Illinois Senate passes bill that Trump must reveal tax returns or be barred from state's 2020 election

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
9,120
15,578
665
USA
dunpachi.com
Source here.

Donald Trump will have to release five years of tax returns if he wants appear on the Illinois 2020 presidential ballot, the state's senate has ruled.
The bill, which still requires approval by the Prairie State's House of Representatives, comes amid a growing row in Washington over Mr Trump’s unprecedented refusal to make publicly available his income tax returns.
The US Treasury ignored a congressional deadline to release the documents earlier this week. Treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin claimed the request by the House ways and means committee was “politically motivated”.
Tony Munoz, the state senator who sponsored the bill said: “If you want to run for vice president or president of the United States, hey, what’s wrong with providing your tax returns for the past five years?”
The veteran Democrat added: “If you’ve got nothing to hide, you shouldn’t worry about anything. That’s how I see it.”

I'm curious if this is even legal, but I'm glad the Democrats are making it crystal-clear that they'll manipulate the law for petty partisanship. Trump's tax returns are not a central issue to the interests of the American people, last time I checked.

Do you think a candidate should release tax returns before being allowed to be on a state's ballot for the presidential election? This sure seems... authoritarian to me.
 

Musky_Cheese

Community Liaison
Oct 23, 2016
4,880
7,051
625
If that state could not get any more corrupt.
It just comes across as petty to me.

The more I pay attention to politics in the USA, the more I just see hypocrites.

If you are really against gerrymandering as a party, why are you also guilty of it. If you are for truth, why are you caught intentionally lying or hiding information. If you really care about people, why are you hoping for economic disaster.

I had hoped my party after the lose in 2016 would rethink its message and brand. But instead we chased crazy.

Missed opportunity to be the party of the common people.
 

Sqorin Hammerfarf

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2018
2,476
4,637
330
Pretty sure this is unconstitutional and will be overturned. They should’ve waited a year to do it so it couldn’t be overturned by the election.
 

KINGMOKU

Member
May 16, 2005
5,708
1,174
1,200
This is absolutely unconstitutional and those who proposed and passed it should be brought up on charges of stupidity.

State law never trumps federal law due to the supremacy law.

This is not a state election it's a federal election and Illinois is part of the union.
 

SpartanN92

Member
Sep 7, 2012
2,412
463
475
Some folks in Illinois may have skimmed through the Constitution but here is a refresher on Article 2 and the minimum requirements for the Presidency...

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Not sure I see anything here about releasing tax returns.
 
Last edited:
Jun 26, 2013
2,992
1,107
385
The Illinois Democrats don't realize how dumb of a move this is, do they...? It screams "If we can't beat Trump, then we might as well cheat to make sure he doesn't win".
 

Yoshi

Gold Member
May 4, 2005
13,198
1,819
1,340
31
Germany
www.gaming-universe.de
If you want to make it compulsory to release your tax returns to run for president, then I think you need to introduce such law on federal levels. Introducing on a state-level limits to federal elections screws woth the election process and can lead to terrible fracturing of rules, or, worst case, to contadictory rules in different states-
 

Blood Borne

Member
Oct 30, 2017
999
919
225
The left has literally nothing to attack Trump on, the economy is great. They look for the most petty and trivial things to latch on. All the have is a Trump is a meanie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shaqazooloo

Silas Lang

Member
Mar 8, 2012
1,237
40
470
Dear Democrats,

This is what fascism is.
Yeah bro. Elected officials representing thier constituents by passing laws for transparency for elected officals is the most fascist thing I have ever witnesssed. We need to get those second ammendent people to take care of this fascism.

Anyway, this would need to be a federal law. Courts will strike it down most likely.
 
Last edited:

RokkanStoned

Gold Member
Jan 14, 2018
1,563
1,440
360
Norway
Feels pretty pointless, short-sighted and more damaging to democrats.
A republican hasn't won the state since 1988 and the 2016 results showed 85% for Hillary. If anything you'd want Trump to spend time there.
 

Super Mario

Member
Nov 12, 2016
810
863
250
Could you imagine if the right instituted all of these measures to prevent a Democratic candidate from running? The side of justice and virtue is all for having illegals and kids vote, changing the rules, you name it.

If I was Trump, there would be no chance in hell I'd release my returns. There is no law requiring it. All it is, is a page taken out of the democratic playbook. Smear him that "he doesn't make as much as he claims" smear him because "he didn't pay a lot of taxes (while following the laws)." If he doesn't want to subject himself to it, it's gotta be because he's up to no good.

The ironic part, is he really has nothing to prove. It's the other politicians who are millionaires on much lower salaries. If there's anyone who should be proving their financials, it's them.
 

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
3,206
1,545
615
All of you are looking at this long.

The last time a republican president won Illinois was over 30 years ago before the mail-in/early and illegal alien voting measures took place with father Bush.

Trump doesn't need Illinois to win and wouldn't get it anyway, WHO CARES?

This is like panicking because California passed the same law. OH NOEZ!
 

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
556
289
210
Yeah bro. Elected officials representing thier constituents by passing laws for transparency for elected officals is the most fascist thing I have ever witnesssed. We need to get those second ammendent people to take care of this fascism.

Anyway, this would need to be a federal law. Courts will strike it down most likely.
I wonder why you don't go after the left for exaggerating what fascism is. It was sarcasm. This isn't fascism because nationalism isn't involved but globalism should be rather similar.

Either way misuse of the definition of fascism or not it's still at least authoritarianism based off of personal bias.
 
Last edited:

oagboghi2

Member
Apr 15, 2018
2,771
3,351
250
Yeah bro. Elected officials representing thier constituents by passing laws for transparency for elected officals is the most fascist thing I have ever witnesssed. We need to get those second ammendent people to take care of this fascism.

Anyway, this would need to be a federal law. Courts will strike it down most likely.
Passing laws specifically designed to stop your political enemies is pretty fascistic, yeah.

Jesus 😆
 

Miku Miku

Gold Member
Jan 13, 2018
897
1,238
350
Fine with me. Make everyone do it and it's fair in my book. Presidents are held to high scrutiny. And this promotes discussion of tax policy and also helps us know who we're electing.
 

finowns

Member
May 10, 2009
2,876
462
665
The Illinois Democrats don't realize how dumb of a move this is, do they...? It screams "If we can't beat Trump, then we might as well cheat to make sure he doesn't win".
It’s also a dumb precedent, do they want Texas to start putting prerequisites for a nominee to be on the ballot? It reminds me of when the dems started the precedent on court nominations and are now mad at the Republicans for doing the same thing.
 
Last edited:

Silas Lang

Member
Mar 8, 2012
1,237
40
470
I wonder why you don't go after the left for exaggerating what fascism is. It was sarcasm. This isn't fascism because nationalism isn't involved but globalism should be rather similar.

Either way misuse of the definition of fascism or not it's still at least authoritarianism based off of personal bias.
Because that's not the topic?

Authoritarianism is wanting transparency from our elected officals? It applies to every candidate.

Passing laws specifically designed to stop your political enemies is pretty fascistic, yeah.

Jesus 😆
Passing laws to promote transparency of our elected officals is pretty fantastic, yeah.

Jesus 😆
 

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
556
289
210
Because that's not the topic?

Authoritarianism is wanting transparency from our elected officals? It applies to every candidate.



Passing laws to promote transparency of our elected officals is pretty fantastic, yeah.

Jesus 😆
Our "elected officials" aren't or shouldn't be able to abuse their power like this, but luckily this is just a state law. Illinois was always a cesspool.
 

appaws

Gold Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,364
802
1,040
Taylorsville, Ky!
This is getting back to 1860 style regional partisanship, where Lincoln was not on southern state ballots, and Breckenridge was not on the northern. If we get to that point, again I ask, in what sense are we a nation? Isn't it better to get some sort of peaceful, gradual separation going?
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

JareBear

Gold Member
Nov 5, 2016
8,808
9,495
425
I don't care where (just far)
Source here.

Donald Trump will have to release five years of tax returns if he wants appear on the Illinois 2020 presidential ballot, the state's senate has ruled.
The bill, which still requires approval by the Prairie State's House of Representatives, comes amid a growing row in Washington over Mr Trump’s unprecedented refusal to make publicly available his income tax returns.
The US Treasury ignored a congressional deadline to release the documents earlier this week. Treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin claimed the request by the House ways and means committee was “politically motivated”.
Tony Munoz, the state senator who sponsored the bill said: “If you want to run for vice president or president of the United States, hey, what’s wrong with providing your tax returns for the past five years?”
The veteran Democrat added: “If you’ve got nothing to hide, you shouldn’t worry about anything. That’s how I see it.”

I'm curious if this is even legal, but I'm glad the Democrats are making it crystal-clear that they'll manipulate the law for petty partisanship. Trump's tax returns are not a central issue to the interests of the American people, last time I checked.

Do you think a candidate should release tax returns before being allowed to be on a state's ballot for the presidential election? This sure seems... authoritarian to me.
This seems like something that shouldn’t be happening but is happening. I know the world, in general, gets stranger by the day, but politics in general just seem to be getting bizarre.

It all almost makes me sympathize with Trump and three years ago I never thought I would say that.

I just feel like priorities don’t seem to be in order, across the board, right now
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
9,120
15,578
665
USA
dunpachi.com
This seems like something that shouldn’t be happening but is happening. I know the world, in general, gets stranger by the day, but politics in general just seem to be getting bizarre.

It all almost makes me sympathize with Trump and three years ago I never thought I would say that.

I just feel like priorities don’t seem to be in order, across the board, right now
Keep your eyes bright and open, then. Things will get significantly more bizarre in the next month.
 

Silas Lang

Member
Mar 8, 2012
1,237
40
470
Our "elected officials" aren't or shouldn't be able to abuse their power like this, but luckily this is just a state law. Illinois was always a cesspool.
If enough people feel that way then they will be voted out.

No one buys this bullshit that this is being done to "increase transparency". Fuck off with that shit excuse. 😂
No, I will not "fuck off" because you feel transparency is "bullshit" or a "shit excuse." 😂

Here is the legislation if anybody is curious. It's pretty short. It applies to everyone running for president.

 

Corderlain

Member
Jun 12, 2018
527
583
220
If enough people feel that way then they will be voted out.



No, I will not "fuck off" because you feel transparency is "bullshit" or a "shit excuse." 😂

Here is the legislation if anybody is curious. It's pretty short. It applies to everyone running for president.

Damn you drank that Kool Aid fast as fuck bro
 
  • Like
Reactions: CausticVenom

oagboghi2

Member
Apr 15, 2018
2,771
3,351
250
If enough people feel that way then they will be voted out.



No, I will not "fuck off" because you feel transparency is "bullshit" or a "shit excuse." 😂

Here is the legislation if anybody is curious. It's pretty short. It applies to everyone running for president.

It applies to everyone....except themselves of course. It just happened to only come up against Trump.

What a coincidence. 🙄

Damn you drank that Kool Aid fast as fuck bro
He chugged it in seconds. They could pass anything and Silas would support it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CausticVenom

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
556
289
210
It applies to everyone....except themselves of course. It just happened to only come up against Trump.

What a coincidence. 🙄


He chugged it in seconds. They could pass anything and Silas would support it.
Yeah, he's absolutely downplaying and excusing it out of bias. His tax returns are irrelevant, it's definitely not a coincidence that the party of hating the rich and likes to tax gouge the people also wants to see the tax returns of a billionaire President.
 
Dec 22, 2007
3,830
177
895
The article says the bill still needs approval. It also says it applies to call candidates and not just Trump. The title is slightly disingenuous, though it will likely actually pass specifically due to Trump.

Honestly, I don't see an issue with it. Frankly, we should be doing significantly more-thorough background-checks on pretty much every politician. They're pretty much all corrupt and get away with everything because nobody has the power to check any of their activities and history.
 

Silas Lang

Member
Mar 8, 2012
1,237
40
470
Damn you drank that Kool Aid fast as fuck bro
What specific issue do you have with transparency of potential presidential candidates?

It applies to everyone....except themselves of course. It just happened to only come up against Trump.

What a coincidence. 🙄


He chugged it in seconds. They could pass anything and Silas would support it.
It applies to every presidental candidate. That's fair and transparent.

Yes, I chugged the kool-aid of legislation that promotes transparency of presidential candidates. The horror! It must mean I will support anything!




Yeah, he's absolutely downplaying and excusing it out of bias. His tax returns are irrelevant, it's definitely not a coincidence that the party of hating the rich and likes to tax gouge the people also wants to see the tax returns of a billionaire President.
Yes, how biased of me to want more transparency from potential presidental candidates. I must have an agenda if it applies to each individual running regardless of political party. Come on dude, you were talking of fascism and authoritarianism with this bill which is ridiculous.

What's the point of this? It instills more trust between the people (the electorate) and the individuals they will elect.
 
Mar 18, 2018
1,539
1,032
240
Possibly corrupt Millionaires asking billionaires to pony up their taxes returns to find out if they are possibly corrupt... fuck me Ive seen it all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DeepEnigma

CausticVenom

Member
Apr 27, 2018
556
289
210
What specific issue do you have with transparency of potential presidential candidates?



It applies to every presidental candidate. That's fair and transparent.

Yes, I chugged the kool-aid of legislation that promotes transparency of presidential candidates. The horror! It must mean I will support anything!






Yes, how biased of me to want more transparency from potential presidental candidates. I must have an agenda if it applies to each individual running regardless of political party. Come on dude, you were talking of fascism and authoritarianism with this bill which is ridiculous.

What's the point of this? It instills more trust between the people (the electorate) and the individuals they will elect.
Liberals call anything right wing fascism do now that I do it you actually notice it for once?

You still have yet to prove how it's transparency. Would you do the same for literally any other party? I personally doubt it, I was pointing out the reality of this situation.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
993
588
260
What specific issue do you have with transparency of potential presidential candidates?



It applies to every presidental candidate. That's fair and transparent.

Yes, I chugged the kool-aid of legislation that promotes transparency of presidential candidates. The horror! It must mean I will support anything!






Yes, how biased of me to want more transparency from potential presidental candidates. I must have an agenda if it applies to each individual running regardless of political party. Come on dude, you were talking of fascism and authoritarianism with this bill which is ridiculous.

What's the point of this? It instills more trust between the people (the electorate) and the individuals they will elect.
Why stop at presidents, why not just let every politician showcase there bank account for total transparency.

This is selective transparency just to checkmate trump because they can't win it and have to go out of there way just to target him.

Everybody knows he has enough death chickens in his closet that he will never spill those beans.

It's pathetic and idiotic. And will only help to empower his position at the end of the day.
 
Last edited:

Corderlain

Member
Jun 12, 2018
527
583
220
What specific issue do you have with transparency of potential presidential candidates?



It applies to every presidental candidate. That's fair and transparent.

Yes, I chugged the kool-aid of legislation that promotes transparency of presidential candidates. The horror! It must mean I will support anything!






Yes, how biased of me to want more transparency from potential presidental candidates. I must have an agenda if it applies to each individual running regardless of political party. Come on dude, you were talking of fascism and authoritarianism with this bill which is ridiculous.

What's the point of this? It instills more trust between the people (the electorate) and the individuals they will elect.
You don't want transparency you just want some pathetic dig at Trump because every last little piece of bullshit the Democratic party has throw at the wall has failed to stick. You are honestly pathetic as fuck. Accept reality. You got sold a lie. Stop shilling. You could say he's a big meanie and kind of rude, but obsessing over fake problems is worthless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eiknarf