SCOTUS rules on subpoenas of Trump financial records (Update: 2d Cir. rules against Trump) (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

In the criminal grand jury case (Vance - the New York case), the SCOTUS rules that a sitting president is not immune from a state grand jury request. It is a 7-2 opinion (with Roberts joining the 'liberals' and Gorsuch and Kavanaugh concurring). Case is remanded for resolution based on "defenses available" to any person subject to that kind of subpoena.

 

[Saintamaniac]

The irreparable harm argument is in support of a stay of the district court's ruling that the subpoena is valid and may be enforced against Mazars, Trump's accounting firm. So he's not making these arguments about the tax return subpoena itself, he's making them to try to get the Second Circuit to stay the district court's decision pending additional appellate review.

The argument about irreparable harm is that if the district court's order is not stayed and Vance executes on it (by requiring Mazars to produce the returns or face criminal action for violating a subpoena), the appellate review process will be effectively rendered moot because the horse will already be out of the barn, so to speak.

This is a very common argument in this context (trying to get a stay pending appellate review) - and it's generally persuasive on its face. That doesn't mean there aren't other aspects that can be more persuasive or even compelling, but the idea that a party has a legal right to seek higher review that will be extinguished if the lower court order isn't stayed is a correct one, in and of itself.

I understand this better now. I still want him to lose this case but your explanation lays out what the harm would be.

 

[MT15]

Perhaps Vance's team of investigators for the District Attorney of New York County can find something, I don't know - but I'm dubious of this idea that tax returns hold the key to Trump's criminal conduct. They're official sworn documents that he has filed with the IRS over the years, and criminal investigations launched from tax return information are not uncommon, the IRS has its own investigators and it works with the FBI. If there is evidence of criminality in Trump's tax returns, I don't suspect that it's particularly obvious - though perhaps it contains what would amount to admissions about relationships that could then be tied to other, more incriminating evidence beyond those returns.

But even that might be unrealistic, I don't know. I have always thought the real reason Trump fights so hard to keep his tax returns from the public is because they show that he reports very little taxable income and pays minimum tax. I think a lot of that is due to special tax treatment for real estate losses, but Trump has basically admitted that he uses those rules ("why wouldn't you?" he asks) and I think the result is that his numbers are very low and he's concerned about how that will play with voters.

I recall a story a while ago, maybe 2-3 years, where at some time in the past he had to make a public financial statement and he had paid zero taxes during the year in question. Might have been when he was trying to get into the casino business or when he was trying to buy an NFL team, can’t remember the exact reason he had to disclose. He lost no support from his base then, they said it proved he was a smart businessman. So I really don’t think that’s the reason.

Tell you what, though, the harder he tries to conceal them the more I think there’s something in there that would be politically damaging. They need to be looked over. There’s something he thinks is really bad in there.

 

[insidejob]

I still think that the big bombshell is he’s worth a fraction of what he’s been claiming he is

Me too. I've thought this since day one. We know the business genius has the ability to bankrupt some of the most un-bankruptable businesses on earth: casinos. Why should we believe that he's handled his personal finances any differently? I also wouldn't be shocked to find out that if you went back to those casino bankruptcy years, Trump's personal wealth went the other direction because he was stealing from his companies to personally enrich himself.

One big tell from him is that he never just comes out and says what he's worth. I guarantee you Warren Buffet knows becaue he probably sits down with a cup of coffee and his morning paper to see how his money is doing. Trump? "Some say it's $4 Billion - others say it's much more bigger than that and these are some really smart people so I would tend to trust their analysis over my bankers, accountants and lawyers' analysis of my wealth."

Of course, he'd never tell you who these "really smart people" are because they're likely figments of his imagination.

 

[superchuck500]

Me too. I've thought this since day one. We know the business genius has the ability to bankrupt some of the most un-bankruptable businesses on earth: casinos. Why should we believe that he's handled his personal finances any differently? I also wouldn't be shocked to find out that if you went back to those casino bankruptcy years, Trump's personal wealth went the other direction because he was stealing from his companies to personally enrich himself.

One big tell from him is that he never just comes out and says what he's worth. I guarantee you Warren Buffet knows becaue he probably sits down with a cup of coffee and his morning paper to see how his money is doing. Trump? "Some say it's $4 Billion - others say it's much more bigger than that and these are some really smart people so I would tend to trust their analysis over my bankers, accountants and lawyers' analysis of my wealth."

Of course, he'd never tell you who these "really smart people" are because they're likely figments of his imagination.

I think he's referring to John Miller and Ron Vara.

 

[insidejob]

I think he's referring to John Miller and Ron Vara.

You're probably right. And that's really sad.

 

[efil4]

The irreparable harm argument is in support of a stay of the district court's ruling that the subpoena is valid and may be enforced against Mazars, Trump's accounting firm. So he's not making these arguments about the tax return subpoena itself, he's making them to try to get the Second Circuit to stay the district court's decision pending additional appellate review.

The argument about irreparable harm is that if the district court's order is not stayed and Vance executes on it (by requiring Mazars to produce the returns or face criminal action for violating a subpoena) while appellate review remains pending, the appellate review process will be effectively rendered moot because the horse will already be out of the barn, so to speak.

This is a very common argument in this context (trying to get a stay pending appellate review) - and it's generally persuasive on its face. That doesn't mean there aren't other aspects that can be more persuasive or even compelling, but the idea that a party has a legal right to seek higher review that will be extinguished if the lower court order isn't stayed is a correct one, in and of itself.

ohhhh ok now i get it. So there are two things happening here. One can offset the other. Has nothing to do with the "evidence" sought...just the process itself within the legal system.

Merci!

 

[superchuck500]

The Second Circuit has stayed the district court's ruling on the subpoena pending further appellate review set for 9/25.

 

[efil4]

The Second Circuit has stayed the district court's ruling on the subpoena pending further appellate review set for 9/25.

Engrish please

nm the tweet just loaded lol

 

[wardorican]

The Second Circuit has stayed the district court's ruling on the subpoena pending further appellate review set for 9/25.

So, the 25th will be the final word on this?

 

[Nebaghead]

So, the 25th will be the final word on this?

Then they have to wait 7 days after the decision before anything is released.

 

[Saintamaniac]

Then they have to wait 7 days after the decision before anything is released.

I think if he loses this, his last hope is the supreme court.

 

[Nebaghead]

I think if he loses this, his last hope is the supreme court.

I thought they already ruled on it and it is up to the lower courts.

 

[superchuck500]

I thought they already ruled on it and it is up to the lower courts.

So S. Ct. only ruled on Trump’s executive privilege position - they remanded for further proceedings, and noted that Trump could still assert arguments that anyone could assert. But when the district court then ruled on those questions, Trump still has rights to seek higher court review, including to the Supreme Court.

It’s pretty much widely anticipated that the arguments he’s making now are not legally persuasive. It is anticipated that the Second Circuit will rule against him. He will then ask for Supreme Court review, but it isn’t likely that they will take it. It would be a discretionary cert request on the basis of the kinds of ordinary objections to a subpoena that anyone could assert - his being president isn’t relevant to that. While the Court had a more compelling reason to review the executive privilege question, it doesn’t have the same interest in an ordinary subpoena dispute. Trump’s team would have to present a compelling basis for the Court to take it up and there just doesn’t appear to be anything like that in the cards.

 

[SaintForLife]

You are aware Mueller did not get his tax returns, right?

He was leaving that for SDNY.

So to answer your question, yes. No one fights this hard to have their tax returns kept out of the hands of investigators that has nothing to hide.

What Mazars and Deutsche Bank have will have serious implications.

Trump said as much in his latest court filing. His last effort to keep them from investigators.

I don't know how you continue to assume this guy has played by the rules his entire career.

Yeah Mueller never looked at his tax returns.

but again don’t let the truth stop you.

Its been pointed out numerous times that Mueller didn’t obtain Trump’s taxes.

Special counsel Bob Mueller has teamed up with the IRS. According to sources familiar with his investigation into alleged Russian election interference, his probe has enlisted the help of agents from the IRS’ Criminal Investigations unit.

This unit—known as CI—is one of the federal government’s most tight-knit, specialized, and secretive investigative entities. Its 2,500 agents focus exclusively on financial crime, including tax evasion and money laundering. A former colleague of Mueller’s said he always liked working with IRS’ special agents, especially when he was a U.S. Attorney.

And it goes without saying that the IRS has access to Trump’s tax returns—documents that the president has long resisted releasing to the public.

Potential financial crimes are a central part of Mueller’s probe. One of his top deputies, Andy Weissmann, formerly helmed the Justice Department’s Enron probe and has extensive experience working with investigative agents from the IRS.

Exclusive: Mueller Enlists the IRS for His Trump-Russia Investigation

Will the accountants take down key members of Team Trump? Or force the president’s tax returns into the open?

www.thedailybeast.com

...Trump has been fuming about the probe in recent weeks as he has been informed about the legal questions that he and his family could face. His primary frustration centers on why allegations that his campaign coordinated with Russia should spread into scrutinizing many years of Trump dealmaking. He has told aides he was especially disturbed after learning Mueller would be able to access several years of his tax returns.

The president has long called the FBI investigation into his campaign’s possible coordination with the Russians a “witch hunt.” But now, Trump is coming face-to-face with a powerful investigative team that is able to study evidence of any crime it encounters in the probe — including tax fraud, lying to federal agents and interference in the investigation.

“This is Ken Starr times 1,000,” said one lawyer involved in the case, referring to the independent counsel who oversaw an investigation that eventually led to House impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton. “Of course, it’s going to go into his finances.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-lawyers-seek-to-undercut-muellers-russia-investigation/2017/07/20/232ebf2c-6d71-11e7-b9e2-2056e768a7e5_story.html

Many of the investigators and prosecutors hired by Mueller fueled speculation that he was giving careful scrutiny to Trump’s finances. For example, in June Andrew Weissman left his position as chief of criminal fraud at the DOJ when Mueller offered him a senior management role on the special counsel team. Weissman is an expert in international fraud and organized crime, famed for his role in combating mob activity on Wall Street. Other additions to the team include Jeannie Rhee, white-collar crime specialist and former senior adviser to former Attorney General Eric Holder, and most recently Greg Andres, a longtime white-collar defense lawyer who most recently served as deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s criminal division, overseeing the fraud unit and the program targeting illegal foreign bribery.

Special Counsel Mueller impanels grand jury in Russia investigation

VICE is the definitive guide to enlightening information.

www.vice.com

The president and his beleaguered White House staff have given no outward sign that they have thought about the prospect yet. But in interviews, veteran federal prosecutors and legal scholars said that Mueller, who began his investigation only last week, has clear-cut authority to obtain the president’s tax returns—perhaps the most sensitive and sought-after government documents since the Pentagon Papers—from the IRS if Mueller suspects they might contain evidence of a crime.

And short of firing Mueller and shutting down his investigation, Trump—who is the first president in 40 years to refuse to make his tax returns public, despite once promising to do so— would have almost no way of stopping him. In fact, the prosecutors said, the president and his lawyers would not necessarily even know that Mueller had obtained them.

Could the Russia Investigation Reveal Trump’s Tax Returns?

If special prosecutor Robert Mueller suspects they contain evidence of a crime, the most sought-after documents in Washington might just be unearthed.

www.politico.com

Any Federal Prosecutor, or Special Cousel, can get the tax records with a court order.

9-13.900 - Access to and Disclosures of Tax Returns in a Non-tax Criminal Case

Title 26 U.S.C. § 6103 prohibits disclosure of tax returns and tax return information except as specifically provided in § 6103, or other sections of the Code. Among the disclosures authorized are those in 26 U.S.C. § 6103(i) concerning access to returns and return information by certain Department of Justice personnel for use in the investigation and prosecution of federal criminal statutory violations and related civil forfeitures not involving tax administration.

Applications for the ex parte order authorized by this paragraph may be authorized by: the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, any Assistant Attorney General, a United States Attorney, any special prosecutor appointed under 28 U.S.C. § 593, or any attorney in charge of a Criminal Division organized crime strike force established pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 510. It is anticipated that most applications will be authorized by United States Attorneys or Strike Force Chiefs.

It is the Department's policy that an Ex Parte Application For Returns and Return Information be filed under seal. Prosecutors should file the motion to seal simultaneously with the Application. The motion should request the court to seal the application and its order granting or denying the application. United States Attorneys should notify Internal Revenue Service whenever a motion to seal is granted, and whenever the records are subsequently unsealed.

9-13.000 - Obtaining Evidence

www.justice.gov

Mueller said no one instructed him to not look into Trump’s finances. Mueller wouldn’t answer whether he got Trump’s tax returns.

3:14 p.m. Mueller is asked about Trump's tax returns

"Your office did not obtain the president's tax returns which could otherwise show foreign financial services, correct?" Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, an Illinois Democrat, asked.

"I'm not going to speak to that," Mueller said.

"In July 2017, the president said his personal finances were off limits or outside the per view of your investigation. And he drew a red line around his personal finances.Were the president's personal finances outside the purview of your investigation?" Krishnamoorthi asked.

"I'm not going to get into that," Mueller responded.

"Were you instructed by anyone not to investigate the president's personal finances?" Krishnamoorthi said.

"No," Mueller answered.

Report doesn't exonerate Trump, Mueller testifies, and he could be charged after leaving office

Robert Mueller has testified that his report does not exonerate President Donald Trump as he has claimed and that he could be charged after leaving office.

abcnews.go.com

-Manafort was found guilty on tax evasion and bank fraud.

-Mueller charged Gates with tax and bank fraud.

-Cohen pled guilty to tax evasion, bank fraud, and campaign finance violations.

-Mueller was looking for financial links between Trump and Russia.

-Mueller teamed up with the IRS Criminal division.

-Mueller hired lawyers that were considered experts in financial crimes.

-If you think that Mueller didn't get Trump's taxes and look for any financial links to Russia, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[efil4]

Show me the court order. Not assumption articles.

You clearly said they can obtain wit a court order. If there was one, where is it?

Because there is one now, that has its own thread. So if there was ANY truth to the Daily Beast opinion, you think Trump would have simply allowed them access without a fight?

As to the bridge, no one wants your used bridge. You bought it long ago. It's all yours. Clearly.

But nice try lol

 

[JimEverett]

Show me the court order. Not assumption articles.

You clearly said they can obtain wit a court order. If there was one, where is it?

Because there is one now, that has its own thread. So if there was ANY truth to the Daily Beast opinion, you think Trump would have simply allowed them access without a fight?

As to the bridge, no one wants your used bridge. You bought it long ago. It's all yours. Clearly.

But nice try lol

According to the post above the Department's policy is to file a Request under seal and the Order would be under seal - so no one on here could possibly show such an Order.

 

[MT15]

Still remains that we have nothing to indicate that Mueller either sought or obtained Trump’s tax returns. Just speculation which was put forth as proof.

 

[JimEverett]

Still remains that we have nothing to indicate that Mueller either sought or obtained Trump’s tax returns. Just speculation which was put forth as proof.

I agree it is speculation, but it is more than "nothing" - we know Mueller did enlist the IRS in his investigation, as well as bringing charges against at least two people for tax crimes.