Trump must release tax returns or be barred from state’s 2020 election ballot

Your solution then is his lawfully required FCC forms showing all of his assets and liabilities.

The tax return won't show what you want.

 

Uh, no. You cannot place words into a statute which are not there, and Congress stated its purpose in the initial demand, which are legitimate purposes.

Sekulow is a pretend lawyer. He's got a niche, which is pushing bullshit religious issues, and that's it. The statute is plain and unambiguous.

 

I essentially mean those voting for him. The rest of you refused to vote for him.

 

What you have asked is immaterial to the question of the President giving up his tax returns.

I imagine it is the financial schedules that good Americans want to see.

 

There's a rule that states that? Where is it, Bobert?

 

And what is it that is not already on his financial disclosure form that is so important for you to know?

 

Sir, you are going to have to wait. Why do you want his returns? Would you vote for the man?

What do you think we republicans did vs Hillary's tax returns? I did not look. I do not care what they say.

 

Look at this by another lawyer

https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...gress-might-not-get-trumps-tax-returns-226571

Why Congress Might Not Get Trump's Tax Returns
Unless Democrats invoke impeachment, there's a strong chance they'll lose this legal fight.


By ROSS GARBER

April 04, 2019

 

I have no idea. I do know that a man who has repeatedly been proven as fraudulent is running the country while refusing to disclose paperwork that is ordinarily disclosed.

What do you have to lose by him showing his taxes?

 

What does that matter? No matter who voted for the current president (hell, it was only 27-28% of those eligible to vote!), we all have an interest in the president's integrity, motives, background, etc.

 

That is not in the tax returns.

Take your returns for instance. Do your returns show your integrity, motives and background?

 

He in my view and millions of others does a splendid job running the executive branch. I do not see Trump as running the country. I do not see Gavin Newsom as running CA but he could make a better case than could Trump.

 

They could. Not sure why you would dismiss that so readily, especially in the case of a guy like Donald whose income comes from investors, investments and businesses all over the country and the world.

 

Democrats started the Vietnam war. Then they escalated the war. Then they protested the war, spit on returning veterans and glorified dodgers. Now they mock and condemn dodgers and those who got deferments. Democrats are politicized nut jobs, blowing around with the the winds.

 

You should hold your breath until a judge honors their request.
Just because we wanna see is not part of a legitimate investigation

 

Wow, you must tell the IRS far more than you legally must.

Face it, we republicans read the FCC reports. We found that those were very long and detailed. We do not believe character is a space to be filled out on the 1040 forms.

 

The Democrats will puff the white owl hoping a Judge rules in their favor.

 

That's more than a stretch, Bobby. First, the statute implicitly provides that requiring the turn over of a tax payer's returns is a congressional oversight function. It does not require that there be a "legislative purpose", because it assumes one. So that's not a strong argument at all. Second, assuming, for the sake of argument only, that a purpose must be stated, it is stated in the request for the returns. Congress need not "prove" that its stated purpose is "super duper true". But that's beside the point, because that's not a requirement. Third, the whining about "uh! his privacy!! waaaah!!" is already provided for in the statute. The returns must be viewed in closed session.

Those were terrible arguments.

 

Well your demand he does so in spite of the fact you can't come up with anything you think you might find in them labels it a witch hunt and pulls the legs our from under your demand then. I have nothing to lose or gain and don't really care about seeing them. I read his FEC disclosures, so did the Democrats, I bet even the IRS. What of anything bad came out of them?

 

The court cases that require a legislative purpose have been cited several times now. Those are solid legal arguments. Take it to court.

 

That is not in the tax returns.

Take your returns for instance. Do your returns show your integrity, motives and background?

Which form is that? And what information would that be that is not already on his financial disclosure forms?

 

Not on this issue, and I've read the cases; they simply have no applicability here, as the statute implicitly provides that this is a legitimate congressional function, as it requires the returns to be provided.

BTW, who do you think "takes it to court"?

 

If you notice, they are not clamoring for the tax returns of any other politician.

 

It is THE salient question which you and the other anti-Trumpers have been dodging for over two years. What is in his financial schedules that is not in his FEC financial disclosures?

 

Yes on this issue and the Congress would take the IRS to court to force the disclosure.