Supreme Court won't halt turnover of Trump's tax records

Ah yes the "code" only Cohen knows.....

 

If he paid them out of campaign funds and then didn't report it that's clearly illegal.
[

 

"Honest, your honor, I didn't tell anyone to kill Jimmy No-Nose. I simply told my people he needed to be fitted for a new pair of shoes. I don't know how he ended up at the bottom of the river!"

 

Doesn't even have to be from campaign funds. If it was to help the campaign, it was a campaign contribution, regardless of what account it came out of.

 

LOL... damn, you have a perfect record on being perfectly wrong on EVERYTHING on this topic... It's almost savant like...

Remember the tape??

SNIP
The recording offers the public a glimpse at the confidential discussions between Trump and Cohen, and it confirms the man who now occupies the Oval Office had contemporaneous knowledge of a proposal to buy the rights to the story of Karen McDougal
ENDSNIP

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/24/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-tape/index.html

More, please!!

 

He wrote the check as Cohen stated under oath because he didn't want his wife to find out and candidate are perfectly FREE to spend their money to influence and election by getting people to vote for them. If he buys a news suit so he looks good at a rally that is spending money to influence an election. It is NOT a crime.

I've not said a prosecutor cannot get a subject of investigations tax returns. I have said there should be clear probable cause to do so, tax returns are some of our MOST protected information and what a judge must approve any such attempts to get that personal private information. And you just illustrated that for you this is not about justice this is about some kind of vengeance seeking and even wanting it on PPV. So much for the 4th, the 5th, the 14th amendments getting Trump seems to be more important that fundamental constitutional rights.

 

They have clear probable cause due to his financial loan disclosures and tax reassessments not matching his occupancy reports.

And yes, destroying trump is paramount

 

It was how the money was HANDLED and Cohen's end. Trump discussed paying off Daniels too, perfectly legal.

 

None of those amendments make it illegal for a court to obtain tax returns or other business documents with a subpoena. How do you come up with this nonsense?

 

Where does the law require these two totally disconnected number match? But thanks for proving the point that in your opinion the legal system is for destroying your political enemies. Too bad you don't seem to understand the repercussions of that.

 

These are PERSONAL tax returns and a subpoena for personal tax records. If a prosecutor ask for my tax returns or even my business tax returns I will ask to see the subpoena requiring me to turn them over.

 

Oh no you got him this time!

lmao

 

. . . these were documents from the SAME YEAR. If the numbers do not match, then he was either lying on one, the other, or both. Lying on any of them is illegal. Surely you know this.

 

Sounds like they were looking for the tax returns for the Trump Organization. And, regardless, they supplied subpoenas. Trump first tried arguing that he was above the law and could ignore all subpoenas and even order those associated with him to ignore all subpoenas. That failed. Then he tried arguing that the subpoenas were over-broad. That failed too.

 

As I said.... nonsense savant... I couldn't come up with some of those circular arguments if I tried...

 

That’s not true. If it was he wouldn’t need to bill the campaign to use his office space or his jet.

 

So why didn’t trump report the “loan” on his financial disclosures

 

It is called tax evasion.
Maybe you have heard of it?

 

Absolutely not true. Campaign finance covers money spent in service of a campaign, regardless of where it comes from. Even someone who fully funds their own campaign has to report expenditures to the FEC. Source: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates...king-receipts/using-personal-funds-candidate/

 

If he buys it explicitly for the rally and doesn't report it, that is a crime.

 

He fully knows that... he just hopes everybody else (anybody else?) doesn't...

Of all the perma-topics on PF.com, watching @Bluesguy spew nonsense about the Stormy story is one of my personal favorites..

He also knows T**** didn't spend his own money on this project, at least when it mattered (IE BEFORE the election)

Hell, I'm frankly STUNNED Cohen actually got repaid anything at all....I think SOMEBODY eventually realized Mikey did a good job there... He actually did, when you think about it.... Who would think a Home Equity LOC could be that useful?

 

I know what it means and I also know that congress has, over the years, passed laws allowing the president to institute some tariffs. FDR was the first. JFK got an expansion. Trump used the expansion signed into law by Kennedy and passed by the congress controlled by the DNC, to issue his tariffs. That makes them constitutional, with him following a law that was written and used since 1962.

 

Only when the President is acting as the "mere agent" of Congress and under their clear guidelines, which isn't what Trump did.

 

No. Trump used section 232 of the act signed into law in 1962 and it passed muster(congress isn’t who handles this one) so they were instituted. National security is a broad term.

“Section 232 allows the President to implement these tariffs without the approval of Congress, following an investigation by the Department of Commerce.”

https://yeutter-institute.unl.edu/w...riffs-and-how-does-affect-international-trade

 

Canadian steel is not a threat to national security. I'll keep going with the Constitution. Thanks. You keep going with the guy why tried to wipe his ass with it on a regular basis.