5 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

Thursday, April 11, 2019

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance.

 

Congratulations; you've picked the juiciest cherry!  Now all somebody has to do is find a poll showing the exact opposite, like this:

 

Getting back on topic, I'd like to see some reasoned legal analysis explaining why the IRS has not yet released the tax returns.  The law is pretty straightforward and unambiguous.  The IRS has been asked for Trump's tax returns under section 6103 of the tax code, which states that "the secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request."

 

All I've seen thus far is special pleading.

9 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Trump is never going to produce his tax returns so those who continue to look for something / anything to use to *get* Trump need to pound sand. 

Trump is scared skinny that the world will find out that he is only worth a dollar-twenty-nine.

His loyal, rose-tinted-glasses followers will be devastated. Bullshit baffles brains will be redefined. His alleged, rich friends around the world will ignore his calls and turn their backs on him (if they haven't already).

Fox and Friends will call it FAKE returns. CNN will report the honest truth.

 

Let it rip Donald. Keep your word (just this once). Otherwise, "pound sand".

10 hours ago, Emdog said:

All our dear Trump backers: why aren't you holding his feet to the fire over his returns? He promised he would release them. And please don't use the lame and false argument "he's under audit and can't" which is a lie. Obama released his every year and IRS audits every President's tax returns. Once you sign and turn in, that's it unless you later submit an amended return.

So rather than defending a person who flat out lied to you, why don't you press him on this?

I am not defending Trump, however he really is under no obligation to release the returns. (I don't hold politicians accountable for their campaign statements and it's foolish trying to do so). I don't think many people really care about Trump's tax returns.  The only reason the Dems want them is to hopefully find something they can make newsworthy for the next couple of years. Further there is a big difference in corporate/business tax returns and personal tax returns. In reality Trumps personal tax returns would probably not show all that much. I would think that the Trump organization has it's own corporate returns and that Trump's personal returns would just reflect profits/losses from his various business interests on K-1's, 1099's etc. Not to say that there couldn't be questions but if the IRS accepted the returns reviewed them without finding fault, there is not much that can be done.  The general cry by people who want Trump's tax returns is to keep digging until they can find anything that might hurt Trump. The Dems most likely want to find something in declared deductions they can make an issue of. The general populace is mostly unfamiliar with complicated personal tax returns and they think there is going to be some giant revelations but what they will probably get is people raising more questions than there are answers. The returns will probably show that Trump is not a charitable as he claims.  Well, that probably wouldn't be a surprise.

 

Finally if people think the President's tax returns should be made public, I would suggest that all elected officials tax returns be made public.  That goes for all members of Congress. Congress should just pass legislation that makes it a requirement to release tax returns on the internet for 10 years for all in Congress and the President.  Easy solution but that will never happen.

1 hour ago, Trouble said:

I am not defending Trump, however he really is under no obligation to release the returns. (I don't hold politicians accountable for their campaign statements and it's foolish trying to do so). I don't think many people really care about Trump's tax returns.  The only reason the Dems want them is to hopefully find something they can make newsworthy for the next couple of years. Further there is a big difference in corporate/business tax returns and personal tax returns. In reality Trumps personal tax returns would probably not show all that much. I would think that the Trump organization has it's own corporate returns and that Trump's personal returns would just reflect profits/losses from his various business interests on K-1's, 1099's etc. Not to say that there couldn't be questions but if the IRS accepted the returns reviewed them without finding fault, there is not much that can be done.  The general cry by people who want Trump's tax returns is to keep digging until they can find anything that might hurt Trump. The Dems most likely want to find something in declared deductions they can make an issue of. The general populace is mostly unfamiliar with complicated personal tax returns and they think there is going to be some giant revelations but what they will probably get is people raising more questions than there are answers. The returns will probably show that Trump is not a charitable as he claims.  Well, that probably wouldn't be a surprise.

 

Finally if people think the President's tax returns should be made public, I would suggest that all elected officials tax returns be made public.  That goes for all members of Congress. Congress should just pass legislation that makes it a requirement to release tax returns on the internet for 10 years for all in Congress and the President.  Easy solution but that will never happen.

Doesent matter how Donald feels the law says shall it’s out of his hands all the bleating wineing ranting wont make any difference the irs not Donald (shall)release the returns

 

 

 

 

Off-topic posts and replies removed.  

 

Is the USA in such perfect shape that our elected/paid officials spend soooo much time on Trump tax or Trump this & that?

 

I mean I get it...The hate, the loss candidate hurt, the whatever being the driving force but really?

For crying out loud it has been this way in one form or another for years now.

 

Are these folks who instigate so many "investigations" of one sort or another the same ones who cried out when Trump was asking for Obama's Birth records?

Is this the excuse used to act out in this way?

 

Lastly let me assure the soon to be hand wringing replies I did not vote for Trump but, I really see many things that our elected & then paid to work representatives could be working on to better "our" country. Then I wonder if they have anytime for any real work with all these...episodes of soap opera like BS

 

 

38 minutes ago, mania said:

Is the USA in such perfect shape that our elected/paid officials spend soooo much time on Trump tax or Trump this & that?

The best way to undo the damage done by the current POTUS is by defeating him (and Pence) in 2020.  Therefor the Democrats need to show the electorate what Trump has done.  There is ample reason to investigate if substantial money laundering, misrepresentation or outright fraud has been carried out by Trump over the last few years.  Tax returns are the best way to investigate those issues especially since no part of the Trump Organization is a public company.

 

38 minutes ago, mania said:

Are these folks who instigate so many "investigations" of one sort or another the same ones who cried out when Trump was asking for Obama's Birth records?

Is this the excuse used to act out in this way?

The ridiculous, lame brained and childish Trump birtherism attack was a very generous gift by him to his critics.  I don't think those critics are upset about that.  The fish they're interested in frying is large enough to fill a lot of stomachs.

38 minutes ago, mania said:

I really see many things that our elected & then paid to work representatives could be working on to better "our" country. Then I wonder if they have anytime for any real work with all these...episodes of soap opera like BS

In order for it to remain "our" country we need to prevent the rampant undoing of the regulations preventing corporate takeover of government.  Capitalism and the profit motive are very effective but must not be the overriding consideration in every decision of government.

Kudos gamboler well said seems to me many of the (trumpers) try to label non supporters as hate leftie ect ect many myself included reject the lies the con the smears the attacks on the institutions the corruption the epic incompetence it’s not about right or left now it’s about morals and our survival

1 hour ago, mania said:

Lastly let me assure the soon to be hand wringing replies I did not vote for Trump but, I really see many things that our elected & then paid to work representatives could be working on to better "our" country. Then I wonder if they have anytime for any real work with all these...episodes of soap opera like BS

Checks and balances are a must to keep certain politicians in line. Never has America had the need for those checks and balances like they do now. So you should be thanking those who start the many "investigations", not complaining about them. If it weren't for oversight (investigations, checks and balances), here's my view of what The Trump Banana Republic might look like:

 

Donald would raise his pay to one billion per day. What the heck, that's only 365 billion a year. It's only money (future generations can pay off the debt, or just let China absorb it when they take over).

 

Donald would close America to all immigration unless he personally approved each immigrant. He would evict all who were not born on American soil.

 

Donald would appoint his family to all the powerful positions, they'd govern the country as a family. Eric would be in charge of eliminating anybody who steps out of line.

 

Donald would sign a fiat that would nationalize all businesses with over 100 employees but he would take a 51% stake in each business.

 

Donald would reduce the tax rate to "0" for all companies with 100 employees or more.

 

Donald would hold a vote to elect himself the most brilliant man in the world (mark the right box on the ballot or expect a visit from Eric).

 

Donald would abolish government. He would appoint himself King of the monarchy and make his decisions solely from his golden throne, located in Florida at that place he owns that he would have sold to the American taxpayer for 100 billion dollars and then leased back to himself for one dollar a year.

 

Donald would .......... ! Well, it's endless, truly endless. But these few examples might help you understand why these "investigations", oversight and controls are necessary. Never has America seen such a wannabe autocratic president. You should learn to appreciate those who are expending such a huge effort to try and keep this whacko in line.

 

He will not release them willingly. He has way too much to hide. From the fraudulent valuations of his properties in order to procure loans, to the lack of charitable donations, to the deferment from his bankruptcies. His tax returns do not make him look like much of a patriot!

As I maintained from the beginning, if the demand to see the tax returns (anyone's tax returns) stands, the matter will end up in court.  While the law Congress seeks to impose hasn't been tested by the courts, the right to confidentiality with respect to returns has. Here's just one of many examples of such:

 

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/11/10/The-Supreme-Court-upheld-today-the-confidentiality-of-tax/9264563518800/

 

I have no idea which side would prevail in such a court challange but if I had to guess I think the court would require that there be a compelling need in order to see taxes which are otherwise confidential. I'm not sure Trumps taxes would meet that standard if that were the standard they set.

57 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

As I maintained from the beginning, if the demand to see the tax returns (anyone's tax returns) stands, the matter will end up in court. 

Now that was a tough call. Clearly, most observers were expecting the Treasury Department to meekly comply with the request.

11 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Now that was a tough call. Clearly, most observers were expecting the Treasury Department to meekly comply with the request.

 

So, when I told you that in several prior posts wny did you continue to harangue and challenge it?

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

So, when I told you that in several prior posts wny did you continue to harangue and challange it?

 

 

 

 

I never challenged the fact that the Trump administration was going to fight it. I mean really, the famously belligerent Donald Trump was going to let Treasury hand over his tax returns without a fight?   

I did challenge the grounds you were citing for his likely refusal. Mainly that laws guaranteeing taxpayer rights were relevant. As the article from Vox showed, not one of those lawyers, from conservative to liberal, experts in Constitutional and Tax law, cited that as a possible ground for Trump refusing to hand over his tax returns.

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

I never challenged the fact that the Trump administration was going to fight it. I mean really, the famously belligerent Donald Trump was going to let Treasury hand over his tax returns without a fight?   

I did challenge the grounds you were citing for his likely refusal. Mainly that laws guaranteeing taxpayer rights were relevant. As the article from Vox showed, not one of those lawyers, from conservative to liberal, experts in Constitutional and Tax law, cited that as a possible ground for Trump refusing to hand over his tax returns.

 

Show me the cases where access to another persons taxes was granted arbitrarily rather than on the basis of a compelling need or evidence of criminality. Even if the House committe wins this, which I don't think they will, they will lose by setting this precedent.

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Show me the cases where access to another persons taxes was granted arbitrarily rather than on the basis of a compelling need or evidence of criminality. Even if the House committe wins this, which I don't think they will, they will lose by setting this precedent.

The question is whether or not the request serves legitimate legislative interests. Most legal experts in this area believe that the House will prevail. Of course that doesn't mean it will. Actually, if the House invokes impeachment investigations as a reason, that would pretty much make it a slam dunk for them.

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

I have no idea which side would prevail in such a court challenge but if I had to guess I think the court would require that there be a compelling need in order to see taxes which are otherwise confidential. I'm not sure Trumps taxes would meet that standard if that were the standard they set.

^ this is basically what I think will be the conclusion. Also basically what the starters know going in

So brings me back to wondering who is actually working on the piles of real problems we have.

 

I am quite sure those who launch these deals know from the start the likely result.

Yet it does not stop the frivolous/sensationalism

 

Would be at least nice to see those that launch these held to help defer the costs if it again comes to a bunch of frivolous sensationalism.

Why do taxpayers have to pay for these things ? Because ultimately their all our employees

3 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

The ridiculous, lame brained and childish Trump birtherism attack was a very generous gift by him to his critics.  I don't think those critics are upset about that. 

That is not what I meant....When I said are they the same who complained of such stupidity why then do they themselves constantly see attention equally useless minutia.

Either get something real or better yet get to work doing what we hired them to do.

 

43 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Show me the cases where access to another persons taxes was granted arbitrarily rather than on the basis of a compelling need or evidence of criminality. Even if the House committe wins this, which I don't think they will, they will lose by setting this precedent.

The requirement is a legitimate reason to see the taxes, not compelling reason.

 

 

2 minutes ago, mania said:

That is not what I meant....When I said are they the same who complained of such stupidity why then do they themselves constantly see attention equally useless minutia.

Either get something real or better yet get to work doing what we hired them to do.

 

One of the things ‘we hired them to do’ is keep the executive and the president in check.

 

After two years neglecting that duty the House is now on it.

 

What a difference a House Majority makes.

2 hours ago, neeray said:

Donald would....x9

I'm sure that is someones dream but it is not the reality of how our govt works.

Many talk Checks and balances but then go off on these fantasies

 

The soap operas that have run for sometime now are not anything to do with Checks and balances

it is a basic diversionary witch hunt.

 

We gave all of them a break when we gave them a job

Now they should get to work or just get

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

After two years neglecting that duty the House is now on it.

Puleeze ????

11 minutes ago, mania said:

^ this is basically what I think will be the conclusion. Also basically what the starters know going in

So brings me back to wondering who is actually working on the piles of real problems we have.

 

I am quite sure those who launch these deals know from the start the likely result.

Yet it does not stop the frivolous/sensationalism

 

Would be at least nice to see those that launch these held to help defer the costs if it again comes to a bunch of frivolous sensationalism.

Why do taxpayers have to pay for these things ? Because ultimately their all our employees

 

It could blow up in their faces. Anyone over the age of 50 has known for decades just who and what Trump is. He got elected anyway.

 

People like to say Trump is weakening America's institutions, but as far as I can see it's institutions 10 and Trump 0. This is the kind of stuff that weakens institutions like law enforcemnt and revenue collection and and regulators. It smells like a Thai style retroactive charge designed to undermine democratic institutions.

 

Democrats should be careful of what they wish for as the precedent they set, will be 10 times more vengeful when the Republicans return the favor.

1 minute ago, mania said:

I'm sure that is someones dream but it is not the reality of how our govt works.

Many talk Checks and balances but then go off on these fantasies

 

The soap operas that have run for sometime now are not anything to do with Checks and balances

it is a basic diversionary witch hunt.

 

We gave all of them a break when we gave them a job

Now they should get to work or just get

I doubt very much you had any part in giving a job to the Congressional Representatives who are now doing their job keeping this President in check.

Just now, lannarebirth said:

 

It could blow up in their faces. Anyone over the age of 50 has known for decades just who and what Trump is. He got elected anyway.

 

People like to say Trump is weakening America's institutions, but as far as I can see it's institutions 10 and Trump 0. This is the kind of stuff that weakens institutions like law enforcement and revenue collection and and regulators. It smells like a Thai style retroactive charge designed to undermine democratic institutions.

 

Democrats should be careful of what they wish for as the precedent will be 10 times more vengeful when the Republicans return the favor.

Exactly & why can't they see this?

 

18 hours ago, wombat said:

the IRS is under no legal obligation to produce tax records.

nothing to look at, move along please to the next Trump drama.

Exactly correct. 

Your US tax return information is confidential. The IRS and your tax professional cannot disclose your tax information to anyone else without your explicit consent.

If you find out that the IRS has disclosed your tax information without your consent, you may bring a civil lawsuit for damages. The IRS has steep penalties against tax preparers who disclose tax return information without your permission. Your tax preparer cannot release your confidential tax information to anyone without your explicit permission. If your tax preparer asks you if it is OK for him to share your information with third-parties, it is your right to say No.

 

So as others have said it is Trump's right to tell congress to pack sand regarding this issue. If the voters don't like that Trump does not release his tax information they can vote for someone else in 2020. It did not seem to bother enough voters to matter in 2016 so I doubt it will be a major issue the next time around either.

19 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

pound sand

You say this quite a bit... what does it mean?

1 minute ago, mania said:

Exactly & why can't they see this?

 

Because it’s not attached to reality.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I doubt very much you had any part in giving a job to the Congressional Representatives who are now doing their job keeping this President in check.

??? ????????

 

This is exactly the kind of thing the non-workers would say & yet ....WTH would it have to do with anything

As if a citizen voicing  displeasure with its elected government has something to prove???

 

You should aim much much higher or at least look at the problem