of a white collar crime family. and when it comes to our constitution, he has this belief, as he said just this week, that as president he is empowered to do anything, which is not at all what our constitution says. donald is a dictator in waiting, and in case is a good example of his belief that he should simply rule, not administer, but rule the country forever. so what about starting at the state level? why not using new york state s new tax laws to acquire the president s at least state taxes while they re still going after the federal taxes? well, as a matter of legal strategy, accepting the new york state version of his tax returns, which they could also get on the governor and other elected officials might undercut with some judges the argument that they want to see his federal tax returns, which are going to be very similar, but not identical. so they want to make sure this law, section 6103 of the tax code is enforced, just as it has
to, but as president if you have nothing to hide, you put out your taxes. there s no reason not to. i m a tax lawyer by trade. now you re saying you can t get the taxes because it violates my first amendment rights? you don t think it s political retaliation? no. look at the law that was passed. they used 6103, it s a privacy statute you re not supposed to get people s returns. when they use that s from 1920 something. you have to be legitimate legislative purpose. how is it a violation of the first amendment? if you have coordinated action because of political position, it s retaliation. that violates the first amendment i m a first amendment lawyer. obviously there s the separation of powers issues. let me tell you about the tax returns to end the mystery here. people say he s not under audit. ly tell you here today, i know the president is under audit. show proof. what do you want me to show
political retaliation? no. look at the law that was passed. they used 6103, it s a privacy statute you re not supposed to get people s returns. when they use that s from 1920 something. you have to be legitimate legislative purpose. how is it a violation of the first amendment? if you have coordinated action because of political position, it s retaliation. that violates the first amendment i m a first amendment lawyer. obviously there s the separation of powers issues. let me tell you about the tax returns to end the mystery here. people say he s not under audit. i will tell you here today, i know the president is under audit. show proof. what do you want me to show the audit letters? yeah. i don t have to do that. how can people believe you? why doesn t the irs commissioner say he is under audit? that s up to the irs commissioner. normally they don t discuss that? put them out if he has nothing to hide.
companies, there is a section of the united states code, 6103 which says upon the request of the chairman of the ways and means committee, which is a tax committee in congress. the irs shall turn over the tax returns of the president, so our chairman richard neal has been following the letter of the law, requested six years of trump s business and tax returns, returns i might add that the president said during the election he would be happy to turn over and still hasn t. so he made the request to the irs, the irs deferred to department of treasury, treasury says we re not going to give them to you. so that was in april. in may, we issued subpoenas for those documents. they pretty much just ignored the subpoenas, so the final step in trying to enforce that was on july 2nd, we filed a lawsuit trying to enforce them turning over those documents and the statute is very clear. it says upon the request they
tax return. and it shall be delivered to the chairman. it doesn t say, unless it s the president, it doesn t say, unless the president is uncomfortable, delivering that tax return. the law is clear. it is intended for a specific purpose, to allow the congress to play its necessary, constitutional role, to provide oversight and information that we can get. not only have they not complied with section 6103, but they willfully denied the subpoena, a legally issued subpoena that they should have answered. they are trying to create new law and says the administration does not have to answer to anybody. and we think that s wrong and we re not going to let it go. the verdict is in for a decorated u.s. navy s.e.a.l. accused of murdering an isis prisoner. up next, we head to san diego to