JUST IN: DOJ releases opinion that puts the kibosh on Democrat demands for Trump’s taxes [FULL OPINION]

The DOJ has just released an opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel that explains why Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin does not have a legal obligation to release Trump’s taxes to Democrat committees in Congress:



The opinion defends Mnuchin’s prior refusal to turn over Trump’s taxes and you can read the full 33 page opinion below:

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

36
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
11 Comment threads
25 Thread replies
15 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
newest oldest most voted
Alabamamom
Member
Active Member
Alabamamom

I demand to see the democrat committee members release their taxes. I’d like to know how they walk in as a member of congress and come out as millionaires and make millions once they’ve left office.

Chow Yun Fatty
Member
Trusted Member
Chow Yun Fatty

If the IRS doesn’t have a problem, I don’t care.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

I haven’t read the whole thing but glancing through it the conclusion is that it’s a witch hunt. They are going about it backwards. Instead of having a legitimate purpose they want to use the records to find something in them to justify getting the records and releasing them to the public.

That is the very definition of a witch hunt and fishing for dirt.

slantry
Member
Active Member
slantry

The problem with the opinion is that all of the case law on this says, basically, that you can’t probe to try and find congress’s “true” motive so long as there is a factually legitimate purpose. Maybe the courts will revisit that principle in the litigation that inevitably will ensue over this demand, but as it stands now, Trump’s ultimately going to lose this fight.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

Avatarslantry They didn’t do that. They found that there wasn’t a legitimate purpose to begin with.

slantry
Member
Active Member
slantry

Edit: Note that “factually” in my above comment was supposed to read “facially.” I blame autocorrect. * * * No, they found that the “true” purpose was not a legitimate legislative purpose and that the stated purpose was BS. You can read it in the syllabus… “Under the facts and circumstances, the Secretary of the Treasury reasonably and correctly concluded that the Committee’s asserted interest in reviewing the Internal Revenue Service’s audits of presidential returns was pretextual and that its true aim was to make the President’s tax returns public, which is not a legitimate legislative purpose.” All of that may be true, but the courts aren’t allowed to look past the stated purpose (at least unless they revisit the law on this).

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

slantry Yes, but Congress cannot force the executive branch to disclose confidential information without a legitimate legislative purpose. The DOJ went to great lengths to explain why the stated purpose was BS, and it’s unfortunate they had to do so because it is obviously a bunch of BS. The executive and legislative branches are equal, so they don’t have to accept Nadler’s stated purpose without question. Edit…I’m removing the details of why it’s a bogus “legitimate purpose” because you know them. Comment was too long. There is no way the Dems can succeed at claiming their need for Trump’s records is for a legitimate legislative purpose, which is specifically to provide oversight into how the IRS conducts audits on the President’s taxes. None of the evidence supports that. The evidence entirely goes to support that they want it for nefarious reasons…which is not a legitimate legislative purpose. Sorry for the… Read more »

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

kong1967kong1967 …and it put the formatting back in after I apologized for it removing them. I don’t want to remove the apology because it will remove the formatting again. UGH.

slantry
Member
Active Member
slantry

Haha, I had the same thing happen to me. Those three asterisks weren’t supposed to just sit there.

My point is that the existing jurisprudence instructs the courts to query whether the reason stated by congress is itself a legitimate legislative purpose. If it is, you end the whole thing there—it doesn’t matter if their stated reason is obviously BS. And unless that changes, Trump is going to lose in the courts plain and simple.

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

Avatarslantry I get what you are saying, but it seems to me that the DOJ disagrees with that.

“the Executive need not treat the Committee’s
assertion of the legitimacy of its purpose as unquestionable.”

Gadbous
Member
Active Member
Gadbous

Law suit in 3, 2, 1……

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

lot easier for the justice Department to fight [on behalf of President] these committee chairs than Trump and his Attorneys.

sjmom
Member
Noble Member
sjmom

Here comes the contempt vote from the Dems in Congress for the entire OLC. razz

Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

Well then, good news! For now…

Tracy
Member
Noble Member
Tracy

Womp womp.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Well, OK. I, for one, never really cared about them in the first place.

But I did think it would be a good show of transparency and good faith to the country for him to volunteer them – to show that he’s the squeaky clean paragon of virtue and honesty and American principles that we all voted for. I certainly would have considered voting for him in 2020 if he said, “Here, my life’s an open book. I have nothing to hide and I’ve done everything above board my entire life.”

But no.

Eh, he’s not that into transparency and good faith. Whatevs. And I guess he doesn’t want my vote.

Opportunity missed, Donald. But keep on Proggin’ buddy. Keep on Proggin.

AirForceVet98
Member
Noble Member
AirForceVet98

“Eh, he’s not that into transparency and good faith..”

Good faith bro? Seriously? If you were in Trump’s shoes, being ruthlessly attacked by conspiracy theory subscribing Dems & socialists looking for ANY reason to impeach you & throw you & members of your family in prison to appease the mob, would you volunteer ANY information to that group of psychos?

I highly doubt it.

“And I guess he doesn’t want my vote.”

Then enjoy Biden & his out-of-the-closet socialist pals implenting policy & choosing more SCOTUS judges. I don’t like a lot of Trump’s choices either, but he’s miles better than the 2 dozen candidates the psychos on the other side are offering

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

Does he have something to hide? Something they can use against him?

Look I get it. They’ll pounce on anything they can find to ruin this guy.

Why did we vote for a guy who has things like that again?

AirForceVet98
Member
Noble Member
AirForceVet98

The reason you don’t release anything further is he’s already cooperated with the Special Counsel. Trump could have invoked Executive Privlege at any time to stop Mueller…he didn’t do it once. Now the Dems have moved on from Russia & inventing another scandal in his taxes.

So in summation, you have a party that is literally lying to you & their constituents about what is in the Mueller report & creating a new “scandal” with a sympathetic press giving them cover and perpetuating more lies.

It’s not about hiding.

And I didn’t vote for Trump either, but after these last 2 1/2 years, I’m running to vote for him…warts & all to stop the “abortion at any stage for any reason” & “ban all semi-automatic firearms” socialists.

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

All that has nothing to do with anything I said.

If I were Donald (or any other government employee – from politician to the surly bitch at the DMV), I’d release anything the American people demanded. They have a right to know every little detail about who’s overlording them. Warts and all.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

You wont’t believe this AT,but I did my Driver License renewal last month and I had the nicest four public employees I have met in a long time.From the application,photograph,eye chart,and finally the Written exam.The lady conducting the written exam even congratulated me twice for no misses.

Sentinel
Member
Noble Member
Sentinel

ATAT

I didn’t. But I’m likely to this time around (even though I still don’t like him).

khammer
Member
Active Member
khammer

Because our two major political parties nominated shitty candidates?

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

The only one I saw nominated who was Shitty was Clinton.We have doe alright with our Pick..

khammer
Member
Active Member
khammer

In retrospect, yes. He’s exceeded the expectations I had for him when he was elected. If you factor in the level of genuine resistance to anything Trump, not just from the Dems, which was to be expected, but from his own party and the MSM, I think he’s done rather well.
If only he could figure out how to “stick a sock in it” once in awhile……..

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

ThanksK hammer.,like what you said.

TJK ✓
Member
Noble Member
TJK ✓

Let me see,

You get the communist progressives and the “workers”, and the kkk to split their vote and maybe I will vote for a pure constitutional conservative.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

You will probably be sitting out the next election.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

During the primaries we only had two real choices.Trump and Cruz.The Republicans chose to go with a successful Businessman and not a politician.We wanted to try something different and so far has been more successful than any politician could have done.

ryan-o
Member
Noble Member
ryan-o

Really, you’d have us believe your vote hinged on his taxesn

AT
Member
Noble Member
AT

My vote hinged on his integrity.

Danaellen
Member
Noble Member
Danaellen

HAHAHAHA!!

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

No doubt they will say the DOJ is obstructing Congress from performing it’s duty of “oversight”.

bigsir74
Member
Noble Member
bigsir74

Great point Kong,and they will be attacking the wrong Dog,when they go after the DOJ and Attorney General Barr.I really doubt they will challenge that 33 page response.What do you think

kong1967
Member
Noble Member
kong1967

Avatarbigsir74 I really don’t know how the Democrats will react and who they will blame. However, they have acted irrationally the entire time and have done things that are so ludicrous it boggles the mind. I’ll just say that it’s possible they will try to say Barr or Trump influenced this decision and it’s more of their attempt to cover up his “crimes”. Like with Barr, they will not acknowledge that releasing those records would be a violation of the law.

New West
Member
Noble Member
New West

Here come the threats and the list of who they will call…are they staying for the summer? Glad they told them to pound sand…

Back to Top of Comments