Politics Appeals court hands Trump another loss, saying Congress can seek his tax returns

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
MarAzul said:
Ok, carry on. My guess isl he proved all he needed to, for the people to elect him and satisfy the law.
Click to expand...
Maybe? I dont believe he’s really Proven anything though, and maybe he doesnt have too. I just think he’s all talk in that regard.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
In terms of Trump's tax returns I've always had a lot of questions... Kind of for both parties on this.
If his Tax-returns proved Fraud or some kind of illegal activities wouldn't the IRS have caught that by now? Or are we saying they're completely freaking oblivious and bad at their jobs?
Click to expand...

It is completely legal to earn money from properties in foreign countries. It is a completely different thing if you know certain presidential actions show bias to these foreign countries as it benefits one's portfolio.

The 2 things are not the same.

At this point would getting his tax returns accomplish anything? It would either be clean and change no one's opinion. Be dirtier than Al Capone and change no one's opinion.
Click to expand...

I do not subscribe the the idea that the truth has no value. I am sure it will sway the opinions of some people, which is all that is required.[/quote][/quote]
 
If Obama didnt release his tax returns, Trump supporters would flip their shit, so just move on, it's more blatant hypocrisy, it makes no sense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
andalusian said:
It is completely legal to earn money from properties in foreign countries. It is a completely different thing if you know certain presidential actions show bias to these foreign countries as it benefits one's portfolio.

The 2 things are not the same.



I do not subscribe the the idea that the truth has no value. I am sure it will sway the opinions of some people, which is all that is required.
Click to expand...
[/quote][/QUOTE]
I did not say they were the same. I am saying unless it's extremely Blatant it will be very hard to prove that because the money came in from someone with ties from Russia that, that somehow gave them presidential favor, at least if the only evidence is a tax return.

We've heard these games before, IE, Hillary owns this thing, some Chinese man gave them money, thus of course if you're Fox news Hillary is a traitor to China. It's a whole lot of assumptions and confirmation bias going on.

The truth seems to matter less and less in the court of politics, but sure it may change someone out there. I'm not at all saying they shouldn't pursue the truth though.
 
CupWizier said:
Apparently the courts are on my side right now and not yours as they have refused to block congress from getting his tax returns. What law are you referencing?:biglaugh:
Click to expand...
I don't know who you are responding to but I'm going to guess that it's Marzy.
The law that I think he may be referencing is the FAKE law, an offshoot of the fake news, an offshoot of Fox News.
 
[/QUOTE]
I did not say they were the same. I am saying unless it's extremely Blatant it will be very hard to prove that because the money came in from someone with ties from Russia that, that somehow gave them presidential favor, at least if the only evidence is a tax return.

We've heard these games before, IE, Hillary owns this thing, some Chinese man gave them money, thus of course if you're Fox news Hillary is a traitor to China. It's a whole lot of assumptions and confirmation bias going on.

The truth seems to matter less and less in the court of politics, but sure it may change someone out there. I'm not at all saying they shouldn't pursue the truth though.[/QUOTE]
You've got to follow the hard evidence that was hard to dig up because of all of Trump's meticulous obfuscation. The hard evidence will prove the case and first you need the tax returns to give you some good ideas on where to look.
 
TorturedBlazerFan said:
If his whole campaign about being a good businessman was a lie. If he is so good at business he has yet to actually prove that. All we really know is that his Dad was and he has apparently not driven himself into poverty which I guess is a good place to start.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that he has built his fortune on the backs of many small businesses, some of which were on man and built on six bankruptcies. Then there's the whole business of swindling people including the IRS. How about keeping Blacks out of his condos which he was convicted in court for doing. This would mean not renting, leasing or selling to the average guy or gal.
 
Lanny said:
Don't forget that he has built his fortune on the backs of many small businesses, some of which were on man and built on six bankruptcies. Then there's the whole business of swindling people including the IRS. How about keeping Blacks out of his condos which he was convicted in court for doing. This would mean not renting, leasing or selling to the average guy or gal.
Click to expand...

He also still owes 100s of millions of dollars in loans...not to mention purposely defaulting on loans to get a tax break.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-a-personal-tax-break-by-defaulting-on-loans/
 
The SC should refuse to hear it. It puts them in a corner. If they take the case and rule in favor of Trump, they are leveraging the executive and judicial branches against the legislative branch. If the vote in favor of congress they are leveraging the judicial and legislative branches against the executive branch. Either way it obscures a fine line and tramples separation of power.
 
Chris Craig said:
Thats bullshit. Using the SC as his personal fixer.
Click to expand...

Chris Craig said:
The SC should refuse to hear it. It puts them in a corner. If they take the case and rule in favor of Trump, they are leveraging the executive and judicial branches against the legislative branch. If the vote in favor of congress they are leveraging the judicial and legislative branches against the executive branch. Either way it obscures a fine line and tramples separation of power.
Click to expand...

Bullshit!
Congress has no legitimate reason to be looking into Trumps taxes or anyone else's for that matter. The Federal Income tax law, started about 100 years ago, but not for the purposes of giving Congress another view into the affairs of citizens or the President.
 
MarAzul said:
Bullshit!
Congress has no legitimate reason to be looking into Trumps taxes or anyone else's for that matter. The Federal Income tax law, started about 100 years ago, but not for the purposes of giving Congress another view into the affairs of citizens or the President.
Click to expand...

Too bad. The Supreme Court only delayed the ruling to hear more evidence before they make a ruling. It's not up to you no matter how you interpret the rules.
 
Chris Craig said:
The SC should refuse to hear it. It puts them in a corner. If they take the case and rule in favor of Trump, they are leveraging the executive and judicial branches against the legislative branch. If the vote in favor of congress they are leveraging the judicial and legislative branches against the executive branch. Either way it obscures a fine line and tramples separation of power.
Click to expand...

This post reflects a complete non-understanding of not only the role of the SCOTUS, but a general non-understanding of the basic foundations of our justice system and especially how the abuse of law by one branch (in this case the legislative branch) is remedied by one or two other branches.
 
MarAzul said:
Bullshit!
Congress has no legitimate reason to be looking into Trumps taxes or anyone else's for that matter. The Federal Income tax law, started about 100 years ago, but not for the purposes of giving Congress another view into the affairs of citizens or the President.
Click to expand...

C'mon Marz...even Trump said he would release his tax returns after the "audit" was completed...that was 3 years ago. Even you have to confess that if we were talking about Obama, you'd be screaming for him to release his returns.

Why would Trump say he would release the returns and then refuse to do so, unless of course, he's hiding something?
 
MARIS61 said:
This post reflects a complete non-understanding of not only the role of the SCOTUS, but a general non-understanding of the basic foundations of our justice system and especially how the abuse of law by one branch (in this case the legislative branch) is remedied by one or two other branches.
Click to expand...

Oh please, I liked it better when you would simply copy and blindly paste a wall of words without context. Are you saying that you alone have an "understanding" of the role of the SCOTUS and the foundations of our justice system that the rest of us are somehow devoid of?

Please, just stop.
 
yankeesince59 said:
Even you have to confess that if we were talking about Obama, you'd be screaming for him to release his returns.
Click to expand...

No. The President is under no obligation to release his tax returns, nor should he be. Fishing expeditions in between elections are no way to run a country.

"AmendmentIV– The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation"
 
MarAzul said:
No. The President is under no obligation to release his tax returns, nor should he be. Fishing expeditions in between elections are no way to run a country.

"AmendmentIV– The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation"
Click to expand...
A president facing multiple litigation suits doesn't fall under that category...he's being impeached....Trump is deep in law suits against him and Trump University....nice try trying to check for fishing licenses but everybody has one that's up to date already...while you're checking what presidents can and can't do look up witness tampering, obstruction and misuse of campaign funds or blackmailing foreign governments for dirt on American citizens while president....also being banned from charity registrations for pilfering cancer fund money aimed for children....then there's his properties used for diplomatic govt biz...and our tax paid secret service to follow his Trump reps Ivanka and Jared around the world supplying security.....Trump doesn't know the playbook....he doesn't get to duck out now. Strange how these little glitches in his conduct just slip by you unnoticed.
 
Last edited:
riverman said:
A president facing multiple litigation suits doesn't fall under that category....Trump is deep in law suits against him and Trump University....nice try trying to check for fishing licenses but everybody has one that's up to date already
Click to expand...

Hate will do you in.
 
MarAzul said:
No. The President is under no obligation to release his tax returns, nor should he be. Fishing expeditions in between elections are no way to run a country.

"AmendmentIV– The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but
upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation"
Click to expand...

That's BS and you know it. And do you seriously think that Trump is "running the country" the right way? What has this mental deficient accomplished in 3 years?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top