Trump Tax Returns Case Moves At Light Speed As Supreme Court Issues Formal Ruling
The case is moving quickly now. It is about time...
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Supreme Court has granted a request from Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance and Trump's lawyers to issue an immediate formal ruling on Trump's tax returns.
CNN reported:
The US Supreme Court granted the Manhattan district attorney's request to immediately issue its judgment in the case over President Donald Trump's tax returns, paving the way for new challenges to a grand jury subpoena to be handled by a lower court judge.
The district attorney asked for that time to be cut short, and Trump's attorney agreed. Friday, Chief Justice John Roberts said the request is granted.
It usually takes 25 days for a judgment to formally issued by the Supreme Court. The speed-up means that the case is still on an accelerated timeline. Trump only has a month to add new challenges to the subpoena from the Manhattan DA.
The President's stall tactics have fallen flat. The DA could have Trump's tax returns and business documents during the heart of the 2020 presidential election. It is not out of the realm of possibility that Trump or members of his family could be indicted in New York as voters are going to the polls in the fall.
None of it is going the way that Trump wanted, as his luck may have finally run out on hiding his tax returns and potentially criminal activity before the election.
Tags
Who is online
86 visitors
I want to see Trump's taxes. You?
Yes, out of principle and precedence I want his tax returns reviewed. I look at this as a win:win. Those who want to see his tax returns will get their way AND if there's nothing unusual there then his supporters can call it a win.
Not sure why either side would be opposed since it would put to rest speculation.
Not sure why either side would be opposed since it would put to rest speculation.
Its really quite simple....
Actually if Trump really had nothing to hide you would think he would want his returns revealed as quickly as possible-- because that;s that's the only way that would prove-- beyond any shadow of a doubt-- that he is.in fact, innocent of any wrong doing!
Until he does that people will always have suspicions-- and the only way guarnteed to clear his name would be to have the returns revealed as quickly as possible!
Yes, my point exactly.
Perhaps Trump simply doesn't care that some yahoos want to see his returns.
Wish in one hand, shit in the other and see which hand fills up faster!
Under normal circumstances I would agree. In the current polarized country we live in I feel confident the left would cherry pick information and have "experts" tell us why Trump is the devil and the right would cherry pick information and have "experts" tell us how everything he did was within the law.
Everyone will claim they win and no ones mind will be changed. Sound familiar?
Hmmmm, maybe that is why I really don't care to see them.
Trump is most probably a cheap. None of us are "pink-footed babies" here. We have some experiences with cheats, thieves, and robbers to varying degrees—if only in the movies. Donald Trump himself was open enough to admit that he 'cut corners' in his taxes and 'won' big doing so. (Even though, he won't give anybody who can make a proper assessment of just how big those corners were years before his presidency!
As for enablers enabling, oh well. Still, knowledge (knowing facts) carries its own power!
The IRS had all of Trumps returns and audited them. What do you think, some yahoos will find something bad when trained professionals didn't!
Lol
The IRS had Richard ("I am not a crook.") Nixons tax returns in the storehouse too. After 'close' examination, Nixon paid back taxes ($4,000) to the treasury for underpayments. The Clinton's underrepresented on their Whitewater deal. They paid back taxes too. So, Donald Trump's taxes are "Up" . . . .
He doesn't have to "clear his name" because he hasn't been convicted of any wrong doing....taxwise or otherwise.
Allegations are a dime a dozen.
Does Congress have them or not?
Last I checked, Congress was still whining about not having them.
Stonewalling. It's a thing. Look it up, please.
Whining. It's a thing. Look it up, please.
This isn't about what you or I want. This isn't about the right of left. It isn't really about what is in his tax returns. It's about right and wrong. About following our laws. This man has blocked every single subpoena and he and his cohorts need to be taught that America has laws that all Americans have to follow. Even the President. He works for us, we don't bow to him.
So demand to see the tax returns for Pelosi, Schiff, Biden, Obama, Sanders, Clinton and the rest. Why focus on just one person.
Your post is an excellent example of short sightedness and narrow thinking. Thinking in terms of political parties not in terms of the country as a whole has been a successful strategy for this administration.
This is why so much animosity has developed in the country. There is an inability by a certain faction of voters (approx. 35%) that are not capable of thinking of anyone but their own self interests.
Making our leaders accountable is one way for the people to ensure our interests are foremost in their minds. Allowing leaders to circumvent and manipulate the system for their own self interest is dangerous. This isn't about political parties - move beyond that way of thinking........if you can.
Then put me on ignore and you don't have to ever read another one of my posts.
Ugh - another member who communicates via "trump speak". Let me see if I can translate.......I under the part where you say my post is ridiculous and I kinda get the political hackery at it's finest but I'm totally stumped on the supply education part.
[Deleted]
That's totally true and lord knows I'm no Anne Sullivan. So to save myself I will put you on ignore.
You think the member was having a discussion with me? really.. That wasn't my impression and I took the necessary action to avoid derailing the seed any further. It appears you also want to talk about me and not the issue.
Yes, I saw your earlier post but then you inserted yourself into my and another member's back and forth. That is what I was referring to.
I had not yet gotten to the comment you made that actually WAS on topic.
[deleted]
Well said and I personally thank you for entering and restoring the room to its balance! Donald Trump is running amok and all his sycophants wish to do is change the subject away from authoritarianism (that goes in their favor)!
This is so disappointing. So very sad and pathetic. We have to struggle so all over again in this country explaining rights and wrongs to otherwise intelligent people.
The tradition is for presidents, eh? Trump is a pathetic, combative, litigious, obstructionist!
Why are you dodging for this low-class racist-devoid of any redeeming value-man? Donald Trump has been given the world (by God if you are a mind to believe it (I know you are not!)) and still he remains a 'sewer' of all the selfishness and abusiveness he can muster rolled into one! He stands for nothing really, for he would gladly heave your worldview under the wheels of his bus-if only it was different than his own. . . .
Thinking for oneself is not really as complex as you may think there, Muva. What other soundbite you got in your 'quiver.' Curious. Get 'em off out! Make it 'rain' soundbites already! (Giggles.)
Trump is a chump! And, he likes his black Americans to know their 'percentages.' They can find 'em left resting in the ghettos of the 70's.
What does the word: "shill" mean? I wonder.
This is about a presidential tradition. Trump supporters know this, but 'shill away' anyway.
You like your "quickie" corrupt politicians who score (get conservative policies stuffed down the throats of the citizenry) and then leave? Got it! This country is not a conservative policy 'piggy back'! There are over 325 million plus of us and we are diverse. This nation can not exist again to 'service' conservatively selfish and greedy appetites.
And yet the diverse peoples of this country pack in to the democratic party. Conservatives are even running the independents away! Lies can not serve your goals anymore. Trump is a chump you should dump. He is a lying deceiver his followers have inhaled and imbibed to the point of drunkenness. Only a fool can not see Trump is a relic sticking up out of time. He would fall on his face, if you did not orient him to stand!
How is he the best conservative to lead this great country; this mighty and diverse people?
And with that any chance of a conversation with you of any value had disappeared.
I'm sorry, Jeremy. We definitely were not having a meaningful discussion before. As far as I am concerned, until you can express the plain truth about Trump in the manner you complain about so many democrats, we simply tread water at the surface of deeper discussion. It's really quite shocking too.
So you want me to back your unfounded accusations. Sorry, not going to happen.
I see you're on 'trump time,' got it! Fine, we will 'sleep' here.
No, your ranting and rambling doesn't sound familiar at all.
Sorry, but you have no right to see them.
That is not what the Supreme Court says...
Wow-- if that's not a compelling argument-- I don't know what is!
/sarc
Actually, now that I think of it-- there's an equally impressive counter-argument:
Sorry, but we have every right to see them.
My argument is more fact based, and grounded in years of legal precedent that your's is!
You obviously have misinterpreted the Court's ruling then.
Good luck seeing them!
Please, do link your case precedents that would allow you to view a private tax return.
Being as how you have years of legal precedents, just 3 cases will do quite nicely.
Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance might get to see them but I doubt you or I will.
Wrong. Vance may have the right to see them, depending upon how the lower court finally rules. YOU, however, have absolutely no right to see them at all, nor does anyone else not connected to that District Attorney's office. Even they are allowed to use them only for official business.
It seems that you figure that, if they get into the hands of Vance, they will immediately be leaked, and you seem to approve of that. If they are leaked, Vance should be held totally responsible and should be indicted and convicted for leaking them.
Still waiting on your legal precedents you claim your "opinion" is based on.
12 hours of internet searching, and you can't even find ONE case?
As you may know, highly valued, high-ranking, and high powered people have staffing. And, you can only swear staffing to so much. So unless you can find a 'culprit' who leaks important (not trivial) documents, you can not indict, try, or convict a professional for simply doing his or her job! The courts do not exist to settle vendettas.
Moreover, your leap to leaking is a supposition. It is not a foregone conclusion, despite who the person in question is or the intensive of those who wish to know about these returns. For that matter, the White House and Congress have leakers too. May be Trump should not have driven up the 'stock' of his returns so high?!
No one has suggested that "people doing their job" get indicted for it. That is ridiculous!
By that same logic you cannot indict President Trump for things his staff does either. Guess the buck doesn't stop there.
If only the Democrats would follow that rule we wouldn't even be talking about this.
Hi Snuffy! What you talking about? Leaking? Something more?
I want to see Trump's taxes. You?
It's unlikely you would know how to interpret them.
If there was a problem with Trump's taxes, Obama's IRS would have pointed it out long before the 2016 election.
At any rate, nothing will be done before the November election.
I have never been interested in seeing any political office holders tax returns and I don't plan on starting now. What I would be interested in knowing is how many of the people that seem so interested now have ever actually reviewed any other politicians tax returns.
The public as individuals need not see the returns, some trusted representatives should see them. All of this could be resolved if Donald Trump (Do as I say not as i do) would end his stonewalling.
If I demand to see r return, and you refuse, are you stonewalling?
First, sadly, I am not a 'trusted representative (of this nation),' Secondly, I suppose you are not such a person either. Lastly, as a member of the public, congress and other trusted representatives can view all my returns, for it has never crossed my mind to try to tie 'em up with litigious treatment.
Really? Good luck finding one. Seems they are all too busy spinning everything that happens to be trusted to do what is best for us.
Of course, we could let a Trump sycophant or sycophants be our trusted or team of trusted officials. Just kidding. There is no daylight between Trump and his supporters! When Trump looks into a mirror what is staring back? Sycophants in the millions!
And you go by "right down the center" do you? Here is a 'word to the wise': What is good is good 99.99 percent of the time. If Donald Trump is good, let's see a demonstration of it on this right now.
If you choose to make your returns public, go for it!
Not everyone is so willing to forfeit their rights
That's full of it. And not even the subject. Here refresh yourself, I'll help:
Trump tax returns case moves at light speed as Supreme Court issues formal ruling
I know exactly what the topic is, and you have no right to see Trump's returns.
Don't digress. Accentuate this discussion, please.
Stop telling me what to do. If you don't like my responses, you are completely free to skip on by.
Since it is not possible for anything but light to move at light speed based on today's science, perhaps the "subject" needs to be re-phrased? There, can't get more on topic than that!
You 'chatted me up' Tex'! @1.4.2. I started to act like I am out, but no—it's Tex' after all! (Giggles.)
Irrelevant. I'm elevated above insults. You are welcome to depart as the reverse of your arrival. See ya!
Yes, I asked a simple question.
nice, but really, I am not interested in what else you pretend about.
Easily entertained, are you?
But giggles? Aren't you a little old for that?
If you can't see it then it is because you refuse to see/
You bust me up. "Pepper bellies." See! (Giggles.)
Rhetoric? It is not a demonstration!
"Right down the center" (of one side.)
hmmm....yet another off topic post.
guess that can happen when people get emotional and lose their rationality
Nope...don't care and none of my...or your business, especially before he became president.
Besides, unless you are a CPA or tax lawyer, you probably would have no idea what you are looking at.
You probably think the word "Russia"shows up in them.
Oh hell yeah... he's gotta have W-2's from the Kremlin...
Outside of the radical left, I would calculate the nation's interest in the President's tax returns as just about ZERO.
yeah vic, who cares if trump broke the law by paying hush money to some trollops before a presidential election, right?
Please show us where?
For starters this..
I had a hard time getting by that first sentence. If that conversation was criminal, where's the indictment?
It isn't like the left isn't trying.
Boring.
Sure seems like some are very curious about private tax returns.
Pity that the large majority clamoring for them will never see them.
Except, the US President is not a private citizen!
And, the courts have ruled he must show them...
You obviously have misinterpreted the Court's ruling then.
Good luck seeing them!
I don't need luck. The law is on my side...
Actually not entirely true. Legal precedent summarized HERE .
While those are the facts, personally I think his refusal to divulge the records reflects poorly on his willingness to support "transparency" as some other presidents have voluntarily done in the past. He incubates the very suspicions and theories that are being used against him politically. And he destroys any claim he can make about he or his administration being more transparent than past presidents or administrations.
Pity that the large majority clamoring for them will never see them.
Actually the majority clamoring (clamor!, clamor!
) will soon see them,.
You obviously have misinterpreted the Court's ruling then.
Good luck seeing them!
I haven't misunderstood anything...
What makes you think you'll see grand jury information?
Did you know about grand jury secrecy?
So what in that makes you think you'll see his tax returns?
If (when) Trump is indicted based on the Vance investigation, the tax returns will likely be submitted into evidence. In that case, I doubt that they will remain under seal.
You sound awful sure that will happen. So sure, in fact, that I don't see how the returns will help any, if there is a case to begin with.
You sound awful sure that will happen.
My gut tells me... that's totally convincing, right?
Your second sentence is just a bit too much circular reasoning for a mere mortal like me to follow...
Did your gut tell you Hillary was going to lose?
My gut told me that Trump could win in 2016, which I told anyone who asked. It could happen again, unfortunately. We will find out in November.
My head told me that Trump--like any candidate--had a chance to win
My gut told me Democrats were over-confident.
I don't to see them as I don't have the resources to verify the numbers. I want the experts to do that and just let us know if they are bs or not.
FFS does ANYBODY think that if there were something Obama and Clinton wouldn't have made it public during the 2016 campaign?
Only fools would believe it, especially after the IRS was clearly not pro-conservative.
'Fish! How 'bout that Orly Taitz? How she rockin' these days? Trump still ain't satisfied that black man with a name like Obama can be from here!
I ain't asking for Trump's returns, by the way: New York State and Congress, the legally responsible people are doing the asking through the courts!
Trump's penis: Eeww. Get it out of here! No thank you! How about no?!
Typical racist comment.
You wish. How about that Central Park Five? Do you think Trump should apologize to them for wishing their black and brown skins the gas chamber? How about those "good" klansmen with tiki torches? Is Trump just misunderstood? Or did his niece just write a book where she says he was an 'ugly' racist child and young adult? Or, words to that effect?