Trump lawyers ask judge to kill Democrats' bid to seize tax returns

[ouch]

There sure must be some real juicy goodies hidden in those tax returns. I mean really big juicy goodies!! Now, once again, it's up to the ex-King's appointed judge to make a decision. Do we remember starting clear back four years ago when The King began his quest to load courts up with his appointed judges? Yeah, for a big dope he knew what he was doing with that move.

MSN

www.msn.com

Both sides are due Wednesday to tell District Court Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, how they want to proceed in the case.








Take a look at Judge McFadden's history being with law enforcement. His history dealing with investigations into white collar crimes, money laundering and even in the Criminal Division of the DOJ. One would think ut-oh, the ex-King might be in trouble with a judge who seems hard on criminal acts and big on investigations into those white collar elites. However, being a member of the Federalist Society just might create a problem for those of us seeking the truth hidden in the ex-King's tax returns. Will Judge McFadden see fit TODAY to allow the truth to surface in the hands of Democrats?

Trevor N. McFadden - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the District of Columbia and as counsel to the United States Deputy Attorney General. He also has extensive experience as a law enforcement officer, having served as both a Deputy Sheriff in the Madison County Sheriff's Office and as a police officer with the Fairfax County Police Department.[1]

McFadden clerked for Judge Steven Colloton on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. He was previously a partner in the Compliance, Investigations & Government Enforcement Group in the Washington, D.C. office of Baker McKenzie, where he represented clients in white collar matters, including Foreign Corrupt Practices Act investigations, anti-money laundering compliance work, and U.S. trade compliance matters.[2][3]

Before becoming a judge, McFadden served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.[2]



He has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2003.

 

[calamity]

There sure must be some real juicy goodies hidden in those tax returns. I mean really big juicy goodies!! Now, once again, it's up to the ex-King's appointed judge to make a decision. Do we remember starting clear back four years ago when The King began his quest to load courts up with his appointed judges? Yeah, for a big dope he knew what he was doing with that move.

MSN

www.msn.com

Both sides are due Wednesday to tell District Court Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, how they want to proceed in the case.








Take a look at Judge McFadden's history being with law enforcement. His history dealing with investigations into white collar crimes, money laundering and even in the Criminal Division of the DOJ. One would think ut-oh, the ex-King might be in trouble with a judge who seems hard on criminal acts and big on investigations into those white collar elites. However, being a member of the Federalist Society just might create a problem for those of us seeking the truth hidden in the ex-King's tax returns. Will Judge McFadden see fit TODAY to allow the truth to surface in the hands of Democrats?

Trevor N. McFadden - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the District of Columbia and as counsel to the United States Deputy Attorney General. He also has extensive experience as a law enforcement officer, having served as both a Deputy Sheriff in the Madison County Sheriff's Office and as a police officer with the Fairfax County Police Department.[1]

McFadden clerked for Judge Steven Colloton on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. He was previously a partner in the Compliance, Investigations & Government Enforcement Group in the Washington, D.C. office of Baker McKenzie, where he represented clients in white collar matters, including Foreign Corrupt Practices Act investigations, anti-money laundering compliance work, and U.S. trade compliance matters.[2][3]

Before becoming a judge, McFadden served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.[2]



He has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2003.

The Nazification of the US continues unabated.

 

[Callen]

I actually don't think the Dems should continue fighting for his tax returns. For what purpose at this point? It looks very politically motivated. Let the Cyrus Vance deal with it criminally in NY State.

 

[Noodlegawd]

There sure must be some real juicy goodies hidden in those tax returns. I mean really big juicy goodies!! Now, once again, it's up to the ex-King's appointed judge to make a decision. Do we remember starting clear back four years ago when The King began his quest to load courts up with his appointed judges? Yeah, for a big dope he knew what he was doing with that move.

MSN

www.msn.com

Both sides are due Wednesday to tell District Court Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, how they want to proceed in the case.








Take a look at Judge McFadden's history being with law enforcement. His history dealing with investigations into white collar crimes, money laundering and even in the Criminal Division of the DOJ. One would think ut-oh, the ex-King might be in trouble with a judge who seems hard on criminal acts and big on investigations into those white collar elites. However, being a member of the Federalist Society just might create a problem for those of us seeking the truth hidden in the ex-King's tax returns. Will Judge McFadden see fit TODAY to allow the truth to surface in the hands of Democrats?

Trevor N. McFadden - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the District of Columbia and as counsel to the United States Deputy Attorney General. He also has extensive experience as a law enforcement officer, having served as both a Deputy Sheriff in the Madison County Sheriff's Office and as a police officer with the Fairfax County Police Department.[1]

McFadden clerked for Judge Steven Colloton on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. He was previously a partner in the Compliance, Investigations & Government Enforcement Group in the Washington, D.C. office of Baker McKenzie, where he represented clients in white collar matters, including Foreign Corrupt Practices Act investigations, anti-money laundering compliance work, and U.S. trade compliance matters.[2][3]

Before becoming a judge, McFadden served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.[2]



He has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2003.

The judge's background in relation to law enforcement, etc. is irrelevant here. If he does his job as a judge, all he has to decide is whether there is a legitimate legislative purpose for the disclosure of the returns to the relevant Congressional committees (and only to those committees) and, hopefully, whether any such supposed justification is a pretext for what Democrats really want, which is to misuse the applicable law to leak Trump's returns to the public, or to use them for some other illegitimate purpose.

 

[BlueTex]

The judge's background in relation to law enforcement, etc. is irrelevant here. If he does his job as a judge, all he has to decide is whether there is a legitimate legislative purpose for the disclosure of the returns to the relevant Congressional committees (and only to those committees) and, hopefully, whether any such supposed justification is a pretext for what Democrats really want, which is to misuse the applicable law to leak Trump's returns to the public, or to use them for some other illegitimate purpose.

Incorrect, he needs to read the actual law regarding disclosure... Nowhere in the law is legislative purpose mentioned... Using "legislative purpose" as a deciding factor would be creating law that doesn't exist...

 

[Plasmaball]

This is a delay tactic. Hopefully the judge dismisses this and we move on.

 

[TomFitz]

The judge's background in relation to law enforcement, etc. is irrelevant here. If he does his job as a judge, all he has to decide is whether there is a legitimate legislative purpose for the disclosure of the returns to the relevant Congressional committees (and only to those committees) and, hopefully, whether any such supposed justification is a pretext for what Democrats really want, which is to misuse the applicable law to leak Trump's returns to the public, or to use them for some other illegitimate purpose.

The real President’s tax returns were posted for all to see, right on his campaign website.

Which is in keeping with the practice of the last 75 years.

What seems to be the problem with the failed fool’s gold fuhrer?

 

[Noodlegawd]

Incorrect, he needs to read the actual law regarding disclosure... Nowhere in the law is legislative purpose mentioned... Using "legislative purpose" as a deciding factor would be creating law that doesn't exist...

View attachment 67346143

Ah yes, the simplistic approach. But not the correct one. You might be surprised to learn that this isn't the only law that needs to be considered. Even Biden's DOJ acknowledged that, and the need to provide a legitimate legislative purpose.

But of course, if he's just going to apply this law and only this law, and only according to its literal text, he can and should insist that Treasury only make the returns available to the Committee when it is actually sitting in closed executive session, and at no other time. That'll make for some really long days for the committee members, I suspect.

 

[BlueTex]

Ah yes, the simplistic approach. But not the correct one. You might be surprised to learn that this isn't the only law that needs to be considered. Even Biden's DOJ acknowledged that, and the need to provide a legitimate legislative purpose.

But of course, if he's just going to apply this law and only this law, and only according to its literal text, he can and should insist that Treasury only make the returns available to the Committee when it is actually sitting in closed executive session, and at no other time. That'll make for some really long days for the committee members, I suspect.

Cite the other law you think applies...

I don't think you understand what "closed executive session" means....

 

[Noodlegawd]

Cite the other law you think applies...

Here you go: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/index.html

And: https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1419111/download

As the 2019 Opinion recognized, this statutory directive does not exempt the June 2021 Request from the constitutional requirement that congressional demands for information must serve a legitimate legislative purpose.

I don't think you understand what "closed executive session" means....

Feel free to enlighten me. Be sure to use citations to relevant authorities.

 

[mike2810]

/sarcasm on
Trump cry's routers, routers, routers, what are they wanting to hide in Maricopa County

Trump cry's tax returns, tax returns, tax returns, I am not hiding anything You have no need to see them.

 

[Subieguy]

I actually don't think the Dems should continue fighting for his tax returns. For what purpose at this point? It looks very politically motivated. Let the Cyrus Vance deal with it criminally in NY State.

Disagree! There are all ready about 17 indictments surrounding the running of his Trump Org. for SOME reason, its very possible laws have been broken and Trump knows it.

 

[longview]

What legal requirement exists that requires Trump to release his tax returns?

 

[element94]

The Nazification of the US continues unabated.

I've always lamented not having an opportunity to kill Nazis; I'm kind of excited.

 

[Callen]

Disagree! There are all ready about 17 indictments surrounding the running of his Trump Org. for SOME reason, its

First off....we rarely disagree!

I that is my point, it is up to the criminal courts to pursue criminal behaviour. Congress has a very limited scope on what they can use the tax information for. In this case Congress is saying it is to provide oversight on the IRS and any auditing they were doing on Trump. I think that is very thin. By law they can't disclose publically.

 

[longview]

First off....we rarely disagree!

I that is my point, it is up to the criminal courts to pursue criminal behaviour. Congress has a very limited scope on what they can use the tax information for. In this case Congress is saying it is to provide oversight on the IRS and any auditing they were doing on Trump. I think that is very thin. By law they can't disclose publically.

But do you think they will look very hard at how Trump's tax returns were leaked?

 

[Helix]

The shitgibbon said he loves wikileaks. Given this, he should be fine with someone leaking certain things.

 

[ouch]

I actually don't think the Dems should continue fighting for his tax returns. For what purpose at this point? It looks very politically motivated. Let the Cyrus Vance deal with it criminally in NY State.

I think the "political" purpose would be to once and for all find out if Trump is beholden to a foreign power and it would be important to know if he is or isn't beholden to a foreign power, since he's shown a great interest to run for president again in '24. If he became president again, you now how everything (S/I/T) Trump works from the oval office. Nothing can touch the King no matter his wrongdoings. Other than that, yeah - hopefully we learn from Cyrus Vance's office about any evidence found in his tax returns that helps to convict his sorry ass.

 

[Callen]

But do you think they will look very hard at how Trump's tax returns were leaked?

Nope, which is why I think this is a dumb idea. Let the prosecutors in NY deal with it otherwise I think it's a political misstep.

 

[Callen]

I think the "political" purpose would be to once and for all find out if Trump is beholden to a foreign power and it would be important to know if he is or isn't beholden to a foreign power, since he's shown a great interest to run for president again in '24. If he became president again, you know how everything Trump works from the oval office.

That is precisely the point. The law says they can't use their power to obtain his tax return information in that way.

ETA......I would think differently if he was a sitting President but as a past President any information they "release" would be purely political . That is not how Congress should use their oversight powers.......yes I am a bit of a Pollyanna as I view bthese things....its the Canadian in me!

 

[Cardinal]

I actually don't think the Dems should continue fighting for his tax returns. For what purpose at this point? It looks very politically motivated. Let the Cyrus Vance deal with it criminally in NY State.

Three points:

1) Even after the end of his Presidency, the people have a right to know what conflicts of interest, if any, the former President may have had in the course of his term.
2) Congress convenes investigations for the purpose of full transparency to the American people, whereas legal matters are likely to be entirely in secret.
3) Finally, Trump is likely to be a candidate in 2024, and as such the American people have the right to know of his conflicts of interest in the first term and in a possible second term.

 

[Callen]

the American people have the right to know of his conflicts of interest in the first term and in a possible second term.

I don't disagree but according to the law Congress cannot release the information to the public. They can only use it internally are as it relates to oversight. In this case, they are saying it is to do oversight on the IRS.

 

[justabubba]

you misunderstand

tRump has already told us he will release his tax returns when the audit is completed

quit being so impatient

it will take a while for hell to freeze over

 

[Cardinal]

I don't disagree but according to the law Congress cannot release the information to the public. They can only use it internally are as it relates to oversight. In this case, they are saying it is to do oversight on the IRS.

That isn't an argument for denying Congress its place as both a co-equal branch of government and as a Constitutionally mandated check on the Executive Branch, or for denying its Constitutional and legal right to see the President's tax returns.

Also, while sharing his tax returns is a narrow avenue at best, Congress still has the right to investigate the President for ethics violations and conflicts of interest. Jumping ahead to the idea of sharing his tax returns in full with the public is putting the cart before the horse.

 

[Tbird19482]

The real President’s tax returns were posted for all to see, right on his campaign website.

Which is in keeping with the practice of the last 75 years.

What seems to be the problem with the failed fool’s gold fuhrer?

Do you have a link for this
"The real President’s tax returns were posted for all to see, right on his campaign website."
I would like to see it
so far I haven't found any such thing
Have a nice afternoon