My advice; for what it's worth

[Docthehun]

My dear friends on the left. You'll be learning nothing you didn't already kind of know, it'll fuel the fire, which in the end, won't help a damn thing.

But hey! Do what you've got to do.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/house-democrats-ask-treasury-trumps-tax-returns-220817792.html

[MisterVeritis]

The Republicans need to ask the IRS for a decade's worth of tax returns for every democrat and spouse.

[countryboy]

My dear friends on the left. You'll be learning nothing you didn't already kind of know, it'll fuel the fire, which in the end, won't help a damn thing.

But hey! Do what you've got to do.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/house-democrats-ask-treasury-trumps-tax-returns-220817792.html

Soooo, does this mean all elected officials will be producing their tax returns? Or just Trump.


Neal said that the decision to request the returns was in the interest of ensuring "the accountability of our government and elected officials. To maintain trust in our democracy, the American people must be assured that their government is operating properly, as laws intend.”

[Docthehun]

Soooo, does this mean all elected officials will be producing their tax returns? Or just Trump.

Just Trump. Nobody cares about the rest.

[Common]

My dear friends on the left. You'll be learning nothing you didn't already kind of know, it'll fuel the fire, which in the end, won't help a damn thing.

But hey! Do what you've got to do.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/house-democrats-ask-treasury-trumps-tax-returns-220817792.html

They wont take your advice Doc, they are going to continue the collusion illusion and there will be those on the left still clammoring for trumps impeachment. They are going to find endless reason to investigate him and it will go on.

America is watching and now that muellers over they will be paying more attention to other aspects, like the new socialists in the democrat party and the Rhetoric and the incredibly UNDOABLE socialist ideals they have like medicare for all and the green new deal.

But the issue that the democrats are misjudging the most is the illegal immigrant fiasco they have created at the border. They are misjudging americas pulse on that issue and they are believing skewered polls.

[Docthehun]

The Republicans need to ask the IRS for a decade's worth of tax returns for every democrat and spouse.

Betsy called and wanted to know if she could claim damages because she wrote it off. She hopes she's not included in the Dem & spouse requirement. I reminded her she's a Republican. "Whew!" Poor thing!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/betsy-devos-40-million-yacht-vandalized-ohio-n894836

[Dr. Who]

Soooo, does this mean all elected officials will be producing their tax returns? Or just Trump.
It should be all. It's about time that the rat's nest of corrupt representatives is rooted out.

[Lummy]

It should be all. It's about time that the rat's nest of corrupt representatives is rooted out.

I think that's fair. It would be a simple matter of posting them all online. If Trump, then everyone in Congress.

If not everyone in Congress, then not Trump.

[Dr. Who]

I think that's fair. It would be a simple matter of posting them all online. If Trump, then everyone in Congress.

If not everyone in Congress, then not Trump.
That's fair. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.

[Sergeant Gleed]

Tax returns are a private thing.

I KNOW!!!

if we switched to a national retail sales tax, their would be no need for individuals to be raped by the tax man.

[Lummy]

Might get rid of half the democrats in congress in one swoop.

[fishy104]

Well let the Mueller report be released as subpoeaned by the House in its entirety and for 45's tax returns as requested to be released in particular. Then that should be the substance for thought at knowing what needs to be known for the entire public to be aware of. This is considering it is the working and middle class taxpayer that paid over $30 million for the Mueller investigation and as taxpayers hold the burden at accommodating this criminal 45 family and associates on its taxpayer dime. Its time to start serving the best interests of society instead of the unAmerican interests of a criminal and lawless 45 administration that remains in violation of U.S. Constitutional law and the decency of humanity.

[countryboy]

Just Trump. Nobody cares about the rest.

That's what I thought. Hypocrites, and liars.

[countryboy]

It should be all. It's about time that the rat's nest of corrupt representatives is rooted out.
Thanks Doc, I couldn't agree more. All, or none.

[Dr. Who]

Might get rid of half the democrats in congress in one swoop.
Let the chips fall where they may. I don't see either party as innocent.

[Peter1469]

Well let the Mueller report be released as subpoeaned by the House in its entirety and for 45's tax returns as requested to be released in particular. Then that should be the substance for thought at knowing what needs to be known for the entire public to be aware of. This is considering it is the working and middle class taxpayer that paid over $30 million for the Mueller investigation and as taxpayers hold the burden at accommodating this criminal 45 family and associates on its taxpayer dime. Its time to start serving the best interests of society instead of the unAmerican interests of a criminal and lawless 45 administration that remains in violation of U.S. Constitutional law and the decency of humanity.
It can't be released in its entirety. Several laws would have to be broken to do so.

[Trish]

I’ll be upset when a birth certificate is demanded. Otherwise I simply look at this as a request to have information that should have been released to the public years ago. I find it rather humorous that some are offended by transparency but only when it involves their team.

I’m also not opposed to have all persons in elected positions to release their taxes. I think that type of transparency may weed out the career crooks and those who are working for businesses and not their constituency.

[DGUtley]

I’ll be upset when a birth certificate is demanded. Otherwise I simply look at this as a request to have information that should have been released to the public years ago. I find it rather humorous that some are offended by transparency but only when it involves their team. I’m also not opposed to have all persons in elected positions to release their taxes. I think that type of transparency may weed out the career crooks and those who are working for businesses and not their constituency.

If there was a law requiring the release of taxes, I'd be all for the release of them -- there isn't. This information should not have been released as it is not required to be released. It is not a transparency issue, it's a confidentiality issue -- protected by federal law. By the way, this attempt by the committees to get his taxes should not result in the release of same as the statutes place strict limits on who may view them and under what circumstances. This is all politics. My personal view is that he won't release them b/c they want them -- pure and simple. It gnaws at them and he knows it. It distracts them and he knows that. Someone will go to jail if they become public as it is still illegal to release them to the public. When they get them and it's another nothingburger, he'll get another win.

[Common]

It should be all. It's about time that the rat's nest of corrupt representatives is rooted out.

Shouild have clammored for Obamas and company

[alexa]

Shouild have clammored for Obamas and company

Since Obama, unlike the current occupant of the White House, isn't a criminal fraud, no one had to *clamor*

Ready, fire, aim. lol



PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama released his 2007 tax returns on Wednesday, showing he and his wife earned $4.2 million, mostly from book sales.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-obama-taxes/obamas-earned-4-2-mln-in-2007-tax-return-idUSN1638096220080417


President Obama and his wife Michelle Obama released their 2008 federal and state income tax returns on Wednesday.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/documents/president-obamas-2008-income-tax-returns


On April 15, 2010, the White House released copies of the 2009 tax returns filed by President Obama and his wife, Michelle, as well as those filed by Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., and his wife, Jill.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/documents/2009-tax-returns-of-president-obama-and-vice-president-biden



Today, the President released his 2010 federal income and gift tax returns. He and the First Lady filed their income tax return jointly and reported an adjusted gross income of $1,728,096. The vast majority of the family’s income is the proceeds from the sale of the President’s books. The Obamas paid $453,770 in total federal tax.
The President and First Lady also reported donating $245,075 – or about 14.2% of their adjusted gross income – to 36 different charities. The largest reported gift to charity was a $131,075 contribution to the Fisher House Foundation. The President is donating the after-tax proceeds from his children’s book to a Fisher House scholarship fund for children of fallen and disabled soldiers. The President and First Lady also released their Illinois income tax return and reported paying $51,568 in state income taxes.
Download the Obamas’ tax returns (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/POTUS_taxes.pdf) (pdf).

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/04/18/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-tax-returns-and-tax-receipts


oday, the President released his 2011 federal income and gift tax returns. He and the First Lady filed their income tax returns jointly and reported adjusted gross income of $789,674. About half of the first family’s income is the President’s salary; the other half is from sales proceeds of the President’s books. The Obamas paid $162,074 in total tax. The President and First Lady also reported donating $172,130 – or about 22% of their adjusted gross income – to 39 different charities. The largest reported gift to charity was a $117,130 contribution to the Fisher House Foundation. The President is donating the after-tax proceeds from his children’s book to Fisher House, a scholarship fund for children of fallen and disabled soldiers.
The President’s effective federal income tax rate is 20.5%. The President believes we must reform our tax system which is why he has proposed policies like the Buffett Rule that would ask the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share while protecting families making under $250,000 from seeing their taxes go up. Under the President’s own tax proposals, including the expiration of the high-income tax cuts and limitations on the value of tax preferences for high-income households, he would pay more in taxes while ensuring we cut taxes for the middle class and those trying to get in it.
The President and First Lady also released their Illinois income tax return and reported paying $31,941 in state income tax.
Download the Obamas’ tax returns (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/president_obama_complete_return_2011.pdf)

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2012/04/13/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2011-tax-returns




Today, the President released his 2012 federal income tax returns. He and the First Lady filed their income tax returns jointly and reported adjusted gross income of $608,611. The Obamas paid $112,214 in total tax.
The President and First Lady also reported donating $150,034 – or about 24.6 percent of their adjusted gross income – to 33 different charities. The largest reported gift to charity was $103,871 to the Fisher House Foundation.
The President’s effective federal income tax rate is 18.4 percent. The President believes we must reform our tax system which is why he has proposed policies like the Buffett Rule that would ask the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share while protecting families making under $250,000 from seeing their taxes go up. Under the President’s own tax proposals, including limitations on the value of tax preferences for high-income households, he would pay more in taxes while ensuring we cut taxes for the middle class and those trying to get in it.
The President and First Lady also released their Illinois income tax return and reported paying $29,450 in state income tax.
DOWNLOAD THE OBAMAS’ TAX RETURNS (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/complete_return_president_obama_2012.pdf)




Today, the President released his 2013 federal income tax returns. He and the First Lady filed their income tax returns jointly and reported adjusted gross income of $481,098. The Obamas paid $98,169 in total tax.
The President and First Lady also reported donating $59,251 – or about 12.3 percent of their adjusted gross income – to 32 different charities. The largest reported gift to charity was $8,751 to the Fisher House Foundation. The President’s effective federal income tax rate is 20.4 percent. The President pushed for and signed into law legislation that makes the system more fair and helps the middle class by extending tax cuts (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/taxes/) to middle class and working families and asks the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share. In 2013, as a result of his policies, the President was subject to limitations in tax preferences, as well as additional Medicare and investment income taxes, for high income earners. The President and First Lady also released their Illinois income tax return and reported paying $23,328 in state income tax.
DOWNLOAD THE OBAMAS' TAX RETURNS (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/image/2013_potus_tax_returns.pdf)

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/04/11/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2013-tax-returns




Today, the President released his 2014 federal income tax returns. He and the First Lady filed their income tax returns jointly and reported adjusted gross income of $477,383. The Obamas paid $93,362 in total tax.
The President and First Lady also reported donating $70,712 – or about 14.8 percent of their adjusted gross income – to 33 different charities. The largest reported gift to charity was $22,012 to the Fisher House Foundation. The President’s effective federal income tax rate is 19.6 percent.
In January 2013, the President signed into law legislation that extended tax cuts to middle-class and working families and helped improve the country’s fiscal health by asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share. In 2014, as a result of his policies, the President was subject to limitations in tax preferences for high-income earners, as well as additional Medicare and investment income taxes.
While we’ve made progress in ensuring that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share by raising their tax rate to the level it was under President Clinton, there is more work to do. We need to close special tax loopholes for millionaires and billionaires, and invest in the middle class. The tax policies proposed in the President’s Budget would make paychecks go further in covering the cost of child care, college, and a secure retirement, and would create and expand tax credits that support and reward work.
The President and First Lady also released their Illinois income tax return and reported paying $22,640 in state income tax.
Download the Obamas' tax returns here. (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/20150410093348711.pdf)

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/04/10/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2014-tax-returns




Today, the President released his 2015 federal income tax returns. The President and the First Lady filed their income tax returns jointly and reported adjusted gross income of $436,065. The Obamas paid $81,472 in total tax. The President’s effective federal income tax rate is 18.7 percent.
The President and First Lady also reported donating $64,066 – or about 14.7 percent of their adjusted gross income – to 34 different charities. The largest reported gift to charity was $9,066 to the Fisher House Foundation.
The President signed into law legislation that extended tax cuts to middle class and working families while helping improve the country’s fiscal health by requiring a greater contribution from the wealthiest Americans. In 2015, as a result of his policies, the President was subject to limitations in tax preferences for high income earners.
While we’ve made progress toward ensuring that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share, there is more work to do. We need to close special tax loopholes for millionaires and billionaires, and invest in the middle class. The tax policies proposed in the President’s Budget would make paychecks go further in covering the cost of child care, college, and a secure retirement, and would strengthen tax credits that support and reward work.
The President and First Lady also released their Illinois income tax return and reported paying $16,017 in state income tax.
Download the Obamas' tax returns here. (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/Blog/Obamas%202015%20Taxes.pdf)

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/04/15/president-obama-and-vice-president-bidens-2015-tax-returns

[Don29palms]

Since Obama, unlike the current occupant of the White House, isn't a criminal fraud, no one had to *clamor*

Ready, fire, aim. lol



https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-obama-taxes/obamas-earned-4-2-mln-in-2007-tax-return-idUSN1638096220080417



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/documents/president-obamas-2008-income-tax-returns



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/documents/2009-tax-returns-of-president-obama-and-vice-president-biden



https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/04/18/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-tax-returns-and-tax-receipts



https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2012/04/13/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2011-tax-returns





https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/04/11/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2013-tax-returns



https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/04/10/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2014-tax-returns



https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/04/15/president-obama-and-vice-president-bidens-2015-tax-returns

Since you're a liar why should anyone believe anything you post?

[alexa]

Since you're a liar why should anyone believe anything you post?

Tissue?

[Peter1469]

If there was a law requiring the release of taxes, I'd be all for the release of them -- there isn't. This information should not have been released as it is not required to be released. It is not a transparency issue, it's a confidentiality issue -- protected by federal law. By the way, this attempt by the committees to get his taxes should not result in the release of same as the statutes place strict limits on who may view them and under what circumstances. This is all politics. My personal view is that he won't release them b/c they want them -- pure and simple. It gnaws at them and he knows it. It distracts them and he knows that. Someone will go to jail if they become public as it is still illegal to release them to the public. When they get them and it's another nothingburger, he'll get another win.
They have to complete financial disclosure statements every year as it is. They are public documents.

[Trish]

They have to complete financial disclosure statements every year as it is. They are public documents.
Yes, and this President and his family are upstanding and honest citizens.

Puh...lease (Trish rolls her eyes) looks like the pussy grabbers are actually just pussies. hahahahahahaha

[Trish]

If there was a law requiring the release of taxes, I'd be all for the release of them -- there isn't. This information should not have been released as it is not required to be released. It is not a transparency issue, it's a confidentiality issue -- protected by federal law. By the way, this attempt by the committees to get his taxes should not result in the release of same as the statutes place strict limits on who may view them and under what circumstances. This is all politics. My personal view is that he won't release them b/c they want them -- pure and simple. It gnaws at them and he knows it. It distracts them and he knows that. Someone will go to jail if they become public as it is still illegal to release them to the public. When they get them and it's another nothingburger, he'll get another win.

Actually counselor, it's the law to ensure that the IRS is doing their job. We know how this Administration has tried to obstruct, bully and manipulate Agencies and Civil Servants into hiding the truth. Did you read the letter sent by the Chairman? This is your realm, the letter is airtight and pursuant to the law.

Trish - BIG GRIN

[Peter1469]

Yes, and this President and his family are upstanding and honest citizens.

Puh...lease (Trish rolls her eyes) looks like the pussy grabbers are actually just pussies. hahahahahahaha
I was waiting for a response to what you quoted.

[Trish]

I was waiting for a response to what you quoted.

Don't make me think too much this morning Peter. I'm working off minimal sleep and a different time zone.

I went back and looked at what I posted and I have to admit I'm a little confused. Can you help a girl out and clarify what you are referencing. Sorry - I'm not trying to be difficult..........yet.

[Don29palms]

Actually counselor, it's the law to ensure that the IRS is doing their job. We know how this Administration has tried to obstruct, bully and manipulate Agencies and Civil Servants into hiding the truth. Did you read the letter sent by the Chairman? This is your realm, the letter is airtight and pursuant to the law.

Trish - BIG GRIN

Wrong again as usual.

[Trish]

Wrong again as usual.

You are clearly divorced or have never been married. Everyone knows that women are always right........

[Peter1469]

Don't make me think too much this morning Peter. I'm working off minimal sleep and a different time zone.

I went back and looked at what I posted and I have to admit I'm a little confused. Can you help a girl out and clarify what you are referencing. Sorry - I'm not trying to be difficult..........yet.
Travelling? Hopefully for pleasure and not work.

I was stating that these public officials have to file financial disclosure statements in response to the proposition that they release their tax returns. Anyone can read the financial disclosures of senior government officials.

[Trish]

Travelling? Hopefully for pleasure and not work.

I was stating that these public officials have to file financial disclosure statements in response to the proposition that they release their tax returns. Anyone can read the financial disclosures of senior government officials.

There are confidential financial disclosures also and those are not open to the public so you cannot make a blanket statement that this information is already available.

Traveling for work but it's one of my favorite locations so it's not too much of a hardship.

[Peter1469]

There are confidential financial disclosures also and those are not open to the public so you cannot make a blanket statement that this information is already available.

Traveling for work but it's one of my favorite locations so it's not too much of a hardship.
Financial disclosure statements for senior officials (the people at issue) are publicly available. The financial statements for non-senior officials are confidential.

Cool about your travelling.

[stjames1_53]

I think that's fair. It would be a simple matter of posting them all online. If Trump, then everyone in Congress.

If not everyone in Congress, then not Trump.
we also need to see tax returns for all staffers, IT contractors, and anyone who does business with the government.
I'd really like to see Awan's tax returns from when he was working as a IT consultant for Wasserman-Schultz. My guess is that he was working for a lot of Democrat representatives.

[MisterVeritis]

That's fair. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.
Tyrants everywhere claim the same thing.

[stjames1_53]

That's fair. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.
ahhhhhhhhhhhh, the soft words of tyranny
Of course, you're going to show us your tax returns as soon as you read this, right?

[Peter1469]

Expect the IRS to deny to hand over Trumps tax records. It will be interesting to see what the courts say.

[MisterVeritis]

Expect the IRS to deny to hand over Trumps tax records. It will be interesting to see what the courts say.
It is illegal. Congress has no authority to ask for an individual's tax returns.

[DGUtley]

Actually counselor, it's the law to ensure that the IRS is doing their job. We know how this Administration has tried to obstruct, bully and manipulate Agencies and Civil Servants into hiding the truth. Did you read the letter sent by the Chairman? This is your realm, the letter is airtight and pursuant to the law. Trish - BIG GRIN

This is pretextual. Let's just all agree on that. Regardless of whether it is or isn't, the returns statutorily will still be confidential.

[DGUtley]

That's fair. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.

That's just not true. I have nothing to hide but would not release my tax returns.

[Trish]

This is pretextual. Let's just all agree on that. Regardless of whether it is or isn't, the returns statutorily will still be confidential.

meh

As my father always asked me when I would complain about something “but is it true”

[Peter1469]

It is illegal. Congress has no authority to ask for an individual's tax returns.
That is why the IRS won't release them.

[Captdon]

It should be all. It's about time that the rat's nest of corrupt representatives is rooted out.

Why should it be anyone? The IRS does great job of collecting the proper taxes. They go after everyone like a dog digging up an old bone. The Democrats wouldn't be able to find anything the IRS couldn't find anymore than they can find "collusion" when Mueller couldn't.

[Captdon]

Well let the Mueller report be released as subpoeaned by the House in its entirety and for 45's tax returns as requested to be released in particular. Then that should be the substance for thought at knowing what needs to be known for the entire public to be aware of. This is considering it is the working and middle class taxpayer that paid over $30 million for the Mueller investigation and as taxpayers hold the burden at accommodating this criminal 45 family and associates on its taxpayer dime. Its time to start serving the best interests of society instead of the unAmerican interests of a criminal and lawless 45 administration that remains in violation of U.S. Constitutional law and the decency of humanity.

Name the crime and what law was broken. You say this and offer nothing to back it up. Trump is audited every year by the IRS. They don't miss anything. This just a Democratic scam to fool the likes of you. The Democrats know you are gullible enough to think they can find something Mueller couldn't find.

[Captdon]

I’ll be upset when a birth certificate is demanded. Otherwise I simply look at this as a request to have information that should have been released to the public years ago. I find it rather humorous that some are offended by transparency but only when it involves their team.

I’m also not opposed to have all persons in elected positions to release their taxes. I think that type of transparency may weed out the career crooks and those who are working for businesses and not their constituency.

Then change the law. Trump has the same right to privacy about his returns as anyone else.

[Peter1469]

Why should it be anyone? The IRS does great job of collecting the proper taxes. They go after everyone like a dog digging up an old bone. The Democrats wouldn't be able to find anything the IRS couldn't find anymore than they can find "collusion" when Mueller couldn't.
The IRS already knows everything needed for individual income taxes. They should have their computers do them for us and give us a chance to agree or disagree.

[Captdon]

Yes, and this President and his family are upstanding and honest citizens.

Puh...lease (Trish rolls her eyes) looks like the $#@! grabbers are actually just $#@!. hahahahahahaha

*sigh*

[Captdon]

Actually counselor, it's the law to ensure that the IRS is doing their job. We know how this Administration has tried to obstruct, bully and manipulate Agencies and Civil Servants into hiding the truth. Did you read the letter sent by the Chairman? This is your realm, the letter is airtight and pursuant to the law.


Trish - BIG GRIN

Wipe the grin off. What Agencies and civil servants have been bullied and manipulated. What truth was hidden? Every person Mueller asked to talk to did. Every document Mueller asked for he was given. He issued no subpoenas to get anything from the Trump Administration, unlike the last Administration that refused to talk to Congress.

[Captdon]

You are clearly divorced or have never been married. Everyone knows that women are always right........

My wife tells me that too.

[Captdon]

There are confidential financial disclosures also and those are not open to the public so you cannot make a blanket statement that this information is already available.

Traveling for work but it's one of my favorite locations so it's not too much of a hardship.

https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/disclosure

Members of Congress, candidates for federal office, senior congressional staff, nominees for executive branch positions, Cabinet members, the president and vice president and Supreme Court justices are required by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to file annual reports disclosing their personal finances. Compliance and enforcement of this requirement is overseen by the congressional ethics committees, the ethics offices of government agencies and, in the case of executive branch officials, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

Congress has access to these. The public doesn't need them.

[Captdon]

It is illegal. Congress has no authority to ask for an individual's tax returns.

I don't see where the Constitution allows Congress to investigate anything.

[Peter1469]

https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/disclosure

Members of Congress, candidates for federal office, senior congressional staff, nominees for executive branch positions, Cabinet members, the president and vice president and Supreme Court justices are required by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to file annual reports disclosing their personal finances. Compliance and enforcement of this requirement is overseen by the congressional ethics committees, the ethics offices of government agencies and, in the case of executive branch officials, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

Congress has access to these. The public doesn't need them.
Anyone can search them (http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial-search.aspx).

[Sergeant Gleed]

https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/disclosure

Members of Congress, candidates for federal office, senior congressional staff, nominees for executive branch positions, Cabinet members, the president and vice president and Supreme Court justices are required by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to file annual reports disclosing their personal finances. Compliance and enforcement of this requirement is overseen by the congressional ethics committees, the ethics offices of government agencies and, in the case of executive branch officials, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

Congress has access to these. The public doesn't need them.

Oh, I disagree with that last. I would like to know how someone on a Congressman's salary, maintaining a residence in on of the most expensive cities in the country AND a residence in his home district, can be more a millionaire, many times over.

Their financial history should be a matter of public record.

[Sergeant Gleed]

Anyone can search them (http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial-search.aspx).

Oh. Ikay.

[Peter1469]

Oh. Ikay.
That link is good for the House. The Senate has its own. Federal agencies too.

[MisterVeritis]

I don't see where the Constitution allows Congress to investigate anything.
Clearly, Congress lacks Constitutional authority to criminally investigate anyone. Given budget authority, the ability to investigate how the executive and judicial agencies they fund use the money is implied. It is reasonable.

I don't know how it works if the House brings impeachment charges.

[ripmeister]

It is illegal. Congress has no authority to ask for an individual's tax returns.
Not sure but it's my understanding that the chair of ways and means does have that authority

[MisterVeritis]

Oh, I disagree with that last. I would like to know how someone on a Congressman's salary, maintaining a residence in on of the most expensive cities in the country AND a residence in his home district, can be more a millionaire, many times over.

Their financial history should be a matter of public record.
Term limits will slow the rate of corruption.

[MisterVeritis]

Not sure but it's my understanding that the chair of ways and means does have that authority
I doubt it.

[ripmeister]

My wife tells me that too.

I see you are a wise scarred veteran too. LOL

[ripmeister]

I don't see where the Constitution allows Congress to investigate anything.
Oversight? Checks of checks and balances?

[alexa]

Not sure but it's my understanding that the chair of ways and means does have that authority
As well as the Senate Finance Committee chair and the Chair of the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The law is pretty clear on this. Also, I don't see how any claim of executive privilege can be made on returns filed prior to his election.


(1) Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Finance, and Joint Committee on Taxation Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)shall furnish such committee with any return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)specified in such request, except that any return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure. (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103
They can't release them to the public, however.

[MisterVeritis]

Oversight? Checks of checks and balances?
Do you have a link from the Constitution?

[ripmeister]

Do you have a link from the Constitution?

No. I'm sure you do though.

[MisterVeritis]

As well as the Senate Finance Committee chair and the Chair of the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The law is pretty clear on this. Also, I don't see how any claim of executive privilege can be made on returns filed prior to his election.




https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103
They can't release them to the public, however.
No problem. The President, in return should ask for the tax returns of every Democrat member of the House and Senate.

(g)Disclosure to President and certain other persons(1)In general Upon written request by the President, signed by him personally, the Secretary (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) shall furnish to the President, or to such employee (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)or employees (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)of the White House Office as the President may designate by name in such request, a return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)with respect to any taxpayer (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)named in such request. Any such request shall state— (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)(A)the name and address of the taxpayer (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) whose return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)is to be disclosed,

(B)the kind of return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) which is to be disclosed,

(C)the taxable period (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or periods covered by such return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103), and

(D)the specific reason why the inspection (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or disclosure (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) is requested.

[MisterVeritis]

No. I'm sure you do though.
I am not the one making the claim.

[alexa]

No problem. The President, in return should ask for the tax returns of every Democrat member of the House and Senate.

(g)Disclosure to President and certain other persons(1)In general Upon written request by the President, signed by him personally, the Secretary (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) shall furnish to the President, or to such employee (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)or employees (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)of the White House Office as the President may designate by name in such request, a return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)with respect to any taxpayer (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)named in such request. Any such request shall state— (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)(A)the name and address of the taxpayer (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) whose return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103)is to be disclosed,

(B)the kind of return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) which is to be disclosed,

(C)the taxable period (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or periods covered by such return (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or return information (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103), and

(D)the specific reason why the inspection (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) or disclosure (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103) is requested.


Fine with me.

(D) should be particularly amusing, given the orange one's allergy to the truth.

Go for it.

[MisterVeritis]

Fine with me.

(D) should be particularly amusing, given the orange one's allergy to the truth.

Go for it.
Goose: Gander.

[alexa]

Goose: Gander.
I know you're lying.

[Tahuyaman]

There is no requirement for a president to make his tax records public.

[Cotton1]

The Republicans need to ask the IRS for a decade's worth of tax returns for every democrat and spouse.

Surely you jest. Dems pay taxes?

[Tahuyaman]

That's fair. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.
That’s not true. If you have nothing to hide, is it ok to have all your phone conversations and emails monitored by government?

[MisterVeritis]

I know you're lying.
It is possible for me to lie but it is not my practice. I leave that to people on your team.

[Dr. Who]

ahhhhhhhhhhhh, the soft words of tyranny
Of course, you're going to show us your tax returns as soon as you read this, right?
Why would I? Am I an elected representative or do I have anything whatsoever to do with government? No. So my tax returns are not only none of your business, sharing them would violate my anonymity on this forum.

Are you afraid that some of your favorite politicians wouldn't survive in office if they shared their tax returns?

[Dr. Who]

That’s not true. If you have nothing to hide, is it ok to have all your phone conversations and emails monitored by government?
When did we go from sharing tax returns to monitoring all communications?

[Dr. Who]

That's just not true. I have nothing to hide but would not release my tax returns.
Why would you need to? Are you planning to run for Congress or President?

[Dr. Who]

Why should it be anyone? The IRS does great job of collecting the proper taxes. They go after everyone like a dog digging up an old bone. The Democrats wouldn't be able to find anything the IRS couldn't find anymore than they can find "collusion" when Mueller couldn't.
Well, if some people are playing shell games with income such that they are paying little to no taxes and then voting to decrease taxes on their fellow shell gamers or voting against closing loopholes in the tax code, it would be seen as very self-serving. Alternatively, if they are voting for increases in taxes on people who have no loopholes to take advantage of, it would be met with cries of hypocrisy. Having to reveal tax returns might keep a good many people with closets full of financial skeletons from seeking public office.

[stjames1_53]

Why would I? Am I an elected representative or do I have anything whatsoever to do with government? No. So my tax returns are not only none of your business, sharing them would violate my anonymity on this forum.

Are you afraid that some of your favorite politicians wouldn't survive in office if they shared their tax returns?
why are tax returns relevant for others and not you? You're right, it is all about privacy. Mine yours, whomever..........we don't' have that right.
But aside of all of that, what do you have to hide?

[stjames1_53]

Well, if some people are playing shell games with income such that they are paying little to no taxes and then voting to decrease taxes on their fellow shell gamers or voting against closing loopholes in the tax code, it would be seen as very self-serving. Alternatively, if they are voting for increases in taxes on people who have no loopholes to take advantage of, it would be met with cries of hypocrisy. Having to reveal tax returns might keep a good many people with closets full of financial skeletons from seeking public office.

you are directing your comments towards Trump. WE all know it.
Do you actually believe that Trump doesn't get audited at least twice a year? He probably has been assigned a team from the IRS audit and criminal investigations just looking for any shady dealings. And you can damned sure bet Obama ordered an investigation into Trump's tax records when he announced his run. You can also bet they also doubled their efforts when he won.

[Dr. Who]

why are tax returns relevant for others and not you? You're right, it is all about privacy. Mine yours, whomever..........we don't' have that right.
But aside of all of that, what do you have to hide?
Nothing but my identity.

[Dr. Who]

you are directing your comments towards Trump. WE all know it.
Do you actually believe that Trump doesn't get audited at least twice a year? He probably has been assigned a team from the IRS audit and criminal investigations just looking for any shady dealings. And you can damned sure bet Obama ordered an investigation into Trump's tax records when he announced his run. You can also bet they also doubled their efforts when he won.
I wasn't just referring to Trump. He's not the only politician with extensive financial interests.

[Tahuyaman]

When did we go from sharing tax returns to monitoring all communications?
Well, if you have nothing to hide......? Right?

[Dr. Who]

Well, if you have nothing to hide......? Right?

No one suggested anything of the kind. Don't shift the goal posts.

[Tahuyaman]

No one suggested anything of the kind. Don't shift the goal posts.
Hold it. There's no shifting of the goal posts here. You said that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. Doesn't that apply to everything? If You have nothing to hide, you shouldn't care if all of your communications are monitored as well as your tax records, right? What's the difference if you have nothing to hide?


If one has nothing to hide, everything about your life should be available to any government agency and open to the public, right?

[Cotton1]

That's fair. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.

That's a cliche' typically tossed about by those that find your life more interesting than their own or have never had anything to lose .
Apparently its a bluff that works on occasion as the phrase survived time. I know this is in regards to taxes but our society has lost respect for the privacy of others. I have never , don't and would never consider things such as talking to.census takers etc. In 2010 it turned into quite a scene when a census taker tried to convince me I was " obligated by law" to answer. My main thought was " this is a gated community. It has a gate to keep undesirables away. Who is responsible for letting this illbred. Rude, nosy idiot in"?. Then he repeated the " your obligation etc" crap. I finally lost my temper and said " my only "obligation" to you is not to beat you unconcious for breathing. " . I still feel anger for that idiot.

[stjames1_53]

No one suggested anything of the kind. Don't shift the goal posts.

he just said what you did???? YOU DID say it!!!!!!!!

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/107887-My-advice-for-what-it-s-worth #9

That was you that said it.

[Tahuyaman]

he just said what you did???? YOU DID say it!!!!!!!!

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/107887-My-advice-for-what-it-s-worth #9

That was you that said it.
She said it, but she cherry picks who it applies to.

[AZ Jim]

Hold it. There's no shifting of the goal posts here. You said that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. Doesn't that apply to everything? If You have nothing to hide, you shouldn't care if all of your communications are monitored as well as your tax records, right? What's the difference if you have nothing to hide?


If one has nothing to hide, everything about your life should be available to any government agency and open to the public, right?In your mind that is a logical conclusion?

[Abby08]

In your mind that is a logical conclusion?

In your mind, it isn't?

[Tahuyaman]

Hold it. There's no shifting of the goal posts here. You said that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. Doesn't that apply to everything? If You have nothing to hide, you shouldn't care if all of your communications are monitored as well as your tax records, right? What's the difference if you have nothing to hide?


If one has nothing to hide, everything about your life should be available to any government agency and open to the public, right?


In your mind that is a logical conclusion?
It is. Tell me why it isn't?

[Don29palms]

Tell me why it isn't?

It can't. It doesn't think for itself.

[Tahuyaman]

It can't. It doesn't think for itself.

He doesn't have the ability to provide a substantive response to any comnent or question.

[Dr. Who]

That’s not true. If you have nothing to hide, is it ok to have all your phone conversations and emails monitored by government?


Hold it. There's no shifting of the goal posts here. You said that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. Doesn't that apply to everything? If You have nothing to hide, you shouldn't care if all of your communications are monitored as well as your tax records, right? What's the difference if you have nothing to hide?


If one has nothing to hide, everything about your life should be available to any government agency and open to the public, right?


he just said what you did???? YOU DID say it!!!!!!!!

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/107887-My-advice-for-what-it-s-worth #9

That was you that said it.


She said it, but she cherry picks who it applies to.

It's pretty clear who shifted the goalposts and it wasn't me. That last statement: "She said it, but she cherry picks who it applies to." - is pure prevarication. Disappointing.

[Tahuyaman]

It's pretty clear who shifted the goalposts and it wasn't me. That last statement: "She said it, but she cherry picks who it applies to." - is pure prevarication. Disappointing.
There was no shifting the goal posts. If one has nothing to hide, what personal information is off limits to the public?

You seem reluctant to address that.

[Mini Me]

Tax returns are a private thing.

I KNOW!!!

if we switched to a national retail sales tax, their would be no need for individuals to be raped by the tax man.
It would be better to have a tax on HEDGE FUNDS! Which produce nothing of value. They gamble with TRILLIONS of $$, then crash the economy when bets go bad!
Just a 1 or 2 % tax would bring in a ton of revenue, and the average person would not be affected!

[Captdon]

Anyone can search them (http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial-search.aspx).

Yea, I went there. You can't get any Executive office holder.

[Captdon]

Oh, I disagree with that last. I would like to know how someone on a Congressman's salary, maintaining a residence in on of the most expensive cities in the country AND a residence in his home district, can be more a millionaire, many times over.

Their financial history should be a matter of public record.

That's fine. I don't think it's my business.

[Captdon]

Clearly, Congress lacks Constitutional authority to criminally investigate anyone. Given budget authority, the ability to investigate how the executive and judicial agencies they fund use the money is implied. It is reasonable.

I don't know how it works if the House brings impeachment charges.

Okay, with the money part. How do they get the right to investigate Benghazi or Trump? Implied is a funny word for you to use.

[Dr. Who]

There was no shifting the goal posts. If one has nothing to hide, what personal information is off limits to the public?

You seem reluctant to address that.

The topic was tax returns. The reason for such transparency is to avoid inviting the foxes into the henhouse. I think that should be obvious.

[Captdon]

I doubt it.

The law from the Teapot Scandal gives then the power but it has never been in the courts. I doubt that SCOTUS would make the President an exception of the privacy of his returns.

[Captdon]

Oversight? Checks of checks and balances?

No, I don't see that in the Constitution. Mr V gave a good point about budget money.

[Captdon]

As well as the Senate Finance Committee chair and the Chair of the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The law is pretty clear on this. Also, I don't see how any claim of executive privilege can be made on returns filed prior to his election.




https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103
They can't release them to the public, however.

It isn't about Executive Privilege. It would be about his right to the same privacy as you have. Congress is not a court. A court will also have to consider that the returns will be leaked immediately.

By the time SCOTUS rules on this, the Republicans will have the House back and that will be the end of the matter.

[Captdon]

Why would I? Am I an elected representative or do I have anything whatsoever to do with government? No. So my tax returns are not only none of your business, sharing them would violate my anonymity on this forum.

Are you afraid that some of your favorite politicians wouldn't survive in office if they shared their tax returns?

You have no right to see anyone's return. Being elected to office doesn't mean you give up your rights.

[Captdon]

Well, if some people are playing shell games with income such that they are paying little to no taxes and then voting to decrease taxes on their fellow shell gamers or voting against closing loopholes in the tax code, it would be seen as very self-serving. Alternatively, if they are voting for increases in taxes on people who have no loopholes to take advantage of, it would be met with cries of hypocrisy. Having to reveal tax returns might keep a good many people with closets full of financial skeletons from seeking public office.

We could use sodium thiopental too. No one loses their right by holding an office.

[Captdon]

Nothing but my identity.

Redact it.

[Captdon]

In your mind that is a logical conclusion?

No, liberals only want to screw with others. You're a goof.

[Captdon]

The topic was tax returns. The reason for such transparency is to avoid inviting the foxes into the henhouse. I think that should be obvious.

Privacy is to keep your nose out of my business.

[Tahuyaman]

The topic was tax returns. The reason for such transparency is to avoid inviting the foxes into the henhouse. I think that should be obvious.


When did the requirement to publicize your tax information get put in place? What other private information should be made public?

If you support this notion of transparency when it comes to ones private tax information, you should support making everything public, right?

[MisterVeritis]

It would be better to have a tax on HEDGE FUNDS! Which produce nothing of value. They gamble with TRILLIONS of $$, then crash the economy when bets go bad!
Just a 1 or 2 % tax would bring in a ton of revenue, and the average person would not be affected!

Is there anything you know? If so shouldn't you write about it?

[MisterVeritis]

Okay, with the money part. How do they get the right to investigate Benghazi or Trump? Implied is a funny word for you to use.
Obama's Benghazi Massacre involved State, CIA, probably NSA, and the DoD. It was not a criminal investigation. In my opinion, it was legitimate.

The coup attempt against Trump is a legitimate criminal investigation. We should appoint a special prosecutor to find out who committed the crimes. The investigation into Trump and the effort to destroy him and every person who helped him get elected is a criminal conspiracy that deserves death for some and life imprisonment for many others.

[MisterVeritis]

The law from the Teapot Scandal gives then the power but it has never been in the courts. I doubt that SCOTUS would make the President an exception of the privacy of his returns.
Then turnabout is fair play. The president has the same authority to demand anyone's tax returns. So President Trump can demand the tax returns of every Democrat in office, their spouses, their adult children, and all known associates.

[MisterVeritis]

The topic was tax returns. The reason for such transparency is to avoid inviting the foxes into the henhouse. I think that should be obvious.
President Trump made his billions and then ran for office. The critters in Congress become multimillionaires while on the job. Who is the risk? Even for you, I think the answer should be obvious.

[Dr. Who]

When did the requirement to publicize your tax information get put in place? What other private information should be made public?

If you support this notion of transparency when it comes to ones private tax information, you should support making everything public, right?
We are talking about holding public office. Voters should know who they are voting for, not just relying on the practised spiel intended to gain confidence and hence votes. If revealing tax returns becomes a requirement, then it's only a problem for those who don't want to try to justify those things that are tolerable to the IRS but not tolerable to the voters. People are not stupid - the shell games that have been given the blessing of those who also benefit from those shell games will not be viewed with the same acceptance by the majority of the people who cannot practice that kind of tax avoidance. Even Warren Buffet has questioned a tax system where poorer people pay more in income tax on a relative basis than the rich:


Buffett stated that he only paid 19% of his income for 2006 ($48.1 million) in total federal taxes (due to their source as dividends and capital gains, although the figure excluded the taxes on that income paid by the corporations that provided it), while his employees paid 33% of theirs, despite making much less money. "How can this be fair?" Buffett asked, regarding how little he pays in taxes compared to his employees. "How can this be right?" He also added, "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." After Donald Trump accused him of taking "massive deductions," Buffett countered, "I have copies of all 72 of my returns and none uses a carryforward. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett#Taxes


Most people would not put others on a pedestal for their ability to legally avoid paying the taxes that they themselves have to pay. On the other hand, there is a long-standing American tradition of admiring successful lawbreakers beginning with the Wild West.

[Dr. Who]

When did the requirement to publicize your tax information get put in place? What other private information should be made public?

If you support this notion of transparency when it comes to ones private tax information, you should support making everything public, right?
No, I don't. Tax returns can reveal a private philosophy that belies the public image.

[Dr. Who]

President Trump made his billions and then ran for office. The critters in Congress become multimillionaires while on the job. Who is the risk? Even for you, I think the answer should be obvious.
Did I at any point suggest that the tax return transparency should be limited to the first run at office? It should be an ongoing requirement. You may suppose that I am only directing this at Trump, but I am also targeting those like the Clintons and their infamous foundation and any other Congress critters that are likely speaking with forked tongues.

[Tahuyaman]

No, I don't. Tax returns can reveal a private philosophy that belies the public image.

So can making many other things public knowledge.


Now, tell me when disclosing personal tax information became a requirement?

[Tahuyaman]

Did I at any point suggest that the tax return transparency should be limited to the first run at office? It should be an ongoing requirement. You may suppose that I am only directing this at Trump, but I am also targeting those like the Clintons and their infamous foundation and any other Congress critters that are likely speaking with forked tongues.


It's not a requirement.

[HawkTheSlayer]

No, I don't. Tax returns can reveal a private philosophy that belies the public image.
Lol. This is complete hypocrisy.

Better think a little deeper.
Should gay and lesbian people's private "philosophy" be made public on their tax returns?

Could it damage them in your country? It could in the US.

[stjames1_53]

It's pretty clear who shifted the goalposts and it wasn't me. That last statement: "She said it, but she cherry picks who it applies to." - is pure prevarication. Disappointing.

So, you attacked MY statement based on what another posters put up?

he just said what you did???? YOU DID say it!!!!!!!!

http://thepoliticalforums.com/thread...hat-it-s-worth (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/107887-My-advice-for-what-it-s-worth) #9

That was you that said it.
That was my statement. You're afraid to touch it because it is true.
You can deal with his as you choose. Deal with mine!
Your words...if you have nothing to hide......
So, what are YOU hiding?

[Dr. Who]

So can making many other things public knowledge.


Now, tell me when disclosing personal tax information became a requirement?

It hasn't been, but there is a movement to make it mandatory. Those who wish to be elected representatives should have to qualify themselves for the position.

[Dr. Who]

So, you attacked MY statement based on what another posters put up?

That was my statement. You're afraid to touch it because it is true.
You can deal with his as you choose. Deal with mine!
Your words...if you have nothing to hide......
So, what are YOU hiding?
Calm down - don't be so emotional. I didn't bring up the notion of monitoring communications. Full stop. I was only discussing tax returns simply because they can belie a personal financial philosophy that is at odds with a politician's public persona. There are many reasons why people choose to enter politics but one of them, and the least desired by voters is the quest for power and the desire to ensure that the wealthy are the net beneficiaries of the system.

[Captdon]

It hasn't been, but there is a movement to make it mandatory. Those who wish to be elected representatives should have to qualify themselves for the position.

On the federal level,they can't do it. The Constitution sets the requirements for election. Congress can't add or subtract from them.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41946.pdf

(https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41946.pdfThere)There are three, and only three, standing qualifications for U.S. Senator or Representative in Congress which are expressly set out in the U.S. Constitution: age (25 for the House, 30 for the Senate); citizenship (at least seven years for the House, nine years for the Senate); and inhabitancy in the state at the time elected. U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 2, cl. 2 (House);and Article I, Section 3, cl. 3 (Senate). The Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed the historical understanding that the Constitution provides the exclusive qualifications to be aMember of Congress, and that neither a state nor Congress itself may add to or change such qualifications to federal office, absent a constitutional amendment. Powell v. McCormack, 395U.S. 486, 522 (1969); U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779, 800-801 (1995); Cook v.Gralike, 531 U.S. 510 (2001).

[Dr. Who]

Lol. This is complete hypocrisy.

Better think a little deeper.
Should gay and lesbian people's private "philosophy" be made public on their tax returns?

Could it damage them in your country? It could in the US.
What part of "holding public office" is being lost in this conversation? You guys are losing your ability to remain rational in these conversations. I think that TDS is becoming amplified on the right as you desperately fight to defend the indefensible and throw any obstacle in the way of logic that is possible. No one is forced to run for elected office, so the rules for same should include a level of transparency that isn't required for a regular job.

[Dr. Who]

On the federal level,they can't do it. The Constitution sets the requirements for election. Congress can't add or subtract from them.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41946.pdf

(https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41946.pdfThere)There are three, and only three, standing qualifications for U.S. Senator or Representative in Congress which are expressly set out in the U.S. Constitution: age (25 for the House, 30 for the Senate); citizenship (at least seven years for the House, nine years for the Senate); and inhabitancy in the state at the time elected. U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 2, cl. 2 (House);and Article I, Section 3, cl. 3 (Senate). The Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed the historical understanding that the Constitution provides the exclusive qualifications to be aMember of Congress, and that neither a state nor Congress itself may add to or change such qualifications to federal office, absent a constitutional amendment. Powell v. McCormack, 395U.S. 486, 522 (1969); U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779, 800-801 (1995); Cook v.Gralike, 531 U.S. 510 (2001).

If both parties agree to that stipulation, it will be so. Otherwise, there can be pressure to amend the Constitution.

[Dr. Who]

So, you attacked MY statement based on what another posters put up?

That was my statement. You're afraid to touch it because it is true.
You can deal with his as you choose. Deal with mine!
Your words...if you have nothing to hide......
So, what are YOU hiding?
I included you in the post quotes because you seemed to believe that I brought up the subject of communications. I didn't and posted quotes of the discussion in order. Paranoia does not enhance credibility. I don't respond to emotional tirades.

[Mister D]

Did I at any point suggest that the tax return transparency should be limited to the first run at office? It should be an ongoing requirement. You may suppose that I am only directing this at Trump, but I am also targeting those like the Clintons and their infamous foundation and any other Congress critters that are likely speaking with forked tongues.

His point is that political office corrupts and that Trump is far less susceptible to the allure of wealth because he already has it.

[Dr. Who]

His point is that political office corrupts and that Trump is far less susceptible to the allure of wealth because he already has it.

And my point is that tax returns can be read by accountants like the FAA reads black boxes. I'm going to avoid commenting on Trump because my opinion of that man is well known. Politics can move a person from the middle class to the wealthy and make the wealthy even wealthier.

[Mister D]

And my point is that tax returns can be read by accountants like the FAA reads black boxes. I'm going to avoid commenting on Trump because my opinion of that man is well known. Politics can move a person from the middle class to the wealthy and make the wealthy even wealthier.

Your opinion of Trump is the crux of the matter. It's an age old republican maxim: wealthy men are less corruptible. You would do better to worry about those who use the system to enrich themselves.

[Common Sense]

I'm not accusing Trump or anyone of any impropriety, but Trumps wealth doesn't mean he's less susceptible or less likely to be corrupt. In fact, Trump's various holdings, projects and enterprises actually give him more opportunities to use his power and influence for his and his family's personal gain.

It's also quite clear that money means a great deal to Trump. People like Trump don't reach a certain level of wealth and say ok, I've made enough.

[Dr. Who]

Your opinion of Trump is the crux of the matter. It's an age old republican maxim: wealthy men are less corruptible. You would do better to worry about those who use the system to enrich themselves.

If Trump were Warren Buffett I would agree, however, he is not and will never be. My issues with Trump have nothing to do with his alleged wealth, but who and what he is.

[Chris]

I'm not accusing Trump or anyone of any impropriety, but Trumps wealth doesn't mean he's less susceptible or less likely to be corrupt. In fact, Trump's various holdings, projects and enterprises actually give him more opportunities to use his power and influence for his and his family's personal gain.

It's also quite clear that money means a great deal to Trump. People like Trump don't reach a certain level of wealth and say ok, I've made enough.


Bezos did, just gave his wife $38BN. The rich are very generous.

[Mister D]

If Trump were Warren Buffett I would agree, however, he is not and will never be. My issues with Trump have nothing to do with his alleged wealth, but who and what he is.

Trump had little wealth to gain from political office. That seems obvious. Your personal dislike of Trump was also sort of the point.

[Mister D]

Bezos did, just gave his wife $38BN. The rich are very generous.

Apparently, Trump became President not because he has an ego but because he wants more money. Yeah ..

[Common Sense]

Apparently, Trump became President not because he has an ego but because he wants more money. Yeah ..
Who said that?

[Mister D]

Who said that?

Then what is the issue?

[Mister D]

Does anyone seriously believe the typical liberal democratic politician isn't motivated by self interest?

[Dr. Who]

Trump had little wealth to gain from political office. That seems obvious. Your personal dislike of Trump was also sort of the point.
A person who can no longer get a bank loan for his real estate ventures and ultimately had to resort to licensing his name to make money and take a TV gig that was winding up, hasn't got a lot of options other than to trade on his name politically. Being President opens up huge post-Presidential sources of revenue and allows him to use his international connections to benefit his personal interests. Please don't be naive. Even Presidents who were relatively poor before holding office, made significant money after the fact.

[Common Sense]

Then what is the issue?

So no one said it?

[Mister D]

So no one said it?

See above.

[Common Sense]

Does anyone seriously believe the typical liberal democratic politician isn't motivated by self interest?

I think most politicians, regardless of party, get into politics either because they believe they can make a difference according to their values, or simply for their own personal gain.

Do you think Dems are somehow more motivated by self interest than Reps?

[Mister D]

A person who can no longer get a bank loan for his real estate ventures and ultimately had to resort to licensing his name to make money and take a TV gig that was winding up, hasn't got a lot of options other than to trade on his name politically. Being President opens up huge post-Presidential sources of revenue and allows him to use his international connections to benefit his personal interests. Please don't be naive. Even Presidents who were relatively poor before holding office, made significant money after the fact.

Yes, being POTUS opens up all sorts of opportunities. Out of all the Presidents in my lifetime and yours Trump needs them the least.

[Common Sense]

See above.

I'm looking above. I haven't seen anyone make the claim.

[Mister D]

I think most politicians, regardless of party, get into politics either because they believe they can make a difference according to their values, or simply for their own personal gain.

Do you think Dems are somehow more motivated by self interest than Reps?

When I say liberal democracy I'm describing the entire system. Not a partisan comment. Just to be clear. But I think the system attracts self seeking , egotistical douche bags not idealists.

[Mister D]

I'm looking above. I haven't seen anyone make the claim.

Then what are we talking about? Can you explain?

[Common Sense]

When I say liberal democracy I'm describing the entire system. Not a partisan comment. Just to be clear. But I think the system attracts self seeking , egotistical douche bags not idealists.
Ok. My mistake then. When you said liberal democratic, I assumed you were referring to Democrats.

[Dr. Who]

Yes, being POTUS opens up all sorts of opportunities. Out of all the Presidents in my lifetime and yours Trump needs them the least.
I'm not as assured as you are that he is as wealthy as he claims. He's not poor, but he has all manner of pending lawsuits against him and has burned his financial bridges. It's pretty difficult to be a real estate entrepreneur when you can't get a loan and investors avoid you like the plague. This Presidential gig forestalls all litigation and gives him time to allow his SIL to bring in new revenue.

[MisterVeritis]

Did I at any point suggest that the tax return transparency should be limited to the first run at office? It should be an ongoing requirement. You may suppose that I am only directing this at Trump, but I am also targeting those like the Clintons and their infamous foundation and any other Congress critters that are likely speaking with forked tongues.
I don't believe you. I mean I don't trust you.

[MisterVeritis]

If both parties agree to that stipulation, it will be so. Otherwise, there can be pressure to amend the Constitution.
Stipulation? LOL. Buffoon.

[MisterVeritis]

I'm not accusing Trump or anyone of any impropriety, but Trumps wealth doesn't mean he's less susceptible or less likely to be corrupt. In fact, Trump's various holdings, projects and enterprises actually give him more opportunities to use his power and influence for his and his family's personal gain.

It's also quite clear that money means a great deal to Trump. People like Trump don't reach a certain level of wealth and say ok, I've made enough.
Sigh.

You dumb shit.

[Dr. Who]

I don't believe you. I mean I don't trust you.
I can't make you trust me, but while I'm a liberal, I'm not a political partisan. When I say that both parties are corrupt, I mean it.

[Dr. Who]

Stipulation? LOL. Buffoon.

That's rude. Why are you being so disrespectful? I haven't called you names.

[Common Sense]

Sigh.

You dumb shit.

Lol...thanks for that. We were running low on irony.

[Abby08]

I'm not accusing Trump or anyone of any impropriety, but Trumps wealth doesn't mean he's less susceptible or less likely to be corrupt. In fact, Trump's various holdings, projects and enterprises actually give him more opportunities to use his power and influence for his and his family's personal gain.

It's also quite clear that money means a great deal to Trump. People like Trump don't reach a certain level of wealth and say ok, I've made enough.

Kinda like, Walter White.

[Common Sense]

That's rude. Why are you being so disrespectful? I haven't called you names.
Mr. V may actually be psychopathic. Maybe just extremely emotionally damaged.

This is a person who would like to see liberals and anyone left of him physically annihilated. He advocates for the murder of millions of Muslims through military strikes. He literally doesn't see any value of the lives of people who disagree with his political and cultural values.

It's gotta suck to live with all that hate and malice. But I suspect a lot of it is compensation and a coping mechanism.

[Dr. Who]

Mr. V may actually be psychopathic. Maybe just extremely emotionally damaged.

This is a person who would like to see liberals and anyone left of him physically annihilated. He advocates for the murder of millions of Muslims through military strikes. He literally doesn't see any value of the lives of people who disagree with his political and cultural values.

It's gotta suck to live with all that hate and malice. But I suspect a lot of it is compensation and a coping mechanism.
I like to think that disagreeing without childish attitude is what anyone who isn't a child should be aiming for, but I am at times disappointed.

[Common Sense]

I like to think that disagreeing without childish attitude is what anyone who isn't a child should be aiming for, but I am at times disappointed.
Set the bar lower. Less disappointment.

[Dr. Who]

Set the bar lower. Less disappointment.

I can't. It's a matter of principle.

[Captdon]

Obama's Benghazi Massacre involved State, CIA, probably NSA, and the DoD. It was not a criminal investigation. In my opinion, it was legitimate.

The coup attempt against Trump is a legitimate criminal investigation. We should appoint a special prosecutor to find out who committed the crimes. The investigation into Trump and the effort to destroy him and every person who helped him get elected is a criminal conspiracy that deserves death for some and life imprisonment for many others.

You convinced me about budgetary oversight. The Constitution says nothing about any of this. I don't see any reference to "implied powers." I didn't know we could make up powers.

[Captdon]

Then turnabout is fair play. The president has the same authority to demand anyone's tax returns. So President Trump can demand the tax returns of every Democrat in office, their spouses, their adult children, and all known associates.

Turnabout is nice but not legal. I thought legal was the foundation of what we do. of this. I thought we didn't want to be like the liberals. I thought we wanted to follow the Constitution and the law.

[Captdon]

We are talking about holding public office. Voters should know who they are voting for, not just relying on the practised spiel intended to gain confidence and hence votes. If revealing tax returns becomes a requirement, then it's only a problem for those who don't want to try to justify those things that are tolerable to the IRS but not tolerable to the voters. People are not stupid - the shell games that have been given the blessing of those who also benefit from those shell games will not be viewed with the same acceptance by the majority of the people who cannot practice that kind of tax avoidance. Even Warren Buffet has questioned a tax system where poorer people pay more in income tax on a relative basis than the rich:


Buffett stated that he only paid 19% of his income for 2006 ($48.1 million) in total federal taxes (due to their source as dividends and capital gains, although the figure excluded the taxes on that income paid by the corporations that provided it), while his employees paid 33% of theirs, despite making much less money. "How can this be fair?" Buffett asked, regarding how little he pays in taxes compared to his employees. "How can this be right?" He also added, "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." After Donald Trump accused him of taking "massive deductions," Buffett countered, "I have copies of all 72 of my returns and none uses a carryforward. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett#Taxes


Most people would not put others on a pedestal for their ability to legally avoid paying the taxes that they themselves have to pay. On the other hand, there is a long-standing American tradition of admiring successful lawbreakers beginning with the Wild West.

It can't become a requirement so it doesn't matter what you think.

[Captdon]

It hasn't been, but there is a movement to make it mandatory. Those who wish to be elected representatives should have to qualify themselves for the position.

And SCOTUS will throw it out. You know, that pesky Constitution thing.

[Captdon]

What part of "holding public office" is being lost in this conversation? You guys are losing your ability to remain rational in these conversations. I think that TDS is becoming amplified on the right as you desperately fight to defend the indefensible and throw any obstacle in the way of logic that is possible. No one is forced to run for elected office, so the rules for same should include a level of transparency that isn't required for a regular job.

Post #121.

[Captdon]

If both parties agree to that stipulation, it will be so. Otherwise, there can be pressure to amend the Constitution.

It doesn't matter what the Parties decide. They can't do it. See how, the Constitution doesn't allow it.

[Captdon]

If Trump were Warren Buffett I would agree, however, he is not and will never be. My issues with Trump have nothing to do with his alleged wealth, but who and what he is.

Then why do you want to see his returns? The IRS sees them and they have no problems with them. Why would you?

[Captdon]

A person who can no longer get a bank loan for his real estate ventures and ultimately had to resort to licensing his name to make money and take a TV gig that was winding up, hasn't got a lot of options other than to trade on his name politically. Being President opens up huge post-Presidential sources of revenue and allows him to use his international connections to benefit his personal interests. Please don't be naive. Even Presidents who were relatively poor before holding office, made significant money after the fact.

So you lied. You said it wasn't about Trump. You thought we wouldn't catch that.

[Tahuyaman]

It hasn't been, but there is a movement to make it mandatory. Those who wish to be elected representatives should have to qualify themselves for the position. What other private information does one need to reveal in order to be “qualified” for an elected position?

Why is one’s tax information a qualifier for office? Just because a handful of nosy busybody’s say so?

[Tahuyaman]

Then why do you want to see his returns? The IRS sees them and they have no problems with them. Why would you?
Nosy busybodies think they need to know.

[Tahuyaman]

If both parties agree to that stipulation, it will be so. Otherwise, there can be pressure to amend the Constitution.
Seriously? Amend the constitution? WTF?

I have a better idea. Eliminate the income tax.

[Tahuyaman]

If Trump were Warren Buffett I would agree, however, he is not and will never be. My issues with Trump have nothing to do with his alleged wealth, but who and what he is.
So, if Trump was a wealthy liberal who donates large sums of money exclusively to Democrats, you’d have no issue with him. Got it.

[Don29palms]

What other private information does one need to reveal in order to be “qualified” for an elected position?

Why is one’s tax information a qualifier for office? Just because a handful of nosy busybody’s say so?

Why do foreigners without a dog in the fight feel they think they should have any opinion on American politics. It's really none of their business to begin with especially when they have a fucked system.

[Tahuyaman]

Why do foreigners without a dog in the fight feel they think they should have any opinion on American politics. It's really none of their business to begin with especially when they have a $#@!ed system.

Because our economy controls theirs too.

[Dr. Who]

So you lied. You said it wasn't about Trump. You thought we wouldn't catch that.
You know that if you click that little blue hyperlink next to the 'originally posted by' you can see what post was being quoted. If you did you would know that I was responding to a comment about Trump that was directed to me. Nice try, but no cigar.

[Dr. Who]

So, if Trump was a wealthy liberal who donates large sums of money exclusively to Democrats, you’d have no issue with him. Got it.
I wouldn't like Trump any better if he was a Dem President. I didn't like him back when he was best buds with Bill and Hillary.

[Tahuyaman]

I wouldn't like Trump any better if he was a Dem President. I didn't like him back when he was best buds with Bill and Hillary.

That doesn't mean there should be laws which apply to him, but exempt Democrats.


Again, I'm going to ask you the question you've been dodging. If one's tax information should be made public, what other private information do you demand access to? Reading lists? Web sites visited? Personal emails disclosed?

[Dr. Who]

That doesn't mean there should be laws which apply to him, but exempt Democrats.


Again, I'm going to ask you the question you've been dodging. If one's tax information should be made public, what other private information do you demand access to? Reading lists? Web sites visited? Personal emails disclosed?
Nothing further other than the tax returns.

[Tahuyaman]

Nothing further other than the tax returns.


That's quite inconsistent.

[Dr. Who]

That's quite inconsistent.

Inconsistent with what?

[Tahuyaman]

Inconsistent with what?


Inconsistent with your need to have certain private information revealed to the public. Your need for tax information to be disclosed is exclusive to Trump. If you were concerned with one's fitness for office, there's other private information just as revealing.

If there was something nefarious with his taxes, the IRS would have uncovered it and prosecuted him. All you need to know it that there's nothing illegal with his tax matters.