I will be happy to let a court decide that, and whether there is a legislative purpose to getting them.
And all other financial records?
Sure. And what are you going to say if they say congress has the right?
A reminder re the purpose of this thread was not about tax documents but personal financial documents. I believe there is another thread re Congress and taxes.
"President Trump sued his own accounting firm and the Democratic chairman of the House Oversight Committee at the same time Monday ā trying an unusual tactic to stop the firm from giving the committee details about Trumpās past financial dealings.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, seeks a court order to quash a subpoena issued last week by the committee to Mazars USA. Trumpās lawyers also are asking a federal judge to temporarily block the subpoena until the court has had a chance to review their request."
Oh, and I love that āunusual tacticā of stopping people from getting your personal financial records, as if though it were not unusual to demand them.
What is the controversy?
Not Doug, but I will be disappointed, and at the same time accept their ruling.
What will you do if the Court says that congress does not have the right?
I do not know what if anything I might or might not say, but I do realize Judges get to decide the laws, not me. Not other posters in this forum.
Of course, I will accept that ruling. I have no skin in that game, and I personally am not worried about congress looking into my financial records, they would get pretty bored combing them over.
The Constitution [Fourth Amendment] is supreme to laws not made in pursuance thereof!
JWK
"In matters of power let no more be heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. ā¦Jefferson
There was testimony by the Presidentās former lawyer that the President has engaged in insurance and loan fraud. He further stated that this can be proven by looking into his financial history.
Not a fishing trip, but a direct result of testimony.
2 Likes
Is that technically legal or technically illegal?
The hell you say? Trump a crook?
No one ever said Trump was smartā¦ just because he waived it doesnāt mean he is transparent.
If you read the report he likely could not have asserted privilege anyway.
Donāt need a search warrant.
Section 6103(f).
Tbh, this is Trumpās only move.
He engaged in insurance and loan fraud, probably evaded taxes and laundered money, probably writes off expenses of mistresses as business deductions, and on and on.
Heās fried once they get to his tax returns. And he knows it.
Heās gonna try to a whole bunch of lame duck stuffed as diversions.
Legal. Electorial College electors can vote for whomever they want. Sure there are several state laws that direct them how they are supposed to, but legally they can vote for whatever eligible candidate they want.
OKā¦Have a Court order it. Not a politician looking to eliminate a political opponent.
The optics for the dems would look so much better if a judge ordered it.
Then people would be bitching about activist judges.
The congress doesnāt need a court order.
They already have the lawful authority.
As I have repeatedly said, Iām sure your side will tell it to the court before it getās rejected by them
Invoking the 4thā¦lololol which pundit told you that?
