U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Trump's immunity claim, lets prosecutor get financial records

[Pedrogaz]

I guess Trump will appeal this verdict from the SCOTUS. He will appeal to the Trump council (Him, Ivanka and Jared) to prevent disclosure. I don't expect the public will learn the secrets of the tax returns any time soon.

[Tie Dye Samurai]

4 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

You guys are funny.  Getting Trump's financial records now won't really matter much.  You and other Trump minions will still support the guy even if it's revealed that he laundered money for the Russians.  The rest of us already know that he's unfit to be President.

 

It's AFTER the elections.  Once Trump is out of office (circa 2021), the authorities will be going after Trump with vigor.  In the end, he'll get to reunite with his former lawyer Cohen in prison.  That will be justice served. 

The guy should have just owned the fact that he let Stormy Daniels spank him with a Forbes with his picture on it.

1. Then there would not have been hush money...and the adult actress\entertainer\professional companion would not hush (shocking).

2. Then there would not have been paying the porn queen off to keep quiet during the homestretch of the 2016 election by his lawyer who is now in jail...(and who Trump called 'a rat')

3. Then there would not have been a New York case brought against him that wanted to see his taxes

4. Then he could have kept claiming he wasnt showing his taxes (even though he really really wants to but the American people just are not interested in that) because of the and what is obviously the biggest largest most luxurious audit in financial history (it is huge unprecedented and nothing like we have ever seen folks). 

 

But somehow this is all the fault of the radical left, Biden and Obama, Pelosi and Schiff and Schumer, The FBI, The CIA, his "rat lawyer", the lower courts of New York and most importantly those treasonous traitors on the SCOTUS bench that are supposed to be "his guy's".

 

So...when does all of this winning start that we will get so tired of? So far the only thing I really see in all of this as a win was that he did Stormy Daniels...in 2006...while his new wife was raising their 4 month old son. Ok...maybe not a win there either. 

 

 

[jimmybcool]

5 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

There is a God. No one should be immune from financial obligations and audits. Nothing to do with left or right. Also, wear a mask. No need to make it political. yawn. 

No one IS immune.  There is this government agency called the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that audits and verifies everyones tax return.  Including presidents, senators, etc.  Trumps are sent into the same organization as everyone else's.  

[riclag]

 He won't give us his tax returns! lol Where are those tax returns?

 

Somethin tells me when they go to the SDNY ,fake sources are gonna be leakin, fake news imop! 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, jimmybcool said:

No one IS immune.  There is this government agency called the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that audits and verifies everyones tax return.  Including presidents, senators, etc.  Trumps are sent into the same organization as everyone else's.  

Trump was not claiming immunity from having to submit taxes, he was claiming immunity from investigation and prosecution.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

10 minutes ago, jimmybcool said:

No one IS immune.  There is this government agency called the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that audits and verifies everyones tax return.  Including presidents, senators, etc.  Trumps are sent into the same organization as everyone else's.  

 

Except if memory serves, there have been past news reports that political people in Treasury have interfered (presumably on Trump's behalf) in the normal staff/bureaucrat level review of Trump's tax filings. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/us/politics/trump-taxes-whistleblower.html

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/irs-whistleblower-said-to-report-treasury-political-appointee-might-have-tried-to-interfere-in-audit-of-trump-or-pence/2019/10/03/0c768b34-e52e-11e9-a331-2df12d56a80b_story.html

 

Yes, his returns go to the IRS. But what happens with them once they land in the IRS world, where the president appoints the commissioner, is anything but clear.  He may not be immune, but he certainly considers himself to be immune, above and beyond all laws and jurisdiction of anyone.

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Chomper Higgot]

 

6 minutes ago, riclag said:

 He won't give us his tax returns! lol Where are those tax returns?

 

Somethin tells me when they go to the SDNY ,fake sources are gonna be leakin, fake news imop! 

That’s all a bit cloak and dagger stuff.

 

A more likely scenario is the Grand Jury returning a verdict supporting indictments and Trump’s tax returns being presented as evidence in open court.

 

No need to resort to accusations of ‘fake’ anything when normal and due prosecution process is followed.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Exhibit A on Trump's view of his supposed immunity from everything:

 

Quote

In one lower court hearing in New York, an attorney for the president said Trump would theoretically be immune from investigation even if he shot someone on New York’s Fifth Avenue. During the 2016 campaign, Trump claimed that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/09/supreme-court-trump-tax-records.html

 

Quote

 

In October 2019, during the appeals court argument in the grand jury subpoena case, Judge Denny Chin asked Trump's lawyers about the president's "view on the Fifth Avenue example." Are you saying that "local authorities couldn't investigate? They couldn't do anything about it? That's your position?" Chin asked.

 

"That is correct. That's correct," responded William Consovoy, Trump's lawyer.

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/05/12/853450751/supreme-court-to-hear-cases-involving-trumps-taxes-financial-records

[riclag]

4 hours ago, GinBoy2 said:

Well this a little nuanced if you read the opinion.

 

What the Justices affirmed that the President doesn't have it absolute immunity by virtue of the office.

 

What they said however, was that POTUS has the same resource to challenge in court a subpoena based on burden, harassment, abuse.

 

Trump made no argument other Presidential absolute immunity, and thats what SCOTUS ruled on today.

 

So it will go back the 6th district who will refer back to district court, where Trump will be able to fight the case, on the abuse, harassment or burden arguments.

 

So this is no where near done, and I sincerely doubt it will work it's way through the courts before November 

 

So don't break out the popcorn just yet 

So when they take it back to the lower courts, too take the path that SC clearly defines (other constitutional  concerns) for office of the POTUS  ,it will eventually get back to the SC again for a ruling . It will probably take another 3 years to get those results . 

som nam nah 

[Saint Nick]

5 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Yeah, but it gives the left so much hope.  Every other avenue they've tried has failed so maybe, just maybe, this will be their 'golden goose' to nail Trump.  Please, Kelsall, don't take away the left's hopes and fairy dreams.  That's cruel.

Let's see'em then! 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, riclag said:

So when they take it back to the lower courts, too take the path that SC clearly defines (other constitutional  concerns) for office of the POTUS  ,it will eventually get back to the SC again for a ruling . It will probably take another 3 years to get those results . 

som nam nah 

Meanwhile (State) prosecutors are getting Trump’s tax and other financial records right now.

 

And Trump has zero control

over State Prosecutors, nor can he or any President after him pardon State convictions.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

11 minutes ago, riclag said:

So when they take it back to the lower courts, too take the path that SC clearly defines (other constitutional  concerns) for office of the POTUS  ,it will eventually get back to the SC again for a ruling . It will probably take another 3 years to get those results . 

som nam nah 

 

It may well drag out for who knows how long... But if memory serves, there was precious little in the lower court rulings in the two cases (DA and Congress) that would portend any kind of likely ultimate prevailing on Trump's part.

 

For a guy who likes to claim he has nothing to hide, he's certainly working overtime to hide just about everything possible relating to his conduct. 

 

And the more than likely reason is... he's an unprincipled crook and liar, and he knows it better than anyone else, just as his former attorney Michael Cohen and his niece have told us.

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[riclag]

grand jury under seal! Now the congress should go back and change the law to make all elected officials vulnerable to fodder when releasing their returns!

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trumps-taxes-supreme-court-ruling-john-roberts-1026580/

Edited July 10, 2020 by riclag

[Andy from Kent]

38 minutes ago, Tie Dye Samurai said:

The guy should have just owned the fact that he let Stormy Daniels spank him with a Forbes with his picture on it.

1. Then there would not have been hush money...and the adult actress\entertainer\professional companion would not hush (shocking).

2. Then there would not have been paying the porn queen off to keep quiet during the homestretch of the 2016 election by his lawyer who is now in jail...(and who Trump called 'a rat')

3. Then there would not have been a New York case brought against him that wanted to see his taxes

4. Then he could have kept claiming he wasnt showing his taxes (even though he really really wants to but the American people just are not interested in that) because of the and what is obviously the biggest largest most luxurious audit in financial history (it is huge unprecedented and nothing like we have ever seen folks). 

 

But somehow this is all the fault of the radical left, Biden and Obama, Pelosi and Schiff and Schumer, The FBI, The CIA, his "rat lawyer", the lower courts of New York and most importantly those treasonous traitors on the SCOTUS bench that are supposed to be "his guy's".

 

So...when does all of this winning start that we will get so tired of? So far the only thing I really see in all of this as a win was that he did Stormy Daniels...in 2006...while his new wife was raising their 4 month old son. Ok...maybe not a win there either. 

 

 

 

 

I think the hidden video of the Russian prostitutes peeing on him would be more damning.

 

Shouldn't you make "rat lawyer" plural.   The Donald seems to have more enemies than RMN.

 

Edited July 10, 2020 by Andy from Kent

[cmarshall]

Trump won today.  The congressional subpoena was issued fifteen months ago and the decision today sends it back to the district court where Trump will argue against it, appeal it, and then appeal the decision of the Appeals Court to the Supreme Court once again.  That process will not happen quickly and could even take a year or more.

 

Similarly in the case of the Manhattan District Attorney Vance who will now have to go to the state court to issue the subpoena against Trump's accountants and Deutsche Bank upon receipt of which his office will have to continue their investigation.  Prosecutors don't like to issue indictments before an election since it gives the appearance of attempting to influence the outcome of the election.  The public can only see documents that DA Vance has obtained if they are entered as evidence in a court case, which will not happen before the election if at all.

 

So, Trump has achieved his goal of delaying the subpoenas so that the voters will not know the extent of his corruption and lawbreaking in time for the election.  The Supreme Court facilitated this outcome favorable to Trump in the first place by accepting the Vance case at all.  There was no reason that they could not have simply refused to review the case allowing the Appeals Court's decision against Trump to stand.  Their decision today did not add anything to the earlier decision.  If they nevertheless thought it important that they weigh in on the issues they did not have to delay their decision by the six months it took.  The Supreme Court decided the case of the Watergate tapes against Nixon in three weeks.

 

So Roberts gets to look like he is a defender of the rule of law while he is enabling Trump's reelection bid to continue while keeping the voters in ignorance of the financial facts of Trump's violating numerous laws.  

 

In the long run things don't look so good for Trump.  DA Cyrus Vance Jr. of Manhattan won his last election under a considerable cloud which he nevertheless won because he was effectively unopposed.  Not to put too fine a point on it Vance took a bribe of $50,000 to decline to prosecute Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump for real estate fraud for which his line attorneys believed they had a strong case.  He also declined to prosecute Harvey Weinstein even after one of his victims caught him on tape admitting the sexual assault.  So, Vance is likely to be worried that the voters might toss him out in the next election.  His best chance to survive is to make a case for himself as the prosecutor who took down the Trump crime family.  His boss, the New York State Attorney General, wants to be governor and can expect a similar boost in her political fortunes from a prosecution of the Trumps.  Even if Trump were to try to pardon himself or to resign with the promise of a pardon from Pence, no presidential pardon would protect him from state prosecution.

 

So, I think a prosecution or prosecutions will result from Vance's investigation, but that will be next year when Trump is out of office.

[riclag]

24 minutes ago, Andy from Kent said:

 

 

I think the hidden video of the Russian prostitutes peeing on him would be more damning.

 

It was russia  disinformation ,drummed up by one of the haters(steel).

If there was such a video it would of surfaced during the debunked russian hoax investigation (mueller)which the prosecutors are under criminal investigation(durham)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/06/why-the-mueller-investigation-failed

 

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3xkxj/bill-barr-picked-a-mueller-like-prosecutor-to-investigate-the-mueller-probe

Edited July 10, 2020 by riclag

[earlinclaifornia]

7 hours ago, Kelsall said:

*yawn*  The darling of the left, Rachel Maddow, got ahold of Trump's tax return a while back and reported there was nothing out of the ordinary.

You never have stopped posting inaccuracies regarding her actual reporting.  I routinely post a link so as to debunk. 2005 two pages.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/14/trump-tax-returns-rachel-maddow-says-acquired-2005-form.html

[earlinclaifornia]

2 minutes ago, riclag said:

It was russia  disinformation ,drummed up by one of the haters(steel).

If there was such a video it would of surfaced during the debunked russian hoax investigation (mueller)which the prosecutors are under criminal investigation(durham)

What proof do you have that the video doesn't exist?  That you personally have not seen it is that it?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

21 minutes ago, Andy from Kent said:

I think the hidden video of the Russian prostitutes peeing on him would be more damning.

 

Trump supposedly is something of a germaphobe...  So I don't know about the prostitutes story.

 

But if the story instead was of Putin taking a leak on him, THAT I would believe!!! 

[riclag]

13 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

What proof do you have that the video doesn't exist?  That you personally have not seen it is that it?

lol Maybe if a  thread comes up in the future, we can discuss that topic in detail again

[Andy from Kent]

29 minutes ago, riclag said:

It was russia  disinformation ,drummed up by one of the haters(steel).

If there was such a video it would of surfaced during the debunked russian hoax investigation (mueller)which the prosecutors are under criminal investigation(durham)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/06/why-the-mueller-investigation-failed

 

One moment please.     I'm taking notes and I need to sharpen my pencil.

 

I commend your choice of sources.     I like the New Yorker as well as The Atlantic.

 

Your chosen article is  fairly lengthy but I fail to see any specific reference to the, as yet,  undisclosed videos which will likely show up in the future on  some porn site.   Can you please  provide more specificity?

 

There's no time like the present for you to come clean with your proof.

Edited July 10, 2020 by Andy from Kent

[Bob A Kneale]

7 hours ago, Kelsall said:

*yawn*  The darling of the left, Rachel Maddow, got ahold of Trump's tax return a while back and reported there was nothing out of the ordinary.

No, she got hold of two pages of it, that's all but, you're right, there was nothing untoward there.

[Chomper Higgot]

41 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Trump won today.  The congressional subpoena was issued fifteen months ago and the decision today sends it back to the district court where Trump will argue against it, appeal it, and then appeal the decision of the Appeals Court to the Supreme Court once again.  That process will not happen quickly and could even take a year or more.

 

Similarly in the case of the Manhattan District Attorney Vance who will now have to go to the state court to issue the subpoena against Trump's accountants and Deutsche Bank upon receipt of which his office will have to continue their investigation.  Prosecutors don't like to issue indictments before an election since it gives the appearance of attempting to influence the outcome of the election.  The public can only see documents that DA Vance has obtained if they are entered as evidence in a court case, which will not happen before the election if at all.

 

So, Trump has achieved his goal of delaying the subpoenas so that the voters will not know the extent of his corruption and lawbreaking in time for the election.  The Supreme Court facilitated this outcome favorable to Trump in the first place by accepting the Vance case at all.  There was no reason that they could not have simply refused to review the case allowing the Appeals Court's decision against Trump to stand.  Their decision today did not add anything to the earlier decision.  If they nevertheless thought it important that they weigh in on the issues they did not have to delay their decision by the six months it took.  The Supreme Court decided the case of the Watergate tapes against Nixon in three weeks.

 

So Roberts gets to look like he is a defender of the rule of law while he is enabling Trump's reelection bid to continue while keeping the voters in ignorance of the financial facts of Trump's violating numerous laws.  

 

In the long run things don't look so good for Trump.  DA Cyrus Vance Jr. of Manhattan won his last election under a considerable cloud which he nevertheless won because he was effectively unopposed.  Not to put too fine a point on it Vance took a bribe of $50,000 to decline to prosecute Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump for real estate fraud for which his line attorneys believed they had a strong case.  He also declined to prosecute Harvey Weinstein even after one of his victims caught him on tape admitting the sexual assault.  So, Vance is likely to be worried that the voters might toss him out in the next election.  His best chance to survive is to make a case for himself as the prosecutor who took down the Trump crime family.  His boss, the New York State Attorney General, wants to be governor and can expect a similar boost in her political fortunes from a prosecution of the Trumps.  Even if Trump were to try to pardon himself or to resign with the promise of a pardon from Pence, no presidential pardon would protect him from state prosecution.

 

So, I think a prosecution or prosecutions will result from Vance's investigation, but that will be next year when Trump is out of office.

I guess that’s why Trump is having a whine fest over it on Twitter.

[Bluespunk]

6 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

There is a God

And much to trump’s consternation, it’s not him...

[Mavideol]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

But looking further ahead, Trump faces possible future criminal prosecution in his native New York, perhaps after he leaves office.

I do hope so, usually what goes around come around, his lawyer Cohen was found guilty and serving time for  financial payments to some ladies, Trump signed the check he's guilty as well, thus same punishment, lock him up

[Mavideol]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

it’s an oncoming freight train.

more like an OUTgoing freight train and if it's at the speed of a TGV even better

[winslowsjardine]

Well, one result of this could be to make Mr. Trump resolve to stay in office instead of deciding not to run. I don't think it's been decided yet if a sitting President can be prosecuted by a state.

[Eric Loh]

59 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

I do hope so, usually what goes around come around, his lawyer Cohen was found guilty and serving time for  financial payments to some ladies, Trump signed the check he's guilty as well, thus same punishment, lock him up

His tax records will revealed more than 1 crime. He may be lock up for good and he may plead pardon from Biden. 

[Thomas J]

Nothing but a political stunt to get at Tax Returns so they can point to something in them and say what he did was unethical or illegal.  They did the same to Romney when the say he had a Cayman Islands account.  Such an account is neither illegal nor does it provide any tax benefits but that is how the left spun it.  They never want Trump to pursue his agenda.  Their strategy is to occupy him by keeping him embroiled in fake controversies like the Russian Collusion, or his relationship with a porn star. 

[cmarshall]

26 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I guess that’s why Trump is having a whine fest over it on Twitter.

Trump likes to whine.  I don't think Jay Sekulow ever believed his own argument that the president has absolute immunity.  Trump himself doesn't actually believe anything he says.