U.S. Treasury's Mnuchin refuses to release Trump's tax returns to Congress

[CaptQuint]

And remember, he gets to stick taxpayer money in his pocket whilst he vacations and get free advertising for his clubs. But he donates his salary so he's charitable

[FSchmertz]

To catch him in his sinister lies and corruption. Or at least embarrass him somehow.

This president is embarrassment-proof. His immediate reaction to anyone finding fault in any way is to go on the attack, often in a crude way and also often on an unrelated tangent to the original point. And Faux Nooz and the MAGats then gooble his splooge up.

[beagleboy]

The tax returns are highly unlikely to provide proof of him doing anything wrong.
That will come from his bank records being released by Deutsche Bank and other groups. If he lied on his bank reports saying his properties are worth more than they actually are - that's bank fraud. His personal tax returns are extremely unlikely to show much in the way of actual details or information about his activity other than a bunch of K-1s which hide most information. I'd wager just about everything he makes flows through a partnership or S-corp.

The bank records would give an indication of his actual net worth which would likely upset him more than any income return.

[CaptQuint]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

[CaptQuint]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

[CaptQuint]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

Then what is the reason for wanting his returns? (I already know the answer, no need to reply)

Because he did not divest himself from his business

[AnalHamster]

He didn't divest, and has repeatedly lied about his reason for not disclosing as he said he would and his foreign business entanglements. You have to be a full blown trump cuck not to see the problem. And since he has nothing to hide, there really shouldn't be a problem with getting it out of the way.

[CaptQuint]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

Then what is the reason for wanting his returns? (I already know the answer, no need to reply)

Because he did not divest himself from his business

Thats about as accurate as the Russia collusion hoax

So he did divest?

[Burn1dwn]

The only proof we have that the IRS audits his tax return "every year" is Trump telling us that no? He's lied that the audit means he can't release his returns.

Don't get into politics if looking at your personal and financial life means you are being attacked.


edit: also the IRS wouldn't be looking to see if income was linked to unethical or corrupt government deals.

It's funny that some people cough..cough Biker think that Congress wants the returns to perform their own audit. It would seem important to see what is in there and how a President's personal finances stack up against his policies and decision making. Of course that is why all recent Presidents have released them on their own.

Why do you think they want them?

To catch him in his sinister lies and corruption. Or at least embarrass him somehow.

Why am I interested in seeing them? To see what his business connections really look like and see if he lets personal financial interests dictate policy. I think voters have the right to know and so did Trump before he was a a candidate.

So you want to make this about partisan hackery. At least youre honest about it

And you know what else? You sound like a naive child. Every single major political figure has special interests attached to him/her. Grow the fuck up

And Trump ran on a platform that included being too fabulous to be beholden to those groups.

[VinceBordenIII]

Is this the latest "issue"? Or a rehashed "issue" from before Trump was a Russian spy?
Are they looking for something specific or just fishing?

Seriously? Latest issue? It's only an issue because Trump seems hell bent on not releasing them. Even though he advised (tweeted unsolicited suggestions) former candidates to supply them for transparency. This doesn't move your "give a shit" meter one bit? Gee, I wonder why?

Because I see past the bullshit?
WRT executive/legislative issues, you fight fight fight. They all do.

[VinceBordenIII]

The only proof we have that the IRS audits his tax return "every year" is Trump telling us that no? He's lied that the audit means he can't release his returns.

Don't get into politics if looking at your personal and financial life means you are being attacked.


edit: also the IRS wouldn't be looking to see if income was linked to unethical or corrupt government deals.

It's funny that some people cough..cough Biker think that Congress wants the returns to perform their own audit. It would seem important to see what is in there and how a President's personal finances stack up against his policies and decision making. Of course that is why all recent Presidents have released them on their own.

Why do you think they want them?

To catch him in his sinister lies and corruption. Or at least embarrass him somehow.

Why am I interested in seeing them? To see what his business connections really look like and see if he lets personal financial interests dictate policy. I think voters have the right to know and so did Trump before he was a a candidate.

So you’re fishing, then.

[CaptQuint]

There’s something quaint about members of the same political movement that brought us the House Benghazi committee complaining about politically motivated oversight, but even if Team Trump were correct — that is, even if the sole purpose of these information requests is to uncover information about a political foe — Trump still has no legal case.

[VinceBordenIII]

Is this the latest "issue"? Or a rehashed "issue" from before Trump was a Russian spy?
Are they looking for something specific or just fishing?

Seriously? Latest issue? It's only an issue because Trump seems hell bent on not releasing them. Even though he advised (tweeted unsolicited suggestions) former candidates to supply them for transparency. This doesn't move your "give a shit" meter one bit? Gee, I wonder why?

Remember, this is the same person that criticized the previous president for golfing too much, and said he'd be too busy to play golf.



The only way you can tell if this conman is lying is if his lips move.

P.S. And his hypocritical MAGats and Rethugs say no big deal, we like being lied to, lets vote for him again!

Are you saying he’s a hypocrite? Oh no!

[VinceBordenIII]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

[CaptQuint]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

I answered Bikers question. You do not get expand my response.

[VinceBordenIII]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

I answered Bikers question. You do not get expand my response.

You said as much. Don’t need no reason. I get it. It’s partisan stuff. Perfectly normal and usual. But don’t try to act like it’s anything else. This is a fight between executive and legislative.

[CaptQuint]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

I answered Bikers question. You do not get expand my response.

You said as much. Don’t need no reason. I get it. It’s partisan stuff. Perfectly normal and usual. But don’t try to act like it’s anything else. This is a fight between executive and legislative.

Very perceptive of you, only the legislative has the rule of law on its side.

[FSchmertz]

Is this the latest "issue"? Or a rehashed "issue" from before Trump was a Russian spy?
Are they looking for something specific or just fishing?

Seriously? Latest issue? It's only an issue because Trump seems hell bent on not releasing them. Even though he advised (tweeted unsolicited suggestions) former candidates to supply them for transparency. This doesn't move your "give a shit" meter one bit? Gee, I wonder why?

Remember, this is the same person that criticized the previous president for golfing too much, and said he'd be too busy to play golf.



The only way you can tell if this conman is lying is if his lips move.

P.S. And his hypocritical MAGats and Rethugs say no big deal, we like being lied to, lets vote for him again!

Are you saying he’s a hypocrite? Oh no!

Well, I'm actually saying it's worse that folks like you are O.K. with the President being that, and bending over and wanting more of same.

[AnalHamster]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

Just like investigating someone for a security clearance is.

[VinceBordenIII]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

Just like investigating someone for a security clearance is.

There is a difference. He's not asking for a clearance. They want an issue.

[CaptQuint]

This is the same administration that said the President can declare a national emergency even if he admits that there is no emergency and it is a blatant attempt to circumvent the power of the purse because the power was given to him to do so. But congress can't do something that they are given the power to do because they don't think their reasons are good enough.

[AnalHamster]

It's ok for Trump to violate the emoluments clause of The Constitution because everyone does it

Where is the probable cause?

The House does not require probable cause. Do you think they are a County Sheriff?

So you acknowledge this is merely a fishing expedition?

Just like investigating someone for a security clearance is.

There is a difference. He's not asking for a clearance. They want an issue.

He has clearance automatically with the job. People like his son in law who failed background checks also have clearance, because he has the power to overrule the career officials who normally make that decision. Is an investigation for security clearance a fishing expedition? Well yes, it is. That's the whole point of it. Checking there are no fish. Normally this isn't necessary because past presidents have voluntarily given the information and divested from their businesses like Trump lied to you that he would do. Instead he is hiding his tax returns, lied about why, lied about divesting from his businesses, lied about those businesses and is trying to cover everything up. You don't think that's at all suspicious or that the one person with access to everything should be open enough to reassure folk that he's not bent?

[FSchmertz]

This is the same administration that said the President can declare a national emergency even if he admits that there is no emergency and it is a blatant attempt to circumvent the power of the purse because the power was given to him to do so. But congress can't do something that they are given the power to do because they don't think their reasons are good enough.

It might be worth taking to court, knowing they wouldn't win in the foreseeable future, to assert the power they're supposed to have.

One of the problems has been that Congress has given too much of their Constitutional authority and delegated it to the administrative side, and needs to take it back and do the jobs they were elected for again. They've been ducking their responsibilities.

[CaptQuint]

This is the same administration that said the President can declare a national emergency even if he admits that there is no emergency and it is a blatant attempt to circumvent the power of the purse because the power was given to him to do so. But congress can't do something that they are given the power to do because they don't think their reasons are good enough.

It might be worth taking to court, knowing they wouldn't win in the foreseeable future, to assert the power they're supposed to have.

One of the problems has been that Congress has given too much of their Constitutional authority and delegated it to the administrative side, and needs to take it back and do the jobs they were elected for again. They've been ducking their responsibilities.

They have to take it to court or just chuck the Constitution out the window

[VinceBordenIII]

I think it's political. It's not about reassuring anybody of anything. In America, the 2020 campaign has already begun. It's going after Trump from all angles for 2020.