JayJay
192
It would be really interesting to view a thread sorted by poster.
The evolution of the argument being made by the OPer in this thread in order to hold onto an original mistaken idea has been fascinating to watch.
Textbook example of the all-too-human tendency to reach a conclusion first and only bring forth evidence that supports that conclusion…as opposed to the more scientific method of trying to prove one’s initial hypothesis is NOT true.
Read the original letter written to request these tax returns. The statutes allowing for this official on Ways and Means to request this is spelled out.
We may not like that this statute exists. We may think it’s a power grab by our government, but that is a totally different debate.
What’s not up for debate is Ways and Means was very careful in how they sought out Trump’s tax returns.
They are not investigating Donald Trump. They are investigating whether the IRS has done what legal code requires them to do regarding auditing the President and Vice-president’s tax returns.
You may think this a “run-around” or using legalese to go after their real target. You may be correct…doesn’t change the fact they have the statutory coverage to do this. Therefore, arguments regarding “constitutional rights to privacy” are irrelevant and are actually red herrings.
There really is nothing for the courts to decide.
5 Likes
i wonder if some grunt CPA was sitting around, the day Trump announced his candidacy, thinking “Oh hell. He needs to hide his tax returns. That will lead them to “X” and 7 mistresses”.
i hope the IRS commissioner turns over trumps taxes despite trumps protest. either him or some other irs official…
I’m simply pointing out that we’re guessing when we shouldn’t be; we’re guessing because Trump’s flunky Barr is hiding the report.
Quick answer: With this request, they do.
Tell your congressperson to change the law then.
Actually the law has never been used to seize someone’s tax records. The article you provided describes a voluntary request, not a use of the law to seize Enron’s tax records.
Please show me where the 1924 law was used to seize someone’s tax records.
It was used under Nixon. He didn’t fight it.
Nixon voluntarily provided his tax records. The law wasn’t used.
dantes
203
God help you if you ask him for evidence to support that claim.
Finally, the public has a right to know about the president’s taxes simply because he is now the taxpayer in chief. As many of us struggle to complete our own tax returns and pay any applicable taxes, we should receive assurance that the president is paying his fair share. In 1973 and 1974, Congress used the law to investigate President Nixon’s taxes and found (and disclosed to the public) that he owed about $500,000 in additional tax.
Just stop, please.
All you’ve done is provided an article on the 1924 law DEM house members will invoke. The article in no way contradicts my prior statements. 
It states it was used against Nixon. But have fun living in your reality.
Vali
209
As they are tasked with crafting tax legislation, and Fat Donald has claimed his taxes are “very complex”, then reviewing his tax returns and seeing the impact of the tax code on person worth a few hundred million dollars will probably be constructive to their task.
The way I see it, their rationale for requesting the tax returns is more valid than Fat Donald’s rationale for hiding them.
I believe that the ways and chairman needs to see the president tax returns to formulate legislation as the law was written. To think there is a partisan reason is mere conjecture on your part.
Allan
Vali
211
This is the correct take.
Fat Donald really does not have an angle here.
https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1114252079231586304
2 Likes
