DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump family, businesses sue in effort to block banks from complying with subpoenas

Trump family, businesses sue in effort to block banks from complying with subpoenas


President Trump, members of his family and his private businesses filed a federal lawsuit late Monday against Deutsche Bank and Capital One in an attempt to block the financial institutions from complying with congressional subpoenas.

The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, comes after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) issued the subpoenas seeking records related to Trump's personal and business finances.

“The subpoenas were issued to harass President Donald J. Trump, to rummage through every aspect of his personal finances, his businesses, and the private information of the President and his family, and to ferret about for any material that might be used to cause him political damage. No grounds exist to establish any purpose other than a political one,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit comes days after it was reported that Deutsche Bank had started turning over Trump’s financial documents to the New York state attorney general’s office in response to a subpoena.

DEVELOPING

https://thehill.com/homenews/administrat...block-them-from

If Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters are requesting it, two absolute deranged conspiracy theorists, I feel like they probably have a leg to stand on here.

BS,, there are a ton of reasons to question anything about Trump,, They are doing their jobs by requesting this data. and Trump is standing in the way for what reasons? tell me why he's standing in the way., Tell me what he's afraid of..

He says he's innocent of everything... Guilty of Nothing, so why is he afraid.... WHY?

I'd like to see the "If you have nothing to be afraid of" clause in the constitution. They are using their legal options to fight two of the leading conspiracy theorists from obtaining his private business dealings.

He is certainly hiding stuff, but the likelihood it has anything to do with Russia is nill. These two absolute deranged conspiracy theorists are doing everything they can to save face on their debunked collusion narrative, you need to see that.

Again, I am not buying into him fighting against Conspiracy theory people,, If the are or aren't I'll leave to others.

But if you want to shoot down a conspiracy,, what do you do, fight against giving information that will clear you or give information that clears you? Which would you do? I'd clear my name.. It's as simple as that, and he can't do that.

Or you can just point to the fact that no one was charged for conspiracy after a 2 year investigation and not let them rummage through your personal business. They have every right to challenge this from these delusional, deranged, outright liars. The "If you have nothing to hide" argument is trash, it was with the Patriot act and it is here.

As for the other part of your comment, I'm in thee employment field. Often I'm called upon to verify a candidates background.. That often include Credit Checks, Criminal checks both locally and nationally. I'm also asked to do drug screening as well.

Did Trump take a drug test? Probably not. But then, has any former president been required to take one,, again, probably not.

And until now, I'd not ever thought about it being necessary.

So, while it appears on the surface that we have some rules in place to protect a president from making/changing policy with the thought of increasing his/her own wealth, clearly, there are no teeth in those rules... Trump has skirted them from the beginning. (remember him trotting out that lady who may or may not have been anyone qualified, with all the volumes of books on a table telling us how he's seperated himself, remember that farce?)

I'd be calling for a change is what we can look at. And my new rule would be "EVERYTHING"!

Drug tests regularly, Credit Check randomly, Audit of all bank statements verifying where the money comes from before during and after they are in office.

I have, in the past, placed people in factory jobs, I knew more about their background than I do about any presidents.

That just doesn't seem right to me...

I agree with that. I've said all along rolling all these checks and balances out would be great, I am all for it, it will cut both ways which is fair.

I am also for campaign finance reform. Set amounts you can spend for each candidate, level the playing field.

Trump is taking everything to court for two reasons. First is to delay any real info from coming out until after the 2020 election. Second is in hopes these cases will land in front of a Trump friendly judge at some point so an otherwise no brainer enforcement of congressional powers will limited or denied. This would also set precedent for future Presidents.

Trump is blatantly obstructing congressional investigations into him trying to force Pelosi's hand IMHO. He wants impeachment proceedings to be started now while Mitch and company are in power to protect him. This gives him a club to bash dems with in 2020.

Yes, Campaign finance and term limits for Congress..

I see no reason for a guy like Lindsey Graham or a woman like Nancy Pelosi to be in office for 30 years...

2 terms in congress is all.. To me, that means two terms as a senator or as a Rep... Or one of each. But after that, you are out. You can run for US President or Governor of your state if you wish or even dog catcher if it suits your fancy,, But US Congress, no.., 2 terms and you gotta go.

Right now, there are things being said (unsubstantiated as far as I know) that McConnell and Graham have accepted money from Russia... either directly or though some other entity. I don't know if that's accurate.

But on the off chance that it is, we need regular audits of all congressional members, their Immediate family and staff.

And to be sure they aren't paid by those countries or entities after they leave office, those audits need to continue for years after they are gone.

Put that in place and I guarantee you, a crook/scam artist/ conman won't run... they'd know that eventually they'd get caught.

I don't to get into the penalty phase, but if you put rules in place and they don't follow them, they gotta be removed from office first and foremost then financial punishments and potential jail time.

We really don't hold our elected officials accountable very well.. It's damn time that we do.

This isn't a partisan issue.. this is an everybody issue. Nobody gets a pass.

Of course, it's all just my opinion, but I think it's high time for it to be so.

Incoming New York attorney general plans wide-ranging investigations of Trump and family
Just-elected Letitia James, who takes office next month, tells NBC she will probe real estate deals, Trump Tower meeting, emoluments, Trump Foundation and more.
Tish James

New York Attorney Gen.-elect Letitia James, who takes office next month and is planning extensive probes of President Donald Trump and his family members. Andy Katz / Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images file
Dec. 12, 2018, 4:30 AM EST
By Allan Smith
New York Attorney Gen.-elect Letitia James says she plans to launch sweeping investigations into President Donald Trump, his family and "anyone" in his circle who may have violated the law once she settles into her new job next month.

"We will use every area of the law to investigate President Trump and his business transactions and that of his family as well," James, a Democrat, told NBC News in her first extensive interview since she was elected last month.

James outlined some of the probes she intends to pursue with regard to the president, his businesses and his family members. They include:

Any potential illegalities involving Trump's real estate holdings in New York, highlighting a New York Times investigation published in October into the president's finances.
The June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian official.
Examine government subsidies Trump received, which were also the subject of Times investigative work.
Whether he is in violation of the emoluments clause in the U.S. Constitution through his New York businesses.
Continue to probe the Trump Foundation.
"We want to investigate anyone in his orbit who has, in fact, violated the law," said James, who was endorsed by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

James campaigned on passing a bill to change New York's double jeopardy laws with an eye on possible pardons coming out of the White House. James told NBC News she wants to be able to pursue state charges against anyone the president were to pardon over federal charges or convictions and whose alleged crimes took place in the state. Under current New York law, she might not be able to do that.

"I think within the first 100 days this bill will be passed," she said, adding, "It is a priority because I have concerns with respect to the possibility that this administration might pardon some individuals who might face some criminal charges, but I do not want them to be immune from state charges."

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

She's also enlisting help from some prosecutorial heavy hitters, like former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, as a part of her transition to help her identify important hires for her office with an eye on bringing in experts for its Trump-related investigations.

New York is home to the president's namesake business, the Trump Organization, and it is where Trump's presidential campaign was headquartered and his reelection campaign as well. And it is where a number of key events under special counsel Robert Mueller's microscope, such as the controversial June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, took place. All of that falls within James' jurisdiction.

As a result, she is about to become one of the most recognizable — and powerful — state attorneys general in the country.

"Taking on President Trump and looking at all of the violations of law I think is no match to what I have seen in my lifetime," James said.

Currently the city's public advocate for a few more weeks, James is set to take over for New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood. She was appointed to fill in for the remainder of Eric Schneiderman's term after he resigned earlier this year following accusations of sexual misconduct.

The most prominent litigation between the attorney general's office and the president involves the Trump Foundation. Schneiderman began probing the charity in 2016 and Underwood later filed the lawsuit against Trump, his adult children and the foundation in June.

The foundation is accused of engaging in illegal political coordination with the Trump campaign, self-dealing and violating legal obligations. The Trumps and the foundation could face millions of dollars in penalties as a result. Trump's lawyers tried and failed to have the case thrown out in New York state Supreme Court, alleging the probe was politically motivated.

Underwood also was investigating whether Trump has violated the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution, which generally prohibits federal officials from receiving gifts or payments from foreign or state governments.

The White House, Trump Organization, an attorney representing the company and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani did not respond to requests for comment.

Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz told NBC News that the president has "considerably more vulnerability" when faced with New York state investigations because he can't hold out the offer of pardons or fire investigators, though he said James' scope would be limited to matters occurring before Trump became president.

He added that it remains an open question as to whether a sitting president can be charged with a state crime.

For her part, James said she thinks Mueller's "doing an excellent job."

"I think he's closing in on this president," she said, "and his days are going to be coming to an end shortly."

So let me get this straight. He shouldn't allow one of the legal principals of congress, oversight, because they are Democrats. Do you have any idea how weak that sounds?

Pretty sure I said nothing about them being Democrats.

But they are and everyone knows that.

Mary Ellen
‏ @mec1539

Let me get this straight @SpeakerPelosi @HouseDemocrats you want to see the debit card records of @realDonaldTrump daughter Tiffany? Why? Are you trying to regain a glimpse of your youth? Don’t you know how America is seeing you & your actions You’ve all fallen off the rails

A Twitter post from a Trumpian? So much for a credible source.

More examples of the Democrat Mob abusing their power.

They can't beat Trump with policies so they play their evil little games at our expense.

These are bad people.

I love this type of whining after watching the no holds barred pummeling y'all gave hillary and the Obamas for 8 years. Trump is such a victim. BooHoo.

He is point blank spitting on the constitutional powers of oversight of the coequal Congressional branch. He can cry until the cows come home, this is going to happen.

Even Bill Maher called them Stalkers.

New York push to reveal Trump's state tax returns takes a step forward
By Evan Simko-Bednarski and Sonia Moghe, CNN

Updated 7:06 PM ET, Tue April 30, 2019
President Donald Trump has declined to release his federal tax returns, but New York legislators are pushing a bill aimed at enabling the release of his state returns.
President Donald Trump has declined to release his federal tax returns, but New York legislators are pushing a bill aimed at enabling the release of his state returns.
(CNN)A New York effort to enable the release of President Donald Trump's state tax returns is inching closer to becoming law.

On Tuesday, a bill authorizing the release of state returns to Congress moved out of the State Senate's Budget and Revenue Committee.
The bill is expected to be taken up on the floor of the State Senate next week. If passed, it will allow the state's tax commissioner to hand over any New York tax returns at the request of the US House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, the US Senate Finance Committee or the Joint Committee on Taxation.
State Democrats are hopeful it will present a way around the President's refusal to release his federal filings.
The bill's initial sponsor, Democratic State Sen. Brad Hoylman, said on Tuesday that he expects the bill to pass.
"It has 33 cosponsors including the leadership," Hoylman said. "That suggests widespread support by the Senate."
Mike Murphy, spokesman for New York Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, was more blunt.
"It will pass next week," he said via email.
A companion bill is working its way through the State Assembly, shepherded by Democratic State Assemblyman David Buchwald. Though that bill is still before the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, Buchwald said he expects it to pass.
"I believe the New York State Assembly should and will agree to a legislative path forward on this topic," he said in an emailed statement.
Minority leaders for both houses did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Earlier this month, Assembly Minority Leader Brian Kolb said the bill was "political grandstanding," and that tax returns should stay "between the taxpayer, the IRS or New York State Tax and Finance Department."
Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday that he would support the bill should it arrive on his desk.
"We believe everybody running for office -- whether it's federal, whether it's state -- should release their tax returns. This measure, as long as it applies to everybody, we support."
Though the legislation would enable the release only of the President's state returns, the fact that much of his business has been conducted in New York means that such returns could be nearly as telling as his federal returns.
Trump has repeatedly declined to release his tax returns, the first president in more than 40 years to decline. He has said ongoing Internal Revenue Service audits prevent him from releasing his returns, despite the fact that no such audit would prohibit their release.

Judge allows congressional Democrats' lawsuit against Trump over business earnings to move forward
CNN Digital Expansion 2018 Katelyn Polantz
By Katelyn Polantz, CNN



(CNN)A lawsuit from Democratic members of Congress over Trump business earnings from foreign governments while President Donald Trump is in the White House can continue to move forward, a federal judge decided on Tuesday.

The ruling, which firmly rebukes the President's arguments, will empower Congress if they seek more information about payments received by Trump's family businesses and other business details. Judge Emmet Sullivan's opinion lands as House Democratic committees are seeking more details through subpoenas about Trump's financial history.
At issue in this case was the meaning of "emolument" -- a term used in the Constitution that says US officeholders should not accept presents from foreign governments.

With emoluments "defined broadly as any profit, gain, or advantage, it is clear," Sullivan writes, that Congress has "a plausible claim against the President for violations of the clause."
"The President's argument regarding the 'judgment' and 'planning' needed to ensure compliance with the Clause is beside the point. It may take judgment and planning to comply with the Clause, but he has no discretion as to whether or not to comply with it in the first instance," Sullivan wrote.
The case is one of the few legal tests of the constitutional clause -- yet is among several suits that contest Trump's family business while he's in the White House.
Sullivan sided with the Democrats in the lawsuit, and had previously ruled they had the ability to continue to pursue the case.
Another case that hinges on the constitutional clause and that's related to Trump's revenues at his hotel in Washington is currently paused because an appeals court is weighing it. In that case, state attorneys general from Washington, DC and Maryland argue that the Trump International Hotel has benefited from an unfair competitive advantage, and the President shouldn't be able to have a connection to the business that is blocks from the White House.
In both cases, the plaintiffs are seeking to look closer at Trump business records, which the Trump administration is fighting against.

He might not win the 2020 election without providing his financials. Last I looked 25 states have introduced bills that would require presidential candidates to release their tax returns to appear on that state's 2020 ballot. If even half of these are turned into state law, that's a lot to overcome. It would be fought by the white house I'm sure, and it'd likely be up to the courts to decide on whether that is constitutional or not.

In theory, Trump could be blocked from the ballot in any state where the new requirement became law. But not a single state has enacted it so far, and the governors of California and New Jersey have vetoed it after it passed both state chambers. It's more interesting as a way for state Democrats to troll Trump than as an actual re-election threat.

https://www.axios.com/states-tax-return-...4aad919bdb.html

Of course, there is no chance in hell that a report on Fox is bias.....LOL

They know they can't beat Trump so they play their underhanded baby games in trying to bring him down.

True Americans won't stand for it.

Hey, he won with a minority of the votes. Over three million less. I wonder how many more millions the Democrats would need to beat him?

If they had only bothered to visit the rust belt, you know those fly over inbred hillbillies they detest so much. They could have won in the landslide that was polled on every polling outlet. Wouldn't even have to deal with this problem and try to change the entire system that has been in place for hundreds of years.

Yeah, one of those sytsems allowed you to pay your doctor for a house call with a chicken for him to eat. My how times have changed. At one time the hospital bill for having a baby was $100.00

At some point you have to protect your people from glutinous greed.

But you are right in that if the Dems would have spent more time in the mid west they would have won the election in 2016. A three million vote buffer simply isn't enough.

You're right, it isn't.

Yep, that’s the trump era. It has a few people like you who like to separate American’s as good vs bad. Divide and conquer.