During the presidential election cycles, the entertainment lamestream enemedia, political hacks, career charlatan politicians, and various commentary pundits talk about a candidate's "qualifications" to be president. Even number 44 talked about his prior term as a "qualification" to hold the office. When Hillary Clinton threw her hat into the ring, she and the lamestream enemedia touted her "qualification" for the presidency included being Secretary of State, a former First Lady, and her stint as a Senator from New York. But, what are the "qualifications" to be president?
According to Article II, Section I, paragraph 5 of the Constitution for the united States of America, the qualifications are as follows:
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.
Basically, there are three qualifications: natural born citizen, age at least 35 years, and residency in the united States for 14 years. So, where does it say in the Constitution that the president is required to furnish federal tax returns? It doesn't, because there was no federal tax at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. But, if Hillary Clinton had her way, candidates would be required to release their tax returns. In a Twitter tirade on Tuesday, Clinton, while criticizing President Trump, outlined her plan for Democrats to regain power in Washington, DC.
Before getting into Clinton's Twitter "hissy fit," this woman is the master of projection, detraction, obstruction, and obfuscation. Normally, the actions this woman accuses her opponents of taking are actions she is guilty of doing. And, if her opponents aren't doing the actions she is guilty of taking, she is detracting and obfuscating to remove interest in her activities.
In a stunning display of projection, Clinton blamed Trump – despite no proof being found after two years – for undermining the 2016 election, and for “breathtaking corruption.”
“Donald Trump refuses to be subject to the law. The legitimacy of our elections is in doubt. The president is waging war on the truth. The administration is undermining the national unity that makes democracy possible. And then there’s the breathtaking corruption,” Clinton tweeted.
The former Secretary of State then asserted that Trump emerged not as a result of the American people’s dissatisfaction with the outsourcing U.S. jobs, a stagnant economy, soaring trade deficits, high taxes and regulations, or endless wars, but because of the “radicalism” of the GOP and “decades of demeaning government.”
“We should be clear about this: The increasing radicalism and irresponsibility of the Republican Party, including decades of demeaning government, demonizing Democrats, and debasing norms, is what gave us Donald Trump,” she tweeted.
Can she really be that out of touch? Not at all. She knows exactly what she is doing. The more she repeats these lies, the more her cult followers will believe her.
She goes on to list how the Democrats can regain control of the government, including forcing future candidates to release their tax returns, and rewriting the Constitution by abolishing the Electoral College.
Currently, there is no law on the register mandating that presidential candidates or the president release any federal tax returns. However, Republican Senator Ben Sasse from Nebraska hopes to change all of that with a "bill" he proposed last weeek, which would help Clinton accomplish her goal of returning Democrats to power.
Wednesday on CNN’s “The Lead,” Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) announced he is introducing an ethics reform bill tomorrow which will require all presidential and vice presidential candidates to release their tax returns.
Sasse said, “I would say that, you know, in five different bills I’m going to introduce tomorrow, and I think a lot of them are going to make everybody mad. There are going to be a lot of oxes gored here because frankly, every election cycle, people talk a lot about draining the swamp, and nobody ever does it. It’s a campaign issue and governance issue and nobody is making progress and the American people have more and more distrust of this city. So I think there are things about the tax returns provision that has been a norm of American politics for decades.”
He added, “It’s never been a law, but everybody has always done it. This is the first time it hasn’t happened. The president said he would release them once he got the nomination and then once he got elected and then he said the people lost interest. I think there is a lot of distrust. He should release them. But on the other side of the aisle, there is going to be a bunch of Democrats frustrated as well. But Hillary Clinton as secretary of state had lots of public trust responsibilities and she has family members out there making speeches for six figures and enriching the Clinton Foundation at the same time. There’s just a lot—we need to do to drain the swamp and to tackle the culture of corruption that’s in Washington, D.C., because public distrust is only going to get worse in an era of more and more, not just Russia, but Chinese misinformation operations against Washington, D.C. and against public trust in America.”
According to Sasse, "everybody has always" released their tax returns. But, that is not exactly true. The Sunlight Foundation indicated that tax returns released by presidents and candidates actually started with Carter. So, the statement that "everybody has always done it" made by Sasse is false. Moreover, it wasn't until 1913, with the ratification of the 16th Amendment, did the government begin to tax income; and, without any specific legislation or regulation, required individuals to file a tax return on wages earned. The requirements for president, contained in the Constitution, do not base eligibility to hold the office on whether or not tax returns are released to the public. But, if members of Congress decided this should be a requirement, the Constitution would need to be amended according to the amendment process outlined in Article V.
The big question is "why is it so important to certain individuals for a president to release tax returns?" Again, the Sunlight Foundation has provided some possible reasons.
We believe tax returns, when considered in conjunction with financial disclosure forms, help paint a fuller picture of the candidate’s financial dealings. It’s a snapshot of their financial positions and interests. For more than four decades, presidential candidates have seemed to agree with our perspective, and every candidate since Carter has released tax returns voluntarily to the public.
What do we glean from these separate pieces of information?
From tax returns we learn:
- Yearly income of the candidate
- How much the candidate paid in taxes and the tax rate
- What deductions and tax credits claimed
- Real estate taxes and abatements
- How much the candidate gave to charity (which could shed light on their values and priorities)
- To whom the candidate owes money
- Who are the candidates in business with and the financial positions of those companies (whether they have had gains or losses)
- May indicate if money is being held offshore
On the financial disclosure forms:
- Outside Income
- Assets/property owned
- Specific investments/trusts
- Possible conflicts of interest
- Certain transactions/agreements made with businesses and people
- Positions held at different companies outside of the government
It’s also important to remember that unlike Congress, presidents are exempt from conflict-of-interest laws.
This makes disclosure of income tax returns especially important to shed light on areas of possible conflicts of interest. Yearly salaries are often reported in the news but tax returns reveal so much more about the character of the candidate. Their debts give us a broader sense of the state of their finances, and perhaps more importantly an idea to whom they could feel beholden. We learn how much (or little) they paid in taxes, and whether they utilized loopholes in tax law to avoid paying those taxes. It sheds light on whether they conducted activity that they have criticized on the campaign trail.
Learning about candidates businesses, business partners and the state of those activities can help understand how their judgment might be affected by their financial transactions and debts.
We learn their values and priorities from learning which charities they support.
Well, if that is the case, several former presidents would never have been elected to occupy the office. Being that the president does not hold the power of the purse, cannot legislate or dole out money to anyone arbitrarily on a whim (legally or constitutionally), or will receive a "loan" from the government, the tax return and financial disclosure statements mean little to the average American voter. The majority of voters enter the booth and pick a name they recognize or whom the media has indicated as the more "worthy" or who has offered the most "free stuff" or "change." If there is a loophole in the tax law that allows anyone to avoid paying taxes, well, good for the accountant or lawyer that found it for the citizen. Personally, giving to particular charities is not necessarily an indication of priorities or values. Likewise, the lack of giving to particular charities does not necessarily indicate priorities or values.
The information contained on federal tax returns is personal in nature, could be used by unsavory individuals to steal another's identity, and should be required to be confidential for all, regardless of what employment is sought. Besides, the federal tax return of president #44 clearly exposed his use of a Social Security number that was not issued to him; yet, this man was allowed to remain in office when the average citizen would suffer under the charges of fraud. The requirement of a federal tax return is nothing more than fodder for political opponents to use in the political machine. Moreover, if conflict of interest, principles and values, and character were so important, the release of tax returns and financial disclosure statements has failed miserably to derail many presidential campaigns or presidencies.
But, because the election of the president, according to the Twelfth amendment, has been ignored and usurped, without a protest by citizens, then, it would stand to reason, passage of a piece of legislation requiring candidates for president or the president and vice-president to release federal tax returns would not meet any opposition with the citizenry. This is the problem with citizens' ignorance of what the Constitution says – citizens do not know when a usurpation takes place. If you are not familiar with the Twelfth Amendment, read a transcript here. You will find that the political parties and their national committees have taken control of the election process for president and vice-president.
But, I digress. This so-called Republican, conservative Senator has picked a petty issue regarding Trump's release of his federal tax return to squawk about when every Republican member of both chambers allowed someone who was unqualified according to the Constitution to hold the office for eight years, who through the evidence was using a Social Security number not assigned to him, and who committed over 1,300 examples of lies and criminal activity during his terms. Being there is no constitutional requirement to release federal tax returns for the president, there should be no "understanding" of release based on candidates doing so since Carter nor should there be a "bill" or amendment to the Constitution requiring a candidate for president or president to do so. And, when both chambers had Hussein Soetoro's, they did nothing with it, meaning it is not that important to them. It's just another hammer with which to bash Trump – nothing more.
Since the Constitution establishes the criteria for the president, a valid, notarized, birth certificate to determine the candidate's parents and their citizenship status, along with the age of the candidate, and proof of residency of fourteen years in the united States should suffice. But, even these requirements do not prevent malfeasance of political parties determined to place "their man" in office regardless of what the Constitution declares are requirements to be president. Moreover, the lack of adherence to the Twelfth Amendment means the party determines who vies for the office, the primary, based on popular vote, determines who actually receives the nomination (unless it is in the Democratic Party), and the Electoral College determines who becomes president based on how the States award their Electoral votes based on "popular vote."
If both chambers of Congress want the president to release federal tax returns as a qualification for the office, then, they should be willing to do the same, as should any other American citizen seeking employment in any public or private sector job. Not one member of the House or Senate would agree to release their federal tax return for any type of scrutiny by any government agency, private company or the public. If these people in both chambers of Congress are releasing tax returns as a requirement to hold their elected positions without an amendment to the Constitution requiring them to do so, then, they are idiots.
The disclosure of campaign funding is a different story. However, personal financial data and tax returns should not be required since the presidency of Hussein Soetoro proved those documents to be useless in "learning values and principles" and the other information the Sunlight Foundation highlighted.
Sasse cannot seem to shed his "never Trump" blinders long enough to engage in any productive legislative activity. Unfortunately, that is the case for a good many in both chambers of Congress. Never before has there been a "lame duck" Congress when the party of the president holds the majority in both the House and Senate. This is why there has been no legislation addressing the full repeal of Obamacare, the border wall, border security and other issues important to Americans. It is why the unconstitutional DACA and amnesty is still dangling. Congress has more important business to conduct and members of both the House and Senate need to get to it instead of proposing and drafting "fluff" legislation, which holds no water unless the Constitution is amended. And, if the American people would hold those in the District of Corruption to the Constitution, remove those from both chambers who operate outside the Constitution, and instill those honorable individuals who would hold to the Constitution, then, do the same at the State and local level, there wouldn't be so much garbage coming out of government.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.