CONGRESSMAN RICHARD NEAL OF THE FIRST CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
OFFICIALLY ASKED THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE TO PRESIDENT
DONALD TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS FOR THE YEAR'S 2013 THROUGH 2018.
IN HIS ROLE AS THE CHAIR OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE.
HE'S BEEN UNDER PRESSURE TO DO SO FOR MONTHS BY MY, ILUNG
IMAC CPAN HEADED BY BILLIONAIRE TOM STEYER.
PRESIDENT TRUMP REFUSED TO RELEASE HIS TAX INFORMATION BOTH
DURING HIS ELECTION CAMPAIGN AND SINCE BECOMING PRESIDENT CITING
EN AN AUDIT AS HIS REASON FOR NOT DOING SO.
IN REQUESTING THE INFORMATION, CONGRESSMAN NEAL SAID HE WANTED
TO QUOTE, "ENSURE THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF OUR GOVERNMENT
AND ELECTED OFFICIALS." PRENTI NLATOW
THE REQUEST FOR THE PRESIDENT'S TAX RETURNS.
>> THE IRS REQUIRES OR SUGGESTS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT THEY
SHOULD RETAIN SIX YEARS OF TAX RETURNS FOR PURPOSE OF, PPS
BEUDED WE DID WE DID NOT WANT TO
LOSE A COURT CASE BASED ON A TECHNICALITY OF ASKING FOR MORE
THAN THE IRS WOULD REQUIRE. >> AND YOU SAID YOUR REQUEST IS
ABOUT POLICY, BUT NOTOLS. VE A REASE THEIR TAX
FORMS. I THINK THAT THE PRESIDENT THAT
WAS -- THE PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED BY PRESIDENT NIXON, THROUGH
PRESIDENT FORD, THEY VOLUNTARILY SUBMITTED THEIR TAX FOR PURPOSES
, AND IN FACT, PRESIDENT FORD WAS AUDITED.
CLEARLY, VICE PRESIDENT ROCKEFELLER WAS AUDITED.
I POINT OUT THAT THERE IS A NON- PARTISAN AGENCY CALLED THE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION, WHICH IS MADE UP OF
PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE FULLY CAPABLE OF DOING THE AUDIT OR
REVIEWING THE PRESIDENT'S TAX FORMS.
SO, I WANT TO MAKE THIS VY CLR,HI I ABO POLICY.
WE HAVE RESISTED POLITICS. WE DID NOT LINK THIS TO THE
MUELLER REPORT. WE DID NOT LINK THIS TO SOME
NEFARIOUS UNDERTAKING. INSTEAD, I THINK WE TOOK A VERY
MEASURED POSITION, AS I INSISTED THAT WE WOULD, AND APPARENTLY, I
THINK THATHEEAIOHA YOU VEEERO PEOE
OVERWHELMINGLY IS, AT LEAST AS TO FORM, WE DID IT THE RIGHT WAY
>> AND PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS SAID THAT HE WOULD RELEASE HIS TAX
FORMS IF HE WEREN'T BEING AUDIT ED.
I UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE UNDER AUDIT YOU CAN
RELEASE THE FORMS, BUT DO YOU KNOW FOR A FACT IF THE
PRESIDENCY BEING AUDITED AT THIS POINT BECAUSE RECENTLY, T
ESEN FME ATTORNEY, MICHAEL COHEN INDICATED TO A
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE HE FEELS THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT UNDER
AUDIT. >> SECTION 6103 INVITES A GREAT
PLABITOFHEAW AND TO MAKE SURE THE REQUEST WE MAKE
WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE LAW WILL BE FULLY TESTED.
I THINK THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS TO PUT THE FULL MAGNIFYING
GLASS IN TERMS OF CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON TOP OF THE REQUEST,
AND CLEARLY, I THINK THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR,
EVENTUALLY, THEOUS T DERME WT THE WORD "SHALL"
MEANS BECAUSE IN THE END, I THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO COME
DOWN TO PRETTY MUCH THAT WORD. IT DOES NOT SAY HERE, MAYBE.
IT DOES NOT SAY HERE, IF. IT SAYS, UPON REQUEST FROM THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE OR THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
SENATE FINANCE COMMITT,HE PREN O WHOMEVER, SHALL
SUBMIT THEIR TAX FORMS. >> WELL, THE WHITE HOUSE
APPARENTLY, IS BUILDING ITS CASE AGAINST THAT RIGHT NOW, AND AS
YOU INDICATED, THIS COULD END UP IN FEDERAL COURT.
SOME SAY IT COULD END UP ALL THE WAY AT THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH
WOULD TAKE, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MONTHS, PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, A
.EAR OREFE WEUL W TRESNEHI
THAT'S IMPORTANT ABOUT THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM, AND THAT
IS THAT THEY EMBRACE PRECEDENT. THEY EMBRACE THE NATURE OF THE
ESTABLISHED LAW. THEY, IN FACT, MAKE
DETERMINATIONS. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY BASED ON
THE TIMETABLE OF AN ELECTION OR CAMPAIGN CYCLE.
I THINK THAT WE ARE BETTER OFF FOR IT.
SO I AM HOPEFUL THAT IT WILL BE EXPEDITED, BUT I ALSO ASSUME
THAT THIS IS GOING TO HEAD TO COURT INHE NOOISNTFUTURE.
>> I AM WONDERING IF THE TAX RETURNS ARE RELEASED, WHO GETS
TO SEE THEM? YOU, OBVIOUSLY, AS CHAIRMAN OF
THE COMMITTEE, BUT WHO ELSE SEES THOSE?
>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. YOU CANNOT SUMMARILY OR
ARBITRARILY JUST RELEASE THE TAX I ALEIOTION OFEDERAL LAW.VE
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE
PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE NON- PARTISAN TO REVIEW THE FORMS
, AND THEN THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE OF WOULD THE
OPPORTUNITY AT THAT POINT TO DECIDE THROUGH AN UP OR DOWN
VOTE WITH FULL TRANSPARENCY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY OUGHT TO
BE RELEASED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
PRILE PRIVACY PLAYS INCH WE FILE OUR TAXES.
I THINK WE NEED TO BE CIRCUMSTANCE SPECK ABOUT HOW WE
PROCEED, AND I THINK WE OUGHT NOT TO CONTEMPLATE THE VIOLATION
OF FEDERAL LAW OTHER THAN ADHERING TO THE FULL PROCEDURES
OF WHAT FEDERALAW DTAS. Y HE GEN T I
COMMISSIONER UNTIL APRIL 10 TO RESPOND TO YOUR REQUEST.
IF YOU DON'T HEAR BACK, WHAT IS YOUR NEXT STEP?
WHAT DO YOU DO NEXT? >> WE ARE ANTICIPATING THAT WE
ARE IN THE MIDST OF BUILDING A CASE.
SO WE WILL CERTAINLY NOTIFY THEM THROUGH ANOTHER LETTER, AND THEN
WE WILL DMIAS ON, AGAIN, A PERIOD OF TIME, THAT
WILL BE FAIRLY BRIEF, THAT WE WILL, THEN, PROCEED TO AGAIN, I
THINK, IN THIS INSTANCE HERE, TAKE ANOTHER STEP.
>> WOULD THAT INCLUDE A SUBPOENA , FOR EXAMPLE?
>> WE HAVE A STRATEGY. ON, VIOUSLY? WKE
>> ACTUALLY, WE HAVE A STRATEGY. [LAUGHTER]
>> OKAY. BUT YOU WON'T TELL ME WHAT IT IS
>> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. >> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD THE
PRESIDENT'S RESPONSE WHEN HE LEARNED OF YOUR REQUEST.
HE SAID, AND I AM QUOTING NOW, " IS THAT ALL?
," MEANING THE SIX-YEAR PD. USLLT' T, AND PRESIDENT
TRUMP ADDED, "SO I GUESS THEY ARE GIVING UP."
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF A COMMENT LIKE THAT GIVEN THE OFFICIAL
REQUEST? >> WE ARE NOT GIVING UP.
>> WHAT ARE YOU SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR, CONGRESSMAN NEAL,
IN THOSE RETURNS? IS THERE ANYTHING, ANY QUESTNS
,NYSSS TT YOU HAVE IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND
YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE ANSWERED? IF, IN FACT, YOU DO SEE THOSE
RETURNS? >> OUR INTENT IS NOT MISCHIEVOUS
OUR INTENT IS TO TEST THE FEDERAL LAW ON THE BOOKS SINCE
1924, AND TO APPLY THE FULL TER TTAW TTHEQST
TH W HEEND TO MAKE SURE THAT LAW UNDER AGAIN, THE
MAGNIFYING GLASS, STANDS UP SO WE ARE GOING TO DEFEND THE
CONGRESSIONAL PREROGATIVE HERE. I HIGHLIGHTED BEFORE THE HAMPDEN
COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION LAST WEEK IN A SPEECH THAT I MADE THAT
OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY FOR LEGISLATIVFUTI DES A
LEAST TO MAGMA CARTA. IT IS PART OF THE BRANCH OF HOW
IT MIGHT OVERSEE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
AFTER ALL, IN SOME MEASURE THAT'S WHY THE AMERICAN
REVOLUTION WAS FOUGHT. I THINK THAT CONGRESSIONAL
INTENT IS VERY IMPORTANT HE. GH RPOIBIT IN
CONGRESS AS IT RELATES TO THE EXECUTIVE.
IT HAS BEEN TESTED BEFORE. CONGRESS IS THE FIRST BRANCH OF
GOVERNMENT FOR THAT VERY PURPOSE I HOPE THAT THE PRESIDENT HERE
WILL VOLUNTARILY COMPLY WITH THE REQUEST THAT WE HAVE MADE.
THIS IS NOT A, I THINK, AN ASK ON OUR SIDE THAT IS NOT WITHOUT
MERIT. >> AS I UNDERSTAND IT, BESIDES
THE PRESIDENT'S PERSONAL TAXES, YOU ARE ALSO ASKING FOR T
FOATNELINGOIG BUNE EITIES?
>> IT'S ENCOMPASSING THE IDEA THAT ENMA OF THE PRESIDENT'S
BUSINESS INTERESTS ARE INTERTWINED IN WHAT WE WOULD --
WE WOULD CALL, IN THE TAX WORLD, PERSONAL INCOME TAXES, YES.
I NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL BECAUSE I AM A PETITIONER IN
WHAT IS LIKELY TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL LEGAL CONSEQUENCE.
>> GENERALLY SPEAKING THE RESPONSE HAS BEEN FAVORABLE IN
IC Y WEN ABOS, VERYD MANNER IN METHODICALLY FROM A LEGAL POINT
OF VIEW TO DOT YOUR I'S AND CROSS YOUR T'S LEGALLY.
I WANT TO GET YOUR REACTION TO A COMMENT THAT THE REPUBLICAN
SENATE CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRASSLEY MADE.
HE WAS VERY CRITICAL OF THE DEMOCRATS SG TTHE
SLEIMEANG PSINT TRUMP, WITH A PASSION.
THEY WANT HIS TAX RETURNS TO DESTROY HIM.
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF RHETORIC LIKE THAT?
>> THIS WAS NOT MOTIVATED BY MAL EVOLENCE.
CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY, HE'S A FRIEND OF MINE, WHAT HE HAS TO SAY NON
NONSENSE. >> ARE YOU FEELING THE HEAT AS
CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE HAVING MADE THIS FORM
AL REQUEST? ARE YOU FEELING A LITTLE HEAT
FROM THE REPUBLICAN SIDE OF, YOU KNOW, CONGRESS NOW OR NOT?
>> I THINK THAT IF PEOPLE COULD SAY THAT NO OTHER AMERICAN
PRESIDENT HAS EVER SUBMITTED THEIR TAX FORMS, THEN I COULD
UNDERSTA T PPL MIG SUESTEL THIS WAS AN ILL-
CONSIDERED STRATEGY. WHEN YOU HAVE, AS NOTED EARLIER
IN THE INTERVIEW, WHEN YOU HAVE EIGHT AMERICAN PRESIDENTS IN
SUCCESSION WHO HAVE ALL PREVIEW ED THEIR TAX FORMS, FOR
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS ANY SENSE
HERE THAT ONE WOULD BE FEELING THE HEATRHIS.
Y NA TUGHTS AS THIS ISSUE MOVES FORWARD NOW?
YOU MADE THE REQUEST, OBVIOUSLY, OFFICIALLY, BUT WHAT SHOULD WE
BE LOOKING OUT FROM HERE ON OUT AND ANY FINAL THOUGHTS OF THE
WAY THAT THIS IS PROGRESSING? >> I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE ARE TRYING TO CALL ATTENTION TO, SIMULTANEOUSLY, IS
THE NOTION OF PROPORTIONALITY. ISEEK.WOETEMEN BLSANDEA
TH ROR OTHE IRS, AND WE ALSO ARE GOING TO PROCEED TO THE
PRESCRIPTION DRUG BILLS NEXT WEEK, SO THE NORMAL WORK OF
CONGRESS, SIMULTANEOUSLY, IS UNDERWAY.
I HAVE TRIED VERY HARD TO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS WHAT ONE, BUT
ONE ISSUE IN THE DEBATE, SO I AM NOT OF THE MIND TO SAY THAT THIS
IS ALL THAT WE ARE DOING. I DON'T WANT THE IDEA TO BE MADE
AS SPEAKER PELOSI HAS CORRECTLY POINTED OUT THAT, AGAIN, THAT
THIS IS SOME NOTION OF CONSPIRACY BECAUSE IT'S REALLY
NOT.