Posted on 05/12/2020 2:05:49 PM PDT by robowombat
How is this more burdensome, though, than what took place in Clinton versus Jones? I guess I’m not sure I understand that, he said, adding: There, they sought the deposition of the president while he was serving. Here, they’re seeking records from third parties.”
A good solid swipe at Bill Clinton!
That’s cool to see that at the SCOTUS.
Nothing new here! The communist Democrats always find way to win. When half of the SC are communist, America is in real trouble.
I don’t remember who requested these returns in the first place, and for what reason?
I’m sure it’s just to leak them to the press.
B@stards.
As I understand the law above is the standard for Congress to subpoena Trump's or any ones records. There are supposed to be legislators not frivolous imbeciles.
Assuming the justices see through this nonsense, the commie democrat congress critters are trying to pull off, there is no way they get what the records, as we hate Trump is not a legitimate legislative purpose.
So we’re looking for 5-4?
zSCOTUS was wrong in the Clinton case, IMO.
Why is Gorsuch even trying to compare the seeking of personal tax records from a time before Trump was in office, to seeking the deposition of a sitting President? One has nothing to do with the other.
He's saying what was done to Clinton was way more intrusive than a tax-return request. It's a swipe at Trump.
i would raise the extremely real and likely concern his returns will deliberately be leaked to the media by the democrats.
They have been leaking things to the press for a very long time.
After all we now know. is there anyone here who thinks there’s a chance in Hell that Obama Inc, hasn’t already seen every line of Trumps returns for the past 30+years?
starting the day he questioned BO’s BC
What it seems to me you’re asking us to do is to put a kind of 10 ton weight on the scales between the president and Congress and essentially to make it impossible for Congress to perform oversight and to carry out its functions where the president is concerned,
Uh, yeah. That’s what that Constitution thingy was written to do. Separation of powers and all that. Wise Latina my ass.
One sure thing: The Old Bolshevik Biddy won’t recuse herself for her prior, multiple, anti-Trump remarks.
It's not a swipe at anybody. He's asking a logical question about the argument being made. That's his job.
Our only hope is another term for trump and to launch a devastating blow to the evil in this country
The difference is BJ Clinton had a VICTIM- Paula Jones
Trump is just asked for his personal tax returns.
(making him and any business partners potential victims, once liberals get their names)
So....it’s a bit confusing. To me, if there were ‘crimes’ that were involved with Specific tax records, that they had ample evidence of criminal behavior, like with Clinton vs Jones, Then the POTUS shouldn’t be immune.
The key words are “Ample Evidence” and “Specific Records”. Nobody really asked the Questions: 1)What is the Crime that these records would shed light on? 2)What specific records in Trumps ‘Tax Records’ are needed? 3) What strong evidence do they have that releasing the POTUS tax records would solve a ‘criminal offense’.
I SEE NO EVIDENCE of this discussion. Stormy Daniels, doesn’t cut it. Campaign finance, was completely ignored by Obama, not enforced on Hillary and the ‘Clinton Foundations’ ignored for the entire DNC in the last election cycle. Since the SCOTUS didn’t step in to stop Comey, FISA abuse, or any prior campaign finance issues, then they be ‘partisan hacks’ if they do so now. The Supreme Court siding with the Democrats would mean that only CONSERVATIVES are under the rule of law.
To prove this isn’t a ‘fishing’ expedition, as pertains to the POTUS, the standard should be to demonstrate convincingly that a serious real criminal offense occurred. Moreover, if they have that, then a single line from a single year of his Tax records, could verify that information.
The problem is that this IS a FISHING expedition, and they can’t GIVE specifics because they LACK a real and serious crime, or even specific evidence. They are doing it for political reasons, not for Criminal Justice, and the SCOTUS should tell them to pound sand or come back with hard evidence of a crime, and SPECIFIC portions of his TAX records that are needed.
Forgot one thing in my last post.
I suspect that they will find nothing in Trumps records. He is just baiting everyone to out themselves as one sided partisan hacks. Then, when they get it they will say “we forced him to give up his tax records” while they wince that they got nothing and now look like morons. That’s what Trump does.
Better be 5-4, advantage us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.