It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can Congress force Trump to hand over taxes ?

page: 11
13
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: toolgal462




How can an actual quote that is on video be somehow the fault of Fox and Friends?

I see. You both thought of the same off topic thing at the same time. That explains it.


How is that surprising? And it's not "off topic" it is entirely on topic. It proves that when your guy makes a promise he doesn't keep, you don't give a crap. When Trump does it, you suddenly care.

And does someone need to explain to you how the legal system in the USA is supposed to work? I've grown tired of trying to explain it to Lefties on here.

Our justice system is NOT supposed to go looking for a crime before they have the evidence that a crime has been committed. Do you understand this concept?

How would you like to have the full force of the Govt. and all it's power and money to go searching for a crime in your past? Do you think they could or would find one?

Think hard before you answer.




posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: toolgal462




When there is evidence of a crime, then they look for the culprit.

So, the fact that IRS policy requires examination of presidential tax returns means there is evidence of a crime?



And I'm quite sure that if there is evidence of a crime somewhere in there, then it will be investigated. Do you see how this works?

So, given what you just said, what is the problem exactly?



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 03:47 PM
link   
No. This is a political witchhunt. They have already weaponized the IRS, stop it already.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462




And I'm quite sure that if there is evidence of a crime somewhere in there, then it will be investigated. Do you see how this works?


Yes.

And, the House Committee is exercising its oversight authority to ensure that the IRS is employing due diligence. An examination is not an audit. Perhaps the returns of a US President should be subject to more thorough scrutiny. That's why the Committee has asked for the returns and information about how the IRS checked them out. Perhaps instead of IRS policy, there should be law, since this president has refused to make his returns public and others may follow suit in the future.

edit on 4/6/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Theophorus

No, with exception being passing a law that requires a President to make their records public as an edibility issue. That law would be vetoed and then require the votes for an override.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: toolgal462




And I'm quite sure that if there is evidence of a crime somewhere in there, then it will be investigated. Do you see how this works?


Yes.

And, the House Committee is exercising its oversight authority to ensure that the IRS is employing due diligence. An examination is not an audit. Perhaps the returns of a US President should be subject to more thorough scrutiny. That's why the Committee has asked for the returns and information about how the IRS checked them out. Perhaps instead of IRS policy, there should be law, since this president has refused to make his returns public.


Why? Because you simply don't like him and your candidate lost the 2016 election and you refuse to let that go and move on with your life?

Don't you think that finding a good candidate to run against Trump would be far more constructive at this point? You know, a candidate with an actual platform that the voters can support?

The platform of "we hate Trump so we vote for anyone who isn't Trump" seems sort of shaky to me.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462


Why?
Because the President of the United States should not be a crook. Nor should he be subject to undue pressures because of his financial interests. Knowing the details of his finances would be helpful in removing questions. No matter who the president is.


Don't you think that finding a good candidate to run against Trump would be far more constructive at this point?

Finding a good candidate to run against Trump would be great. Especially if it were a Republican. But that's the job of the parties, not Congress.

edit on 4/6/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: toolgal462


Why?
Because the President of the United States should not be a crook. Nor should he be subject to undue pressures because of his financial interests. Knowing the details of his finances would be helpful in removing questions. No matter who the president is.


Don't you think that finding a good candidate to run against Trump would be far more constructive at this point?

Finding a good candidate to run against Trump would be great. Especially if it were a Republican. But that's the job of the parties, not Congress.



What evidence do you have that Trump is a crook? Accusations alone are not what we need to hear in order to investigate someone, even the President.

Do you think that the IRS didn't scrutinize every tax return for Trump, who has been a millionaire/billionaire for the last few decades now. If there was a crime, do you honestly believe they couldn't find it?

Do you realize that it should have been the job of the press to investigate whether or not Trump was a crook while he was a candidate? Do you think they tried to find actual evidence of criminal behavior or not?

What do you think the job of journalists is? Spreading propaganda or doing investigations?

I have a feeling I can continue responding until I'm blue in the face but we will continue to go round and round because I'm afraid that some people will just never get it.

Do you honestly believe that getting all of his tax returns is going to help your side win in 2020?

Bottom line, I have tried to help you see what actually might help you get rid of Trump in 2020 and that would be coming up with policies that the people can get behind. But you aren't interested in my humble advice.

So go right ahead and continue down the path you are on but please do not be shocked or dismayed when Trump wins again in 2020. Because you were warned repeatedly that your path would lead to failure.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Ensuring due diligence, and the evidence they are not is based on what?



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462


Do you think that the IRS didn't scrutinize every tax return for Trump, who has been a millionaire/billionaire for the last few decades now. If there was a crime, do you honestly believe they couldn't find it?
I don't know, but apparently the Southern District of New York is particularly interested in the Trump Foundation. Self dealing which the IRS seems to have missed, for example.


Do you honestly believe that getting all of his tax returns is going to help your side win in 2020?
My "side?" In any case, it might depend upon what the tax returns show, either way. But this isn't really about the election. It's about the fact that the House of Representatives is controlled by the Democrats and oversight is in their hands now. They are oversighting.


edit on 4/6/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462

Ohhh?? I like your perspective, that subtle bite 😉
edit on 6-4-2019 by Arnie123 because: Heh



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Phage

Ensuring due diligence, and the evidence they are not is based on what?


Is there something that limits oversight of government agencies? I hope not.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Phage

Ensuring due diligence, and the evidence they are not is based on what?


Is there something that limits oversight of government agencies? I hope not.


Yes, it's called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You might want to take a look at these and learn that even the almighty Government is not above the Law.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: toolgal462



Yes, it's called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Can you cite the relevant article which prevents Congress for overseeing the activities of government agencies?



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: toolgal462

Ohhh?? I like your perspective, that subtle bite 😉


Thanks although I feel I'm wasting my time. Not just on some anonymous message board but also in real life. I have friends and family members who think exactly like Phage and no amount of logic, reason or references to actual Law seems to sway them from their path.

Which simply amounts to "Orange man bad". And they truly believe it's okay and even encourage destroying everyone's rights in the process of proving it!

It really bothers me that this is what we have come to.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: toolgal462



Yes, it's called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Can you cite the relevant article which prevents Congress for overseeing I the activities of government agencies?


The fifth amendment for starters. Go take a quick cursory look on what that one says and get back to me.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Trump has been operating with limited liability Corporate tactics for years, I think it would be very difficult to get a true picture of all his wheeling and dealing. DJT is not receiving a taxable salary for all the work he has done as POTUS, that might be a good place to start looking for clues as to his MO. Why?



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Also, the 4th, 6th and 10th amendment apply. Perhaps you don't understand these?



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Phage

Ensuring due diligence, and the evidence they are not is based on what?


Is there something that limits oversight of government agencies? I hope not.

Yes, the Supreme Court. They have already ruled on the matter. Kilbourn v. Thompson. The Supreme Court already ruled Congress can not delve into people's private financial matters unless they have proper legislative authority.

There is already precedent, Congress can not do whatever it wants whenever it wants. Their request did not include a proper legislative reason over which they have authority. Trump's tax returns serve no such purpose.



posted on Apr, 6 2019 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Slichter
a reply to: Phage

Trump has been operating with limited liability Corporate tactics for years, I think it would be very difficult to get a true picture of all his wheeling and dealing. DJT is not receiving a taxable salary for all the work he has done as POTUS, that might be a good place to start looking for clues as to his MO. Why?



Why don't you forward these suspicions and theories to some crack journalist like Rachel Maddow and blow this wide open?




top topics



 
13
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join