I just want them to do it the right way. Through legislation. Congress shouldn’t be primarily an investigative body. @Jewbacca pointed out Congress has only ever gotten anonymized data from the IRS before.
If they can just pull returns on anybody they don’t like by name. That’s pretty chilling. CEO of a company speaks out against your legislation, just leak something on his tax returns. That’s politburo level stuff right there.
This.
200%
Are they not requesting his taxes through a piece of legislation passed? One to allow for this very thing?
That would depend entirely on whether they have a legitimate legislative purpose to request his returns. Which will likely be decided by higher courts (WaPo recap below).
It’s not like his son took millions from Chinese banks while he was in office.
But there already is legislation. I think mandatory disclosure law would be great, but what Congress is doing isn’t outside of legislation.
Of course it should be - it’s insane to suggest otherwise. We don’t elect kings.
You’re arguing apples and oranges. Trump isn’t a private citizen minding his own business. Trump is a public figure that Congress is required to oversee - and you can’t oversee a public figure without information about that public figure. It’s all fair game. The Constitution prohibits the acceptance of Emoluments, for example - well, if there is a concern Trump has accepted such things, isn’t Congress entitled to use lawful means to get information to determine if that is so?
If Congress wants Mark Zuckerberg’s tax returns, different story. We’re talking about the President of the United States.
As an aside, I simply can’t believe I’m hearing the conservative side of the fence saying it’s a bad thing that the most powerful government official in the world needs more oversight. Just wow.
Really?
It should primarily be an investigator of the Executive branch? As opposed to making laws, as the name implies.
It should do both. Its primary job is passing laws, but it absolutely should be investigating the executive (the whole branch) as part of its job. Investigations range from basic updates to looking into wrongdoing. It’s a critical role of Congress.
If you don’t think so, who should be overseeing the executive branch then?
Oh l dont disagree concerning oversight.
I have posted several times, many of our problems stem from Congress not assuming its first among equals position.
But where does one draw the line on oversight becoming political over reach? The IRS has not put Trump in jail for evasion and financial disclosures are given to OGE yearly.
If the shoe were on the other foot, and Executive oversight agencies were giving Dems the same investigations, every Liberal and newsman would howl to the moon over dictator (insert prejorative of choice) Trump and his blind minions.
I don’t trust the DNC’s motives at all, and neither should Trump. They are after him not out of legitimate concern for oversight, but trying to remove him by any means necessary. They have said so, out loud and on camera. Luckily there’s a court system to sort out such disputes.
The interesting thing is he owns hotels in foreign nations. If he gets a normally awarded work permit to renovate a hotel in Europe… is that an emolument from a foreign power? I’d bet Schumer and Pelosi would argue it is. So his businesses operating normally are accepting emoluments every time a government official stays at one of his hotels?..
This expanded definition will be interesting if they try and get him on it. It’s not like a snuff box or painting that the founding fathers asked/didn’t ask to keep.
See how that work’s @Basement_Gainz?
And @treco…I would stay away from “If the shoe was on the other foot…” arguments. They sound hollow after the GOP’s/Conservatives behaviors, investigations and conspiracy theories for the years of not only of the Obama Presidency…but during his run for President,
That’s why these days I try to avoid using the term conservative. It feels like calling Obama a Hardline capitalist because he’s not as socialist as AoC.
It’s technically correct, but damn does it feel stupid.
What’s your point?
The GOP issued plenty of subpoenas to the Obama administration that they claimed executive privilege over and lawsuits abounded. The attorney general Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress, which means fuck all by the way.
Just flip the Rs and Ds for how Bush was treated and so forth. Politics is a dirty business.
Obama was right to resist the GOP being out for blood and disingenuous, and so is Trump in this instance. Don’t give your enemy anything for free.
Like I said the decision on whether the Dems have a legislative need to see returns vs financial disclosures will be up to the SCOTUS. I wouldn’t be surprised if Kav votes with the liberals. It should be a 9-0 decision… but we all know it won’t be. Get the popcorn.
The hypocrisy of it all.
Welcome to politics man. Don’t take it too serious. The politicians sure don’t.
Ah there’s Zeb. Missed you man
Lol. Do you think any decent human being could flip/lie/manipulate etc… the way they do and still look themselves in the mirror every day? That’s all pols btw. Not just ones that agree or disagree with my worldview. Power hungry people really suck.
They play the game to enrich themselves and their cronies and avoid actually doing their job at all costs.
Exhibit A: Nadler
So in conclusion, every single pol is corrupt and out to enrich themselves, but Trump should illegally push back against Congress (because he hasn’t actually exercised exec privilege, has he?) because even though he is corrupt, the DNCs motives are equally corrupt.
All the while, you wish Congress would act with legislation (even though they obviously are), and pass laws to do things (even though they already did).
What do you actually want out of all this? For a pol you explicitly stated is corrupt and out to enrich himself to not be investigated because you think it’s really just a game?
The line is Congress’s limited powers. They can pass bills or impeach. And the bills they pass aren’t even bills until a President signs them.
Impeachment might be a stupid idea, but Congress is unquestionably entitled to gather information to consider impeachment. The President has no basis for objection on the grounds that he thinks impeachment is ridiculous - it’s Congress’s prerogative, not his.
You mean like Benghazi?
Motives are irrelevant at this point because there is a facially legitimate reason for the tax returns. The only question is: is Congress lawfully entitled to the requested documents? And the answer is yes.
No, it’s a legit concern for oversight - the currrent President of the United States has basically bragged about making money from foreign powers. How is that not worthy of investigation?
Could be, and I’d argue it should be presumed to be, but because of these kinds of situations, public figures often put their holdings in a blind trust. Trump, of course, didn’t.
True. It’s worse.
There’s no such thing. Think about it - because of Trump, we now have “conservatives” saying the most powerful government official in the world needs less oversight from a co-equal, constitutional branch and that courts should ignore the plain language of a duly passed statute (to provide tax returns upon request) and engage in judicial activism and protect Trump from Congressional investigations they don’t like.
They aren’t conservatives, and never were.