House Dems Prepare To Demand Trump Tax Returns With No Evidence Of A Crime

@kitt, #201:

They can, with regard to their presidential primaries. That’s what California has just done, by means that are entirely in compliance with their state constitution. Republican-majority state legislatures have been exercising their regulatory power to the detriment of Democratic Party candidates for some time now.

The GOP may have rolled over for Donald Trump, but there’s no reason he should expect the Democratic Party to do so. He pretty much declared war on the Democratic Party and all of the idealistic American people who proudly support it. Also on the nation’s press, which he has labeled “the enemy of the people”. He has made resistance to himself seem like an existential battle in defense of the soul of the nation. What does he think the result will be? It’s a fortunate thing for us all that our system allows the battle to be waged in the press, the courts, and at the ballot box.

“For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.”

@Greg:

Republican-majority state legislatures have been exercising their regulatory power to the detriment of Democratic Party candidates for some time now.

That is a lie, looking at land mass this country is Republican dominated, breaking it into districts the urban areas have their liars and thieves to represent them. The more rural areas have the GOP representing them. Such is the case in WI our assembly is Republican dominated, with Madison, La Cross and Milwaukee reps being Democrats.
The GOP has rolled over to the will of its voters, not Trump, something the DNC should learn there isnt a walk away campaign for the GOP, in august 2019 African-Americans for Trump was up to 36 percent.
I wonder what is behind the lies that he is racist.
But polls suck we mostly have to wait for the vote count.
Teach a man to fish he will eat for a lifetime, promise him someone elses fish he will vote Democrat.

@Greg:

California’s new financial disclosure requirement pertains specifically to their own state’s primary election ballot, Sherlock.

Now, now, now. Doc asked us to be NICE. That includes those who support liars and socialists.

Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump

The press is doing everything within their power to fight the magnificence of the phrase, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! They can’t stand the fact that this Administration has done more than virtually any other Administration in its first 2yrs. They are truly the ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!

12:41 PM – Apr 5, 2019

He always refers to “fake news”. If you would recall, one of those questions you went out of your way to avoid answering was if you consider the media lying to the American people as bad. Since you were afraid to make your thoughts on the matter known, this means you SUPPORT the media lying to the people, as long as the lies are supporting the liberal agenda (and, of course, they always are).

Indeed, FAKE NEWS, i.e., the media lying to the people IS the enemy of the people. Apparently, CONTEXT is the enemy of liberals, as well as truth.

BBC News, August 6, 2019 – Trump sues California over candidates’ tax return law

US President Donald Trump and the Republican Party are suing California over recent legislation requiring presidential candidates to file tax returns in order to stand in primaries.

State Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, signed the law last week.

In two lawsuits, the plaintiffs said it was unconstitutional as it added an extra requirement to run for president.

Mr Trump has refused to release his tax returns, saying that they are under audit.

California is the first state to succeed in passing such a law, though others under Democratic control have tried.

It would apply to ballots for primary elections but not the general election.

The state is involved in more than 40 lawsuits against the Trump White House on issues such as environmental regulation and immigration.

In the first lawsuit, the Republican National Committee said the law was “a naked political attack against the sitting president of the United States”.

He’s certainly the primary reason for the bill, but that doesn’t make it unlawful. The law could also keep Joe Biden’s name off the California primary ballot, as he released only the most recent three years of his returns in preparation for his 2020 run. Biden had previously released the last 18 years, but skipped a year after not entering the 2016 race.

It argues that the law would “directly impede” Mr Trump’s chances of gaining the Republican nomination. California provides 14% of delegates needed to win.

That’s the nature of a primary ballot qualification requirement. But it won’t keep Trump’s name off the California general election ballot. His chances of being nominated by the Republican Party as their general election candidate are probably about 100 percent. The California primary election will have no effect on that at all.

A second lawsuit by the Trump campaign argues that states do not have the power to supplement qualifications for president set out by the US Constitution.

California has not imposed a supplement qualification for the presidency—only for a name to appear on the state primary ballot, which is under the state’s jurisdiction. His name would still appear on the general election ballot.

Currently there are only three requirements for presidential candidates – to be natural born citizens, over the age of 35 and resident in the US for at least 14 years.

And there are still only three. Nothing California has done changes that, or could change that.

Mr Trump’s counsel, Jay Sekulow, described the law as an “attempt to circumvent the US Constitution”.

The U.S. Constitution doesn’t speak to the matter of state primary elections. It leaves them under the authority of the individual states.

He said voters had already spoken about whether Mr Trump should release his tax returns.

However, Mr Trump is the first major-party presidential nominee not to release any tax returns since Republican Gerald Ford in 1976.

The text of California Senate Bill 27 – Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act – now signed into law.

If Trump had not openly defied an existing federal law that gives Congress an oversight power to obtain and confidentially review a president’s tax returns upon request, this would not be happening.

Take note that Trump is not doing this for HIS OWN benefit.

Of course he’s doing it for his own benefit. Just like he lied when he promised to release them for his own benefit, and then lied about the reason that he couldn’t for his own benefit. We’re coming up on another election year, and his pitching the same old b.s., and now he’s pretending to be doing it out of principle. The man has no principles.

The law requires the IRS to provide them to the House Ways and Means Committee for confidential review when requested, no ands, ifs, or buts. He ordered his flunkies to break that law to evade Congressional oversight. The only principle he’s upholding is his personal view that Donald Trump should be allowed to get away with what he wants.

Trump Lawyers Argue He Cannot Be Criminally Investigated – The president’s legal team is trying to block a subpoena seeking his tax returns, claiming that any criminal investigation of Mr. Trump is unconstitutional.

Sept. 19, 2019 – Lawyers for President Trump argued in a lawsuit filed on Thursday that he cannot be criminally investigated while in office, as they sought to block a subpoena from state prosecutors in Manhattan demanding eight years of his tax returns.

Taking a broad position that the lawyers acknowledged had not been tested, the president’s legal team argued in the complaint that the Constitution effectively makes sitting presidents immune from all criminal inquiries until they leave the White House.

The president “cannot be subject to criminal process, for conduct of any kind, while he is serving as president,” the lawyers wrote in the complaint, filed in Manhattan federal court.

That is, he could literally shoot a man on Fifth Avenue, and not even be investigated for it.

While it is unclear how a judge will view the argument, the case is likely to delay the latest attempt to secure Mr. Trump’s financial records.

The key word being “delay”.

The lawsuit was filed in response to a subpoena issued late last month by the Manhattan district attorney’s office to Mr. Trump’s accounting firm. The subpoena sought eight years of the president’s personal and corporate tax returns as the office investigates the role that the Mr. Trump and his family business played in hush-money payments made in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

Both Mr. Trump and the company reimbursed Michael D. Cohen, the president’s former lawyer and fixer, for money Mr. Cohen paid to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels, an adult film actress who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump. The president has denied the affair.

Federal prosecutors said in a court filing in July that they had “effectively concluded” their investigation into possible crimes committed by the president’s company, the Trump Organization, or its executives. Neither the company nor any of its leaders were charged. However, the office of the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., is exploring whether the reimbursements violated any New York State laws.

The lawsuit filed on Thursday was the latest effort by the president and his legal team to stymie multiple attempts to obtain copies of his tax returns, which Mr. Trump initially said he would make public during the 2016 campaign but has since refused to disclose.

Yeah, he lied to the American people about that. So what of it? If they were stupid enough to elect him, that’s their problem.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers have sued to block attempts by congressional Democrats and New York State lawmakers to access his tax returns and financial records. But their arguments in those cases had been made on narrower grounds.

It is an open question whether sitting presidents are immune from prosecution while in office. The Constitution does not explicitly address the issue, and the Supreme Court has never answered the question.

Federal prosecutors are barred from charging a sitting president with a federal crime, because the Justice Department — in memos written during the Nixon and Clinton administrations — has interpreted the Constitution to implicitly grant presidents temporary immunity while they are in office. Those memos, however, do not bind the hands of state prosecutors.

Presidents have been subject to federal criminal inquiries in the past, including Mr. Trump, who was recently a subject of an investigation conducted by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, that examined ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Mr. Mueller said in May that the Justice Department memo “explicitly permits” the investigation of presidents, although he acknowledged that they cannot be charged with federal crimes.

In their lawsuit, Mr. Trump’s lawyers took their arguments a step further, arguing that no criminal investigation of a sitting president was constitutional.

That is, He’s above the law.

They took particular issue with any investigation conducted by “a county prosecutor,” such as the Manhattan district attorney.

And he’s far, far above the reach of the laws of any pissant state, the governments of which apparently lack the constitutional authority and significance that republicans seem to believe they have.

Mr. Vance’s office is seeking a range of tax documents from Mr. Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, including federal and state tax returns for both the president and the Trump Organization, dating to 2011.

Hey, it’s all false news. Just pretend it isn’t happening, and that it has no significance if it actually is.

@Deplorable Me, #213:

…and you can’t conclusively demonstrate that he’s a criminal without first examining his tax returns. Isn’t that tidy!

You’d turn on a dime concerning the unlawful withholding of tax returns from Congress, if a Democratic Party president were suspected of only a tenth as much.

Actually, the law requires that income from unlawful activity be reported and taxes be paid on such income. The 5th Amendment provides protection from self incrimination, and the specific source of the income doesn’t have to be revealed.

@Greg:

…and you can’t conclusively demonstrate that he’s a criminal without first examining his tax returns. Isn’t that tidy!

First, what the F**K do YOU care about proving anything? You and your liberal crybabies operate 100% on the premise of conviction by accusation. You have NEVER shown an interest in any kind of proof whatsoever and, when you HAVE it, you ignore it.

However, it is conclusive proof you need to access someone’s privacy; it is a credible accusation. You don’t have one. All you have is your whiny rant, “Mean old Trump defeated Hillary and denied liberals their socialist utopia, so we think he is evil and corrupt. DESTROY!! DESTROY!!”

You’d turn on a dime concerning the unlawful withholding of tax returns from Congress, if a Democratic Party president were suspected of only a tenth as much.

I wanted Fast and Furious, IRS targeting, the Obamacare debacle, Benghazi, Iran, illegal spying, emails, Uranium One and numerous other distinct, specific and credible examples of corruption investigated. I have NEVER wanted the scatter-gun digging and probing in the hopes of stumbling across SOMETHING useful you Democrats are involved in employed because, as you know, that is unconstitutional.

Actually, the law requires that income from unlawful activity be reported and taxes be paid on such income.

WHAT unlawful activity?

Another outdated thread. greg is desperate