Trump's lawyers call Congressional congressional demands, his financial statements being "unconstitutional"



[ad_1]

President Trump's lawyers on Wednesday called for congressional claims on unconstitutional tax returns, asking a federal judge to block the House of Commons Standing Committee's subpoena for several years in its financial statements.

In a 24-page record, Trump's legal team asked the court to block a committee summons to Trump's accounting firm, Mazars USA, claiming that the committee's request "did not happen." "Legitimate Legislative Object". Even though there was one, Trump's lawyers argued that the newly-elected Democrats-led House overstepped its authority by passing a bill on the finances and ethics of election campaigns, its first bill in January that would require the president and the vice president to make public the tax returns over 10 years.

"HOUR 1 and any similar proposal to regulate the finances of the president would be unconstitutional.Concession can neither hinder the exercise of its functions by the executive, nor add qualifications to the post of president," wrote the lawyers of Trump, led by William S. Consovoy, of Arlington, Virginia.

Trump's lawyers argued that the president's past personal relationships were unrelated to the functions of the legislature.

Trump is fighting with Congress and others on several fronts to prevent the disclosure of his private financial information to the public.

The New York State Senate on Wednesday passed a law allowing Trump's tax returns to be submitted to congressional committees, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) , Asserted that the New York Times' new statements on Trump's tax returns from 1985 to 1994 should compel the administration to withdraw its objections to the publication of the statements since 2013.

In addition to the House's investigations into bank records, tax returns, and statements by his accounting firm, Trump faces New York State regulatory investigations and defends against plaintiffs in two cases. lawsuits alleging that his company is violating the Constitution by doing business with foreigners. Governments.

Deutsche Bank and Mazars, which Trump prosecuted after House committees issued subpoenas, were Trump's reliable partners when he emerged from his bankruptcy-fueled bankruptcy in the 1990s. to own golf courses and hotels in New York, Florida, Las Vegas and elsewhere. in the USA.

While other investment banks have fled Trump after failing in Atlantic City, Deutsche Bank has granted Trump multi-million dollar loans in the ten years leading up to its White House run. to acquire or develop properties, including its luxury hotel in Washington. the Doral Golf Resort in South Florida and its hotel and residential tower in Chicago.

A large portion of the loans were issued by Deutsche's private banking unit, which allowed it to borrow money that the experts claimed other banks would probably not approve.

For many years, Mazars, a Long Island accounting firm, helped Trump prepare "financial statements", documents in which Trump repeatedly increased the value of its own holdings and often omitted liabilities. .

House Watch Committee Chair Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), Announced plans to call Mazars in April to corroborate the testimony of Trump's former lawyer Michael. Cohen, before a congressional hearing that Trump would have intentionally misrepresented the value of his property for personal gain.

Cummings' lawyers described the lawsuit as a long-term attempt to delay the discovery of politically damaging information about Trump until after the 2020 elections, and to remove from the public the lingering conflicts of interest of officials charged with enforce the laws of the land.

Trump's lawyer said the committee was seeking "unlimited power to subpoena the records of other members of the executive branch, members of Congress and members of the federal judiciary."

If they are wrong, the panel will simply have to wait until the end of the procedure to enforce its subpoena, they said. But if Trump is right, they said, he and his companies "will lose forever their chance to test the constitutionality of this assignment because their confidential financial information will be disclosed."

Jonathan O'Connell contributed to this report.

[ad_2]

Source link