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.

 

2nd judge refuses to block House subpoenas for Trump bank records

page: 14
13
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2019 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

They should have to release tax returns. Every elected official. It prevents bribes.



Yeah, it doesn't do that at all. Have you ever even filed a tax return? Do you know what's on them? Why would you make up nonsense like this?




posted on May, 30 2019 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

I sure do. And when my salary is 100k and I made 300k elsewhere and in a portfolio capital gains etc..the voter can ask some questions.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

I sure do. And when my salary is 100k and I made 300k elsewhere and in a portfolio capital gains etc..the voter can ask some questions.


Kinda like Clinton? And that changed how many people's minds, do you think? These rich #s always have some legal trickery slotted in that explains their extra money. If it was that easy to prove they're doing something wrong, they'd all be getting charges from IRS auditing. As usual, reality doesn't match up to the leftist dogma. Releasing tax returns does precisely nothing but satisfy your little wet dreams.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

I am a conservative libertarian. And those issues greatly effect my decisions. As do votes on bills.

Since you seem to be arguing for your team...I get why you want to protect the president. He has a lot to hide. Like 8 bankruptcies and relying on his trust fund and bank bailouts to hose people for his bad investments.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

We the people are not running the country.

The bar's a little higher there. The transparency is necessary.

Maxine Waters is going to blow him out of the water once she gets her hands on those documents from Deutsche Bank.
And after that NY Times report about suspected money laundering activity being detected by anti money laundering software installed by the bank to protect itself from such activity after having had problems in the past I imagine she is going to be requesting those reports that were not acted upon by bank management. And I imagine that the bank may be in trouble again if it can be shown that they hid that kind of activity from the US treasury dept.

Elijah Cummings is going to go through his accounting firms records. Which holds so much more information that a mere tax return. Lets see where the bulk of his money really comes from... Hint Russia.

NY State still has him listed as an unnamed co-conspirator in the Michael Cohen case regarding campaign finance. Showing that he is at least willing to break the law.

These are things We The People should know about don't you think?



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 08:45 AM
link   


Maxine Waters




Elijah Cummings





The bar's a little higher there. The transparency is necessary.

the fact that you are now counting on these two to save you from the bad orange man is delicious

you go right a head and cheer for these two
one is a pillar of ethics and has been named one of the most corrupt members of congress
the other was neck deep in protecting the illegal irs actions against non profit groups

you guys are a sick joke



The bar's a little higher there. The transparency is necessary.

only for your political rivals
is that you barak?


edit on 30/5/2019 by shooterbrody because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

I am a conservative libertarian. And those issues greatly effect my decisions. As do votes on bills.

Since you seem to be arguing for your team...I get why you want to protect the president. He has a lot to hide. Like 8 bankruptcies and relying on his trust fund and bank bailouts to hose people for his bad investments.


Bankruptcies? You still think that's an argument? That's embarrassing. Yeah, he sure is hiding it, having written and talked about it numerous times. That just shows how ill-informed you are. Not that I'm surprised by that, of course. Don't call yourself a libertarian either. Libertarians believe in the right to privacy and due process.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

I am a conservative libertarian. And those issues greatly effect my decisions. As do votes on bills.

Since you seem to be arguing for your team...I get why you want to protect the president. He has a lot to hide. Like 8 bankruptcies and relying on his trust fund and bank bailouts to hose people for his bad investments.


Bankruptcies? You still think that's an argument? That's embarrassing. Yeah, he sure is hiding it, having written and talked about it numerous times. That just shows how ill-informed you are. Not that I'm surprised by that, of course. Don't call yourself a libertarian either. Libertarians believe in the right to privacy and due process.


Lol not for elected officials....

And notice how i said it would need to be done.


You can't even keep up.


However since that is not a law you need to pass the law and then the newly elected official in the next elections is basically signing away knowingly that position has a concession for your 4th amend rights. Many job positions already have stuff like this and you willingly sign it away. 

If you don't want the job (after such laws are passed) you don't have to take it
edit on 30-5-2019 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 09:44 AM
link   



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

I am a conservative libertarian. And those issues greatly effect my decisions. As do votes on bills.

Since you seem to be arguing for your team...I get why you want to protect the president. He has a lot to hide. Like 8 bankruptcies and relying on his trust fund and bank bailouts to hose people for his bad investments.


Bankruptcies? You still think that's an argument? That's embarrassing. Yeah, he sure is hiding it, having written and talked about it numerous times. That just shows how ill-informed you are. Not that I'm surprised by that, of course. Don't call yourself a libertarian either. Libertarians believe in the right to privacy and due process.


Lol not for elected officials....

And notice how i said it would need to be done.


You can't even keep up.


However since that is not a law you need to pass the law and then the newly elected official in the next elections is basically signing away knowingly that position has a concession for your 4th amend rights. Many job positions already have stuff like this and you willingly sign it away. 

If you don't want the job (after such laws are passed) you don't have to take it


Someone who still thinks Trump's bankruptcies are a point accusing me of not keeping up
too funny.

Keep embarrassing yourself my fake libertarian friend.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Lol. You seem to believe Trump has told the whole story about his business record. The devil is in the details.

But if you honestly can't read between the lines. His records would disclose more recent shady practices he hasn't written about.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

Lol. You seem to believe Trump has told the whole story about his business record. The devil is in the details.

But if you honestly can't read between the lines. His records would disclose more recent shady practices he hasn't written about.


Yeah that's all wishful thinking on your part. You want something to be there that could damage Trump, and to you that's good enough reason to invade his privacy. Again, you're not a libertarian. Get over the election. It's been 2 and a half years.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Actually posts have been about politicians having financial transparency because of the massive lobby problem.

Do you think Jefferson would be against politicians showing the public they aren't being bought by the lobby industry? Do you think he envisioned 40 year politicians getting fat off bribes?

Dude you are having an arguement like a robot.

I never wanted Hillary clinton to win the election. Since I am not brainwashed I also can be critical of Republicans.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I doubt any of the Founders would be down with demanding the President release his financial records for laymen to comb through because they were mad about the results of the election. Our entire system was set up to protect against that kind of mob rule nonsense. It's time to grow up and get over it.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: luthier

I doubt any of the Founders would be down with demanding the President release his financial records for laymen to comb through because they were mad about the results of the election. Our entire system was set up to protect against that kind of mob rule nonsense. It's time to grow up and get over it.


Again you would be illiterate to say that was my arguement. The only legitimate way to have trump release his records is by his own say or some twisted backdoor they would use on us as well.

You can't in one case say he has rights like the rest of us and then all of a sudden be mad he is treated like the rest of us. I was pissed for instance about the patriot act and bull data collection about 18 years before trump supporters got mad about it. Now I am not surprised at all it happened. It happens to regular people all the time. There just is less money to be made selling the info..but if they could get some d pics from Jeff Bezos they could sell them.

My point was it is not against the 4th to make a law all elected officials have financial transparency. They just have to accept the job under those conditions.

I agree the Democrats really have no foot to stand on. I also feel he is hiding something.

I know. Blew your mind I don't have to have a binary choice.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Like talking to a brick wall. In what way is he being treated like the rest of us? A phony investigation into nothing that produced nothing but is still going on into other areas of his life where there's no basis for it? How is that in line with what the Founders wanted? He's had his ass crawled up for 2 years by Mueller with nothing to show for it. Everyone has skeletons in their closet. That's your big reason? You think he's hiding something? That doesn't justify anything you've proposed, and they're far from libertarian views. You can pretend you're impartial all you want but you don't post like someone who is. I'm on the side of freedom.

You can have the last word. I know that's important to you.

edit on 30 5 19 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Lol. You are for freedom? Like a president who can declare an emergency when Congress doesn't do what he wants? Like selling arms to Saudis which Republicans voted against as well?

No you are for a cult. I guess anytime you get a background check it's against the constitution even if it it your choice?

Get a clue. Try and keep some sort of morality to argue from rather than my guy is better so he can be a king.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yeah. I've heard all the slurs from the man who has a slur for everyone not licking his butt.
I stopped paying attention to them a long time ago. The rantings of a bully child.

These trusted public servants are dedicated to doing a job. I could not care less what you think of them.
They understand the oath they took and they understand who they work for.

In regards to counting on them to deliver, It sure seems like they are getting what they asked for so I wouldn't be slighting their individual abilities to get things done.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

"trusted public servants" embroiled and mired in corruption and cheating 😆



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: face23785

Lol. You are for freedom? Like a president who can declare an emergency when Congress doesn't do what he wants? Like selling arms to Saudis which Republicans voted against as well?

No you are for a cult. I guess anytime you get a background check it's against the constitution even if it it your choice?

Get a clue. Try and keep some sort of morality to argue from rather than my guy is better so he can be a king.






new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join