Judge Orders Trump To Release Tax Returns

[Guest]

NEW YORK (Reuters)  -  A federal judge on Monday said eight years of U.S. President Donald Trump’s tax returns must be provided to Manhattan prosecutors, forcefully rejecting the president’s argument that he was immune from criminal investigations. Trump’s returns will not be turned over immediately, after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan granted the president’s request to temporarily block the order, handed down by U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero.

The Manhattan judge had called the immunity claim “repugnant to the nation’s governmental structure and constitutional values,” and said he could not “square a vision of presidential immunity that would place the President above the law.” His 75-page decision complicates Trump’s battle to keep his finances under wraps, despite having promised during his 2016 White House run that he would disclose his tax returns.

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, a Democrat, had subpoenaed personal and corporate tax returns from 2011 to 2018 and other records from Trump’s longtime accounting firm Mazars USA. The subpoena was part of Vance’s criminal probe into the Republican president and his family business. Marrero’s decision would have forced Mazars to start turning over documents on Monday afternoon, but the appeals court said the case had “unique issues,” justifying a delay.

An appeal could be heard as soon as this month. Trump has not been accused of criminal wrongdoing. Two committees of the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives have separately subpoenaed Deutsche Bank AG for Trump’s financial records, which include tax returns.

“The Radical Left Democrats have failed on all fronts, so now they are pushing local New York City and State Democrat prosecutors to go get President Trump,” Trump tweeted after Marrero’s decision. “A thing like this has never happened to any President before. Not even close!” In suing Vance last month to block his subpoena, Trump said he was immune from criminal probes while in the White House and that the U.S. Constitution required Vance to wait.

HOUSE PROBE   The Constitution does not say whether sitting presidents can be indicted, and the Supreme Court has not decided the issue. Federal prosecutors cannot charge sitting presidents because presidents have temporary immunity, according to the Department of Justice, but that does not block criminal probes by state-level prosecutors like Vance or even federal prosecutors.

“It’s uncharted legal terrain,” Jens David Ohlin, vice dean at Cornell Law School, said in an interview.”If the framers of the Constitution desired a president who was completely immune from all forms of criminal prosecution, they would have said so,” he added. “The counterargument is that the Constitution would prohibit it because it would infringe on the president’s ability to govern the country.”

Vance issued the subpoena four weeks after issuing another subpoena to the Trump Organization for records of hush money payments, including to two women prior to the 2016 election who said they had sexual relationships with Trump, which he denies. Those payments were made to Stormy Daniels, a porn star whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, with the involvement of Trump’s now-imprisoned former lawyer Michael Cohen. Trump is also trying to block the House subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and is awaiting a ruling from the 2nd Circuit.

The House probes are separate from the debate over whether Trump should be impeached because of his dealings with Ukraine. Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Trump, said he was pleased the Vance subpoena was put on hold. Danny Frost, a spokesman for Vance, declined to comment. The Justice Department, which opposed dismissing Trump’s challenge to the subpoena, declined to comment. Mazars did not respond to requests for comment, but has said it would comply with its legal obligations. 

‘OVERREACH OF EXECUTIVE POWER’    In his decision, Marrero, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton, declined to assert jurisdiction over the Vance subpoena, saying Trump should have brought his case in a New York state court. But the judge made clear that if the appeals court disagreed with that finding, Trump should lose. Marrero said the president failed to show that enforcing the subpoena would interfere with his presidential duties, cause irreparable harm or be against the public interest. He also rejected as too broad the idea of shielding Trump, his family and his businesses from criminal process.

“The expansive notion of constitutional immunity invoked here to shield the President from judicial process would constitute an overreach of executive power,” Marrero wrote. Marrero said even President Richard Nixon conceded during the Watergate scandal that he would be required to produce documents in response to a judicial subpoena. Trump’s lawyers said the case raised “momentous” questions about the president’s immunity and complying with the subpoena would cause irreversible damage.

“There will be no way to unscramble the egg scrambled by the disclosure,” the lawyers said in a court filing. Trump is running for re-election. His current term ends on Jan. 20, 2021.

Edited October 7, 2019 by Guest

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Apparently, Democrats hate the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Apparently, Democrats hate the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.

You support someone hiding from law. This is a Judge, not some lunatic.

trump will probably start firing investigators and replace them with corrupt yes-men.

Edited October 7, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Apparently, Democrats hate the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.

Judges are a better determinator of that than you or I - you know with all that training and years of experience.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

you know with all that training and years of experience.

Haha this thread was for you buddy, knew you'd jump on it in seconds   

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

3 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Haha this thread was for you buddy, knew you'd jump on it in seconds   

Thanks

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

2 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

You support someone hiding from law. This is a Judge, not some lunatic.

trump will probably start firing investigators and replace them with corrupt yes-men.

This would NEVER, EVER happen to a democrat president. Even Clinton was impeached, not prosecuted, although he committed 8 felonies. 

Trump meanwhile has committed no crime. He's refused to release his taxes WHILE THEY ARE BEING AUDITED. That's just intelligent, because 50,000,000 democrats will be going through every line with a fine toothed comb. No human can withstand that scrutiny and I guarantee 50 million lawsuits by those same ticked off democrats, furious they aren't in power and hating that they can't just remove a duly elected president by fiat. 

As for firing investigators, you said the same thing about Mueller, and were dead wrong then. How long till you just admit you're letting your emotions get ahead of your judgement?  

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

43 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

 

As for firing investigators, you said the same thing about Mueller, and were dead wrong then. How long till you just admit you're letting your emotions get ahead of your judgement?  

It is no secret I dislike trump; but the distaste largely comes from logic not emotion.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Can you say, ‘Continued obstruction’? Sure you can!

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Can you say, ‘Continued obstruction’? Sure you can!

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

If I was Trump’s team I would put this whole issue in front of the Supreme Court immediately.

This is once again a case of a State or Circuit court exceeding their bounds. At this level I would assume that the Supreme Court could not avoid hearing the case.

[Олег Исаев + 1]

On 10/8/2019 at 5:27 AM, Ward Smith said:

On 10/8/2019 at 3:04 AM, Enthalpic said:

You support someone hiding from law. This is a Judge, not some lunatic.

trump will probably start firing investigators and replace them with corrupt yes-men.

This would NEVER, EVER happen to a democrat president. Even Clinton was impeached, not prosecuted, although he committed 8 felonies. Best tax consultant near me url Your Books On Time. Trump meanwhile has committed no crime. He's refused to release his taxes WHILE THEY ARE BEING AUDITED. That's just intelligent, because 50,000,000 democrats will be going through every line with a fine toothed comb. No human can withstand that scrutiny and I guarantee 50 million lawsuits by those same ticked off democrats, furious they aren't in power and hating that they can't just remove a duly elected president by fiat. 

As for firing investigators, you said the same thing about Mueller, and were dead wrong then. How long till you just admit you're letting your emotions get ahead of your judgement?  

what do you think about the situation now??

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 10/8/2019 at 5:09 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

Can you say, ‘Continued obstruction’? Sure you can!

 

On 10/8/2019 at 12:04 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Apparently, Democrats hate the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.

Has previous democrat and republican candidates not released their taxes? even when ajudge says : you must release your tax returns. Trump says no. 

On 10/8/2019 at 5:15 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

This is once again a case of a State or Circuit court exceeding their bounds. At this level I would assume that the Supreme Court could not avoid hearing the case.

And if the supreme court agrees? Is that rigged? 

-----------------------

Oil-price community : all hail Trump

@Tom Kirkman can I request a trump pooh meme? 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

22 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Oil-price community : all hail Trump

@Tom Kirkman can I request a trump pooh meme? 

Fair enough.  But this meme is not illegal in the U.S.

Unlike a certain b*tthurt dictator in a large Asian nation, who bans all Pooh memes.

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

8 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Fair enough.  But this meme is not illegal in the U.S.

Unlike a certain b*tthurt dictator in a large Asian nation, who bans all Pooh memes.

 

LOL. 

Fair enough right back at you. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 10/8/2019 at 2:27 AM, Ward Smith said:

He's refused to release his taxes WHILE THEY ARE BEING AUDITED.

Yeah a very sensible thing to do, why would you release unaudited tax returns to the masses? utterly stupid if you do

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

On 10/7/2019 at 9:27 PM, Ward Smith said:

Trump meanwhile has committed no crime. He's refused to release his taxes WHILE THEY ARE BEING AUDITED. That's just intelligent, because 50,000,000 democrats will be going through every line with a fine toothed comb. No human can withstand that scrutiny and I guarantee 50 million lawsuits by those same ticked off democrats, furious they aren't in power and hating that they can't just remove a duly elected president by fiat. 

 

4 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Yeah a very sensible thing to do, why would you release unaudited tax returns to the masses? utterly stupid if you do

 

^ Nailed it.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

20 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Yeah a very sensible thing to do, why would you release unaudited tax returns to the masses? utterly stupid if you do

How long time does it take to audit taxes? Surely not years. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Unless I am mistaken, although other Presidents may have released their tax filings, it is not a requirement of the office. Furthermore, if the President files jointly with his wife, there is the issue of her privacy to consider as well.

We all know that this is simply another witch hunt tactic by the Dems....apparently they have no moral compass.

I think that ‘fair is fair’, if Trump is forced to release his tax statements, then every Congressman and Senator should be held to the same standard.

How do you think the Dems would react to that...🤔

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 10/7/2019 at 9:36 PM, DayTrader said:

His 75-page decision complicates Trump’s battle to keep his finances under wraps, despite having promised during his 2016 White House run that he would disclose his tax returns.

 

2 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

How long time does it take to audit taxes? Surely not years. 

A vaild point Rasmus, it does suggest that Trump is not happy to do this despite his election promise.

Douglas does as usual make a good point that his wife may also have to disclose hers which may infringe on her rights (not sure on this as I'm from the UK)

3 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I think that ‘fair is fair’, if Trump is forced to release his tax statements, then every Congressman and Senator should be held to the same standard.

This sounds like the best idea yet, then everyone knows who the liars are🤣

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

43 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Unless I am mistaken, although other Presidents may have released their tax filings, it is not a requirement of the office. Furthermore, if the President files jointly with his wife, there is the issue of her privacy to consider as well.

We all know that this is simply another witch hunt tactic by the Dems....apparently they have no moral compass.

I think that ‘fair is fair’, if Trump is forced to release his tax statements, then every Congressman and Senator should be held to the same standard.

How do you think the Dems would react to that...🤔

Sorry, but I call toro caca. 

Trump said he would. Then had a million excuses. Other presidents did (also republican ones). 

this what about-ism is really strange me - can you not defend Trump without attacking dems ? What are you so scared his taxes will show? To you and many others Trump will still be the lesser evil.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 10/8/2019 at 3:27 AM, Ward Smith said:

He's refused to release his taxes WHILE THEY ARE BEING AUDITED.

Imagine if it took him as long to do business filings? I find it hard to believe that a seasoned business man cannot find an accountant that can do a quick audit. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

1 minute ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Sorry, but I call toro caca. 

Trump said he would. Then had a million excuses. Other presidents did (also republican ones). 

this what about-ism is really strange me - can you not defend Trump without attacking dems ? What are you so scared his taxes will show? To you and many others Trump will still be the lesser evil.

I am not scared of a damn thing! This whole ‘releasing his taxes’ issue should never have arisen as it is not a REQUIREMENT of the office. Whether other Presidents chose to do it or not.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 minute ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I am not scared of a damn thing! This whole ‘releasing his taxes’ issue should never have arisen as it is not a REQUIREMENT of the office. Whether other Presidents chose to do it or not.

equally impeachment enquiries are a rigth of the house. So, complaints of this should never arise.

And if the surpreme court end up ruling the Donald needs to release his taxes I expect you are first one in line to demand that law be respected, right??  

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 10/8/2019 at 1:09 AM, Enthalpic said:

Judges are a better determinator of that than you or I - you know with all that training and years of experience.

@ronwagn @Otis11 @Bob D why did you guys downvote? Do you not think judges are qualified to interpret the law???