have some question based on Trump’s action/decisions.

 

[Xelor]

It will only be seen as that by people whose skin is thin when it comes to Trump.

The time for Trump to release his 2016 returns will come this April 15th, or September 30th at the latest. It will arrive on those dates because his return was filed three years prior on one of those dates at the latest. No IRS audit lasts more than 3 years, unless it's found that the taxpayer failed to report 25% or more of his/her income. Accordingly, those returns cannot any longer be under audit and Trump promised to release his returns once the audit was done. His 2015 audit is necessarily done by now, unless, again, the IRS found he failed to report 25% or more of his income.

 

[Xelor]

What's the penalty, elect a moron like Trump?
Deny a Democratic president their SCOTUS nominee?
Pursue a sitting president with a partisan like Ken Starr for nonsense, resulting in a perjury charge for lying about a BJ?
Work with Russia to hack the DNC and win the presidency using private, damaging emails perfectly timed?

Republicans try to bring hell to the opposition all day every day, they are maxed out.

If there are no crimes, no big deal right? I don't want to see his tax returns, or hear about them, unless there is something criminal in there...

Red:
Well, you can rest easy on that count. Nobody will ever force you look at Trump's tax returns.

 

[Rexedgar]

The time for Trump to release his 2016 returns will come this April 15th, or September 30th at the latest. It will arrive on those dates because his return was filed three years prior on one of those dates at the latest. No IRS audit lasts more than 3 years, unless it's found that the taxpayer failed to report 25% or more of his/her income. Accordingly, those returns cannot any longer be under audit and Trump promised to release his returns once the audit was done. His 2015 audit is necessarily done by now, unless, again, the IRS found he failed to report 25% or more of his income.

“As soon as the audit is over,” was a lie, one of many, many.......

 

[OlNate]

Yeah, but no. Not that I support the birther nonsense, but being a citizen is a requirement for being President. Releasing tax returns is most definitely NOT.

For now. I think that's what this thread is about.

Honestly, I think it's a good thing...but only if they finish it. Show us the last 10 years of your tax returns.....and if fraud is discovered you are disqualified from the race. Imagine what that would do for your ability to trust your politicians.

 

[jimbo]

That remains to be seen.

And it most likely won't be seen.

If the houses passes the bill, Senate won't.

If Senate does, it will be contested after due diligence judge shopping.

If shopped judge rules favorably, SCOTUS gets it. 5-4 ruling.

 

[Mach]

Red:
Well, you can rest easy on that count. Nobody will ever force you look at Trump's tax returns.

I'm simply pointing out that congress having access doesn't mean the public needs access.
Similarly, what DOJ has access to, I don't want to see...because I value MY OWN privacy too, and ethically I don't want DOJ sharing private stuff unless its done properly with regards to a crime.
If Trump wants to hide his tax returns from the public like the coward he is, OK (unless they made this a law, etc.) But Trump is screwed up, and we owe it to the public to find out if he's been compromised.

 

[jimbo]

Trump needs no tools, he is a tool :lol:



Sorry, couldnt resist.

A bad one, really bad.

 

[Athanasius68]

Make it 2020. That way there's no action against him during his current presidency but if they would affect his eligibility, then good chance he wouldnt run in 2020. And if he's not eligible, he shouldnt run. Or if there is alot of dishonest crap in there, the people SHOULD know that before voting.

Trump once said nobody would understand his tax returns. The complicated nature of the IRS can certainly make such things unfair to all candidates.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I'm pretty sure they'll have to amend the Constitution to do that. I mean, they could probably pass the bill but I don't see how it is possibly Constitutional.

Yeah, I don’t think it can be a legal requirement in and of itself. But there are a lot of additional requirements candidates have to fulfill, like filing campaign financial reports, if they want to take advantage of matching federal funds. Theoretically they could tie the tax return requirement to those as well. Pass a law saying if you want access to matching funds you have to turn in tax returns.

While I personally don’t care about tax returns, I think doing it that way would be Constituional.

 

[Athanasius68]

There's literally one plausible explanation for the reflexive rage trump supporters have at the notion that Trump could be compelled to release his tax returns: they know full well that his returns contain something dirty. If they genuinely believed that his returns were kosher, they'd shrug and say, "Whatever, guys. Knock yourselves out."

It's more seen as a political hit on Trump-- using the law to pursue a political objective.

 

[Acadia]

For now. I think that's what this thread is about.

Honestly, I think it's a good thing...but only if they finish it. Show us the last 10 years of your tax returns.....and if fraud is discovered you are disqualified from the race. Imagine what that would do for your ability to trust your politicians.

I can argue your point and if it clears a Presidential candidate of any fraud, in order to not have to go through this. Using tax returns as a cudgel isn't how our Congress should be working. It smacks of extortion, and jackboot tactics.
That said, I don't think it should be retroactive to any President elected without the rule/law in place.

 

[Cardinal]

It's more seen as a political hit on Trump-- using the law to pursue a political objective.

And if you genuinely believed his tax returns were kosher, you'd shrug and say, "Whatever, guys. Knock yourselves out."

 

[upsideguy]

While nobody has any expectation that such a bill could pass the Senate in its current makeup, the onus will be on Republicans to argue against the rationale for such a bill. Their argument for why Trump shouldn't release their tax returns, "It's none of your business," wasn't especially compelling when it was first made in 2016. However, in light of the President's insistence on repeating Russian propaganda, taking the side of Putin over our own intelligence community, and the revelation that he lied throughout 2016 about his Moscow Tower deal all the while denying he had any business dealings with Russia, revealing a candidate's tax returns demonstrates the importance of showing the American people that he isn't financially compromised in any way that would lead to him act in the best interests of a foreign government (as just one example).



https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/02/politics/trump-tax-returns-democrats/index.html

Seems like it may be a part of a greater strategy, to get Republicans on record as siding with Trump over custom, decency and the rule of law, or alternatively, to flush out Republicans to do the right thing.

Of course, they will never get the tax returns this way, but that isn't the point. With 22 Republican senators having to defend their seats in 2020, the Dems getting them on record could be very powerful. Of course, the ultimate will be to get them on record in an impeachment trial.

Mueller has the tax returns and I expect the House Oversight committee to obtain them as well.

 

[Rexedgar]

It's more seen as a political hit on Trump-- using the law to pursue a political objective.

How do you feel about Trump’s constant ruminations about investigating his political opponent/s?

 

[jimbo]

What we see here is one more example of how the left cares not a whit for laws or Constitutions when their goal is in sight. They abused the **** out of Kavanaugh and he only got half the treatment they've been giving Trump.

I tell you, whether you like Trump or not it would be wise to open your eyes and see what's being done against him and what the reasons are for doing it. It's a dark and dangerous path we're heading down with all this.

You're correct. DiFi should have been censured for the totally phony Ford lie.

Then there was the clients of Cohen. Raided the offices and home of Cohen and seized all records. So much for lawyer/client privilege.

The tax thing will go the way of the Kavanaugh thing. In the end a very expensive diversive big nothing.

But guess what? This tax return thing may well end up at SCOTUS, where a very pissed off new judge will get a vote.