Ex-US attorney: Mueller ‘absolutely’ has Trump’s tax returns

[corbe]

Ex-US attorney: Mueller ‘absolutely’ has Trump’s tax returns

BY OWEN DAUGHERTY - 12/13/18 06:25 PM EST

Former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg said Thursday that he “absolutely” believed special counsel Robert Mueller has President Trump’s tax returns.

The comment came in response to a question from MSNBC host Nicole Wallace on “Deadline: Whitehouse” about whether Rosenberg thought Mueller had Trump’s tax return.

“Absolutely,” he said. “No question in my mind from day one.”

Rosenberg, who also served as chief of staff to the FBI director from 2013 to 2015, elaborated on why Mueller would possess tax records that Trump has not publicly released.

<..snip..>

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/421327-ex-us-attorney-mueller-absolutely-has-trumps-tax-returns

[skeeter]

These returns have been gone over with a fine toothed comb by the IRS.

But Mueller having them still gives the left a stiffie. Go figure.

[XenaLee]

Ex-US attorney: Mueller ‘absolutely’ has Trump’s tax returns

BY OWEN DAUGHERTY - 12/13/18 06:25 PM EST

Former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg said Thursday that he “absolutely” believed special counsel Robert Mueller has President Trump’s tax returns.

The comment came in response to a question from MSNBC host Nicole Wallace on “Deadline: Whitehouse” about whether Rosenberg thought Mueller had Trump’s tax return.

“Absolutely,” he said. “No question in my mind from day one.”

Rosenberg, who also served as chief of staff to the FBI director from 2013 to 2015, elaborated on why Mueller would possess tax records that Trump has not publicly released.

<..snip..>

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/421327-ex-us-attorney-mueller-absolutely-has-trumps-tax-returns

So... Mueller didn't even have to subpoena the president's tax returns?  How is that legal?  (rhetorical)

[Oceander]

Something doesn’t make sense in this story:  the prosecutor quoted in the article says that Mueller must have Trump’s returns because that’s what you always do in a white collar investigation, and that you would get the target’s returns by obtaining a subpoena from a federal judge.

Which still begs the question of where you would get the returns from; ie, on whom would you serve the subpoena?  Presumably, that subpoena in this case would have been served on Trump or his accountants, and in either event Trump would have known about it.  I find it hard to believe that Trump would keep something like that secret. 

So, while he might have returns for some of the companies in which Trump is involved, I’m not inclined to believe that he has Trump’s personal returns right now.   

[Oceander]

So... Mueller didn't even have to subpoena the president's tax returns?  How is that legal?  (rhetorical)

No; the article clearly says you would subpoena the returns; I just find it hard to believe that Trump would stay quiet about such a subpoena, so in turn I doubt Mueller has Trumps personal returns.

[XenaLee]

No; the article clearly says you would subpoena the returns; I just find it hard to believe that Trump would stay quiet about such a subpoena, so in turn I doubt Mueller has Trumps personal returns.

I..... am forced to agree.   

[Oceander]

These returns have been gone over with a fine toothed comb by the IRS.

But Mueller having them still gives the left a stiffie. Go figure.

Not necessarily.  And if they did, most likely for other issues.  IRS examinations can be remarkably limited in many cases; it’s not often that they’re an open-ended review of everything, except for really large corporations that are under constant audit.  And even then, the trend is toward limiting the examination.

[Oceander]

I..... am forced to agree.   

[DB]

Something doesn’t make sense in this story:  the prosecutor quoted in the article says that Mueller must have Trump’s returns because that’s what you always do in a white collar investigation, and that you would get the target’s returns by obtaining a subpoena from a federal judge.

Which still begs the question of where you would get the returns from; ie, on whom would you serve the subpoena?  Presumably, that subpoena in this case would have been served on Trump or his accountants, and in either event Trump would have known about it.  I find it hard to believe that Trump would keep something like that secret. 

So, while he might have returns for some of the companies in which Trump is involved, I’m not inclined to believe that he has Trump’s personal returns right now.

The IRS has all the records that were filed.

[corbe]

   You make a valid point @skeeter The IRS has had them since their creation and beyond the continuous audits haven't found anything, apparently. 
   The replacement for that snake Koskinen (term ended 11/12/2017) is Trump appointee David Rettig who was just confirmed and sworn in 2 months ago 10/1/2018.
   Contrary to what some believe here I am not a leftist nor do I want Trump destroyed but I have advocated all along that this was his Achilles heel or he would have released them years ago.

[DB]

   You make a valid point @skeeter The IRS has had them since their creation and beyond the continuous audits haven't found anything, apparently. 
   The replacement for that snake Koskinen (term ended 11/12/2017) is Trump appointee David Rettig who was just confirmed and sworn in 2 months ago 10/1/2018.
   Contrary to what some believe here I am not a leftist nor do I want Trump destroyed but I have advocated all along that this was his Achilles heel or he would have released them years ago.

The prosecutor has access to other records that the IRS does not. For example Cohen's "fixing" activities. Things become apparent when crossed referenced with other sources.

[mystery-ak]

Ex-US attorney: Mueller ‘absolutely’ has Trump’s tax returns
By Owen Daugherty - 12/13/18 06:25 PM EST

Former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg said Thursday that he “absolutely” believed special counsel Robert Mueller has President Trump’s tax returns.

The comment came in response to a question from MSNBC host Nicole Wallace on “Deadline: Whitehouse” about whether Rosenberg thought Mueller had Trump’s tax return.

“Absolutely,” he said. “No question in my mind from day one.”

Rosenberg, who also served as chief of staff to the FBI director from 2013 to 2015, elaborated on why Mueller would possess tax records that Trump has not publicly released.

“The first thing that white collar prosecutors do…is you get tax returns and you get credit reports,” he said. “You get tax returns with an order from a federal judge and you get credit reports with a grand jury subpoena because those are the documents that give you leads.”

more
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/421327-ex-us-attorney-mueller-absolutely-has-trumps-tax-returns

[Oceander]

The IRS has all the records that were filed.

Actually, no, not after a certain number of years. They’re pretty aggressive about reducing paper files to database entries and shredding the originals. 

Also, the grounds on which Mueller, as a federal law enforcement officer, could subpoena Trump’s returns on an ex parte basis under 26 IRC sec. 6103(i) are fairly narrow and require that there be a specifically designated federal criminal statute under which he is proceeding, a showing of reasonable cause to believe that a specific criminal act had been committed, reasonable cause to believe that the return may be relevant to the commission of that act, and that the information sought cannot be reasonably obtained, under the circumstances, from another source. 

I’m not sure if all of these elements could be satisfied, although it’s entirely possible that Mueller has information the rest of us don’t that ties Trump to a specific federal crime with respect to which his return information would be relevant.

[skeeter]

   You make a valid point @skeeter The IRS has had them since their creation and beyond the continuous audits haven't found anything, apparently. 
   The replacement for that snake Koskinen (term ended 11/12/2017) is Trump appointee David Rettig who was just confirmed and sworn in 2 months ago 10/1/2018.
   Contrary to what some believe here I am not a leftist nor do I want Trump destroyed but I have advocated all along that this was his Achilles heel or he would have released them years ago.

As with almost everything else involving these investigations it obvious the objective isn't so much to prosecute actual wrongdoing, although the involved investigators would be delighted to and will if they can, but are all optics geared towards destroying Trump's support base. Then no more troublesome policy initiatives, no re-election.

These tax returns are an example. I'm sure there are all kinds of politically embarrassing but perfectly legal nuggets in them.

PS you may not be a leftist but most definitely are a stinker. HBD.

[Oceander]

   You make a valid point @skeeter The IRS has had them since their creation and beyond the continuous audits haven't found anything, apparently. 
   The replacement for that snake Koskinen (term ended 11/12/2017) is Trump appointee David Rettig who was just confirmed and sworn in 2 months ago 10/1/2018.
   Contrary to what some believe here I am not a leftist nor do I want Trump destroyed but I have advocated all along that this was his Achilles heel or he would have released them years ago.

Unless Mueller is investigating Trump for tax fraud, what the IRS would look for in a return under audit and what a prosecutor would look for in a non-tax investigation could be very different.

[DB]

Actually, no, not after a certain number of years. They’re pretty aggressive about reducing paper files to database entries and shredding the originals. 

Also, the grounds on which Mueller, as a federal law enforcement officer, could subpoena Trump’s returns on an ex parte basis under 26 IRC sec. 6103(i) are fairly narrow and require that there be a specifically designated federal criminal statute under which he is proceeding, a showing of reasonable cause to believe that a specific criminal act had been committed, reasonable cause to believe that the return may be relevant to the commission of that act, and that the information sought cannot be reasonably obtained, under the circumstances, from another source. 

I’m not sure if all of these elements could be satisfied, although it’s entirely possible that Mueller has information the rest of us don’t that ties Trump to a specific federal crime with respect to which his return information would be relevant.

First, I never suggested he didn't need a judge's consent in order to get access to the documents. I'm simply saying that the IRS has some records to gain access to, probably at least the last seven years and Trump is no ordinary tax return. So it is highly likely the record keeping for those kinds of returns have additional backup. And "records" don't have to be paper records. So there's information to be had without demanding it from Trump directly. In addition it depends on how those returns align with new information they've gotten from Cohen and others. Those "lawyer" expenses he deducted may have been hush money for example.

[Emjay]

   You make a valid point @skeeter The IRS has had them since their creation and beyond the continuous audits haven't found anything, apparently. 
   The replacement for that snake Koskinen (term ended 11/12/2017) is Trump appointee David Rettig who was just confirmed and sworn in 2 months ago 10/1/2018.
   Contrary to what some believe here I am not a leftist nor do I want Trump destroyed but I have advocated all along that this was his Achilles heel or he would have released them years ago.

@corbe   Thank you for not being a leftist.  I have heard they are horrible people.  I also appreciate your not wanting Trump destroyed as I think it would be bad for America and the Republican Party, which, by the way, is the political party that is not the democrat party.

But I don't think the tax returns are any sort of Achilles heel.  I think they are probably just full of complicated stuff that the wrong sort of person could blow up into something and make a big deal of it and I think Trump prefers to keep them private for that reason.

So many politicians came into DC poor and ended up extremely wealthy so where are the tax returns reflecting those people's entry into the promised land? 

I think if we have the right to demand Trump's tax returns, then I should be able to demand Hillary's or delve into the money Obama made from that awful book he didn't write. gotta be some juicy stuff in there.

This tax return promised land is just another wet dream of the democrats and the Press to "GET Trump."  It won't happen.

[Skeptic]

Anyone that would access these tax records are required to sign for them. That record should be accessible. Verification should be easy.

[corbe]

@corbe   Thank you for not being a leftist.  I have heard they are horrible people.  I also appreciate your not wanting Trump destroyed as I think it would be bad for America and the Republican Party, which, by the way, is the political party that is not the democrat party.

But I don't think the tax returns are any sort of Achilles heel.  I think they are probably just full of complicated stuff that the wrong sort of person could blow up into something and make a big deal of it and I think Trump prefers to keep them private for that reason.

So many politicians came into DC poor and ended up extremely wealthy so where are the tax returns reflecting those people's entry into the promised land? 

I think if we have the right to demand Trump's tax returns, then I should be able to demand Hillary's or delve into the money Obama made from that awful book he didn't write. gotta be some juicy stuff in there.

This tax return promised land is just another wet dream of the democrats and the Press to "GET Trump."  It won't happen.

@Emjay

   And therein lies the major difference in our political philosophy, as it relates to OUR President, you trust his character and I do not. With that being said I want him to finish his term and get as much accomplished to turn this Country around as humanely possible.