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

Nickyjo said:
That's the key, I believe. Unless I am missing the point, for which I apologize, I don't understand those in Trump's camp's lack of interest in whether Donald has some investments in a country that might create a real or perceived conflict of interest as president. It seems analogous to Trump not understanding why his AG Sessions recused himself.
Click to expand...
Yes - and for goons like (S/I/T) Trump, he has absolutely no moral compass or good conscience that supports in good faith an entire population in the US based on our Constitution. He is dedicated to himself only and admires other dictators.
 
bongsaway said:
The word shall has no wiggle room. It is only a matter of time until trump is forced to turn them over.
Click to expand...
I like your vibe - only wish I could depend on it --- meaning I hope the Hell that you're correct.
 
Tlrmln said:
How do you figure? You think the Treasury Department is not part of Biden's Executive Branch? That's a new one.
Click to expand...

Who told you that the Treasury Department continues to object?
You think that new administration do not affect the opinions of the departments? If you thin so, watch what is happening now with the DOJ and how it reverses course in some many issues.
 
Tlrmln said:
The conclusion doesn't change the requirements of the law, which was the point of referring to that document. DOJ's conclusion was a given in this discussion. The issue I was discussing with someone else was the legal test. It's very common for people to agree on what the law requires, yet disagree on the conclusion that should be reached based on it in a particular case. In case you were unaware, that's one of the reasons we have courts.

Let me reveal to you a trick you can use when preparing to stick your nose into a conversation between two other people: Always read the entire conversation first. It helps you get a rough idea of what the actual issue is.
Click to expand...

Ohh, so you cite an authority selectively and you prefer to ignore its conclusions which are based on everything that was written in the opinion, including on the requirements that you think that can determine a decision.
 
How about this? The legitimate question for Congress is why does it takes over 5 years to complete a single audit? Is the IRS so incredibly incompetent that it takes years to perform an audit? Perhaps some legislative streamlining is in order. Let's take a look at those returns that are apparently so complex. Let's quiz the Director of the IRS on why his agency has taken so long.

What? Trump has not been under audit for many years? But Trump told us all he was under audit. Well then, get Mr. Trump in here to straighten this matter out.

"Mr. Trump, have you been under IRS audit since 2015? And please remember, you are under oath."
 
Last edited:
Stealers Wheel said:
The legitimate question for Congress is why does it takes over 5 years to complete a single audit? Is the IRS so incredibly incompetent that it takes years to perform an audit?
Click to expand...
I think that is the gist of the legislative oversight claim.
 
All I want to know is to whom does Donald Trump owe money? Is he telling the banks one thing and the tax collector something else? It should appear somewhere as I'm sure he is deducting interest on the debt.

Does he owe money to people in Russia? How much does he owe them?
 
Stealers Wheel said:
How about this? The legitimate question for Congress is why does it takes over 5 years to complete a single audit? Is the IRS so incredibly incompetent that it takes years to perform an audit? Perhaps some legislative streamlining is in order. Let's take a look at those returns that are apparently so complex. Let's quiz the Director of the IRS on why his agency has taken so long.

What? Trump has not been under audit for many years? But Trump told us all he was under audit. Well then, get Mr. Trump in here to straighten this matter out.

"Mr. Trump, have you been under IRS audit since 2015? And please remember, you are under oath."
Click to expand...
The problem existing at the IRS has been Trump's buddy who is commissioner of the IRS, Rettig.

publicseminar.org

Biden Must Fire IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig - Public Seminar

Photo Credit: Paul Brady Photography _____ Like many of former President Trump’s appointees, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Charles Rettig made...Read More
publicseminar.org publicseminar.org
Rettig is also a long-time Trump defender and associate. When Democrats demanded that Trump release his tax returns during the 2016 presidential election, Rettig, speaking then as a private citizen, defended Trump’s refusal as a sound decision for someone under audit. After Trump took office, with pressure mounting from congressional Democrats to reveal his tax returns, Rettig remained outspoken in his support of Trump’s tax opacity. After Trump nominated him, he failed to disclose his financial ties to a Trump-branded hotel in Hawaii prior to his confirmation hearing.




In which has also increased this problem with the IRS:

Audits of Millionaires​

Less than 2 out of every 100 taxpayers reporting over a million dollars of income were audited last year[4]. While the ranks of millionaires have nearly doubled since FY 2012[5], the number of millionaire returns that were audited has actually fallen 72 percent - down from 40,965 millionaire audits in FY 2012 to just 11,331 in FY 2020. See Figure 2.

In FY 2012, audits of millionaires turned up $4.8 billion in unreported taxes. Now with less than a third the number of audits, the government uncovered only $1.2 billion in unreported taxes in FY 2020. With 98 percent of millionaires escaping any scrutiny, fewer audits in all likelihood means many millionaires escape paying billions of dollars owed the U.S. Treasury.
 
pamak said:
Who told you that the Treasury Department continues to object?
You think that new administration do not affect the opinions of the departments? If you thin so, watch what is happening now with the DOJ and how it reverses course in some many issues.
Click to expand...

When did I say that the Treasury Department continues to object? Believe it or not, there are people other than Congress and the Treasury Department who have an interest in the issue.

pamak said:
Ohh, so you cite an authority selectively and you prefer to ignore its conclusions which are based on everything that was written in the opinion, including on the requirements that you think that can determine a decision.
Click to expand...

So you still ignored the conversation into which you injected yourself, even after I suggested that you take a look, and now you're basically ignoring the very comment to which you're responding. Classic.
 
Callen said:
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.
Click to expand...
Asserting Congressional oversight which went nowhere under Trump
They will not give that up.
Political or not
Just as the Rs say this is political, the Dems base wants those returns
It is a mix of both
 
isnt it time to forget about trump
 
Judge Trevor McFadden is the same Judge who incorrectly ruled that the House of Representatives lacked standing to sue former President Trump over funding of the border wall.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/...e-appeals-court-revives-house-lawsuit-against
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, dismissed the case in 2019, ruling that the House lacked standing to sue over the national emergency order that allowed Trump to divert military funds to the border wall.
Click to expand...
 
Mugahigh said:
isnt it time to forget about trump [sic]
Click to expand...

Hi, Mugahigh!

I'm going to respond in the negative. The administration of Mr. Donald Trump exposed weaknesses in our beloved Constitution. These, coupled with a propensity for a surprising percent of our America citizens to accept an authoritarian President of the United States, sounds as a tocsin for our country and the system of government, distorted though it may be, which has served this nation for centuries.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
 
Callen said:
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.
Click to expand...
if he committed a crime, that evidence can be turned over...and if he used loopholes to legally skirt paying taxes, that information can be used to close those loopholes via laws.
 
ClaraD said:
if he committed a crime, that evidence can be turned over...and if he used loopholes to legally skirt paying taxes, that information can be used to close those loopholes via laws.
Click to expand...

Hi, ClaraD!

I've boldfaced part of the quote above. Given our present federal legislature and its emphasis on political party 'wins' over the well-being of the American public, the gulf between 'can be' and 'will be' looms large indeed. I place in evidence the gun show loophole. Others can be provided upon request.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
 
ClaraD said:
the law says that if they ways and means committee requests a particular tax payer record it is to be turned over to them....there is no wiggle room there.
Click to expand...
But the same law says they cannot release said records beyond the committee without permission!
 
BlueTex said:
Are they asking to do that? What legal controversy exists that the judge could rule on now?
Click to expand...
I suspect the Judge’s concern may be that the committee will not be able to control the records, and thus violate the law!
 
longview said:
I suspect the Judge’s concern may be that the committee will not be able to control the records, and thus violate the law!
Click to expand...

So he will violate the law because of he thinks might happen? How long do you think that will survive on appeal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom