Mulvaney Says Democrats Will ‘Never’ See Trump’s Tax Returns


President Donald Trump’s acting chief of staff said Sunday that Democrats’ efforts to see Trump’s tax returns will “never” be successful, and “nor should they.”

Mick Mulvaney, during an appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” characterized Democrats’ efforts as politically motivated and claimed that voters had already decided in 2016 that they didn’t care what is in Trump’s returns.

“That’s an issue that was already litigated during the election,” Mulvaney said. “Voters knew the president could have given his tax returns. They knew that he didn’t, and they elected him anyway.”

Trump broke precedent as a presidential candidate with his refusal to release his tax returns. He said then, and continues to maintain, that he is unable to furnish them because he is under audit by the Internal Revenue Service.

Mulvaney seemed to contradict the president at one point in the show, saying that even under audit “you could always allow people to see it.”

Democrats have cited Trump’s decision on the tax returns as evidence that he has something to hide. Last week, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., sent a letter to the IRS formally requesting that six years of Trump’s business and personal tax returns be turned over to Congress by Wednesday.

An attorney for Trump asked the Treasury Department to deny the Democrats’ request, calling it a “gross abuse of power.” Trump himself said he would take the fight over his tax returns all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Mulvaney claimed Sunday that Democrats are overstepping. He said that although the law allows the IRS to hand over someone’s returns under certain circumstances, a “political hit job is not one of those reasons.”

The 4th-highest ranking House Democrat, Rep. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico, defended his party members during an interview on “Fox New Sunday,” saying they are exercising their oversight responsibilities.

“No other president in modern times has had to have their tax returns requested because … they’ve all voluntarily shared them,” Lujan said.

(c) 2019, The Washington Post · Colby Itkowitz  



    • The Dems are mad at Mueller for not finding the Russian ghost to be able to impeach him, so they came up with another hoax. Even if he’ll show them his tax returns of the past 50 years, they won’t be happy and will come up with something else. The Dems, the baby murderers, have to go.

    (Gateway Pundit) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced Thursday that the House Dems will sue to stop President Trump’s emergency declaration on the US-Mexico border.
    Both the House and Senate tried to block President Trump’s national emergency declaration with a resolution and failed — Trump vetoed the bill so the House is taking a rare legal step to stop the president.
    Top Democrats voted to authorize a lawsuit against President Trump emergency declaration on Thursday.
    Pelosi announced that the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which is comprised of five people, voted 3-2 (on party lines) to authorize a lawsuit challenging the President’s decision to transfer funds from appropriated accounts for his border wall.
    Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn voted for it, and Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) voted against it.
    “The President’s sham emergency declaration and unlawful transfers of funds have undermined our democracy, contravening the vote of the bipartisan Congress, the will of the American people and the letter of the Constitution,” Pelosi said in a statement Thursday.
    “The House will once again defend our Democracy and our Constitution, this time in the courts,” Pelosi added. “The President’s action clearly violates the Appropriations Clause by stealing from appropriated funds, an action that was not authorized by constitutional or statutory authority.”
    President Trump traveled to Calexico, California on Friday to inspect new border wall construction.
    Trump also held a round table meeting with border patrol officials where he had a message for the thousands of migrants and asylum seekers headed to the US: “Our country is full…turn around.”

    When Attorney General William P. Barr released a four-page memo two weeks ago opining that “the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense,” we already knew enough to be sure that Barr was spinning the contents of the report his memo claimed to summarize, as multiple reports now say he did.

    That’s because there was already public evidence at the time that undermined Barr’s conclusions. Barr’s letter may have been accurate, technically speaking. But based on what it omitted about two key associates of President Trump — his longtime adviser Roger Stone and his former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort — it was obvious that the attorney general had left whole areas of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s findings out of the summary. That Mueller’s team thinks Barr made the investigation’s findings look less damaging to Trump should not come as a surprise.

    Barr’s summary clears Trump of obstruction of justice because Mueller didn’t have enough proof to charge a narrowly drawn crime: conspiracy or coordination with the Russian government. That wouldn’t include coordination with WikiLeaks. Indeed, because of First Amendment protections, coordinating with WikiLeaks would probably not be a crime.

    It might, however, look a lot worse for Trump than Barr’s flat declaration that no one “in the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia.”

    One person the Mueller report didn’t ‘exonerate’? Vladimir Putin.

    Congress made the Starr report public. It shouldn’t hide Mueller’s.

    Barr is wrong: Obstruction of justice doesn’t require another underlying crime

    Marcy Wheeler
    Marcy Wheeler is an independent journalist who writes about national security and civil liberties.
    © 1996-2019 The Washington Post


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here