Trump, sons sue to block House Democrats from obtaining his financial records

Mar 2019
2,086
440
Texas
#1
In 2017, the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee successfully sued to enforce its subpoena for bank records from Fusion GPS, the firm that hired ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele for the opposition research dossier on Trump and Russia.
And in 2012, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee sued for information into Fast and Furious, the gunwalking scandal that left a border patrol agent dead. Congress held then-Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress over the fight. In 2014, a judge ordered the administration to hand over more than 60,000 documents, but the fight for information is still ongoing in the courts.
The case was slightly different in the sense that Fast and Furious was an example of Congress suing the administration for information. In this instance, Trump and his businesses are personally suing to stop the accounting firm from turning over the information to Congress.
cnn
Well that is quite ironic for the right. I see this lasting about 1 second in court before they are forced to follow the law. The right wants to try to say the request is unfounded but a man under oath testified that potus lied on his taxes. That is more than enough cause to investigate.
 
Nov 2012
40,418
11,668
Lebanon, TN
#4
Cite that.......
Cite how there has not been legislative purpose givin to you in this thread after you cite where such is required.

I already have it is the Tea Pot Dome law..

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-asked-and...
Apr 16, 2019 · EPIC, 910 F.3d at 1235. For starters, requests for tax returns and return information must have a legitimate legislative purpose.
 
Apr 2016
624
436
Florida
#5
I already have it is the Tea Pot Dome law..

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-asked-and...
Apr 16, 2019 · EPIC, 910 F.3d at 1235. For starters, requests for tax returns and return information must have a legitimate legislative purpose.
Your link doesn't work for obvious reasons.

But if you mean McGrain v Daugherty, the result was the direct opposite of your claim. It upheld the power of congressional committees to request records.

{{meta.pageTitle}}
 
Dec 2006
26,304
11,384
New Haven, CT
#6
I'm sure they're going to get the returns.

Do we think he's trying to keep them secret because he's done some really criminal stuff or because he doesn't have NEARLY as much money as he makes out?

I think the latter, because if the general public could nail him on tax fraud, the IRS could have charged him a long long time ago.

And, I think - for him - vanity is paramount.
 
Mar 2019
2,086
440
Texas
#7
I already have it is the Tea Pot Dome law..

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-asked-and...
Apr 16, 2019 · EPIC, 910 F.3d at 1235. For starters, requests for tax returns and return information must have a legitimate legislative purpose.
LOL
You have serious issues.

You have been shown that is crap and does not exist.

There is no such law named tea pot dome law.

You are posting very false information.

Try this link out.

In 1924, Representative John Nance Garner shrewdly put the matter to his colleagues in the House. He asked them to imagine wanting to see his own (Garner’s) tax returns because of an ethics investigation — only to be rebuffed because they had no legal authority to obtain the returns.
In offering himself up as a hypothetical target of investigation, Garner underscored the impotence of Congress. Representative Ralph Lozier, a Missouri Democrat, made a more populist pitch, saying that “the country has the right to know whether or not the tax returns made by the idle rich and the gigantic corporations are fair and reasonable or based on evasion, fraud, and circumlocution.”
The final legislation established safeguards against the reckless dissemination of private tax information. As Yin has observed, Congress ultimately choose an evenhanded strategy, refusing to prohibit committees from sharing tax information, but also refusing to mandate that they must share whatever information they gathered.
Moreover, the threshold for determining what was suitable for release was set very low: The committee could share any information it deemed “relevant or useful.”
accounting today

26 U.S. Code § 6103
 
Last edited:
Mar 2019
2,086
440
Texas
#8
(f)Disclosure to Committees of Congress
(1)Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Finance, and Joint Committee on Taxation
Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that anyreturn or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to suchdisclosure.


cornell
 
Nov 2012
40,418
11,668
Lebanon, TN
#10
Your link doesn't work for obvious reasons.

But if you mean McGrain v Daugherty, the result was the direct opposite of your claim. It upheld the power of congressional committees to request records.

{{meta.pageTitle}}
Works just fine for me, that is why I could cut and paste information from the thread, Actually no, McGain V Daughtery had a legitimate legislative purpose, It was done to evaluate and make changes to Anti - Trust laws

OOPS LEGITIMATE LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE IS REQUIRED. as stated in my link
 

Similar Discussions