U.S. Supreme Court allows release of Trump tax returns

[fj1200]

If there was illegal activity, as you insinuate, then why wasn’t the IRS investigating?

And why does New York State have legal standing over Trump’s Federal returns?

This sets a bad precedent, now a state can demand an individual’s federal return.

The IRS already has his tax returns. They generally audit, not investigate. Besides, I didn't insinutate, I said "alleged."

Because NY is the one investigating alleged illegal activity.

I presume there is no precedent here. Anyone is subject to investigation and subpoenas can be submitted for tax returns. The delay was because he was a sitting president.

The real question is why do you think he shouldn't be subject to the laws just like everyone else?

[fj1200]

Nancy Pelosi and her hubby Paul. I 'think' that no doubt a crime took place in there somewhere but wasn't ever properly investigated over whether she helped in any way or not. Schumer I believe assisted in covering up crimes in congress, but doubtful that anything would bring out his financials. Him and others guilty of obstruction of justice, IMO. I think both AOC and Omar are/were guilty of FEC crimes. Omar is also married twice at the same time. Of course, like the others, never investigations. Oh, Tlaib breaks federal law during campaign as well. She assaulted Laura Loomer. Stacey Abrams has her own political organization, Fair Fight Action, using the funding for her political activities, which is against federal law. She was also soliciting “ineligible, out-of-state, or deceased voters” for the run-off election. Another one of her organizations, stood accused of: "Raffensperger said earlier this week that America Votes "is sending absentee ballot applications to people at addresses where they have not lived since 1994." Vote Forward, he said, "attempted to register a dead Alabama voter, a woman, to vote here in Georgia." He also spotlighted The New Georgia Project, "who sent voter registration applications to New York City.”

This isn't to say that they all had to submit their personal finances, but maybe should have, or maybe should have been investigated at all in some cases. But more so to point out that the lack of alleged illegal activities isn't the case. They all committed crimes IMO, some just less than others.

Lock em all up. I'm right there with ya.

[Kathianne]

Lock em all up. I'm right there with ya.

and Feinstein and let's go back to Harry Reid too, pretty sure statute of limitations might still apply.

[jimnyc]

Lock em all up. I'm right there with ya.

I am not 100% confident they would all be jailed, but I guess my point was that they never even get investigated properly. And in the cases of the finance crimes during campaigns and such, it's always just a small fine and/or just lip service. And the more there are and the more that get treated as if it's no big deal, IMO the more it erodes the integrity of our elections. Also adds to the thoughts that politicians are above the law, which at times it appears they are.

[jimnyc]

and Feinstein and let's go back to Harry Reid too, pretty sure statute of limitations might still apply.

Feinstein I can see if any current issues or more as she is still in office, but I'm lost with Reid? Why go backwards? We speaking of accusations of corruption, or more?

[Kathianne]

Feinstein I can see if any current issues or more as she is still in office, but I'm lost with Reid? Why go backwards? We speaking of accusations of corruption, or more?

This goes back, as did second impeachment. Thus, go back for all. Corruption is Corruption.

[jimnyc]

This goes back, as did second impeachment. Thus, go back for all. Corruption is Corruption.

Well, you know me, I agree. I am all about law and order. But hell, seems hard to difficult to get investigations started today let alone going back. But yeah, I see it now, cause I sure as hell think Hillary needs charges as well, and she's more or less out of the picture. And while I don't agree with the tactics, from day one, as if Russia and all the other BS didn't come to be, then I don't see the southern district and/or others doing their investigations - but as they say about letting the cat out of the bag - should they find crimes within, good luck getting that tossed. I believe this is worse news for him than any impeachment. Always the IRS that gets ya in the end. And if you do the crime, you may see some time.

My only issue with that, is that some get gunned for while others seemingly either ignored or protected or haven't a clue how they avoid justice - as in Hillary.

[fj1200]

and Feinstein and let's go back to Harry Reid too, pretty sure statute of limitations might still apply.

I'm not suggesting we go crazy with backdating crimes but things, especially current infractions, should be investigated regardless of party. The problem is we don't have an independent anything at any level of government when it comes to partisan type investigations.

I am not 100% confident they would all be jailed, but I guess my point was that they never even get investigated properly. And in the cases of the finance crimes during campaigns and such, it's always just a small fine and/or just lip service. And the more there are and the more that get treated as if it's no big deal, IMO the more it erodes the integrity of our elections. Also adds to the thoughts that politicians are above the law, which at times it appears they are.

I'm sure none of them will. These aren't major crimes but you're right, things need to be done on an even basis.

[fj1200]

If this is true...

Trump’s lawyers immediately went to court to block its enforcement, first arguing that he was immune from being investigated while president.

https://apnews.com/article/manhattan...e8f33c480869d6

... then why is it surprising that the documents would be turned over now?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A clear case of political revenge/vengeance using the system.
SCOTUS, yet again has given the dems a greenlight to do this unconstitutional agenda.
Now we get to see how some of the long time planted RINO's operate after they get into position.
SCOTUS IS A FUCKING DISGRACE. A FACT.. -Tyr

[Gunny]

Dumb question here: Since when, why and how is it okay to publicly release someone's tax returns? Maybe someone else mentioned it, but isn't there a 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights?

[icansayit]

Dumb question here: Since when, why and how is it okay to publicly release someone's tax returns? Maybe someone else mentioned it, but isn't there a 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights?

Seems to me, like something so simple, and easy to read just was avoided by everybody in Washington connected to the TRUMP HATERS CLUBS.

They all IGNORED the Constitution...and, unless they are really STUPID and think we all are too....They have N.Y. Lawyers and Politicians who are also guilty of VIOLATING Trump's Constitutional Rights.
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103

If a common OLD Citizen like me can find the LAW. Shouldn't the SCOTUS and LAWYERS be able to READ IT TOO???[/B]

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Seems to me, like something so simple, and easy to read just was avoided by everybody in Washington connected to the TRUMP HATERS CLUBS.

They all IGNORED the Constitution...and, unless they are really STUPID and think we all are too....They have N.Y. Lawyers and Politicians who are also guilty of VIOLATING Trump's Constitutional Rights.
26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103

If a common OLD Citizen like me can find the LAW. Shouldn't the SCOTUS and LAWYERS be able to READ IT TOO???[/B]

YET AGAIN, we see the dems proving they are above the law and able to break the law any damn time they feel like it.
What they are being permitted to do is unconstitutional, criminal and able to set a standard that they can ignore the law and exact vengeance upon any person that they deem to be an enemy.
In short, they are acting ,like ffing Nazis and getting away with it..
Getting away with it because SCOTUS is refusing to do its sworn duty.
And why is SCOTUS doing that?
Some kind of--fix-- is in with the newer justices.
Three of them are refusing to do their sworn duty.
Are they long planted RINO'S?
My guess is yes they are..
Is the dem party behaving the way it is because they have certain SCOTUS justices under their thumb--again I say very, very likely.
If the SCOTUS is thus compromised-we are certainly heading into a 4 year span of drastic and nation weakening changes.
How could this have came to be"""????
One answer== Globalists.. The One World Government people.
Dark are the days that are coming .. Tragic and dark, imho--Tyr

[fj1200]

Dumb question here: Since when, why and how is it okay to publicly release someone's tax returns? Maybe someone else mentioned it, but isn't there a 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights?

They're not being publicly released, they're going to the prosecutor and they would only be seen by the grand jury. And apparently it's not just the tax returns being released it's all the documentation that goes in to preparing tax returns and they're gettig them from trump's accounting firm.

If a judge has signed off on the search and seizure then then there's apparently probably cause.

[gabosaurus]

They're not being publicly released, they're going to the prosecutor and they would only be seen by the grand jury. And apparently it's not just the tax returns being released it's all the documentation that goes in to preparing tax returns and they're gettig them from trump's accounting firm. If a judge has signed off on the search and seizure then then there's apparently probably cause.

If Trump is found guilty of cheating on his tax returns, should he be absolved of blame because he is a former president?