Taxes, freedom of information act...
February 4, 2018 at 12:36 am
(This post was last modified: February 4, 2018 at 12:43 am by Brian37.)
Backstory
Decades before 45 decided to run because Obama poked fun of him. I I was in college. I was taking journalism. During my stay there, one of my fellow students got accused of stealing credit card info, he had worked in offices where he had access to such. He got arrested. I wont say I remember the outcome now as to convictions. I do remember going down town to the city office to ask for records. When I did, I got stonewalled by the clerk, arguing privacy issues. I was persistent in bringing up the "freedom of information act" and finally she relented. I will admit, after the file was handed to me, not being a lawyer, all I could make out was dates and times.
But when you are talking about office of public trust, and not some no name, like the guy I was looking into, even without criminal convictions, it would seem important to me that such a person seeking to hold power, should be subject to far more scrutiny than a no name.
It is been over a year, and even the orange fuck has claimed he would release his taxes. But just like his bullshit recently "I'd be happy to meet with Mueller", and also knowing the IRS has said repeatedly NOTHING is stopping him from doing releasing his taxes, 45 as always is lying his ass off. My question is, why cant "The Freedom Of Information Act" force the fucker to call his bluff? If I can gain access to a no name, why should a high profile politician at the top seat of power be immune to the same scrutiny?
Decades before 45 decided to run because Obama poked fun of him. I I was in college. I was taking journalism. During my stay there, one of my fellow students got accused of stealing credit card info, he had worked in offices where he had access to such. He got arrested. I wont say I remember the outcome now as to convictions. I do remember going down town to the city office to ask for records. When I did, I got stonewalled by the clerk, arguing privacy issues. I was persistent in bringing up the "freedom of information act" and finally she relented. I will admit, after the file was handed to me, not being a lawyer, all I could make out was dates and times.
But when you are talking about office of public trust, and not some no name, like the guy I was looking into, even without criminal convictions, it would seem important to me that such a person seeking to hold power, should be subject to far more scrutiny than a no name.
It is been over a year, and even the orange fuck has claimed he would release his taxes. But just like his bullshit recently "I'd be happy to meet with Mueller", and also knowing the IRS has said repeatedly NOTHING is stopping him from doing releasing his taxes, 45 as always is lying his ass off. My question is, why cant "The Freedom Of Information Act" force the fucker to call his bluff? If I can gain access to a no name, why should a high profile politician at the top seat of power be immune to the same scrutiny?
