So I hear, but hasn't the IRS signed off on them?
"Trump's tax returns will be a treasure trove of criminal behavior."
Trump says his tax returns are routinely audited by the IRS, which must be an easy claim to check. If so, and the IRS signs off, isn't Trump home free?
2
WAPO has an interesting and informative take on this from opinion writer Greg Sargent via University of Chicago Professor Daniel Hemel:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/09/oops-how-trump-undercut-his-effort-keep-tax-returns-hidden/?utm_term=.d873e3fbcdd5
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/09/trump-just-gave-house-very-good-reason-look-his-tax-returns/?utm_term=.ced91bddea8b
2
Amazing that almost every headline is "Democrats against Trump" in some fashion. They should be designating a committee rather than Democrats. In fact, a Senate committee has subpoenaed DJT, Jr., regarding his role in the Russian contact of June, 2016.
I don't expect the NYT Times or other mainstream outlets to show such bias.
2
What is this man Trump hiding?
1
I really dislike the Times use of past tense in its headlines. It's a bit misleading and awkward. Makes it seems like the "news" happened a long time ago when it's just happening now.
Keep at it, Democrats. One subpoena at a time.
Getting thru this ‘brick wall of lies, deceit, fraud and all manner of illegal activity’ spearheaded by NYC’s newest and finest ‘mob boss’ and syndicates will take some time.
Long live American democracy or what remains of it!
5
Keep at it, Democrats. One subpoena at a time.
Breaking that ‘tower’ of ‘lies, deceit, fraud and all manner of illegal activity’, spearheaded by Queens’ finest ‘criminal mastermind’ won’t be easy.
Long live democracy or at least what remains of it.
3
It's not going to matter if even the Federal courts approve the subpoena for Trumps tax returns. He will simple concoct some executive privilege that it cannot be enforced by Federal Authorities. And that is a constitutional crisis because the Republicans will sit on their hands.
16
It's about time:
"... the fight over Mr. Trump’s tax returns could soon head to the federal courts ..."
I don't know whether Neal will fare better under IRC Section 6103 or Congress' power to issue subpoenas in furtherance of some Constitutional power. (Congress' power to issue subpoenas is not a "stand-alone" power, meaning Congress can't simply issue a subpoena for the heck of it; it can do so only to carry out some power granted to Congress under some federal law (a law that is Constitutional, that is) or under the Constitution itself.)
Frankly, 6103 looked pretty good to me, and so I'm surprised that Neal has switched approaches. I do understand that 6103 hasn't been court-tested, but the statute is very clearly worded.
Possibly Neal was "spooked" by the language in 6103 that would require Neal's committee to review Trump's tax returns only in a closed "executive session." It's unclear what that phrase means, but at the very least it presumably means "House members only -- no staffers." For reasons best known to themselves, House members appear to believe they need staff lawyers to ask the questions, and so this bothers them greatly. Not sure why it does, or whether it ought to, but it seems to.
3
Nonetheless do you think it will be enforced if the Federal courts authorize it. Trump could come up with some Executive order to enforce it and Barr will go along with it .
If the Congress really wanted to see tax returns, and check for conflicts of interest, they could simply pass a law saying any candidate for President had to file them with the Congress. In the interest of transparency, Senators and Representatives should put theirs on file as well.
Here's a law that would have bipartisan support from voters.
17
I spend a good portion on my evenings after work catching up on the disaster of the day because I know all of this is history in the making. It's almost a part time job in itself to keep up, but judging from what I'm seeing in the news today, my guess is that by next Friday we are going to see Donald Trump impeached. My only regret is that the live hearings are always in the middle of the day when I work, I wish they would hold these in the evenings, as the taped version isn't the same live.
77
@Missy
I watched the taped Watergate hearings in the evening after I got home from work.
They were plenty interesting.
And you can record them, and go back over a specific question and answer to make sure you heard it correctly.
(Do you expect them to run the hearings so the folks in California, or Hawaii, can watch them live, or just the folks in the central time zone?)
9
@Missy
In fact, PBS rebroadcasted the Watergate hearings in the evening so that people could watch them and that may have helped turn the tide of public opinion against Nixon. They should do it again.
58
@Missy
my guess is that by next Friday we are going to see Donald Trump impeached.
not that easy, though I wish it were.
6
The law is clear. You cannot parse it to mean something else. Military aircraft passenger Stephen (Steve if you will) will try to break the law whereas a black woman gets put in jail for a faulty tail light, dies, in the cell, apparently suddenly suicidal and willing to die over a tail light, and the police are not held accountable.
Even after DNA tested exoneration for the central park 5, there were no calls of "enough already". A black or Latino teenager gets hit with the full force of the law over minor drug possession but snowflakes Don junior and senior must be molly coddled at all costs after multiple credible allegations.
33
@Bob Guthrie
It seems Australia and the US share more than just their fondness for Queen’s English.
Incendiary, hate-filled speech and populist politicians such as Fraser Anning and Clive Palmer (billionaire) are just as common down under as in the ‘land of aplenty’.
3
@Bob Guthrie Guns. Those black and latino teenagers don't go to jail for drug possession, but for having a gun on them while doing so. NYC, 1 joint plus 1 gun gets you at least 2 years.
2
Just the fact that Mnuchin is still with this administration is very telling about his character.
34
Oh those returns will reveal things Donald doesn’t want Americans to know:
He is not and never has been a billionaire
He gives nothing to charity.
He’s a billion dollar loser, having squandered his entire inheritance and then some
He cheats on his taxes
He is, in essence, a welfare king, exploiting tax loopholes to keep himself rolling in clover financed by the taxpayers like us for the last 30 years. Nice work if you can get it.
He launders money for anyone who needs that service
As a result, he is a counterintelligence nightmare and a direct threat to the security of the United States.
Vote him OUT.
32
Keep at it, Democrats. One subpoena at a time.
Breaking that wall of ‘lies, deceit, fraud and all manner of illegal activity’, spearheaded by NYC’s newest and finest ‘criminal mastermind’ and ‘syndicate’ won’t be easy.
Long live democracy or at least what remains of it.
25
Trump's tax returns will be a treasure trove of criminal behavior.
Democrats should have made this top priority conversation every time they were on tv or social media everyday since inauguration day.
Trump is a traitor and confirmed criminal. His mental state has been brought up multiple times by both republicans, democrats and others who work(ed) with him closely.
The fact that Trump and his entire criminal family and "friends" own the White House right now is disgusting beyond belief.
23
This entire sordid drama shows how dishonest Trump really is. He promised to release his tax returns if he got elected, then broke the promise. Now he's fighting tooth and nails to conceal them as his promise is being called in.
The American people have to decide whether they really want a habitual liar and cheat for president.
1
Trump's tax returns will be a treasure trove of criminal behavior.
Democrats should have made this top priority conversation every time they were on tv or social media everyday since inauguration day.
Trump is a traitor and confirmed criminal. His mental state has been brought up multiple times by both republicans, democrats and others who work(ed) with him closely.
The fact that Trump and his entire criminal family and "friends" own the White House right now is disgusting beyond belief.
Death by a thousand cuts.
Trump has been involved in 4,095 in three decades, according to a story just published by USA Today.
2
Typo above: should be 4,095 LAW SUITS
1
Well, the Republicans have done it again. They've directed the narrative to "he's lying" or "look how rich he is," when the real issue is conflict if interest. We've completely forgotten that we're actually looking for who benefits from his policies, and why. Instead, we have another side show about a circus clown
2
Why do reporters keep saying "they wont become public anytime soon" as if anyone in the public looks at ANY tax returns. I hardly look at my own!
We want tax experts to look at them and tell us what's going on - mostly what illegal, immoral, fraudulent, and crooked schemes Trump has been up to.
The "public" will never look at his returns even if you printed them on stalls and over urinals in every bathroom in America.
3
Why is there such a finger to the wind, such hesitation about drawing up articles of impeachment? Must the Democratic leadership always wait for favorable polling numbers? Is this how "democracy" is supposed to work?
3
Should've been done long ago. This administration refuses to obey law, dared anyone to stand up to them, leaving no choice.
2
The committee doesn't have to release the actual returns to the public. But absolutely the committee has every reason to want to see them from a President more notorious than any politician in our history for being dishonest and corrupt.
And we deserve to know what the committee concludes from the documents.
Trump asked for this job as prez. He should be accountable for his tax return like every other modern President .
5
The President who has told 10,000 lies in a little over two years in office is begging for investigation. His words clearly indicate a person who says whatever is convenient for him at the time, true or not.
His continued acceptance of foreign guests and their money at his properties, his continued personal business relationships with foreign governments, his blissful alliance with Putin, and the fact that Russia helped him become President, point to possible violations of accepting emoluments and foreign loans.
Trump's deficit-spending policies, demanding the U.S. take out loans to finance the tax break for the rich, will bring the U.S. deficit to over $1 trillion this year. This tax break personally enriched him, his family, his companies and elected and appointed officials, at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer, now paying higher taxes, and receiving less in Social Security, Medicare and environmental protection.
He and the Republicans are running the U.S. as Trump ran his real estate empire -- into the ground. Fiscal Responsibility is a concept unknown to him, whereas not paying taxes, and, over-valuing his assets for loans, and under-valuing them for tax purposes, is.
The Treasury Dept. and IRS are part of the Executive Branch, and Trump is blocking them from releasing information in order to protect himself. He cannot be impartial, and should recuse himself from any involvement with Ways and Mean's investigation.
5
@Lilou
Give Trump credit where credit is due:
He did not run his business empire into the ground.
He went bankrupt a few times, but for reasons I do not understand was able to always protect his own assets.
Those have naturally grown, while his incompetence as a business man has cost his creditors dearly.
Basically, he is a legally sanctioned serial failure and fraudster.
The biggest failure on his resume will be the United States. The amount of debt he is racking up and the economic damage that will cause down the line is unfathomable.
While everyone in the business worlds is clamouring for the riches the stock market currently holds for them, once the bill comes due, we better make sure that we get out of the market pretty quick and before it crashes down to a Dow of 3000 or so.
1
It's been proved that Russia interfered with a U.S. Presidential Election. It' highly likely that, for some reason, the elected President obstructed the investigation into this attack on our country. Full disclosure of every fact related to this debacle should take precedence over everything in our country of laws, including that President's taxpayer privacy. All taxpayers' privacy was already violated when the contractor credit bureau used for taxpayer verification was hacked.
3
Why not subpoena for NY tax records too? There won't be any problems in obtaining them despite their limited information. Further, the issue of making them public isn't restricted by Federal law.
9
House Democrats have larger problems than Mr. Trump's universal stonewalling on their requests for documents and witnesses.
First, Speaker Pelosi and House Democratic leadership need to significantly upgrade their messaging on the Constitutional "civil war" Mr. Trump just declared by his unprecedented blanket denials for information. Mr. Trump's recent statement his executive administration refuses to comply with any and all House subpoenas was the historical equivalent of the Confederacy firing on Fort Sumter 150 years ago.
Second, Speaker Pelosi and House leadership should not exclusively base their response to Mr. Trump's recalcitrance on complying with legally valid subpoenas by the lengthy process of judicial review. Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats should couple their federal courts' approach with a bare-knuckled counter-attack using their SCOTUS recognized powers of inherent contempt and selective temporary suspension of funding to targeted soft points.
Consider the impact of AG Barr, Treasury Secretary Munichin, the Commissioner and Chief Legal Counsel of the IRS being arrested by the House Sergeant-At-Arms, tried before a House Special Committee fined tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars daily and incarcerated in Washington DC jails until they comply or the end of the current Congressional term in 2020.
Seeing AG Barr and Secretary Munichin doing the perp walk in handcuffs into a DC jail would put anyone under a House supoena cause for pause.
9
To those who think the House Dems are solely acting to embarrass the president, and lack a valid "legislative purpose", please explain what higher purpose was involved when a previous POTUS was interrogated under oath about his sexual relationship with a young lady to whom he was not married. Justice Kavanaugh even wrote up some X-rated questions for the circus.
9
Just an old country tax accountant
Couple things I know about the Fed Tax System (IRS) & tax systems of the "several states":
If you file a tax return to a State, e.g. New York you are required
to submit a copy of the Federal (IRS) tax return with the State tax return. So the "State of New York" already has copies of Trump's Federal tax returns.
I ask: In any investigation, does US congress have the power to subpoena the "State of New York Department of Revenue" to obtain such a copy?
I guess that the tax returns submitted to banks, insurance cos will show differences from those Fed copies submitted to the New York State Department of Revenue. Generally, the tax returns submitted to a bank, as basis for a loan, should be equal to those submitted to the Tax department.
Not talking about "customary differences" between "income per books" and "income per tax return", such as "non-cash using deductions for depreciation, amortization, etc". In other words, after all is reconciled, what if there are " unexplainable" differences of several $100 million dollars? What kind of fancy "taxsplaining" will it
take to explain that?
To me, the idea to file one version of a tax return with a bank, showing higher income, and another version with the tax department (showing lower income) is not advisable.
I can imagine the lawyer&accountant excuses. I could think of details, but there is no room for it in this "twitter-length" attention span world.
5
I don't know how the IRS conducts presidential audits. I can recall an old game that was played in Viennese coffee houses in the times of the old Austrian monarchy.
It was called: "The crown prince exam". It required: 1 crown prince, 1 professor, and 3 experts. The professor asks the crown prince the easiest possible question, the crown prince then answers it in the wrongest way possible. It is now the task of the three experts (who are also the game's main candidates) to best explain why the wrong answer is correct. The expert with the most astonishing, most absurd, yet simple answer wins. The more far fetched, the better.
Other things you need to know about this game are:
1) No matter what, the crown prince cannot fail.
2) Only people with the right mix of knowledge, education, long-suffering regret over the human condition, as well as sarcasm can successfully play this game.
7
We will eventually see how much the 5 conservative justices on the Supreme Court really believe in justice, law and the equal separation of powers.
Who of them actually believe in what they do? and who will go down in history as simply political hacks?
5
Crazy idea:
How about Mr. Neal get something like a search warrant, and Neal and a small contingent just walk into IRS building and get them themselves.
3
I'm starting to view the Trump "presidency" as a massive natural disaster -- the levees have clearly broken -- that is decimating not just the Constitution, but the unity and spirit of the whole nation. It will take years (if not decades) of rebuilding. But at least we are seeing where the work needs to be done. Now can we start doing it already?
5
Strange how the Republicans live by the word "Shall" in the 2nd amendment but don't like it in the tax code
10
The level of corruption of this Congress with respect to how it mercilessly tries to go after Trump is appalling. The IRS has no problem with Trump's filings, any other inquiry is pure political corruption. And I say this as a Liberal, sick of how Neoliberals do everything to avoid talking about real issues.
2
@CK So we're to ignore the issue of the criminal presidency? The tax returns of presidents can't be "weaponized" unless there's something in them that can be weaponized. So what's he hiding why not just hand them over? Tax fraud and lying to the public are for reals and ignoring them in favor of "concentrating on the issues" is the same thing as ignoring the fox put in charge of the henhouse. All the issues are being dwelt with by an illegitimate party.
2
The IRS has roughly 14 percent fewer people since 2010, serving at least five percent more people. They know that taking on super rich (or their litigious imposters) people is a further drain on resources. It’s the same reason bankers aren’t going to jail, but the basic fraudster like the fake heiress in Manhattan serve time - they have lawyers they can pay for that find every angle they can play and gum up a similarly underfunded justice system. The likelihood of conviction is taken into account prior to charging someone, regardless of the crime. A prosecutor has to select where to put resources, that selection is based on their own judgement on likelihood of conviction. If they have to choose between two people who are both holding equally smoking guns, they’ll choose the person who can least afford a team of attorneys. I am sure it’s not quite that cut and dry, but it is a factor.
1
@CK. And you know the IRS has no problem with trump 's tax filings how? Has it shared audit results with you? And are you only concerned with Congressional political corruption, but not presidential political corruption? What a strange "liberal" you are.
1
Absolutely, money counts, and to trump, money is almost the only thing that counts. If the American public is ever to know what trump is up to, what motivates his love of putin, we will have to examine his tax returns. The earlier returns that have appeared show a very different picture than don the con puts out. 1.17 billion dollars of losses by this great business man!
Was he kissing up to dictators for a bailout? His tax returns may tell.
3
Michael Cohen's testimony rings in my ears. Trump will not give up his power, no matter the results of an election, or the results of an investigation. He, and the United States Department of Justice are actively enlisting Russia's support for broad, and decisive interference in the next election while every, single Republican turns their head away in fear. Keep up the work, Democrats in Congress. You may lose the battle, but when Russia or North Korea lobs nuclear weapons to Chicago, after distracting the US with Bolton's war in Iran, and while American women and girls sit in prisons for having a uterus, the truth will have been foretold. World history will anoint the new Russian Republican Party as the United States of America ceases to exist. Putin's wildest dreams will have been realized. We become his glorious prize as Trump, American politicians, and the press, including Fox news, are all beheaded, or worse, in public view. Compliant, deadly power corrupts absolutely everything with astonishing speed. No one is safe with President Trump. No one.
6
We are all aware that Trump will simply ignore any subpoenas but that does not mean they should not be issued, in fact a good policy in dealing with Trump is to issue as many subpoenas as possible, keep them coming and let it be on record just how much he is defying Congress and the Law. The day a new president is sworn in (be it 2021 or 2025) comes the day Trump can be held to account for all his perceived illegal activity without him hiding behind executive privilege.
3
"The House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee routinely use this method to study the effects of tax policy on real taxpayers, but there is scant precedent for using it to study a president’s tax information..."
Why would one make such a distinction?
2
I agree, but if the House wants to impeach Trump and commences hearings toward that end, it would seem that the House would have authority to issue subpoenas to carry out that power. (Or the House could argue that it wants to pass some law, though we all know that's not its real reason.)
If the House starts down the impeachment road, however, it had better be prepared to impeach Trump. Politically, the very worst result for the Democratic Party would be to commence an impeachment investigation and then conclude that Trump should not be impeached after all; we'd never hear the end of Trump tweets if that were to happen.
Assuming the House does impeach Trump, the Senate will never convict him (67 votes would be required). The House could seek to embarrass the Senate in that event, but that would be the DP's only remaining hope...unless, of course, it shifts its focus to where it ought to have been placed long ago: on the 2020 election!
6
@MyFourCents
The 2020 election will and should be about whether the nation remains a constitutional republic with three equal branches of government, or a dictatorship where the executive branch cannot be examined nor, to use Steven Miller's words, Trump will not be "disobeyed."
5
You know, Neal could have gone straight to court with a petition for a writ of mandamus AND issued a subpoena at the same time. He could have gone forward with disobedience of the subpoena in a separate action later.
Neal had standing to pursue the action by the terms of 1603. I'm beginning to suspect that the House Democrats haven't got the courage to actually challenge the President. They would rather sit around whining and wringing their hands.
Are these the guys you want to elect come 2020 or would you rather vote for a criminal who at least knows how to take acvtion?
7
@Andrew Zuckerman
Anyone but Trump
1
On the Democrat election Apocolypse, day .5 nov 2016, I wrote on these pages the need to address the problems in America, no matter who sat in the White House. The frustrated comments that day were all about resist & obstruct. My challenge that AM was to bridge the divide and seek solution. Its 30 months later and you still wont learn. Approx 1/3 of Trumps base are people like me who wont accept the wasteful spending and lack of personal accountability for our govt’s financials. Bring us a candidate who will address the inequities of a tax code that allows the Amazons to pay barely anything & enforces a work for pay welfare system, among other solutions. We will embrace that candidate.
3
@RIhob
With all due respect, as much as ‘progressive Americans’ or perhaps Americans of all stripes would prefer such a candidate, the reality stands in ‘stark’ contrast of that ideal.
That ‘Jeffersonian’ model of equality for all hasn’t been part of the credo of American politicians since the 20th century.
Even FDR, despite his best efforts concerning the uplift of the poor half of the electorate, wasn’t immune to the influence of big corporations or special interest groups and nor has anyone else been since.
And those who tried to raise their voice regarding this ‘inequity’ were silenced, JFK among them.
Certainly, we can all hope for a better tomorrow with a ‘better’ leader at the helm with some sort of a ‘moral compass’ (for what is right and wrong, just and unjust), so that he/she may serve the ‘entire’ nation, regardless of wealth, race, religion or political affiliation.
God protect America.
3
I agree with most of your points about uniting to accomplish some things to move this country ahead. The idea that Trump is creating equality and taking care of the financial issues with our government is where we diverge; I fail to see how the President is accomplishing or even trying to accomplish anything along those lines. The tax cut created further inequities and his rhetoric is definitely not uniting.
I feel one if the main problems with government today is all the palace intrigue, political maneuvering and lack of genuineness of our politicians. So much spin, on both sides, is crazy making. When I am around people who are false, who are hiding who they are, even if they have a smile on their face, I want to turn around and go the other way. I think that is part of the appeal of Trump. He does say what he truly feels, though when he starts to attach alternative facts to support his feelings, I am appalled. Trump and Obama are similar that way. Both can connect with people from the dais. Obama projects more empathy, compassion and adherence to ethics and facts, which I find important. The point is people want their leaders to be authentic, and we lack that when we see obvious ploys by Congress to do things like use arcane laws to justify the ends.
If the political leaders spent more time trying to do the business of the country, and less time concocting the next move and how to gain power, we’d all be better off.
1
@Mark we'd be better off without a criminal as president? Hello?
Biden & Son need to release their tax returns as their Ukraine money laundering scam is coming to light.
4
The House Ways and Means Committee may be able to obtain Trump's tax returns without waiting for a court decision at the federal level. Since Trump's businesses are headquartered in New York, most of the same information in his federal tax return is also present in his New York State return.
The New York State legislature is working on a bill which would authorize the NYS Department of Taxation and Finance to share state tax-return information with relevant congressional committees as long as there is a “specific and legitimate legislative purpose.”
Trump will probably try to tie up this maneuver in court, like he's doing with every other facet of these investigations, but on paper this looks like a feasible alternative path towards the forced release of his returns.
10
Go for it!!!
7
Good luck with that. What are the Dems going to do, arrest Mnuchin? Hes protected 24/7 by the Secret Service. I'm convinced Trump wants the House Dems to impeach him. The Senate will never convict him and the House Dems will have shot their load, will look like idiots, and will have helped Trump to get reelected in 2020.
4
Understand this: The reason given by Ways and Means for the subpoena is to check up on the IRS to see “the extent to which the I.R.S. audits and enforces the federal tax laws against a president.”
And understand they didn't even request any information about any audits which may have been done.
And "a president" only means Trump, not the rest of the presidents.
Sorry, as much as I pray nightly for this clown to somehow be booted out of office, I find this behavior by Ways and Means and by the Democrats literally unethical, unprofessional and ridiculous!
The Democrats are in a race to the bottom with Trump now. Talking heads everywhere telling them to play down and dirty to keep up with the republicans' bad behavior. Understand that standards are not going to rise up after Trump is gone. Precedents are being set for what is acceptable in the future.
This is just another example of what an iron grip Trump has on this country -- look, he has caused the Ways and Means committee to stoop this low. Will his influence stop anywhere for any reason? At this point I will say no, the whole world is being dragged into the cesspool right behind him.
9
@ck It's not down and dirty - it's in the Internal Revenue Code plain and clear. Treasury and the IRS are part of the Executive Branch, controlled by Trump appointees who have demonstrated this week that they are willing to ignore a completely legal, simple request from Congress (the representative body of The People) to protect the President and their status.
This statute has been used multiple times in the past. It never needed to be used against the president due to voluntary disclosure.
Pretty simple.
9
@ck Trump "has caused the Ways and Means committee stoop this low." Actually, Trump didn't cause the committee to do anything. They committee is responsible for its own behavior.
2
@ck Coincidentally, all previous recent presidents made their tax returns available to the public. OF COURSE "a president" refers to Trump. He's the only one who hasn't already complied.
4
The committee should introduce legislation requiring all presidential nominees to make their tax returns public before the November elections, hold extensive hearings on the bill and, after it’s approved by the full House, force the Senate to tell us why it’s a bad idea.
13
@JW it would be much simpler if release of previous 20 years of tax returns were a condition for being on the primary ‘ballot’ of some ‘large’ states, AND for taking part in any debates. Bills can be blocked in the senate.
7
Mueller's report "totally exonerates" him yet he doesn't want that report to see the light of day, nor McGahn nor Mueller to testify? His taxes hide nothing yet he is desperate to keep his taxes hidden?
One can only hope the Dems have been methodically building a case for impeachment. They must call Team 45's bluff and take the fight to them. Let loose the hounds!
19
Why do the corporate media continue to refer to the applicable law as a “little known” statute? It doesn’t matter how old it is, it’s still the law, just like the Constitution, which is much older, and everybody knows about it. You make it sound, completely inappropriately, like an out-of-date relic.
11
@EJS Double parking is illegal. Jaywalking is illegal. Bicycle riding on the sidewalk by an adult us illegal. Go outside anywhere in the city at any time of the day or night and tell me that these laws are anything but "little known." I think you'll find that tax law is even more obscure than that. "Little known" is quite an appropriate description.
@Scottilla You consider those laws “little known?” They may be infrequently followed but everybody knows about them,
1
There's an aspect of the story that the Times and other media are ignoring, thereby confusing many readers. It has to do with the phrase "legislative purpose."
Standing alone, this phrase is ambiguous. It could mean
(a) for a purpose connected to legislation, and/or
(b) for a purpose connected to the powers of the legislature.
While answer (b) includes (a), it's also broader. Congress's Constitutional powers of oversight are an example of (b) that is independent of (a).
I directly consulted Prof. George Yin of University of Virginia (soon to retire), an expert whom the Times continually consults and quotes, on this very issue. The context was the law binding the Secretary of the Treasury to honor certain requests from any chairman of certain Congressional Committees for a citizen's tax returns if the request is for "a legislative purpose." He kindly informed me that the meaning of the law's phrase is (b), “meaning the constitutional responsibilities of the Congress.”
The Times should verify this with Prof. Yin themselves and then mention it in every pertinent story. Then readers needn't worry about Congress coming after their tax returns, and the President should worry more.
7
@A.J. Sutter
But the simple solution is for the Dems to file an Article of Impeachment and then conduct all investigations under the Impeachment banner and they will have more compelling case in court for all the subpoenas they issue to be enforced.
But, another article pointed out the Dems are aware of the efficiency of bundling refused subpoenas and submitting to a single judge for enforcement. this will speed up the process, otherwise there is a risk of the investigations being lost to time.
It took 7 years for the GOP lawsuit against the Obama Attorney General to reach its final appeal.
3
@Chuck Unfortunately, the simple solution isn't so simple, nor do I think it necessary. Everything though is governed by political optics.
The President is hoping for articles of impeachment, so that he can resume his "witch hunt"/victim narrative and run with it into the 2020 election. That the Senate is still on his side makes it easier for him to succeed with this. So these optics win for him. The House leadership is aware of this, so they want to avoid it before 2020.
Impeachment also isn't necessary. Each chamber has the power to arrest and jail someone who refuses to honor a subpoena, via a process known as 'inherent contempt.' The optics issue is it hasn't been used since the 1930s. On the other hand, this imperils the members of the Cabinet rather than the President directly, so the latter's potential to claim victimhood would be diluted.
I would expect that politically the ladder of escalation would be courts -> inherent contempt -> [impeachment after the election, if necessary and feasible]. Inherent contempt is a better step than impeachment if the courts drag on too long.
6
Judging by what some readers are suggesting, the next time anyone receives a Subpoena to appear in court or to appear before a ‘senate’ or a ‘house’ committee, they should just ignore it.
Because that’s what the 45th is doing?!
There’s nothing patriotic about ‘lying’, ‘dishonesty’ and ‘tax fraud and evasion’.
In fact, these are the hallmarks of ‘treasonous’ dictators and despots, who masquerade as ‘benevolent’ overlords.
14
Excuse me but there is no precedence for this, because Trump is the only President to not show his tax returns to the people...so this is the case for building precedence...
29
It is amazing how many commenters state that the Mueller Report cleared Trump; we don't know what it said because we have not been able to read an unedited version! It may have cleared him or it may have implicated him, we simply don't know!
6
It clearly said, unredacted, that if the Mueller team found they could clear the President, they would have done so.
9
@Cpt. Cluck
The Mueller Report identified 10 instances of obstruction of justice. Now the House needs to do its job and file Articles of Impeachment (indictments).
Those who state the Report cleared Trump are apologists for Trump telling a lie; or Russian trolls trying to keep people confused and ignorant; or bots programmed to do the same.
12
@Cpt. Cluck It's scary how many people believe that a trial ends upon introduction of the evidence, or in the case of the Mueller report, refusal to provide the evidence. These are the same people who believe that a guilty verdict is rendered upon arrest of a suspect. Civics education in this country is sorely lacking, and we could probably use a brush-up on logic.
1
They are all playing with fire here! Get the tax returns if you can, I am sure they are as scurrilous as the Mueller Report.
That's not what worries me; Trump may start a war with Iran, no President has lost reelection during a war!
6
... or start a second American Civil War.
Lavrentiy Beria, head of Stalin's secret police, was reported to have said "show me the man and I will show you the crime." For most of us, this statement is a warning about the dangers of unchecked state power; the Democratic Party, however, seems to regard it as a plan for action. First, it was collusion with Russia; now, it is obstruction of justice, Trump's tax returns, the entitlement clause. It just never ends, does it?
2
@Bob Kantor No it never ends because unlike all other presidencies this one is stonewalling all oversight and is now flaunting criminal behavior openly, such as ignoring the law and ignoring subpoenas. It's really no big deal to cooperate with things like ordinary tax information unless there's something out of the ordinary there you're hiding.
1
We know the "stable genius" lost $1.17 billion in the years 1985 through 1994. The serial bankruptcy debtor would want to hide his tax returns if he'd lost another billion after that.
10
No US citizen can be forced to release their tax returns. This is a long accepted legal precedent. This will probably go all the way to the Supreme Court and since the Republicans control the court 5 to 4, the President’s position will be upheld. The Dems will only be wasting time and energy. This foolhardy move will probably garner even more support for the President.
3
@John Murray. It's in the tax code - Ways and Means requests - IRS delivers. ASAP
4
@John Murray
Really? When I want to buy a house, or a $60,000 car it seems the bank or mortgage company can ask to see my tax returns. Any number of government agencies can ask me, legally, for my tax returns, to determine whether my income is too high or too low for some particular purpose. Any farmer applying for a loan through the USDA, etc needs to show the taxes. Not only that, remaining current on your tax filings is essential, because the IRS can put a hold on your professional license, if you think you can thumb your nose at them.
Why so many people think that a president should be held to a lower standard, instead of being a model citizen... is mind boggling. Seems that a good 40% of US citizens would get an
F in civics.
4
@Constant Comment surfer
People can ask for your tax returns but you don’t have to supply them. No one has ever asked for mine and I have bought cars, houses and securities like every American. No one has ever seen my tax returns other than me, the IRS and my accountant.
You write “ it seems that the bank or mortgage company can ask to see my tax returns”. You are mistaken on this.
2
This is exciting stuff, the President and Congress sparring over Constitutional issues. It is vital that Congress has the ability to check a President who has crossed the line so I hope the courts side with Congress. It is our only hope for preventing the presidency from becoming a despot. But that being said, it is not clear to me what Trump's taxes before he entered office have to do with checking his power. I suspect he lied to the public about his finances but that is not unchecked power, it is Trump being Trump. I am more worried about Trump starting a war with Iran as a diversion, which seems far more sinister than his taxes. I hope Congress does not lose sight of the real mission, which is to keep this country safe and defend the Constitution.
8
If Trump is under financial stress from loans, or other deals with foreign governments, from before his Presidency, they would be relevant as to undue influence while he is in office.
52
@Scott Werden
Tax years 2017 and 2018 are also included in the subpoena. i.e the current Presidency
Besides the fact that it’s been done for the last 40 years by every President since after Nixon, it begs the question: Why hide?
Unless, of course, ‘something is ‘rotten’ in the state of ‘Trumpia.’
16
@Scott Werden
Any president's finances, but especially Trump's finances, are subject to scrutiny to determine whether he/she has any financial obligation that would interfere with presidential duties. For example, a president can make deals, policies, etc. that directly enrich he and his family and at the same time harm the American people.
12
Remember all, Trump rigged no. 1 and no. 2 at the irs. God speed and good luck.
7
@db2
Like I said before: A State tax return return filed with the State of
New York will generally require that a copy of the Federal taxes is attached, whether on paper or electronically.
Badaboom badabing, there is your God speed!
3
I have filed NYS and NYC income tax returns all my (longish) life. We do not, and never have had to, attach a copy of the federal return. Pease stop misleading people and raising false hopes. The closest a NYS return gets to what you claim is that they cut to the chase and have us repeat on similar tax lines what we put on the federal. 3-11-19 1:39 PM
1
Ways and Means is right to verify whether Trump accepted emoluments, received loans from enemy states or other foreign entities, has used his office to increase his personal wealth, and, if he underpaid his taxes.
The IRS is part of the Executive Branch. But, in this case, the potential criminal is the Chief Executive, who is evading and blocking the investigation. Trump has a conflict of interest, and cannot impartially direct Treasury or the IRS because he is protecting himself. In essence, he should recuse himself from having anything to do with the Ways and Means investigation.
With (at least)10 citations of obstruction of justice in the Mueller report, and the fact that Mueller could not vindicate Trump of obstructing justice, his financial picture, and those of his businesses, PACS, family, bear examining.
Analyzing this President's tax returns, a man who has unapologetically told over 10,000 lies while in office, is not unreasonable.
To not examine his finances, given his record, would be a dereliction of duty. The Republicans' alleged concern about embarrassing Trump is a red herring. They're most afraid of losing their power in the Senate and the White House, and will fight tooth and claw to protect their swamp.
25
The chase for his returns is a complete waste of time, effort, money etc. This country has more important issues at hand.
1
@Patrick--if Trump's returns and financial records indicate that he, his family or his companies, received loans from foreign nations, emoluments in the form of business revenue while in office, or that he abused Presidential power to increase his personal wealth, and/or evaded paying taxes -- over-valuing property to obtain loans, and under-valuing the same property to avoid taxes --these would represent three Constitutional violations by the President, and one or more Federal offenses on tax evasion.
Testimony to Ways and Means by the people who prepared Trump's tax returns, by representatives of foreign governments which loan money to him, do business with him, his family and/or his companies while he is in office, or who exclusively stay at his properties, would clarify to the American people the extent of Trump's culpability, and whether he should step down, or be impeached.
It's definitely not a waste of time.
@Patrick And the most important issue at hand is that the president is a criminal and setting public policy.
1
I do not feel that they are picking on Trump by issuing a subpoena for his tax records. It has been a tradition for Presidential candidates to release their tax information. He has refused and clearly has something to hide. If he didn't they would have been released as standard operating procedures. He never intended to win when he was running. He's probably the only more shocked than I was when he won. LOL!! If you are honest, you have nothing to hide. He is clearly not honest. We new that before he ran. Bottom line he was not elected by the majority of the population. He has not recruited any new supporters. Democrats have to pay attention to the delegate count. That is where they failed. He will not get a majority again. Probably less than before, hopefully. Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida definitely for delegates. Places Democrats took for granted in 2016, and lost.
7
Why such a fight by Trump against transparency? With so much protest against “fake news” and deep state conspiracies, wouldn’t somebody with nothing to hide want everything out in the light? Especially in a political environment where all of his supporters will see what they want anyway and Mitch McConnell will circle the wagons on behalf of the plutocracy he serves so faithfully.
7
Maybe because it’s his personal business and no one else’s?
@Patrick
You mean the Most Transparent President Ever, who promised to release his tax returns?
What is he hiding?
3
@Patrick The presidents finances are none of the public's business? How do you figure?
The Democrats are digging their own graves over these endless subpoenas and investigations. The people do not care about President Trump's tax returns after being in office for over two years. They want the Democrats to get to work and do the people's business. This is why they were elected. They need to stop wasting time and taxpayers money.
6
@KMW Yes, we do care and what they are doing IS the people's business. The man who has done nothing wrong but seems to have so much to hide is the one wasting the taxpayer's money.
9
@KMW
I disagree and support the investigations.
7
Yeah, thanks. Sure, whatevs.
Of course if you looked, you’d find a long list of actions since January.
But hey, why would you? Hannity’s addictions, far more important.
2
House is weak and powerless under Pelosi!
4
There is no law requiring a candidate to share his tax records. Curiosity is not a reason!!! Obviously the dems have nothing else to hang their hat on.
8
@Dennis
There is credible evidence from a sworn witness (Michael Cohen) that Trump committed fraud and that he may be conducting illegal business with the Russians. That is what law-abiding Democrats with a sense of duty to the rule of law are hanging on their hats on, Sparky.
11
@Dennis you mean trump has nothing to hang his hat on. Otherwise he'd just release the tax returns and not have this whole thing look like he's hiding something.
@DM
Reall? Michael Cohen?
Good. It’s a necessary step. Can the Trump Supreme court defend Americans and the United States Constitution? Trump, Pence, Barr and the GOP are corrupt. The full Mueller report should be seen by our Reps in Congress! It’s a Constitutional crisis! Trump abuses power more every day. We got all of this thanks to both parties ignoring illegal immigration for decades. Period. We have 22 -28 million illegals mostly Hispanics and it is not a right to come to the US. That’s why my Democrats better pick up the no entry ball or Trump will not only stay but will refuse to leave. Thanks Hillary. Thanks sanctuary cities.
2
@Jack you need to understand what corruption is, it’s not protecting your privacy. The public weighted in on the tax return issue, he won the election,
1
The people weighed in on the tax return and other issues on 2018- the Rs were crushed. People want to know what this corrupt president is hiding, and why does he refuse to look into russian meddling in our election. Why is his admin blocking normal briefings of intelligence from CIA, NSA etc to Congress??
If HRC had won and refused R requests for information etc you would be hopping mad. Stop being a partisan and support your constitution.
5
Hillary released 8 years of tax returns.
Lying Trump's tax returns will be as devastating as Nixon's secret tapes.
7
Let’s go fishing!!!
3
Full speed ahead, Dems!
Get your ducks in a row to build that case for ‘impeachment’ when the time comes.
May God purge America of fascism.
18
Donald, show us the money! You've been telling us about how much you have for forty years. Surely you're excited to let people know how enormous the Trump fortune is now!
10
Anything to get Trump, despite zero legislative necessity for those documents
The intellectual dishonesty is appalling
This is the constitutional crisis; congress abuse of power
Meanwhile the Dems have no legislative agenda. It’s so disheartening.
Shame on Dem.
5
@Joe Yoh They have legislative agendas where have you been? You can learn of them from your news sources. In the meantime the porn star criminal presidency is a big inconvenience the left would sincerely NOT have to deal with. But they do.
The two reasons I want to se Trump's tax returns are...
(a) if he's in a financial relationship with an adversarial foreign power, and...
(b) if Trump, the businessman, is profiting from Trump, the president.
I don't think that's too much to ask.
59
Hey everyone. Many seem not to understand that the main issue here is not tax evasion.
It's the Emoluments clause.
26
Why Donald Trump need to be POTUS if does not release his tax returns? Nobody asked him to come in public platform to run the country. It looks like his appointed two judges in US Supreme Court will join other judges to turn over his taxes for public to review. Same game played in 1974, when Supreme Court asked unanimously to hand over the tapes, resulting the resignation of Nixon. History repeats itself.
5
I'll summarize Trump's tax returns: his lawyers filled out paperwork that he signed, which allowed him to take advantage of real estate deductions that people like Biden, Schumer and Pelosi voted for.
Yawn.
I don't care about Trump's taxes. I care about my taxes. And as long as Democrats think quasi-open borders and free stuff for everyone who gets across makes sense, I'm going to have to (former Obama voter) vote Trump.
9
@C. Childers for me it's not about tax deductions, it's about ensuring that the President is not using his office for personal enrichment, and especially that his foreign policy decisions are not influenced by his business interests. We have a president who has refused to put his assets in a blind trust and refused any kind of transparency into those assets. Don't you think that's worrying, regardless of party?
9
I'm glad my parents did not live to see what republicans have done to this country.
18
Giving low population States the same number of Senators irrespective of the number of citizens is totally undemocratic. Those living in Wyoming have 67 times the voting power as each of the 40 million Californians. Those living in solidly Republican rural States have many times the voting power of each of the 40 million Californians. One citizen, one vote--not a chance....
This allows the Republicans to control the rural States by appealing to the values they have--i.e. guns, God and white supremacy. They are quite effective at pretending to champion the interests of those folks while actually legislating to protect their real parties of interest--the wealthy.
21
@Ironmike Oh, you mean like low-population Democratic states such as Hawaii, Rhode Island, Delaware and Vermont?
1
Way and Means wasting time. Cut the funding and file a law suit in the same time as you file this subpoena.
You have to bully a bully, otherwise this will go on long after the 2020 elections.
Show them the limits now.
11
I got to wonder if Barr didn't order Mueller to wrap up the Russia/Trump investigation. So many things unanswered in that Trump could be financially beholden to Putin.
12
@Suzanne Moniz (a well meaning commentator who is unfortunately a little naive)
Our “democracy” was always an oligarchy. Through the very successful application of cosmetics (the so called American Rhetoric which included words like the “founding fathers,” the “American Dream,” the “chosen and blessed nation) we managed to con the naive population.
Now the mask has fallen. Trump and the GOP don’t even care about putting lipstick on the pig.
We need to change the constitution. Ours is not even a constitutional monarchy. We just found out that there is no separation of powers. The emperor dictates (tweets) and the stooges follow.
Bernie 2020 and 2024. Democratic Majority in both Houses, increase the number of justices to 11 in SCOTUS, impeach Kavanaugh. Elect AOC Speaker of the House.
Otherwise ship up and put up with Fascism. The Italians and the Germans did. And they had a better educated population than we have in the red states.
11
"They [Neal and committee lawyers] feared that a judge could simply throw the case out for lack of standing, essentially rendering use of the tax code provision unenforceable whenever the executive branch objects to its invocation."
No lawyer would make such a broad statement about "standing".
The Times should publish an EXACT quote from a committee lawyer and get a comment on the record from a legal expert.
3
Clearly Trump & Co. are in a full-court press to goad Democrats into impeaching. They've put all their eggs into the basket that says if impeachment fails in the Senate, Trump will win in 2020.
Well I say that their eggs will go splat on the floor. An impeachment trial, regardless of the outcome, will accomplish what nothing else is able to in this dual-reality news environment: it will draw all voters' eyes to the same news source for once --- a riveting, must-watch, live-stream of sensational impeachment hearings that will lay bare the complete, disgusting truth of Trump in endless, undeniable, factual detail, and not just for a 24-hour news cycle but for weeks and weeks. It can only further enrage the 57% majority who already polled as disapproving of Trump following the Barr memo, and it will keep them riled up during the home stretch leading to 2020.
10
Doubtful. The polls I’ve seen this week are against impeachment. The Democrats took the House in majority swing districts, most of which voted for Trump. Only the true believers are paying attention to this daily.
2
I was kind of against impeachment, but tend to agree now, if the admin is totally stonewalling everything, there is only one way to go. Impeachment hearing.
Then we will see multiple witnesses on live TV either discussing the lunacy and crimes they witnessed in this admin, or, better, many of them taking the 5th because the place is packed with criminals.
That is why DJT is resisting- McGann or Mueller, or Jared, Miller etc speaking about illegal acts, violation of standards, obstruction of justice, numerous outright felonies. Plus what are his connections to russian and Saudi money- is that why he is so beholden to Vlad and MBS?
Remember- he is Individual No 1 in SDNY- so eligible there for the same felony charges(he is a co-conspirator) for which Cohen is now in prison
5
Is it legal to demand a citizen's personal documents just because you hate him? I thought this kind of intrusion was prohibited by the Constitution.
5
@SCPro: Wrong question. It’s legal to demand the president’s (not any citizen’s) tax returns because there are justified concerns about his financial indebtedness to adversary regimes that would endanger national security. And he pledged to make them public, so he has no legal grounds to stand on in refusing to do so.
17
@SCPro Try truth.More painful but will serve you well in the long run.
4
@SCPro Nobody is asking for his tax documents because they hate Trump, sweetie. It is a legal request in the service of oversight, in the service of determining if our president is beholden to outside interests, to wit: Deutsche Bank, and the State of New York is investigating his many crimes in relation to Trump INC see: Fred Trump and Charles Kuschner. Really. There is a lot going on here, and it is not because anybody bears personal animus towards the guy who calls Democrats and the press "enemies of the people."
13
Chairman Neal, a Massachusetts guy, must be upset that the White House called his beloved Red Sox the Red `Socks' and applauded the team for winning the `World Cup,' not the World Series.
Yes, I'm afraid that did happen.
7
All red-blooded American baseball fans should be upset by that. Even Yankee fans. ;^)
Where do they even find people to work in the administration who are so unfamiliar with American culture?
2
@Liberty Apples I think Chairman Neal is not half so petty as Trump & friends..
3
I've seen this legal strategy before. When your main case falls apart, go after the unpaid parking tickets. The IRS has already reviewed these tax returns. They're a red herring and the bait has been taken... again. Trouble is this time the house is insuring either a Trump victory in 2020 or providing a case with which he can challenge election results
6
Keep up the pressure. Going after Trump is like playing "Whack a Mole". Eventually the cursor will connect with the mole.
10
Really, Trump and his spokespersons claiming that the Meuller Report exhonerates the President on the the basis of the fact that the special counsel concluded that he was not able to establish sufficient evidence to indict on charges of criminal conspiricy is no different than the claim that Al Capone was exhonerated of charges of murder and racketeering because they were only able to get him on tax evasion.
21
Since no indictment has been issued and no crime committed then the request of these tax returns is unconstitutional and will be so adjudged in a court of law.
6
@Mark Andrew: Apparently you don't understand the subpoena power of Congress. It has nothing at all to do with whether or not crimes have been committed.
And I would advise you not to bet about the outcome of a legal case over this issue -- unless, of course, you'd like to bet me. ;^)
6
@Mark Andrew I don't remember indictments as being a necessary precursor to requesting tax returns. Often it is the tax return that begets the indictment. Hey, nice try though.
9
@Mark Andrew. That must be in imaginary Amendment eleventy two.
Everyone running for President discloses his or her tax returns. They are like a resume for a job, a financial resume. Because Trump is a career moneymaker his returns were particularly important. It is an outrage that he has not disclosed them and his failure to do so should have cost him millions of votes.
Jump ahead to today. The issue is no longer voluntary disclosure. It is compulsion. And if the matter is decided by the courts, they will have to state a legal principle of general application. It is vital that that principle be narrow enough not to do harm to you and me.
If the courts were to determine that congressional subpoenas for tax returns have the force of law then anyone’s returns might be made public. The confidentiality of our returns is a vital protected right, and so the court opinion must distinguish between tax scofflaws like Trump and ordinary citizens. The goal isn’t just to get Trump’s tax returns. It is to get his returns while protecting the confidentiality of ours.
11
@michjas
Nowhere is it said the tax returns are to be made public. Congressional committees provides oversight in many other cases where the documents are not made public, not at least related to national security.
12
@OM. Reread the comment. The operative word is “might”.
1
@michjas: Easy enough, not everybody is running for the presidency of the USA.
2
Even if articles of impeachment are passed, the president will still refuse to turn over anything or comply with subpoenas.
5
Whether any president has too much or too little power is not what is in question. A known corrupt thief is president and craven Republicans are shielding him from the law.
32
Maybe Trump can turn over a redacted version of them.
4
Trump bluffs again while holding an empty hand, not even a pair of deuces.
It's how he operates on everything. He puffs up his chest, lowers his voice, makes a threat, and then backs down when his bluff is called.
Recall that Nancy and Chuck figured this out back in December concerning the shut down.
28
@Capt. Penny
I agree with you. 100%.
Bottom line is that Trump has been filing his tax reruns in accordance with the tax laws that Congress wrote. How do I know this? We have been told by the President that his tax returns get audited every year and although he may have had to make changes based on differing interpretations of the tax law by his lawyers when complex tax issues are involved he has not been charged with tax fraud. As long as trump is not violating any tax laws then his tax returns should remain private until such time as Congress changes the law for Presidential candidates and Presidents regarding disclosing their returns to the public.
5
@NYChap "As long as trump is not violating any tax laws..." that can only be determined by an investigation that would include LOOKING AT HIS TAX RECORDS! Trump is not above the law.
12
@NYChap
Are you telling me you believe "Lyin' Don" when he says his taxes have been audited every year? Shame on you. You need to listen more closely, or take a repeat course in high school English so you can differentiate truth from falsehood in whatever comes from the president's mouth.
13
In reply to George Virginia.
But the IRS has already examined President Trump’s tax returns and found nothing wrong. He has faced no charges of tax evasion. If he had it would be in the public record.
"...Democrats are clearly concocting a fake investigation to justify getting ahold of information they can use to politically embarrass the president." Why would this information embarrass the president* if he's been telling the truth all along?
23
@Dan "Why would this information embarrass the president* if he's been telling the truth all along?"
Let see. It seems the Democrats have spent the last 2 years trying to embarrass the President by falsely accusing him, 24/7, of colluding with the Russians to fix the last Presidential election. even after the President has been cleared of that hoax the Democrats continue to accuse him. I suspect that even though the President has filed his Tax Returns in accordance with all the tax laws the democrats will falsely accuse him of a crime once again. I suspect that because they are doing it now and they still have as tier stated goal to damage the President, with lies and false accusations, so they can beat him in the next election. that is why.
3
@NYChap I think Dan was being ironic — see especially his use of lower case and an asterisk (presumably a reference to Trump’s having lost the popular vote) in “president*” .
1
Trump damages himself with his behavior and violates norms on a daily basis. Why was it important to see every other presidential candidates tax returns but not the guy who has significant entanglements throughout his career. He’s hiding something. He always has. It’s just who he is. Believe the facts, not what the con man tells you.
7
I could care less about Trump’s or anybody else’s tax return. I rely on the IRS to send those who disobey tax law to jail. I would venture to say that if we could all see our best friend’s tax return we might find a few interesting things but if they follow the law why should we be concerned? Let’s stop beating up on those who use the tax law to their own advantage and who in the process are doing nothing more than what congress suggests they do.
6
@Confused Trick is the tax returns may in compliance of tax law, but provide of violations of other areas of law, such as the Emoulments clause.
13
It is not the prerogative of Mr. Mnuchin to second guess the motives of Congress, which was expressly his basis for his refusal of the request for Trump’s tax returns. Congressional motives are not his right, under law, to interpret at all. Indeed, the law pretty clearly gives the Treasury Dept. no wiggle room whatsoever – they are bound by law to comply – so, now that it will head to federal court, winning their case should be a slam dunk for House Democrats, in the lower courts, at least.
Of course, depending on how much of an embarrassment those returns may be to Trump, fighting it to the bitter end, and making it a SCOTUS issue, could easily backfire. Ultimately, putting it the hands of Chief Justice Roberts who, unlike the other 4 Republicans on the court, has shown himself to be less of a party-hack, and more of a constitutionalist, means risking a decision that, psychologically at least, could be a precedent for other decisions on presidential stonewalling that are sure to come before the court later.
13
Setting aside the law that requires the Commissioner of the IRS to submit tax documents of any individual when requested by the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, the Congress makes all laws (Article 1) including tax laws.
There has been strong evidence (bravo NYT) that the President, his siblings, and his father all committed massive tax fraud in connection with their inheritance.
When the tax laws are so flawed that the President can have some of the largest tax write-offs and still amass wealth, Congress needs to examine the circumstances. They need to fix the system so the wealthy pay something to support the government and the nation that allow them to scam the system.
14
@Richard Well, for starters, it wasn't his actual money that he lost. It was his investors' money. Didn't stop him from claiming a tax loss and, therefore, not paying taxes for 10 or so years, all the while claiming interest income to the tune of some $59 million.
No wonder the US banks stopped lending to him. They were tired of losing their despositors' money. Not to worry, Deutsche Bank and the Russian mafia were happy to get their hooks into him.
And now he's POTUS and well-positioned to pay them all back, one way or another.
What a country!
4
@Richard
Wake up Richard. Congress IS the system.
What possible reason would Trump have to be embarrassed by his tax returns going to the Committee? One wonders.
13
I applaud Representative Neal's decision to subpoena the Department of the Treasury and the IRS in order to speed, hopefully, the release of Mr. Trump's business tax returns.
There is, obviously, an abundance of indications that Trump's financial affairs will not bear examination. That is apparently why he is resisting their disclosure.
It is the solemn duty of all federal legislators, whether Democratic or Republican, to investigate the president when so much evidence points to his using underhanded methods to satisfy his lust for ever more money.
The fact that so many Republicans are attempting to protect Trump from legal repercussions is suggestive of an open conspiracy against our Constitutional government--a government which was and ought to be the world's most thoroughgoing expression of representative democracy in action.
Trump's inauguration in January of 2017, as is easily perceived in retrospect, was the beginning of a period of creeping dictatorship. We are now overdue in initiating an era of restored liberty.
Representative Neal has taken one important restorative step. A great many others must follow.
62
I feel its my right as a taxpayer to see my presidents’ tax returns, regardless of party or personality. I also dislike DT. However, isn’t it much more reasonable to assume the IRS is capable of detecting evasion than that the documents filed with the IRS contain some sort of legal bombshell threat to DT? If the IRS has approved his taxes, isn’t it most likely that there isn’t likely an evasion problem with them?
Now, politically damaging is another question entirely.
3
@Aaron
No, it is not most likely. The IRS has been hamstrung by greater and greater Republican budget cuts for years.
14
The issue isn’t so much evasion as it is this: How many millions of dollars has the former host of The Apprentice and creator of Trump University received from Russia over the years? What countr(ies) have bailed him out, and on whose behalf is he committing treason as a result?
9
@Aaron the issue is not tax evasion.
It's the Emoluments clause.
7
I think the reason that Congress is going for a subpoena rather than 26 USC 6103(f)(1) is that the latter REQUIRES that "any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session ... " whereas a subpoena might not include that same restriction.
10
Ways and Means should be investigating Trump not only for underpayment of taxes, but also for financial relationships and loans from foreign entities.
This analysis could lead to clear proof of Trump's violation of accepting emoluments, or accepting funds from enemy states, or tax fraud.
When a person fights so hard to protect himself, he looks more, not less, guilty. Given the (at least) 10 citations of obstruction of justice in the Mueller report, and that Mueller could not vindicate Trump of obstruction of justice, his financial ties to Russia and other enemy states bear investigation.
It is not true that Ways and Means must have a legislative purpose for reviewing his tax returns. It is something done frequently to assess the impacts of tax laws on taxpayers. Examining this President's tax returns, a man who has told over 10,000 lies while in office, without apology, is not a bridge too far, even if it's rarely been done.
To not examine his finances, given his character, would be a dereliction of duty. As far as the Republicans' alleged concern about embarrassing Trump, the fact is, the man does not embarrass easily, with the exception of jokes about his tiny hands.
He's not ashamed by his loathsome, retrogressive policies and mad deficit spending on the rich, nor are the Republicans.
20
Americans want to know how Mr. Trump makes his money and how he championed an enormous deficit driven tax cut that raised taxes for homeowners in blue states while giving huge reductions to corporations, pass through entities, and real estate developers. The self dealing and corruption has to be viewed in daylight.
29
About time! And therein will be the the information Trump has so desperately tried to hide. Full speed ahead!
11
There is no law stating a candidate or president has to release his tax returns. Just because past presidents have set precedence by doing so, does not make written in stone. This ismore petty nonsense by the Democrats who, 3 years later, still cannot let go of their 2016 presidential election loss. I don't care how much a person earns or how much of those earning are donated to charities. I *do* care that this bloviating by the Democrats is preventing anything of importance getting done. While they fret about Mueller's report not giving the the outcome they swore they'd get, while they push POTUS to release something he doesn't have to release, people are driving on roads & crossing bridges that are unsafe, prescription drug prices continue to rise along with health insurance premiums & co-pays, senior citizens have to make choices between food & medications, PTSD among our brave military is rampant & illegal immigration (by more than South & Central Americans) is out of control. Yet the Democrats, the party supposedly of the average American, continue to hound the president. Enough is enough. They should either do the work we elected them to do or get the heck out of Congress so we can put people in there who *will* work for us.
4
@Court Clerk You are correct. There is no law stating that a President has to reveal his tax returns. But there IS a law stating that Congress can request to see the tax returns of ANY citizen. The law is the law.
7
@Court Clerk. This is clearly not a democratic issue. Please read bills that have been presented to the senate that are sitting. We have a clearly partisan government that is refusing to work for the benefit of the people of the US. Shame on them all.
1
@Court Clerk
NY State is about to pass a law that requires any candidate for office to release 5 years of tax returns or they are ineligible to be listed on a ballot.
Another 17 states have similar bills in process.
What Court do you clerk in? How can you not have seen that news item?
5
Embarrassment is on the list of many human emotions Donald John has never truly experienced.
He doesn't want his taxes made public because he has "played the sport' tax evasion his entire life and he's still doing it. So the president placed his assets in his son's name via a trust fund which he can revoke in a moments notice. There is a Pandora's Box of narely investments that he desperately wants to remain off limits.
He is hiding somethig pretty big and Don't' let him.
There are a host of issues that this president has brought to light regarding his actions using his interpretation of our Constitution, "tax code provision — Section 6103" is on the top of the list.
8
This is what I don't understand about obtaining the president's tax returns: why is the deadline for the president to respond set so far in the future? How long can it take to get tax records, maybe an hour? Why would the House committee give more than two weeks for a response when they know the subpoena will not be honored anyway? Does it take over two weeks to obey a subpoena? And why is the deadline 17 days away? Is there some legal precedent for this? It seems that in this case justice should be swift, and this country's citizens deserve a faster government response.
9
I am amused to see the topic on this thread turned towards a discussion of what time of day they should air the impeachment hearings !!!
3
Why fight so hard if you're so innocent?
20
@SweetestAmyC
Why not present evidence if you have any? Trump is defending his constitutional rights as well as those of future presidents.
3
@SCPro
Are you asleep? Thanks to the fine reporting here in the NYT, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that Trump, his father and Trump's siblings committed tax fraud in multiple years. These reports not only need to be investigated but if true need to produce legislation that requires the wealthiest people in this nation pay their fare share of the taxes that run this nation.
13
To hazard a wild guess, Trump is broke.
And then because he is broke and can’t get a single dollar from a single American bank, Russia pounced on him.
And then he has now to launder money for Putin and his oligarch, hiding their ill-gotten wealth as “investments”. Just look at how many Russians reside in the Trump Tower at 5th Ave since the 90s.
Follow the moolah!
82
@Opinioned!, then I wish to be that broke and live in such a big fancy house.
“In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:1–3).
Sorry, Opinioned, in these unprecedented times I can’t help but feel like wanting to indulge in all that stuff I had shoved down my throat as a kid. I hate to let things go to waste and the real daily news reads just a ridiculous to me so why not?
If taxes put Al Capone away perhaps there's still hope here.
65
@Rodrian Roadeye
You could try accepting the reality that Trump is going nowhere. You could even try to defeat him in the next election.
Trying to undo the last one is an exercise in futility.
1
President Johnson lamented that he felt like a texas salesman in a hale storm, You can't run you can't hide and you can't make it stop.
The Donald along with members of his team are now in a Texas hale storm
19
I hate Trump. I hate what Republicans are doing to the country.
But this is not a winning issue. While Trump undoubtedly exaggerates his wealth, and the returns would probably be embarrassing, the Repubnicans have a reasonable argument that this is designed to politically embarrass the president.
The SDNY is investigating his businesses, his "charity" and his personal tax maneuvers. They will reveal any possible criminal financial activity. The Times' great reporting already shattered the great wealth, great businessman myth.
The real work should be calling witnesses, accessing the Mueller report in full, including supporting documents, and then impeaching the despicable man for obstruction of justice. Thereafter his financial house of cards can come down and he can, if the evidence allows, go to jail for tax evasion or criminal bank fraud.
That would be lovely. But the only task now is to get this man out of the White House as soon as possible. Keep our eyes on the ball.
14
I strenuously disagree.
One of Congress's most important 'implied' consitutional powers is oversight authority over the executive branch.
Access to materials are necessary to perform oversight.
In this case, there are serious and legitimate questions which have never been resolved regarding emoluments (remember, Trump took the bad decision to not set up a trust[s]). WIthout tax returns from during presidency they cannot perform this.
The several preceding years leading up to presidency are also important because we know of many contacts between Trump and his campaign vs. Russia, so this could also speak to emoluments.
In addition, there are still numerous points to evaluate regarding potential obstruction of justice (as well as why he would obstruct). For this, they should have full access to the underlying material of the Mueller investigation.
I ask you: if Congress cannot perform oversight of Trump (or any POTUS), then who can? Dare we trust any President to an honor system? I would contend that nothing could be less American that allowing a President to go without transparency and oversight, particularly when he has not divested or set up blind trusts.
14
@Barking Doggerel
Um, sorry, but the Mueller report cleared Trump.
The Dems should be filling potholes instead.
@Tall Tree, incorrect.
It declined to weigh in, but offered about 10 or 11 distinct items which need to be investigated (at the very least by viewing all materials supporting Mueller's report) for obstruction.
Also, don't talk about potholes when Republicans failed to do any such thing during a 2 year majority of both chambers of Congress.
8
Why the deadline of May 17th? Honest question. How long does it take to prepare the records? Even if it would take that long theoretically, the deadline should be tomorrow because we all know they won’t comply anyway.
The clock for the 2020 elections is ticking. After the May 17th deadline happens, how long will it take to find these people in contempt? Then how long will it take for this to reach the Supreme Court and to get a ruling?
8
@K
For such a subpoena to pass muster with a court, the time to respond has to be "reasonable."
A week is reasonable, while one day might not be reasonable.
Then the Ways and Means Committee will have to hold hearings to declare failure to respond to be contemptible.
Look for a contempt resolution by the end of May or so.
Then off to the District Court for DC, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supremes.
If things move fast, my guess is that the Supremes will see the case in October, and if they accept it (they have no obligation to hear any appeal), they will offer an opinion by end of June 2020 at the latest.
Just in time for the election.
4
It's hard to understand why a law crafted specifically to get access to information about an elected official - especially a President (the law was crafted as a result of the Harding Tea Pot Dome scandal) - and which does not require a "legitimate legislative purpose" to initiate it, would be thrown out or not upheld by the courts. That said, if Trump and his lawyers can get it appealed and ultimately heard by the SCOTUS, he can bank on his "Gang of Five" to overturn it.
The Founders were aware and concerned that a President could abuse their powers, and engage in corrupt or actions harmful to the United States, which is why they created the checks and balances they did. Trump's refusal to cooperate with legitimate investigations, should by itself be obstruction of justice and warrant impeachment. And if Republicans would hold their duty and honor higher than they do their partisanship, the Senate would convict and remove him.
There is a possibility that the tax returns will reveal things that even the Republicans cannot stomach, and I suspect this is why Trump will fight tooth and nail to prevent them from being revealed. But the American people have a right to know just who is running our country, and who, if anyone, he's beholden to. There is much circumstantial evidence to support the belief that we have a "Moscovian President".
13
@Kingfish52
The IRS is the Taxing Authority not Congress.
Sorry, but even the President of the United States
has a the right to basic privacy.
2
@Kingfish52:
corruption has become so [world]widespread,
that every time i hear/read "checks and balances"
all i associate with that mechanism nowadays is:
checks [are paid] and [embellish account] balances.
and i remember lord acton's saying:
"power tends to corrupt. and absolute power corrupts
absolutely." ["it also demoralizes," he states further.]
2
“The House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee routinely use this method to study the effects of tax policy on real taxpayers”. Isn’t Mr Trump a real taxpayer? It was certainly good enough for Al Capone to be considered a real taxpayer.
19
Is there anyone here who wishes to defend with a straight face the pretext that this subpoena is need to determine, "the extent to which the I.R.S. audits and enforces the federal tax laws against a president" Has the committee also requested the tax returns for the Obamas, the Clintons, the Bush families, and the Carters? Because they want to really explore this question about audits?
Yet another Democratic witch hunt and fishing expedition?
3
Why request tax records from presidents who already provided them?
10
@hmi You do know that the Obamas, Bushes, and Clintons released their federal income tax returns to the public. Without either a request or a subpeona from any Congressional oversight committees.
9
@hmi
Actually yes, all those Presidents provided their tax returns voluntarily and they were examined by oversite committees on an annual basis.
8
Since trump didn't divest it should be law to see his tax returns and his business financial statements since he acts like Russia and Saudi Arabia own him.
27
I don't like Trump, but all this energy and effort spent to embarrass him by making him realease his taxes goes to show that the Dems really don't care about the down trodden whom they claim to defend.
It's all about trying to maintain power.
5
@Tall Tree
"Dems" can walk and chew gum at the same time.
4
Not for nothing, if the Democrats, according to the Trump Republican enablers, are using subpoenas, etc., to reveal info that would 'embarrass' DJT, so the Dems must be thwarted. Well those subpoenas must be dead on and even the Trump Republican enablers know that DJT is guilty of financial related crime not to mention obstruction of justice, nd God knows what else. Since that's the case, the Dems need to be running ads on the television and have people calling into some of those inane radio programs asking logic questions about the enablers' reaction to subpoenas, etc.
The issue of impeachment just fires DJT it doesn't put him in jail where he belongs, together with his family members, enablers, etc. Impeachment will only be successful if the Senate votes to impeach DJT. On the other hand, the Dems could use a failed impeachment to call attention to the soulless Republican enablers who have sanctioned the lawlessness of DJT. While one is at it, Mr. Barr, Mnuchin need to be impeached as well. One should even consider arresting Pence for the water debacle in Flint Michigan. Between you, me and the wall, as long as the enablers in the Senate hold the majority, we are stuck with DJT until he is defeated in the 2020 election.
3
@Rita Harris
until he is defeated in ‘20 -no guarantees that he won’t be re-elected , amazing as that might sound.
1
@Saignonaise
Chipping away at him may gradually peel away some of those Trump voters. Its cost effective and meets the Trump voters where they feel most comfy. . .listening to one of those 'Alex Jones or Fox News' type radio programs.
Wasn't a case of "if", was a case of "when" subpeona coming--
3
"Mr. Neal and lawyers for the House ultimately decided that going straight to court to try to enforce that provision carried too much risk. They feared that a judge could simply throw the case out for lack of standing, essentially rendering use of the tax code provision unenforceable whenever the executive branch objects to its invocation."
The law explicitly states that "Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, ... the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request ..."
Richard Neal is the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives.
He wrote the necessary "written request" and sent it to Commissioner Rettig. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin responded to the letter, so obviously he received it as well.
On what basis could any court find that the law fails to cover the specific facts at hand?
Therefore, a "finding" of "lack of standing" would appear to be irrational, because 26 USC 6103(f)(1) explicitly gives Rep. Richard Neal the authority to make the written request.
14
I’m sure the Trump Supreme Court will think of something.
Democrats' pretending that they want Trump's returns so they can investigate how presidential returns are audited *is* a ridiculous argument. Start impeachment hearings already, be honest about what you're doing, and stop pussyfooting around the dire state of our democracy. Investigating whether the president has conflicts of interest that affect foreign policy, is compromised because of illegal financial dealings, or guilty of bribery or money laundering is the strongest legal argument to getting these returns. Every day that Democrats rationalize not doing their constitutional duty, they themselves undermine the rule of law.
4
Before proceeding, let’s subpoena the chairman’s tax returns and investigate his interactions with interns. No?
8
@Saint Leslie Ann Of Geddes
No politician should be forced to turn over their personal
tax returns.
Why is it always Dems vs. Republicans?
Just do what's right!
Before? How about all these pathetic and useless elected public officials all release their tax returns? They want to enact and enforce tax laws on the rest of us, so I want to know if they're complying with their own laws "before" the rest of us get forced to live by them. I don't understand why this is a political game with supporters of Republicans and Democrats. Why can't you all hold the people you support to the same standard you would apply to those you don't? This - THIS- is the main reason why this country is polarized and going down the toilet...because we have two parties and their supporters who don't care about justice and democracy as much as they care about their own power.
2
@Tall Tree Ok as long as banks dont ask for them too when you go apply for a loan... I mean, if I can make decision over $2T and am allowed to scalp some money from it without showing my taxes, why it is a problem when I apply for a $300k loan? What can go wrong?
Of course, like the failures they are, the conservatives already tried that twice and it almost destroyed the USA twice (great depression deregulation and great recession deregulation)...
1
If Trump were truly intended to show his taxes when the audit is complete, he would have released those years of taxes that were not in audit. I don't think he is under audit for all the years since he has been filing taxes. All the presidential candidates released over 10+ years of taxes. He should make a good faith effort and release taxes for those years that were not audit.
10
When was it the United States Senate's mission to protect the United States' President from internal embarrassment? What is the purpose of this nation?
The United States Senate should stay in their lane, and they should allow the Executive Branch of the United States to fend for itself, if it truly is legitimate
26
Time to start throwing people in jail and imposing hefty fines. I imagine commissioner Rettig cannot afford large fines. Why are the Democrats giving Trump nearly a week to respond to the subpoena? The answer will still be no.
I don’t know about you all but I’m fed up with all this hand ringing and non movement. It’s time to go to war against this most corrupt of presidential administrations.
47
@Raydeohed...and the purpose of the subpoenas is what, the initial crime was what, the continued crime was what, his family did what, you think you have the right to go fishing through his tax returns because ? You are in the United States of America you have to have cause to invade ones privacy. Innuendo and I think are not justification for these incursions … you could be next be careful what you wish for.
@moe Crimes to investigate include:
1 - Collusion with a enemy (NOT exonerated)
2 - Emolument
3 - OBSTRUCTION OF JUCTICE
4 - Treason - Bypassing security clearance and giving away secrets to those who were denied clearance otherwise.
5 - Election fraud (too many gerrymandering cases against republicans. We need to trace where they go)
All the above are just a taste of what needs to be investigated. To investigate, you need records. His taxes are records. Nothing wrong with looking at them when your job is literally to police the president, or did you already forget what congress' job really is?
2
Where are the whistle-blowers when you need them?!?
41
A lot of the Democratic strategy seems to involve reliance on the courts to issue just, impartial rulings. The courts the GOP has been packing for decades.
This will not end easily.
20
@Karen
Maybe you should take a bus to Venezuela?
It's all Dems over there. Not a single Republican.
He never intended to reveal his taxes contrary to his repeated claims during the election ("as soon as the "audit" is completed; because he deep down knows that he is a "cheat". His fundamental perspective on the public good is that it is a delusion meant to keep the stupid and the cowardly under the self-interested and exploitive control of the cunning and the bold. Hence, evading taxes, contractual obligations and the duty to serve in the military is "sport" and "smart".
The problem with this perspective is that it is a love that dare not show itself; the "ruled" must be persuaded that their submission is justified by a true common good, i.e. "make America great..." The great leader must always avoid revealing his own beliefs that any communal good is simply a delusion; such a leader lives in continual fear of being exposed by and to the "suckers" he rules.
17
So the Republicans are saying the Dems only want the tax returns in order to embarrass the president. Um, isn’t that an acknowledgement that the returns have damning information in them? Sorry it’s embarrassing— the point is he may have broken the law.
118
If Trump broke the law let the IRS go after him. HR is supposedly the people’s house not a court room
@Nina Leibowitz
Damning evidence? The IRS audited and accepted Trump's tax returns.
This is all about trying to gain political points. The Dems know that the average American will not understand the huge tax write-offs that Trump took.
Many of us here in Canada watch this new version of the Gong Show, some with delight, some in dismay but mostly with a chuckle, smile or smirk.
How sad that this is really happening....
30
@Rob Kelhsm
It must be nice to live in a real country.
36
We have our own gong show here in Ontario with Doug Ford. Thankfully, our leaders don’t have the wild and unchecked discretionary powers that Trump seems to have. That’s what strikes me as so bizarre - that he seems to be able to arbitrarily declare these massive tariffs, etc, on a whim
4
It has been made abundantly clear this past week that the President has too much power. Congressional laws must change that; but to do so, we will likely need a Democratic majority in the House and Senate.
61
@Bezerkley
The only thing that makes any sense is to have term limits on Congress. These people spend most of their time postulating and raising money for the next term.At the end of the day they have drinks and a few laughs with each other, never mind what party they represent.
This is not supposed to be a lifetime swim in the public trough.
'Mr. Neal’s decision to abandon his earlier approach and issue a subpoena for the material suggests that the dispute over the power of 6103 could go left unresolved... They feared that a judge could simply throw the case out for lack of standing, essentially rendering use of the tax code provision unenforceable whenever the executive branch objects to its invocation.'
Wow. A House tax-writing committee might be ruled NOT to have standing in court when legally requesting tax returns under a current anti-corruption statute. A US president has the most power of any government official, and he poses the most corresponding risk if he chooses to operate corruptly.
Checks and balances only work if each branch has some authority over the others with reasonable barriers to prevent abuse. Timeliness is also of the essence for true accountability.
Trump's main defense seems to be fear of possible embarrassment. (He certainly can't argue it's to prevent criminal exposure.)
Trump's desired threshold is way off for a properly functioning government. And any attempts to simply run out the clock through litigation should be quickly quashed in the courts (if the courts still broadly represent our values).
37
Trump's tax returns have to find their way out -- to Congress and to the public. And I believe that between congressional action and the SDNY, they will.
My questions to diehard Trump supporters are:
- If it emerges -- as it likely will -- that this man to whom you've cast your allegiance has lied on his tax returns, dodged his proper state and federal payments, misrepresented money from illicit sources, etc., will you understand that his actions will have brought harm to YOU?
- Will you agree that someone who engages in such activities does so to enrich himself to the detriment of others? And that you are among those others?
- Will you see that he played (and preyed) on your trust to catapult himself into a position of power from which he could try to game the system further to his own benefit?
- Will you conclude that he was never worthy of your support?
121
@ D Price
Excellent questions. I have wondered, though, what it will take to get his supporters to recognize these and other revelations, as they emerge, as fact/ and not as “fake news” when there has already been SO much information available for YEARS.
13
@D Price unless fox news and Rush put it to them in those exact terms, no they won't.
2
"“As you have recognized, the committee’s request is unprecedented, and it presents serious constitutional questions, the resolution of which may have lasting consequences for all taxpayers,” Mr. Mnuchin wrote."
We already put up with plenty as bad or worse, Mr. Mnuchin. It's about time someone lit the kindling Trump has piled up for a barricade.
32
I don't understand this. Neal should have sued Mnuchin under the statute. There is no language or precedent for "legitimate legislative purpose". If Neal does not have standing, nobody does. Summary Judgement if suit is filed under the statute.
22
@bikegeezer
They may be afraid the courts can't read the plain language of the statute and come to the conclusion it prescribes. Given that it would likely go to the Supreme Court, that seems a legitimate fear.
1
There will be future non-politicians in the Oval Office from both sides of the aisle who have a wealth of actual corporate experience.
With that wealth of experience, more times than not, comes dirt under the fingernails. Trump is the ideal Beta test.
“Life being what it is, one dreams of revenge.”
- Paul Gauguin
2
Though Trump believes he’s unusual and special, he is not. He must abide by the same laws and oversight as everyone else. #equality under the law.
104
@Ricardito Resisting - Unfortunately, people with Narcissistic Personality Disorder do indeed believe they are special, and that as a result, rules which apply to others do not apply to them.
11
@Ricardito Resisting
He IS unusual and special, but not in a good way.
@Ricardito Resisting
I believe he is unusual as well.
Why a subpoena and not a Writ of Mandamus filed with U.S. District Court in D.C.? I’m I missing something? The law seems quite clear.
23
Whether it’s a subpoena or mandamus, either way the power of Congress to compel the information will be the subject of litigation.
4
The article explains why.
I've never seen an innocent man fight so hard to hide their innocence...
371
All of these disputes will likely find their way to the Supreme Court. And people always talk of the 5-4 split on the court making it Trump's court.
But that statement is a very broad blanket and that blanket has holes.
People will disagree with me here, but I expect that Chief Justice John Roberts is not the knee jerk Trump judge Trump and others expect he is. And by virtue of his position, he can control how matters flow through the court.
For instance, if the tax return issue is argued in the court, and there is a majority of justices to take up the issue, Roberts can side with the majority. That means he gets to either write the opinion himself or decide who else might. If he takes on that assignment, he now gets to work among the nine to shape the opinion to his liking. He can even switch sides. It has happened before.
Partisan justices certainly sit on the court, but to claim their adherence to all of Trump's ideas does not do justice to some of the right leaning Justices.
14
@J Fogarty I have less confidence in some of the Supreme Court justices than you do, but Trump may live to regret his tweet claiming there was an "Obama judge," compelling Roberts to push back on judicial partisanship – and perhaps placing a certain burden on himself to prove that he is not a "Trump" (or "Bush") judge. We can only hope.
2
@J Fogarty I have less confidence in some of the Supreme Court justices than you do, but Trump may live to regret his tweet claiming there was an "Obama judge," compelling Roberts to push back on judicial partisanship – and perhaps placing a certain burden on himself to prove that he is not a "Trump" (or "Bush") judge. We can only hope.
1
They don't want to release the returns because it could "embarrass" the president. So... then there is something to be embarrassed about.
1. He's not as wealthy as he claims
2. He's not a charitable as he claims.
3. He has used the tax code to lower his taxes - if he pay taxes at all. Perhaps legally - perhaps not so legally.
4. There are multiple business conflicts of interest.
Hate to use the quote but "if you've got nothing to hide you have nothing to fear". Just as much as the release of the full Mueller report could exonerate him.... but it doesn't.
239
@Liz O'Toole. We already know all of that...now we need to see about money laundering, russian dough, etc.
16
@Liz O'Toole
Another looser idea. Trump will always win with characters like Neil.
@DAB
It's not so loose. As the kids would say, the subpoena is pretty tight.
1
"Subpoenas are now pending from the Ways and Means, Judiciary, Oversight and Reform, Financial Services and the Intelligence Committees."
Wow. He's got stuff to hide from everyone. Harding administration was pretty scandal plagued, no wonder they had to resort to tax code from the time.
32
In the article it says that Republicans are arguing that: Democrats are clearly concocting a fake investigation to justify getting hold of information they can use to politically embarrass the president. Hold on. Since Nixon, all Presidential candidates shared their tax returns publicly. If there was something there that would have embarrassed them politically, we would have learned about it before we votes for them. That is the whole point of revealing the tax returns. The GOP and the President are violating their oath of office, to uphold and enforce the Constitution. The Congress have every right - nay - duty - to investigate the Executive Branch. Stonewalling is un-Constitutional. Be clear, EVERY other employee who works in the White House is REQUIRED to submit their tax returns prior to employment. How can Trump argue otherwise? Only because he MUST have things to hide. We can only speculate, but the previously revealed tax returns from 1985-1994 showed he had zero charitable donations. That alone would be embarrassing. More than likely, his ability to pay zero taxes - that he bragged about in debates, is likely of the same nature as his overstating his assets for loans, and understating them for insurance purposes.He has no shame, and will do anything, no matter how vile, to advance his own agenda. Those who think he is their guy are conned.
168
Suppose we'll obtain access to his records, and find he paid no taxes, didn't donate to charitable organizations, and he's only worth a few millions. How would the average Trump supporter respond to such news?
My hunch is that it wouldn't sway him/her in any way. S/he would happily vote for him, no sweat.
1
Wait, wait. Dropping the 6103 complaint for lack of standing already renders the provision unenforceable. Did you see that? Because that's what I just saw. We don't need a judge. The plaintiff already made the decision. Pursuing the "shall" clause in 6103 isn't worth the prosecution's time. There are easier ways to get stonewalled by the White House.
The shift does signal something more signifcant though. I'm guessing Elijah Cummings is currently carrying the debate. Steve Mnuchin and Charles Rettig both have contempt charges heading their way. Quite possibly inherent contempt charges as well.
Barr asked Trump to use executive privilege to bail him out last time. An action which is now under legal scrutiny. I'm not sure the IRS commissioner is going to get the same leniency. There's nothing in a tax return subject to executive privilege. You submitted the forms to the federal government. They are public domain.
Whoops...
82
@Andy
I submitted my tax forms to the federal government, as did all other tax filers, such as you an me, for example. Can my tax returns be made public? Yours? Everyone's? If that is the standard, then post them on a public website - SSNs, bank account numbers, everything. You first, but not me - thank you.
If only the GOP had insisted he release his taxes to secure the nomination. Likely we wouldn’t be in this awful mess.
99
@Elizabeth Grey. Great idea. How about Congress stepping in and making releasing taxes a requirement to run for president.
92
17 states now require tax releases to be on the ballot.
61
@Zane
Not exactly.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/12/politics/illinois-president-tax-returns/index.html
Quote:
Since 2017, 18 state legislatures, including those in Illinois and New York, have introduced bills that would require presidential candidates to publicly disclose their tax returns to be on the ballot, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
End Quote
I am not sure that any of those bills have become law yet.
1
And what happens next when Steven Mnuchin simply ignores them as others in the Trump administration have done?
Imposing a $25,000 per day fine may be a good start, but when they refuse to recognize that, too, is the House willing to impeach Mnuchin?
At what point are House leaders willing to step up and take action against these lawbreakers?
Or are they just going to sit there because of crass political calculations and let a lawless administration, including the president, continue to laugh in their faces as Barr has already done?
If the House continues to let Trump, Barr et al. to find this situation laugh-out-loud funny, regardless of the outcome in 2020, this country will never be the same.
107
@avrds
Garnish their pay.
5
It’s already not the same.
4
If Mnuchin does not comply, issue a bench warrant, have him picked up, arrested and placed in general population to think about his actions.
I’m sure he would fare very well with his new friends. It may give him a different perspective and appreciation for how the “common” people live.
He can tell them about his taxpayer paid trip to Fort Knox to show his bride the gold bars.
Bench warrants are issued much for less!
7
What is Trump hiding? If all is on the up and up, he'd release those records in a heartbeat, following the presidents before him. Sure looks guilty of something.
188
@Ms D
No, the IRS accepted the returns; in fact Trump was audited!
This is all about embarrassing Trump. The average American doesn't understand that real estate losses are legal write-offs. Dems are trying to gain political
points pure and simple.
This has nothing to do with uncovering anything.
It's just another pathetic attempt to score political points.
@Tall Tree
The amazing part of what you wrote is that there are millions of Americans who are continuing to buy into that hooey.
Have you no interest in learning if your president has financial relationships with adversarial foreign powers that may very well affect his decision-making and aren't you interested in learning if Trump, the businessman, is profiting from Trump, the president? And, if the answers to either or both questions is 'no,' why don't you have any interest? Or, better yet, had Trump been a Democrat, would you suddenly care as to whether or not your president is a crook?
8
@Tall Tree Is it about embarrassing him? What is the embarrassment? That he is not a billionaire? Does he not want us to know he is a fraud and a huckster?
Or, does he have some significant malfeasance to hide? For example, how did a broke man, who could no longer get financing from U.S. banks, obtain financing from Russia or Deutsche Bank?; and as President does he 'owe' favors?
At the 30,000 foot level it stinks. As a guy who has investigated fraud and abuse....putting one CFO in jail, and having doctors, lawyers, and priests removed for sexual harassment...(7 total) I know why stink at 30,000 feet needs a closer look.
Not saying he is guilty. But he is putting on every 'tell' of a man who is horrible guilty or significantly insecure.
Inquiring minds want to know.
10
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others in this trumpian version of Orwellian dystopia.
How ironic that the very same people who point to socialism and communism as perjorative terms, would also reject the very foundation of our capitalist democracy that establishes everyone as equal under the law.
231
How sad that your allusion to Animal Farm and Orwell’s prescience will fly higher than pigs above Pennsylvania Avenue.
America, the world watches and we weep.
11
More subpoenas and more defiance by the executive branch. Are the Democrats toothless? Do something besides another round of ignored subpoenas-let the impeachment proceedings begin. Take meaningful action!
28
@Adam Impeachment is a long, drawn out process. Most Americans want Congress to help them, and impeachment is not directly relevant to many. Sure, start down the path, but don't stop legislating and investigating.
27
@Bruce Maier
If Mueller was denied access to Trump's returns and his lengthy investigation showed no collusion, only the obstruction of a just investigation , then that, and possibly tax evasion may be the only avenues of pursuit. I don't think they will do anything to him for dipping into campaign funds to pay women to keep quiet. Except maybe pay a fine. Politicians have gotten away with far worse.
2
Trump has made due process meaningless. What was a great thing about America has been tossed in the garbage by this administration.
His assault on justice will go to the Supreme Court though, and through the contempt shown to the Constitution by McConnell, and the ready to please Kavanaugh, Trump will get his unfettered executive privilege.
The demeaning of the Constitution by Republicans is a stain on this country.
316
@Suzanne Moniz While I may be naive, I pray that you are wrong. For, if you are correct, our Democracy is doomed. He will go ahead and refuse to accept the results of the next election. He will be, like those he admires, President for life.
58
@Suzanne Moniz
It’s difficult to disagree with you, but part of me hangs on to the belief that serious Jurists will weigh the issues seriously and with deference to the Constitution. The mud slinging by the Executive Branch of the Legislative Branch needs to cease. They are co-equal and the Executive Branch holds no fingers on the scales of Justice.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse for violations of the law.
With humility I hope that John Roberts and even another SCOTUS Jurist will uphold the Constitutional separation of powers and obligation of oversight by Congress.
21
@Suzanne Moniz In extremis, every graduate of West Point, Annapolis, New London, Colorado Springs, and Kings Point takes an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, including second-generation immigrant grifters and their congressional catamites. If it comes to that, there will either be a coup by officers, or a civil war.
15
Public polling indicates support for impeachment hearings raised 5 points since mid-April, to 45%. If the administration wants to keep stonewalling, the Democrats have ever more obvious a reason to proceed.
135
Impeachment in the House accomplishes nothing with this senate. Except rile up his base. It is, sadly, an impotent act that changes nothing. Pelosi understands this.
Investigation, exposure of his misdeeds and political defeat in 2020 are the only way to take Trump down.
9
@paula
Hold hearings first, so the popular support gets up to 55% or more. 65% would be even better.
Then impeach.
15
@Ian. There are cracks starting to show in the Senate, as we speak. Will they be patched, or are we heading for a flood tide in the affairs of men??
4
It seems to me that the law from the time of Teapot Dome was designed to address the stonewalling and obstruction we are seeing again today. Of course its use is exceptional because all other President's have routinely released their tax returns for the last 40 years. As a result there was no need to go to such lengths.
94
@Steve unger
Unfortunately for us, Trump and his corrupt Supreme Court and Cabinet will go to great lengths to make sure he gets what he wants. The days of a non-partisan compromising government are over. Was a time when both sides did what was best for the people through compromise. NOT the Party. Gone.
5
@Rodrian Roadeye
Better said with respect to this and other subpoenas, the days of a non-partisan law-abiding government are over.
2