What "Legitimate legislative purpose" does House Politburo Need Trump's Taxes For
- Thread starter Grokmaster
- Start date
They really don't think ahead, do they?
That's why they're DEMOCRATS. They need someone to do their "thinking" for them.
Then they want the Party of the Jackass to do the thinking for everybody else, too, because they believe it's good for everyone.
they have certain oversight authority over the Executive Branch but not on private individuals.
if there are issues with the taxes for individuals thats the purview of the IRS.
not Congress.
Indeed?
You can hide, but you can't run.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
After the failed four years of the Mueller investigation, two failed impeachment attempts, continuous whining about collusion with Russia only to find out it was the Hildabeast doing it all along, and the Jan 6 witch hunt going nowhere, the Democrats have little left (pun intended) to get Trump with, particularly since HE'S NOT EVEN IN FRIGGIN' OFFICE!
So what? Does that mean he should escape his criminal past? He should face the music for his financial and tax frauds. He should be responsible for his insurrection. He wants to get back into FRIGGING office. You must know that much.
What crime has be been charged with that gives a partisan House committee the right to violate his rights without a warrant?
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Those aren't federal issues, if they're issues at all. Certainly, there is no reason Congress would be investigating them. Financial and tax issues are the IRS's and Treasury department's purview.
Here's why DEMOCRATS are pretending their political opponents are "terrorists"
Tenth Circuit Appeals Court Says Fourth And Sixth Amendment Rights Are Meaningless When "National Security Is On The Line"
Fri, Dec 17th 2021
A case involving the first criminal suspect to be notified by the DOJ that evidence against him was derived from Section 702 surveillance has just reached an end. The Tenth Circuit Appeals Court has decided there's nothing wrong with the government's FISA-enabled warrantless surveillance programs. It also says the word "speedy" can be redefined at will by the government's national security concerns, changing the definition to "however long it takes."
The ACLU, which helped represent the US resident whose communications were collected and intercepted with FISA court orders, summarizes the outcome of this decision: "In a sharply divided ruling, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals today wrongly held that the warrantless surveillance of Jamshid Muhtorov — a legal permanent resident whose email communications were searched by the U.S. government under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) — was lawful. The court also ruled that the egregious seven-year delay leading up to Mr. Muhtorov’s trial did not violate the Speedy Trial Act".
Muhtorov, whose path to arrest involved surveillance programs exposed by Edward Snowden and an FBI informant pretending to be a terrorist sympathizer, was arrested January 21, 2012. His trial didn't begin until May 14, 2018. He spent those six years in jail as a pre-trial detainee.
The Appeals Court doesn't have a problem with any of this. It says the surveillance that targeted the foreign entities Muhtorov communicated with was constitutional, mainly because those rights aren't applied to foreign surveillance targets. Muhtorov, a legal US resident, was targeted after his communications were incidentally collected, resulting in the government intercepting an untold number of emails and 39,000 hours of audio recordings.
The incidental collection of a US person's communications is also lawful, says the Appeals Court. It says those were in "plain view," the other end of targeted foreign communications that the government needs no warrant to obtain. If the initial action was legal, everything that flowed from it was likewise constitutional.
As for the extremely long delay between Muhtorov's arrest to his trial, the court says, in effect, that this all would have gone a lot quicker if Muhtorov hadn't engaged in his right to examine the evidence the government planned to use against him. That "national security precautions" meant he wasn't able to actually see much of the evidence being used is somehow beside the point.
The fact that the government had to gather it and run it past the district court judge shouldn't be held against the government, the court declared.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20211212/11063648109/tenth-circuit-appeals-court-says-fourth-sixth-amendment-rights-are-meaningless-when-national-security-is-line.shtml
Tenth Circuit Appeals Court Says Fourth And Sixth Amendment Rights Are Meaningless When "National Security Is On The Line"
Fri, Dec 17th 2021
A case involving the first criminal suspect to be notified by the DOJ that evidence against him was derived from Section 702 surveillance has just reached an end. The Tenth Circuit Appeals Court has decided there's nothing wrong with the government's FISA-enabled warrantless surveillance programs. It also says the word "speedy" can be redefined at will by the government's national security concerns, changing the definition to "however long it takes."
The ACLU, which helped represent the US resident whose communications were collected and intercepted with FISA court orders, summarizes the outcome of this decision: "In a sharply divided ruling, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals today wrongly held that the warrantless surveillance of Jamshid Muhtorov — a legal permanent resident whose email communications were searched by the U.S. government under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) — was lawful. The court also ruled that the egregious seven-year delay leading up to Mr. Muhtorov’s trial did not violate the Speedy Trial Act".
Muhtorov, whose path to arrest involved surveillance programs exposed by Edward Snowden and an FBI informant pretending to be a terrorist sympathizer, was arrested January 21, 2012. His trial didn't begin until May 14, 2018. He spent those six years in jail as a pre-trial detainee.
The Appeals Court doesn't have a problem with any of this. It says the surveillance that targeted the foreign entities Muhtorov communicated with was constitutional, mainly because those rights aren't applied to foreign surveillance targets. Muhtorov, a legal US resident, was targeted after his communications were incidentally collected, resulting in the government intercepting an untold number of emails and 39,000 hours of audio recordings.
The incidental collection of a US person's communications is also lawful, says the Appeals Court. It says those were in "plain view," the other end of targeted foreign communications that the government needs no warrant to obtain. If the initial action was legal, everything that flowed from it was likewise constitutional.
As for the extremely long delay between Muhtorov's arrest to his trial, the court says, in effect, that this all would have gone a lot quicker if Muhtorov hadn't engaged in his right to examine the evidence the government planned to use against him. That "national security precautions" meant he wasn't able to actually see much of the evidence being used is somehow beside the point.
The fact that the government had to gather it and run it past the district court judge shouldn't be held against the government, the court declared.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20211212/11063648109/tenth-circuit-appeals-court-says-fourth-sixth-amendment-rights-are-meaningless-when-national-security-is-line.shtml
Ways and Means has the power. Nobody ever disputed that until trump. The IRS does not release taxes. They are private. You have to be powerful to get them from them.
Is that so?
Didn't the failing New York Times claim they already had the president's tax returns?
Why, yes. Yes, they did.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/09/27/us/donald-trump-taxes.html
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
What "Legislative purpose" does the Ways and Means committee have looking at a particular individual's tax return, and only that tax return?
Will you understand if he dodges the question?
What the fuck do you care if Trump has to post his tax returns?
Which he said he WOULD do YEARS ago anyway?
I really do not much care either way.
But you sure as shit are freaking out about something that has NOTHING to do with you nor is any of your god damn business.
You are just a fucking, Trump sheep.
JUST as bad as a fucking, Biden sheep.
There is something so disgustingly un-American and wimpy about defending political leaders (on either side of the aisle) like a bunch of fucking, brainless sheep that do whatever they are told.
You people belong in David Milgram experiments.
Giving people fake 450-volt electric shocks for $35 bucks.
Last edited:
Geeko Sportivo
Verified User
Do you know what is obvious to everyone?
Not everyone is always going to agree with my comments or humor here on the forum, but one thing is for sure.
Everything I have to say here, just judging by your reactive responses back to me, is that everything I have to say affects you as if I just rammed a MOP STICK UP YOUR ASS and it pains you in such an obvious and very personally way!
SO THAT MEANS I MUST BE SAYING ALL THE RIGHT THINGS! THAT IS WHAT I CALL SUCCESS! YOU MAKE ME FEEL SO PROUD! Mission Accomplished!
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THAT SO CLEARLY OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE!
SERIOUSLY! THANK YOU AGAIN!
Last edited:
Do you know what is obvious to everyone?
Not everyone is always going to agree with my comments or humor here on the forum, but one thing is for sure.
Everything I have to say here, just judging by your reactive responses back to me, is that everything I have to say affects you as if I just rammed a MOP STICK UP YOUR ASS and it pains you in such an obvious and very personally way!
SO THAT MEANS I MUST BE SAYING ALL THE RIGHT THINGS! THAT IS WHAT I CALL SUCCESS! YOU MAKE ME FEEL SO PROUD! Mission Accomplished!
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THAT SO CLEARLY OBVIOUS TO EVERYONE!
SERIOUSLY! THANK YOU AGAIN!
You think too highly of yourself. You are illegitimate