House oversight chair Comer says ‘6 or 7 Biden family members’ potentially involved in business sche

According to the law.

Specifically 26USC1603, it says tax returns can't be released without written permission from the taxpayer who filed those returns.

 

Ask Congress.

 

I am going to guess that you are wrong on the matter.

 

Show us the text of the law that proves me wrong.

 

None seems discernible. Maybe they are just campaigning for Trump, flinging mud. Do you think that is what the MAGA faction in the House is doing?

 

Nah, you first. I want to watch your posts fail then meltdown.

 

Oh, ok. I ain't skeered...

"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."

Looks like you guessed wrong.

 

He didnt. Drugs do that

 

No, I’m denying whats on it as the chain of custody is ridiculously compromised and you know it

If there was anything on it that was admissible, the Trump administration had the laptop for over a year, why didnt they do anything with it ?

Seriously, why didn’t they do anything with it then ?

 

There is a legal way to do business with foreign nations and another to do so illegally. There wouldn't be an investigation if there is potential proof of illegal activity. Unfortunately for Joe, some of his family members may have to be sacrificed.

 

So, a drug addled idiot like Hunter is going to be trusted by a foreign government with millions of dollars?...lol

 

Yes !!!!

See: Jared Kushner gets Saudi BILLIONS

See: Ivanka gets Chinese Trademarks within days of her fathers official state visit….

 

Really? That is all it says?

 

What more needs to be said...lol

 

they voted for it in close session, which is perfectly legal under the code. Again, you are not reading the code correctly. You are reading the code the way you think the code is read.

 

Yes, I agree. But that will come under the proper venue, namely the FBI or other investigative agencies, not the word of Tony Boblunski and you taking it as Gospel truth.

1. The DA is doing just that with the Stormy Daniels Hush Money via the Grand Jury. That tells me there is probable cause to investigate. Whether there is an indictment, I don't know, but you can't dismiss it no matter how much you want to.
2. Yes Congress can investigate anyone they want to as long as there is some legitimate legislative purpose. They did that during the McCarthyism era with the UnAmerican Activities committee where anyone and everyone may be suspected of being communist sympathizers. They also did it with the Teamsters and organized crime and a few others. But Congress can. The better question is which person. and second, the best question is when to investigate. And the third best question is to what extent the investigation should be done.

 

You better read a history book. Senator Joe McCarthy had nothing to do with the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Also, the HUAC didn't begin, not end with "McCarthyism". It began in 1938 and wasn't disbanded until 1975.

 

Show us where the code says they can vote to publicly released a taxpayer's returns without that taxpayer's written permission. We'll be waiting (forever, I'm sure...lol).

 

Kushner got that money after Trump left office.

 

Apparently the pertinent judges said you are wrong.

 

What judge ruled that the committee could release Trump's tax returns? Provide a link to the ruling.

 

It's this silly little one stacked with Trump appointees......

 

the code does not mention whether the committee can vote to release or not. The code is written whether or not the person would allow release if the committee hearing was public. that is all it says, To be clear, the code reads as follows, "(1)Committee on Ways and Means, Committee on Finance, and Joint Committee on Taxation

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.

What I highlighted in bold is the key here. Tax returns can be furnished to the committee when sitting in close session. that means in close sessions, they don't need permission to view it. If the session is open to the public, or "taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such a disclosure" then the requirement for release is concerned. But once in closed session, then the committee can vote on whether or not to release it, minus any personal identification information attributed to such. That is the legal way and that is what they did here and in 2014.

 

Supreme Court ring a bell

 

The Senate had its version too. Except the committee was named Senate Permenant Committee on Investigations, which was primarily tasked with anticommunism within the US government, among other places.

Second, I am well aware of the HUAC and its long activity. But it was more than just communism, but rather also included catholicism and anything else deemed "UnAmerican" including Japanese, Chinese, Blacks, and so forth. The problem was that it was a bad time where anyone who criticized the government for any reason was labeled a communist. And that is exactly what Trump tries to do except he does not use "communist" anymore, but UnAmerican or unpatriotic. Same effect though.