We simply cannot countenance law breaking run amok:

Steven Mnuchin is the Treasury Secretary and therefore the head of the IRS. In a few hours, he will be in violation of a Congressional order to remit six years of Donald Trump's tax returns for Congressional review. The law is clearly on Congress's side, and Mnuchin is violating that law in order to appease his master.

If Mnuchin refuses to release the tax returns today, Congress should hold him in contempt tomorrow. The contempt can be a precursor to formal impeachment proceedings against Mnuchin for refusing to perform his duties as Treasury Secretary.

ABOVE THE LAW
Carl Kline is a security specialist, subpoenaed to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee about the security clearance given to Jared Kushner. The White House told Kline to ignore the subpoena, and Kline's lawyers told the committee that he was afraid of complying with Congress for fear of losing his job at the Pentagon.

Yes, Democrats should add another count of WITNESS INTIMIDATION to their impeachment charges against Donald Trump. But in the meantime, they should hold Kline in contempt of Congress.

Refusing to respond to lawful requests from Congress is a violation of an actual law. Not a norm, not a convention, but a straight-up freaking law.

Contempt of Congress is defined in statute, 2 U.S.C.A. 192, enacted in 1938, which states that any person who is summoned before Congress who "willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry" shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a maximum $1,000 fine and 12 month imprisonment.

Congress can vote to hold these people in contempt tomorrow, and theoretically throw them in jail tomorrow for their refusal to comply with a Congressional investigation.

rawress.

- chin

{ sipping OJ (w/ pulp) }

DT -> the first Dionysian Presidente?

PA.


- UL

... and, as always, TIA.

BID.

{ something stirs in the boudoir noir }

BIll?

That you?

D!

william said:

---

DT -> the first Dionysian Presidente?

PA.


- UL

... and, as always, TIA.

BID.

{ something stirs in the boudoir noir }

BIll?

That you?

D!

---

DT ain't got nuttin' on me, the first Dionysian Lorde Mayor

What does Trump mean when he threatens to bring the Supreme Court into the fight if the Democrats exercise oversight over the Executive branch by commencing impeachment proceedings against him?

cinque said:

---

What does Trump mean when he threatens to bring the Supreme Court into the fight if the Democrats exercise oversight over the Executive branch by commencing impeachment proceedings against him?

---

It's not in the Constitution. It's one of his stupid idle threats and it's also ignorant

Waco1947 said:

---

cinque said:

---

What does Trump mean when he threatens to bring the Supreme Court into the fight if the Democrats exercise oversight over the Executive branch by commencing impeachment proceedings against him?

---

It's not in the Constitution. It's one of his stupid idle threats and it's also ignorant

---

The SC has nothing to do with impeachment. Why doesn't Trump know this?

Cinque - Read this then get back to us...

riflebear said:

---

HCinque - Read this then get back to us...

---

Are you aware that what Trump did today was an article of impeachment against Richard Nixon?

Oh, and 9451. That's Trump's two year lie count.

cinque said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Cinque - Read this then get back to us...

---

Are you aware that what Trump did today was an article of impeachment against Richard Nixon?

Oh, and 9451. That's Trump two year lie count.

---

What did he do today?

If Trump has lied 9451 then the media & liberals have lied 945,100 times.

cinque said:

---

---

Are you saying you don't want our President to follow the law when someone commits a crime - you want them to let someone get away w/ a crime? Should he do something illegal like Obama and his DOJ did and let someone avoid prosecution for political reasons. Seems you have it backwards again.

I was wrong - I'm sorry.

Axios reports that since May 2017-March 2019, exactly 533,074 web articles have been published about Russia and Trump-Mueller, which in turn have generated "245 million interactions including likes, comments and shares on Twitter and Facebook."

riflebear said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Are you saying you don't want our President to follow the law when someone commits a crime - you want them to let someone get away w/ a crime? Should he do something illegal like Obama and his DOJ did and let someone avoid prosecution for political reasons. Seems you have it backwards again.

---

What?

cinque said:

---

riflebear said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Are you saying you don't want our President to follow the law when someone commits a crime - you want them to let someone get away w/ a crime? Should he do something illegal like Obama and his DOJ did and let someone avoid prosecution for political reasons. Seems you have it backwards again.

---

What?

---

**** wha?

- really profane

cinque said:

---

riflebear said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Are you saying you don't want our President to follow the law when someone commits a crime - you want them to let someone get away w/ a crime? Should he do something illegal like Obama and his DOJ did and let someone avoid prosecution for political reasons. Seems you have it backwards again.

---

What?

---

Finally figured it out. Cinque-poo is the guy on the Allstate commercial watching via his doorbell as his car is being stolen.

"Steven Mnuchin is the Treasury Secretary and therefore the head of the IRS. In a few hours, he will be in violation of a Congressional order to remit six years of Donald Trump's tax returns for Congressional review. The law is clearly on Congress's side, and Mnuchin is violating that law in order to appease his master."

OK, so let's unpack that.

"Steven Mnuchin is the Treasury Secretary and therefore the head of the IRS."

Nope. Charles P. Rettig is the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, and Rettig, not Mnuchin, would make all decisions regarding IRS documents.

"In a few hours, he will be in violation of a Congressional order to remit six years of Donald Trump's tax returns for Congressional review"

Not exactly true. Part of the responsibility of the IRS Commissioner is protecting the privacy of taxpayers. That means Rettig has a legal responsibility to verify the validity of any request for a tax return under US Code Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 61, Subchapter B, Section 6103 (which going forward I shall refer to only as Section 6103 for brevity). Part of that authority Rettig has, is that he may ignore orders he deems invalid, without comment or response.

The Congress, as a whole, has no authority to demand anyone's tax return. The code's direction regarding requests falls under part (f) of Section 6103, which reads:

"Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103

So, first we must consider whether the Chairman has made a proper written request as directed by the law. Second, if such request was properly made, Mr. Rettig has discretion under Section 6103 to confirm that the information will be provided to the committee only under 'closed executive session' conditions as required by the statute.

"The law is clearly on Congress's side, and Mnuchin is violating that law in order to appease his master."
Completely false. If Mr. Rettig deems there is risk of public disclosure of private information, as indeed several members of the committee have already implied they would do, then Mr. Rettig not only has authority to deny such documents to the committee, he would be compelled by law to do so. Ergo, the law is in dispute on this point, and certainly Mr. Mnuchin has nothing to do with the decision by Mr. Rettig. Note further that the Chairman has failed to provide any probable cause for requesting not only multiple years of returns by Mr. Trump, including several years before Trump held any public office (which seriously undermines a demand made with respect to a sitting President), but also includes demands for communications not specifically listed in Section 6103 as something the committee may demand under any circumstances.

Therefore, it would be false to claim that anyone in the IRS or Treasury Department is violating law when protecting private tax returns from potential public release, and any dispute is going to at most produce a court order either directing or prohibiting submission of the returns to the Committee.

It is blatantly dishonest to imply intentional violation of law by the IRS Commissioner, and even more so to make such accusation against the Treasury Secretary, who is not involved in the decision.

I'm more inclined to politifact not Allman
80 Lies
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/?page=2

Waco1947 said:

---

I'm more inclined to politifact not Allman
80 Lies
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/?page=2

---

The law and ethics both stand against you, Waco.

You simply remain willfully blind and corrupt.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Steven Mnuchin is the Treasury Secretary and therefore the head of the IRS. In a few hours, he will be in violation of a Congressional order to remit six years of Donald Trump's tax returns for Congressional review. The law is clearly on Congress's side, and Mnuchin is violating that law in order to appease his master."

OK, so let's unpack that.

"Steven Mnuchin is the Treasury Secretary and therefore the head of the IRS."

Nope. Charles P. Rettig is the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, and Rettig, not Mnuchin, would make all decisions regarding IRS documents.

"In a few hours, he will be in violation of a Congressional order to remit six years of Donald Trump's tax returns for Congressional review"

Not exactly true. Part of the responsibility of the IRS Commissioner is protecting the privacy of taxpayers. That means Rettig has a legal responsibility to verify the validity of any request for a tax return under US Code Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 61, Subchapter B, Section 6103 (which going forward I shall refer to only as Section 6103 for brevity). Part of that authority Rettig has, is that he may ignore orders he deems invalid, without comment or response.

The Congress, as a whole, has no authority to demand anyone's tax return. The code's direction regarding requests falls under part (f) of Section 6103, which reads:

"Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103

So, first we must consider whether the Chairman has made a proper written request as directed by the law. Second, if such request was properly made, Mr. Rettig has discretion under Section 6103 to confirm that the information will be provided to the committee only under 'closed executive session' conditions as required by the statute.

"The law is clearly on Congress's side, and Mnuchin is violating that law in order to appease his master."
Completely false. If Mr. Rettig deems there is risk of public disclosure of private information, as indeed several members of the committee have already implied they would do, then Mr. Rettig not only has authority to deny such documents to the committee, he would be compelled by law to do so. Ergo, the law is in dispute on this point, and certainly Mr. Mnuchin has nothing to do with the decision by Mr. Rettig. Note further that the Chairman has failed to provide any probable cause for requesting not only multiple years of returns by Mr. Trump, including several years before Trump held any public office (which seriously undermines a demand made with respect to a sitting President), but also includes demands for communications not specifically listed in Section 6103 as something the committee may demand under any circumstances.

Therefore, it would be false to claim that anyone in the IRS or Treasury Department is violating law when protecting private tax returns from potential public release, and any dispute is going to at most produce a court order either directing or prohibiting submission of the returns to the Committee.

It is blatantly dishonest to imply intentional violation of law by the IRS Commissioner, and even more so to make such accusation against the Treasury Secretary, who is not involved in the decision.

---

To what "public release" of Trump's tax returns are you referring?

cinque said:

---

---

Jack Ryan says hello on sealed court documents being released during an election. Good call Crazy "5 personality" Cinque.

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Jack Ryan says hello on sealed court documents being released during an election. Good call Crazy "5 personality" Cinque.

---

Who is Jack Ryan?

cinque said:

---

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Jack Ryan says hello on sealed court documents being released during an election. Good call Crazy "5 personality" Cinque.

---

Who is Jack Ryan?

---

You seem to be able to do internet things, so do your own research. Hope you get the meds you need btw and/or help you need!

You seem to have some issues. Let us all know what prayers you need btw. Are you on social security benefits and need help with home deliveries for food?

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Jack Ryan says hello on sealed court documents being released during an election. Good call Crazy "5 personality" Cinque.

---

Who is Jack Ryan?

---

You seem to be able to do internet things, so do your own research. Hope you get the meds you need btw and/or help you need!

You seem to have some issues. Let us all know what prayers you need btw. Are you on social security benefits and need help with home deliveries for food?

---

Seriously, who is he?

Tom Clancy character?

cinque said:

---

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

Pat Neff said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

Jack Ryan says hello on sealed court documents being released during an election. Good call Crazy "5 personality" Cinque.

---

Who is Jack Ryan?

---

You seem to be able to do internet things, so do your own research. Hope you get the meds you need btw and/or help you need!

You seem to have some issues. Let us all know what prayers you need btw. Are you on social security benefits and need help with home deliveries for food?

---

Seriously, who is he?

---

Don't feel bad, I have no idea either.

But I'm thinking it may be a guy who owns a steakhouse in Tyler (it's pretty good too).

https://jackryans.com