White House To Withhold Nominee's Tax Returns (New Precident)

washingtonpost.com
White House To Withhold Nominee's Tax Returns
Document Release Excludes First Bush Administration

By Charles Babington and Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, July 27, 2005; A06



The Bush administration will not give Senate investigators access to the federal tax returns of Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr., White House and congressional officials said yesterday, a break with precedent that could exacerbate a growing conflict over document disclosure in the confirmation process.

Although nominees to the high court in recent decades were required to provide their three most recent annual tax forms, the administration will neither collect such documents from Roberts nor share them with the Senate Judiciary Committee, the officials said. Instead, the Internal Revenue Service will produce a one-page summary.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/26/AR2005072601879_pf.html

Unless the WH cooperates with the Judiciary Committee and turns over EVERY damn thing they ask for, he should be filibustered. They're hiding SOMETHING!IMCPO

If I go to the DMV to register a car, and I do not provide all document requested, I get nothing.

This guy has virtually NO experience as a judge. His previous work experience is most likely corrupt at best. There is only one reason to hide or refuse document release ... There is something to hide.

Sorry AWOL ... you can't expect us to just trust you anymore. You have exhausted your "truth" capital with 5 years of non-stop lying and corruption.

Cheers
Drifter

meaningless if Bush withholds info.

BTW, remember how the Right spewed on and on about Kerry's documents from his military service?

Nothing to see here, move along.:wtf:

once again, imagine what they'd do if a democratic president did this for their nominee.

clinton lost TWO nominees because they didn't pay social security tax for their nannies, for crying out loud.

to provoke the Dems.

but not okay for the confirmation of a SCOTUS judge? :wtf:

Any thing that this sorry-assed administration can do to divert attention from the Rove Scandal , they will do. Even if it means dragging one of their own (Roberts) over the coals and throwing him to the wolves. Roberts, after all, is expendable - and besides he new, so he isn't nearly as important as Our Great Leader's inner circle. Just a take on this seemingly stupid move by an increasingly desperate Red House (for all of the blood)...

Can you say, "Conflict of Interest?"

See this thread from Modem Butterfly:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4201444

Roberts' stock portfolio is a conflict-of-interest nightmare. If Roberts continues to own all these stocks, he may have to recuse himself from many cases before the Supreme Court. (While in private practice in 2003, Roberts represented 19 states in their antitrust suit against Microsoft. Yet his 2003 financial disclosure form shows Roberts holding $100,000 to $250,000 worth of Microsoft stock.)

stocks at the same time the suit was going on.

of many kinds of crooks.

let this stand.

and receiving pay checks from? Can only mean there are some serious conflicts of interest.
This is total bullshit.
I'm tired of taking it up the ass from these frigging bastards. Someone please pass the KY.

He's right in the middle of it.

Cough up the documents. We can't trust what he says.

if you've defaulted on student loans and/or owe back taxes. Why do people applying for an $8 job get a 7 year backround check and a potential SC justice is protected?

to Roberts or away from Rove or do they also just want to make the highest court in the land a smear game as well? Either way, the WH sucks and this decision will bite them on their asses....