Donald Trump posed as his own VP, lies in order to get on Forbes 400 during 80s.

[Antiganon]

The penalties are indeed insane (I don't want to use draconian a third time - it cheapens it ). If you release anyone's tax returns without their permission, or authorization, it's a Class B Felony. 5 years and $100,000 fine. If you even PUBLISH them, without permission, another Class B Felony. So even if you receive them anonymously, you can't publish them.

Which means we'll have to put them up on a mirrored LyinComey website.

I'm aware of and in agreement with those penalties.

There is sufficient information contained in the average person's tax returns to commit identity theft of them, their spouse, and all their dependents.

Shit is not to be trifled with.

[cubby]

I'm aware of and in agreement with those penalties.

There is sufficient information contained in the average person's tax returns to commit identity theft of them, their spouse, and all their dependents.

Shit is not to be trifled with.

I feel like we're arguing about agreeing with each other at this point. Are you saying that while severe, they are that way for good reasons?

[Antiganon]

I feel like we're arguing about agreeing with each other at this point. Are you saying that while severe, they are that way for good reasons?

100% correct.

They are necessarily extremely punitive.

It is possible I misunderstood you initially - I generally read draconian as a very strong and unjust application of the law, rather than simply a very strong application.

[cubby]

100% correct.

They are necessarily extremely punitive.

It is possible I misunderstood you initially - I generally read draconian as a very strong and unjust application of the law, rather than simply a very strong application.

Gotcha - no, you understood me. I feel like the publishing portion of the tax returns are too strong, but understand why they are for releasing them. With Trump I feel like we should know them, just like every other president - so the law does seem draconian in that instance - especially merely publishing them.

However, overall - yeah, the law and penalties do make sense.

[Antiganon]

Gotcha - no, you understood me. I feel like the publishing portion of the tax returns are too strong, but understand why they are for releasing them. With Trump I feel like we should know them, just like every other president - so the law does seem draconian in that instance - especially merely publishing them.

However, overall - yeah, the law and penalties do make sense.

I would be supportive of a bill that requires elected officials to release their tax returns (with PII obfuscated of course).

The law is what it is because it needs to protect the average citizen though, not because it needs to protect Trump. Protecting Trump (in this instance) is a necessary consequence of protecting the other 320 million or so people who aren't complete shitbag elected officials.

[cubby]

I would be supportive of a bill that requires elected officials to release their tax returns (with PII obfuscated of course).

The law is what it is because it needs to protect the average citizen though, not because it needs to protect Trump. Protecting Trump (in this instance) is a necessary consequence of protecting the other 320 million or so people who aren't complete shitbag elected officials.

Agreed. On both points. The irony (and stain on Trump) is that we never needed a law like that because everyone else running for president understood that releasing your tax records was the right thing to do. Now we'll see a law requiring it, of course, after the fact of when it was needed.