By Erica and Karen

When a party to a lawsuit has non-privileged evidence relevant to a key point, and that party refuses to provide the evidence so the jury can evaluate it, the jury may presume that the evidence supports the other side.

For over 40 years, voters have considered information in a candidate’s tax returns to be relevant to their votes. Trump has refused to disclose his.

We will presume that Trump’s returns reflect nothing illegal. His failure to disclose them, however, tells us that transparency is not high on his list of values. He says that he alone will decide what the American people are entitled to know--even though his tax returns would tell us about the way he chooses to structure his business and personal affairs, and provide insight into the values that would guide his choices in the future.  

Trump is being judged in the court of voter opinion, and voters are the jury. Many have speculated what his tax returns might reveal. Because he has refused to disclose them, and end the speculation, we, the voters, may presume that:

1. Trump has paid little or no tax over the years.

2. Trump is not as successful a businessman as he claims to be.

3. Trump’s charitable giving is negligible.

4. Trump has debts to people who may not have our country's best interests at heart.

The presidency is the most important job in the world. The President gets the job on our terms, not his. Voters should insist on getting this critical evidence. If we don't, we will be letting him rig the system.