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.

 

Federal Court orders the President to hand over his tax returns

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: dfnj2015
I don't understand what the big deal is about this issue. Obviously the not so shocking result is going to be Trump pay zero taxes because he leveraged all the strange loop holes in the tax code which exempts all rich people from paying taxes.



Do you not take advantage of every deduction and tax break available to you?
Kinda dumb not too...


Of course. But you are missing the point.


Apparently so....




posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
...and all financial documents to NY Prosecutors.


President Donald Trump is closer to losing control of his tax filings after years of defying a modern presidential norm of disclosing them to the public. A federal judge in New York ruled that Trump can’t stop his accountants, Mazars USA LLP, from turning over his taxes and other financial documents to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., whose office is investigating whether the Trump Organization falsified business records related to hush-money payments.


www.bloomberg.com...

www.breitbart.com...

Well there you go.
No doubt as SC fight will ensue, but it would appear that the current coup is firing from all angles. It's all out political war to reverse the 2016 election.
This tells me that Trump is getting very close to shining a light on Washington corruption


I think if he has nothing to hide then he should just show them.....end of story.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: UKTruth
...and all financial documents to NY Prosecutors.


President Donald Trump is closer to losing control of his tax filings after years of defying a modern presidential norm of disclosing them to the public. A federal judge in New York ruled that Trump can’t stop his accountants, Mazars USA LLP, from turning over his taxes and other financial documents to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., whose office is investigating whether the Trump Organization falsified business records related to hush-money payments.


www.bloomberg.com...

www.breitbart.com...

Well there you go.
No doubt as SC fight will ensue, but it would appear that the current coup is firing from all angles. It's all out political war to reverse the 2016 election.
This tells me that Trump is getting very close to shining a light on Washington corruption


I think if he has nothing to hide then he should just show them.....end of story.
You show me your tax returns (congress) and I'll show you mine. Sounds fair to me



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Gorgonite

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
If he has nothing to hide then why not prove his haters wrong?



Said the same thing about Obama's birth certificate because he wouldn't produce a real BC but the liberals couldn't counter with anything so they called us racists for asking for proof of birth in America. I mean, it's not like a lot of his life was spent in Kenya where his mom met his dad. But yeah, now something that isn't mandatory is being demanded while something mandatory was kept sealed up while those asking were berated for daring to ask for such a thing.




The sad truth of the birther delusion is it doesn't matter what country Obama was born in because his mother was a naturalized US citizen. By law, this makes Obama a nationalized US citizen. The whole birther movement is just veiled racism.

Obama's mother would have to have renounced her citizenship to live in Indonesia at the time .
Stop guessing and learn facts by researching.


Obama's mother was a natural born US citizen. It's the fact. His mother was born in Kansas. She was born in 1947. She moved to Hawaii in 1960. Do the math.

en.wikipedia.org...

"Dunham's research focused on women's work on the island of Java and blacksmithing in Indonesia. To address the problem of poverty in rural villages, she created microcredit programs while working as a consultant for the United States Agency for International Development. Dunham was also employed by the Ford Foundation in Jakarta and she consulted with the Asian Development Bank in Gujranwala, Pakistan. Towards the latter part of her life, she worked with Bank Rakyat Indonesia, where she helped apply her research to the largest microfinance program in the world.[4]"



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
If he has nothing to hide then why not prove his haters wrong?

This will be tied up in the courts for years, long after he is out of Washington.


Sure, why not give up privacy in order to quell random people's curiosity.

?



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook
I think if he has nothing to hide then he should just show them.....end of story.


I really tire of this "logic". I've seen it used on both sides, and I wish it would just go away. It doesn't matter whether or not one has anything to hide, what matters is ones right to privacy.

I don't have anything to hide, hell, I'm poor as hell, but I promise you I'm not going to show you my tax records.

If my landlords come to my place asking to be let in but did not give us proper 24 hour notice, I will refuse to let them in.

Can I come to your place and look around?? Can I see your tax records?? Can I see what's in your bank account, where you make your purchases, all of that jazz?? I mean, if you don't have anything to hide then you shouldn't mind someone looking at all of that.

I will assume the answer is no because you like your privacy, and if that's the case, then take that "nothing to hide" "logic" and stick it somewhere.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:51 AM
link   
What other candidates have submitted 5 years of tax returns. That would be 0 because it's not a requirement. I always wanted to see Obama's college applications and transcripts but understand it's not required.

Nobody has a right to see your tax returns but the IRS. Nobody has a right to see college applications or transcripts but the school and student.

If they want to see his tax records then change the requirement. Nothing is stopping Congress members from submitting legislation. The press should be calling them out not Trump. And writing law from the bench is also wrong. This will go to the SC and be shot down. It's against the law. Don't like the law then change it for everyone, not just Trump.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Gorgonite

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
If he has nothing to hide then why not prove his haters wrong?



Said the same thing about Obama's birth certificate because he wouldn't produce a real BC but the liberals couldn't counter with anything so they called us racists for asking for proof of birth in America. I mean, it's not like a lot of his life was spent in Kenya where his mom met his dad. But yeah, now something that isn't mandatory is being demanded while something mandatory was kept sealed up while those asking were berated for daring to ask for such a thing.




The sad truth of the birther delusion is it doesn't matter what country Obama was born in because his mother was a naturalized US citizen. By law, this makes Obama a nationalized US citizen. The whole birther movement is just veiled racism.

Obama's mother would have to have renounced her citizenship to live in Indonesia at the time .
Stop guessing and learn facts by researching.


Okay, I have to admit it turns out to be a little more complicated that what I have prevously read. However, the law was changed so many times it is impossible to understand which law or how the law is to be applied. The interpretation of whether or not Obama qualifies is certain not straight forward. The law is simply incomplete on this matter. So it really is a matter of subjective judgment. And since Obama got elected and the American people were well aware of the issue it was not as relevant as Republican haters would like.

"In 1940, Congress once again changed the statutory scheme. This time, it
defined a child as being a “citizen of the United States at birth” if at least
one of her parents was a U.S. citizen when the child was born, and the
parent had resided in the United States (or in one of its outlying territories)
for at least ten years, five of which had to come after attaining the age of
sixteen.46 This meant that a child born overseas to a U.S. citizen who had
not yet reached the age of twenty-one would not be considered a U.S.
citizen. Furthermore, the statute declared that if the child did not reside in
the United States by the time she reached the age of sixteen and for the five
years immediately before she reached the age of twenty-one, her American
citizenship would “cease.”47 Congress not only provided requirements for
birthright citizenship here but also a means for it to be taken away.
By 1952, Congress had changed the necessary residency period for a
child born abroad to a U.S. citizen parent once again. The Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952 declared that a child born outside the limits of the
country would only be granted U.S. citizenship if her U.S. citizen parent
was “physically present” in the United States—“residence” was no longer
the term used—for ten years, five of which had to come after that parent
was older than fourteen years of age.48 This provision would later become
salient in the challenges to Barack Obama’s eligibility, some of which
falsely claimed that Obama was born in Kenya; the place of his birth was
important because Obama’s mother, although she was a U.S. citizen, could
not satisfy the statute because she gave birth at age eighteen.49
In 1952, Congress provided that birthright U.S. citizenship could be
taken away from any person who did not come to the United States before
the age of twenty-three and was not “continuously physically present” in
the country for a five-year period sometime between the ages of fourteen
and twenty-eight.50 The requirement of maintaining continuous physical
presence in the country proved to be too onerous for some and in 1957,
Congress relaxed this requirement slightly by allowing an absence for the
child of twelve months, in the aggregate, during the five-year period.51
By 1972, Congress lowered the duration of physical presence required
between the ages of fourteen and twenty-eight to two years, with an
allowable absence of sixty days during this period.52 It also allowed a
child’s birthright citizenship to be retained if the child came to the United
States before the age of eighteen and her alien parent became naturalized
during that time.53 By 1994, however, the law would change once again.
This time it granted citizenship to a child born abroad if either her U.S.
citizen parent or her U.S. citizen grandparent had been physically present in
the United States for at least five years, two of which had to come after the
age of fourteen, prior to the child’s birth abroad.54

The purpose here is not to explain all of the myriad ways in which
Congress has legislated to determine when a child born abroad to American
parents qualifies for U.S. citizenship. Rather, it is to remind us that the
question of whether such children are “natural born citizens” who are
eligible for the presidency is not answered by the Constitution. Nor has it
ever been resolved by the Supreme Court. This is an issue that, instead, has
been left to up to the wisdom of our legislative branch of government.
The Constitution does not say how the children of U.S. citizens born
outside the United States acquire their citizenship.55 Because the Supreme
Court has also not spoken on the matter, the only way they can acquire it,
despite whatever the academic literature says to the contrary,56 is
legislatively. Today, people born outside the United States to at least one
U.S. citizen parent are made citizens at birth by statute.57 But in its

statutory scheme, Congress has not gone far enough. Whether a
presidential candidate born overseas to U.S. citizens is a “natural born
citizen” under the Eligibility Clause is a question that Congress has yet to
answer explicitly. It is a question Congress could easily resolve simply by
defining the term “natural born citizen.” So far, Congress has refused to do
this. As a result, we have had presidential candidates whose eligibility for
office has been challenged, both by their rivals and by ordinary voters."

ir.lawnet.fordham.edu...



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
You guys got him on the ropes this time fer sher



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:00 AM
link   
This decision has no teeth. It's all show.

The President of the United States cannot be prosecuted by a state. Can anyone imagine the uproar if New York decided to put a sitting US President in jail? How would that work? Would officers show up at the White House with guns drawn to arrest him? That would be quick...

    Police: "This is the police! Come out with your hands..."
    Secret Service: Bang! Bang! Bang! Ba-da-da-da-da-da-ba-da-bang! "Headquarters, we need a dozen corpses removed from the main gate."

Assume for the moment that somehow he was able to be apprehended and jailed. Who would sign laws into effect? Who would talk to foreign leaders and negotiate foreign affairs? Would the Cabinet need to meet in the jail lobby to hold highly classified morning briefings?

    Ring! Ring!
    "New York State Penitentiary."
    "Emporer Xi would like to speak with the President. It concerns the uprisings in Hong Kong and we need the assistance of the US Government quickly to avoid another Tiananmen Square incident."
    "You'll have to call back later. He has used up his phone privileges for the week."

Those of you who think Trump is going to jail (or who think Trump should be going to jail) need to stop, smell the coffee, and wake up. You're talking absolute nonsense and making fools of yourselves.

No President can prosecute a sitting Congressman or Federal Judge, because a corrupt President could use that power to affect the votes/decisions of Federal officials for political reasons. No law can be used to target a sitting US President because that could be used by the Congress or the Federal courts to affect his decisions. Instead, we have the impeachment process that can be used to remove a sitting President or Federal judge through a long, drawn out, difficult process and Congressional power to remove a sitting US Congressman through another long, drawn out, difficult process.

That means that, if you consider Trump above the law, you also consider Ruth Bader Ginsberg above the law, AOC above the law, Pelosi above the law, Schumer above the law, Maxine Waters above the law, Adam Schiff above the law... none of them are; they are just under special provisions of the law due to their positions.

This "decision" is a direct violation of the US Constitution and the declared separation of powers. We need to start demanding the removal of those who violate their Oath of Office, either by impeachment on actual charges or by voting the bums out.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

If the actual reason for the tax documents is to discover how the hush payments were handled, then the 8 year request is a stretch and a fishing expedition. Should be a two year request at most, and tax returns really are not going to reveal any hush payments. It's not exactly a line item deduction you can claim, and wasnt exactly an exorbitant amount either.

It's another gasp of fresh air by overzealous prosecutors in NY to find anything. Where have they been the last 30 years plus Donald Trump has lived and done business in NY ? It appears that they have been asleep at the wheel or happy to look the other way, if they feel that illegal activities occurred then why have they waited till now, smells like desperation to me

edit on 10/7/2019 by DJMSN because: corrections



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Necrobile

I work with the federal government. My position requires that I file a yearly financial disclosure form OGC 450, and have to get a background check every 5 years.

I don't have to work with the government, but choose to. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

You can understand why some positions require deeper vetting than others.

I think that should go for the president.

BTW, I don't know if Trump could pass a background check.


edit on 7-10-2019 by HanyManny because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: HanyManny


I think that should go for the president.

Fair enough. Lobby your state representatives or US Congressmen to call for a Constitutional Convention and include full financial disclosure as a requirement for President. I might even join with you in that. Won't affect Donald Trump, of course, but it would still affect everyone that comes after him.


BTW, I don't know if Trump could pass a background check.

His background check was done by We the People of the United States of America. He passed. We elected him. Done.

The FBI does not override We the People of the United States of America.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: HanyManny
a reply to: Necrobile

I work with the federal government. My position requires that I file a yearly financial disclosure form OGC 450, and have to get a background check every 5 years.

I don't have to work with the government, but choose to. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

You can understand why some positions require deeper vetting than others.

I think that should go for the president.

BTW, I don't know if Trump could pass a background check.



He did pass a background check. The Electoral college passed him. Same could be said for Hillary if she had won. Could they pass a BI for GS and SES level employees, probably not but they aren't applying for those jobs. No different than an average person needing college transcripts, references, BC, DL to get hired.

President does not need these things. The requirements are actually very light. Age, US citizen and that's about it. There are people getting elected to offices in the US from actual jail. Crazy but true.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: JON666

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: UKTruth
...and all financial documents to NY Prosecutors.


President Donald Trump is closer to losing control of his tax filings after years of defying a modern presidential norm of disclosing them to the public. A federal judge in New York ruled that Trump can’t stop his accountants, Mazars USA LLP, from turning over his taxes and other financial documents to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., whose office is investigating whether the Trump Organization falsified business records related to hush-money payments.


www.bloomberg.com...

www.breitbart.com...

Well there you go.
No doubt as SC fight will ensue, but it would appear that the current coup is firing from all angles. It's all out political war to reverse the 2016 election.
This tells me that Trump is getting very close to shining a light on Washington corruption


I think if he has nothing to hide then he should just show them.....end of story.
You show me your tax returns (congress) and I'll show you mine. Sounds fair to me


RIGHT. Lets have a internal Quid Pro Quo with Tax Returns.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Fair enough.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyinHeadlock

So you agree that Trump most likely could not get a job as a GS-5 in the federal government?

He is not qualified?

Asking for a friend.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Maxine Waters (head of House Finance Committee) received all the President's bank statements 6 months ago, and went ballistic last week, because she couldn't find any criminal activities.

"This President Needs to Be in Solitary Confinement!", she screamed.



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: DJMSN




If the actual reason for the tax documents is to discover how the hush payments were handled, then the 8 year request is a stretch and a fishing expedition.


Nah. 2 years isn't enough. 8 years will show a pattern, either a legitimate pattern of rising and falling equities and profits or a falsified pattern of manipulated values, to fit the circumstances.


edit on 7-10-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Just reported on Fox, another judge has put a stay in place for now.


More exploding heads to follow.

nice try.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join