• 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

Tbird19482 said:
What do you mean that there won't be any financial cost to him
we all knew that the SOB doesn't pay his people who work for him any ways [sic]
Have a nice day
Click to expand...

Hi, Third19482!

The statements in the quote above seem contradictory.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
 
longview said:
Trump has to agree, to let his tax records out beyond the closed committee, I do not think he will, but they will be leaked anyway.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. "In special cases, the Secretary of the Treasury may be asked for specific return information to respond to committees of Congress. If this happens the committee see the information only in closed session". Tax Reform Act 1976.
books.google.co.uk

Protect Your Digital Privacy!

Annotation Explains to readers how to protect their privacy when using the wide range of digital devices now available that can connect to the Internet or each other. Clear discussion of privacy issues as they affect everyday users of digital devices. Comprehensive coverage of all current and...
books.google.co.uk
 
ouch said:
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.



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?




en.wikipedia.org

Trevor N. McFadden - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org 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.
Click to expand...
The word shall has no wiggle room. It is only a matter of time until trump is forced to turn them over.
 
longview said:
Trump has to agree, to let his tax records out beyond the closed committee, I do not think he will, but they will be leaked anyway.
Click to expand...
Trump said he would ...
 
BlueTex said:
Cite the other law you think applies...

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

I suspect that one can make the argument that without an implicit requirement (that tax disclosure serves a legislative purpose) the law is too broad and it may be unconstitutional. I have seen SCOTUS shooting down laws based on vague language
 
pamak said:
I suspect that one can make the argument that without an implicit requirement (need of taxes for legislative purposes) the law is too broad and it may be unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

One can make any argument in court, winning that argument is key. There is a LONG history of the ways and means committee getting tax returns... Perhaps a stronger argument now is the dispute between the legislative branch and executive branch is moot and the courts have no place being involved.
 
BlueTex said:
One can make any argument in court, winning that argument is key. There is a LONG history of the ways and means committee getting tax returns...
Click to expand...
and it would still be a felony, if those returns were released from that committee without the permission of the induvial.
 
Tlrmln said:
Here you go: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/index.html

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

​



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

TBH, I did not read the whole link because I stopped after reading the following in the first paragraph of your link:

The committees, however, cannot compel the Executive Branch to disclose such information without satisfying the constitutional requirement that the information could serve a legitimate legislative purpose.

So, before I continue I have to ask first how is this relevant today? Biden's Executive Branch is not compelled to do anything,
 
longview said:
and it would still be a felony, if those returns were released from that committee without the permission of the induvial.
Click to expand...


Yes, there is a whole giant book of statutes that can be enforced when violated... How is that relevant to the now non-existent dispute between the executive branch and the legislative branch. How does Trump still have standing?
 
BlueTex said:
One can make any argument in court, winning that argument is key. There is a LONG history of the ways and means committee getting tax returns... Perhaps a stronger argument now is the dispute between the legislative branch and executive branch is moot and the courts have no place being involved.
Click to expand...

The bold is related to my question in my previous post (#60).
 
Tlrmln said:
Here you go: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/index.html

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

​



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

Let me use citations from the relevant authority you posted

Last page in your second link


For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Secretary must comply with the Ways and Means Committee’s June 16, 2021 request pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6103(f)(1) to furnish the Committee with the specified tax returns and related tax information.
Click to expand...

Let me reveal to you a trick when you find long documents and you have no time available to read them thoroughly (as it seems to be the case here).. Always read the first and the last paragraph. it helps you get a rough idea if what the document says.
 
I wonder if Trump will actually pay them
 
Quag said:
I wonder if Trump will actually pay them
Click to expand...
like that is going to happen

i do hope julieannie and weaselman are taking notes
 
Callen said:
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.
Click to expand...
The political misstep was Jan 6

Trump will never be President again
 
pamak said:
TBH, I did not read the whole link because I stopped after reading the following in the first paragraph of your link:

The committees, however, cannot compel the Executive Branch to disclose such information without satisfying the constitutional requirement that the information could serve a legitimate legislative purpose.

So, before I continue I have to ask first how is this relevant today? Biden's Executive Branch is not compelled to do anything,
Click to expand...

How do you figure? You think the Treasury Department is not part of Biden's Executive Branch? That's a new one.
 
pamak said:
Let me use citations from the relevant authority you posted

Last page in your second link




Let me reveal to you a trick when you find long documents and you have no time available to read them thoroughly (as it seems to be the case here).. Always read the first and the last paragraph. it helps you get a rough idea if what the document says.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Torus34 said:
For Mr. Donald Trump, filing the law suit is a win-win-win-win. First, thanks to the donations to his PAC and other slush funds made by his loyal followers, there's no financial cost to him personally. Next, the suit keeps his name in the media and thus before the public. The third win is that his tax information, with whatever it contains, remains unavailable while the suit wends its way through the various court levels. Last, as long as he's a big media name, his grip on the Republican Party and its legislators remains firm.

It would have been foolish for him not to have filed the suit. Mr. Donald Trump, for all that's said to the contrary, is not a foolish man. He is an expert, perhaps one of our very best, in being able to 'read' an audience and give them what they clamor for. Watching him work the crowd at any of his rallies provides ample substantiation.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
Click to expand...
Can't argue too much with what you listed. Mob Bosses know the drill as well.
 
ouch said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
The AntiDonald said:
I wonder if the stable genius ever realized how much legal grief would come his way if he actually became president? Someone around him had to be worried.
Click to expand...
One would think that that would be the case as it is with most people. However, and in my opinion, (S/I/T) Trump has had an entire life of lawyer protection and advice. He's been told what he should and shouldn't do, and if he did something that he shouldn't have - don't worry about it we'll fix it for you. To your point I agree that he thought that he'd get to hide everything - kept untouched or unseen by regular citizens. He didn't encounter how vigorous the media would be as president. If not for those reporters digging and digging for information about him, we'd be none the wiser about his corrupt activities. I'm so very thankful for those reporters, but unfortunately more sad about our justice system but completely disgusted with those low life lawyers who protect mob bosses and other corrupt shits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom