Jump to content

U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Trump's immunity claim, lets prosecutor get financial records


Recommended Posts

Posted
34 minutes ago, Emdog said:

You have been able to see them, if you took the time to look. Took me 30 seconds. I really have a problem with willfully, purposefully ignorant people. https://joebiden.com/financial-disclosure/

What a shame for you ???? 

How about his son's tax return? or will we ignore that for the sake of good order?

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Doesn't matter if Trump releases them or not. If there's nothing bad in them the haters will just say that he's been hiding the bad stuff, and there can't be anything illegal or the IRS would already have done something about that.

 

If I were Trump, and had suffered all the garbage and <deleted> that's been heaped on him for the past 4 years I'd be trying to keep them secret just for a bit of payback. Given by the hysteria it does seem to be working.

That`s what I think as well,he's doing it for devilment and the liberals are falling for it hook,line and sinker.

Liberals are so funny.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Soooooo. Quote the part of the constitution that says presidential candidate tax returns have to be published.

:violin:

OK, this one goes a little bit "round the houses" but  if you'll bear with me, I think there's an argument that it's inherent in the 5th Amendment. This states (in part) that:

 

Quote

"no person shall [...] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

Due process of law means that a fair trial must be accorded to everyone and a fair trial requires that proper rules of evidence must be followed. As part of this, and as specified by the US Supreme Court in its ruling:

 

Quote

 

"In our system, the public has a right to every man's evidence," and "since the founding of the Republic, every man has included the President of the United States."

 

 

So in a slightly indirect but (IMHO) quite logical manner, the 5th Amendment leads us (as indeed, it led the SCOTUS) to the eventual conclusion that the president's tax returns must be released.

Edited by GroveHillWanderer
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

OK, this one goes a little bit "round the houses" but  if you'll bear with me, I think there's an argument that it's inherent in the 5th Amendment. This states (in part) that:

 

Due process of law means that a fair trial must be accorded to everyone and a fair trial requires that proper rules of evidence must be followed. As part of this, and as specified by the US Supreme Court in its ruling:

 

 

So in a slightly indirect but (IMHO) quite logical manner, the 5th Amendment leads us (as indeed, it led the SCOTUS) to the eventual conclusion that the president's tax returns must be released.

But its ok that trump doesnt show his returns. Others should do, and have done so, but trump no. Its ok, they dont want to know.

  • Haha 1
Posted
15 hours ago, candide said:

His son is not holding a political position and, unlike Trump, is not being criminally investigated

 

Meh.

 

Grand Juries are secret.

 

Pretty sure DJTJ's taxes have been reivewed by at least three different investigators in the past owing to his various shady dealings. Manhattan DA did decline prosecution of DJTJ and Ivanka years ago.

Posted (edited)

My sense - accurate like 1% of the time - is that there are tranches of tax returns and other financial douments/filings (both trump personal and trump org)  (supporting charges like Fraud) already assembled (supplied by whistleblowers)  and queued up for release closer to the election.

 

The activities and crimes illustrated in these documents will be defendable - this president and his minions can defend ANYTHING, but their release would NOT be blocked, see New York Times v. Unitied States, 1971.

 

Note that the president is already an Unindicted Co-conspirator in a Federal crime involving illegal financial activities. 

 

 

Edited by mtls2005
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

President's have always released their tax returns,

 

 

https://www.efile.com/historic-1040-income-tax-returns-of-us-presidents-and-candidates/

Presidents of the United States make their tax returns a matter of public record. However, the practice of releasing returns as president or when running for office didn't become commonplace until the late 1960's.

 

Bolding by me

 

https://www.taxnotes.com/presidential-tax-returns

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Are presidents required to release their tax returns?

Presidents aren’t required by law to release their tax returns.

 

 

 

 Trump spent six years saying he'd have no problem releasing his returns, and even scolded a fellow Republican candidate for waiting too long to do so.

So let's celebrate this year's tax season with a look back at broken promises:

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/times-donald-trump-release-tax-returns-article-1.3061868

 

Before Trump announced his candidacy for president, he repeatedly promised to release his tax returns, making such pledges in 2011, 2014 ("absolutely") and 2015.[3][4] During his presidential campaign, Trump first said he would release his returns after they were "worked on.”[5] From 2016 to 2019, Trump claimed that, because the returns were being audited, he could not make them public, but would do so in the future. No law actually prevents tax returns from being released due to an audit, as emphasized by the commissioner of internal revenue.[6][7] Trump later said that voters were not interested in his returns; that "there's nothing to learn from them"; and that his tax rate is "none of your business".[4]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_returns_of_Donald_Trump

Edited by Susco
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
5 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Meh.

 

Grand Juries are secret.

 

Pretty sure DJTJ's taxes have been reivewed by at least three different investigators in the past owing to his various shady dealings. Manhattan DA did decline prosecution of DJTJ and Ivanka years ago.

Ahem, it was about Biden's son.

  • Haha 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, candide said:

Ahem, it was about Biden's son.

Sorry, didn't realize the convo here migrated to Hunter Biden while I as dozing.

 

Apologies.

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...