Will the Supreme Court Rule Against Trump?

[busterhyman]

Trump will not lose. He did not appoint two Republican operates to the bench to lose this kind of case. Republicans have never believed in transparency.

Love the part of the Tax Code where corporations can write off an unlimited amount of losses (see Trump and Bezos) and individuals get a measly 3,000 per year.

well if we get transparency...like ''the obuma'' gave us transparency...no thanks

 

[JohnnyMac]

Following are the number of Article III federal judges serving in the federal judiciary as of May 14, 2020, organized by the president who appointed them.
Appointed by Democrat presidents:

• Barack Obama: 316
• Bill Clinton: 86
• Jimmy Carter: 1

Appointed by Republican presidents:

• Donald Trump: 196
• George W. Bush: 166
• George H.W. Bush: 15
• Ronald Reagan: 18

The federal judiciary is essentially 50/50 with Dem and Rep appointees, but I guess some feel it is infected.

 

[SgtLanquel]

Via former SDNY AUSA Richard Signorelli:

Here's my theory on SCOTUS delay re opinion on the Trump tax returns: Roberts is trying to amass as much of a unanimous opinion as possible in favor of disclosure (following 8-0 Nixon tapes precedent) and it was only argued in May

I do not expect a lengthy delay, perhaps a few days to a week. To have anything remaining after June is rare.

https://twitter.com/richsignorelli/status/1280152138971316226?s=19

 

[Willie99]

Via former SDNY AUSA Richard Signorelli:

Here's my theory on SCOTUS delay re opinion on the Trump tax returns: Roberts is trying to amass as much of a unanimous opinion as possible in favor of disclosure (following 8-0 Nixon tapes precedent) and it was only argued in May

I do not expect a lengthy delay, perhaps a few days to a week. To have anything remaining after June is rare.

https://twitter.com/richsignorelli/status/1280152138971316226?s=19

With Barbanman's track record. It's safe to say things are looking better from Trump now than they did one short hour ago

I especially love citations from experts that just pull something out their ass for the sake of pulling something out their ass. When they're wrong, they just pull something else out their ass. At this point, it's obvious they have really really big asses in which to store an awful lot of sewage

Did you know? Somebody somewhere just tested positive for COVID -19, go find that story, we need to know

Hop hop





PS: If they happen to rule against Trump, it will be 5-4, with Roberts sucking libtard dick dry again. Stated differently, it will be a party line vote

 

[Serbone]

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2020/07/06/dakota-pipeline-shutdown/

Trump now 1-30 ATS last 3.5 years

 

[SgtLanquel]

NEW: Supreme Court will announce decision on Trump financial records tomorrow, which will be the last day of the term

Overheard inside the White House: "Roll out the Adderall trough...it's going to be a long night"

May want to have the 3x forced Benzo injection for tomorrow morning as well so he doesn't try to waddle too far from his bedroom bunker

 

[cybersharp]

Clinton wouldn't release his medical records. Cocaine usage was the rumor.

Funny, I don't remember the Press making a big stink about THAT....

 

[cybersharp]

...And does ANYONE actually believe he has secrets hidden in his tax returns that the
IRS doesn't already know about, and DID NOT APPROVE OF?

He's a damn billionaire. These people have TEAMS of accountants, covering every
possible taxation angle.

 

[SgtLanquel]

...And does ANYONE actually believe he has secrets hidden in his tax returns that the
IRS doesn't already know about, and DID NOT APPROVE OF?

He's a damn billionaire. These people have TEAMS of accountants, covering every
possible taxation angle.

You have no way of confirming he is a billionaire but keep watching reruns of The Apprentice

And the cases in play here are not limited to federal and state tax fraud

They also suspect massive bank fraud and money laundering in the billions

 

[SgtLanquel]

True "billionaires" do not find themselves untouchable by every bank in North America since the late 1990s following his sixth bankruptcy in 16 years, stiffing contractors and investors by multi-billions of dollars

 

[festeringZit]

True "billionaires" do not find themselves untouchable by every bank in North America since the late 1990s following his sixth bankruptcy in 16 years, stiffing contractors and investors by multi-billions of dollars

Pres Trump has never filed bankruptcy.

Companies for which he has had part ownership have filed Chapt 11 restructuring

 

[SgtLanquel]

Pres Trump has never filed bankruptcy.

Companies for which he has had part ownership have filed Chapt 11 restructuring

lol

 

[SgtLanquel]

Actually should be awesome when revelations of Tiny's finances reveal him to be a lifelong law-abiding and fully ethical businessman worth multi-billions and he's just too humble for that to be seen by the world

Will really own the libs

 

[festeringZit]

lol

Not sure what is funny... I hear people repeating the bankruptcy statement about Trump, and people think he's filed personal bankruptcy over and over. It's just not true.

 

[Mobdeeper7239]

Money laundering.


He’s a criminal. Wannabe Putin. Putin’s puppet. Scared of Kaydrov

 

[Michelangelo]

My money says he wins the tax ruling.

What citizen has to publicly disclose their taxes? None. That's who.

Like cybersharp said, if there are any evasions or illegalities the IRS would already have him jailed. You guys do remember Lois Lerner do you not?

More liberal BS to nail our duly elected President. They haven't hit the ball yet. Go back to the girl's jv team.

 

[SgtLanquel]

What citizen has to publicly disclose their taxes?
.

Any citizen suspected of one or more (but not limited to) of the following will find their tax and financial dealings subject to review: bank fraud, state and/or federal tax fraud, money laundering, real estate fraud

Prosecutors such as those in the state of NY and the Manhattan DA routinely subpeona and receive otherwise private tax and financial information for those people suspected of committing financial crimes within their jurisdiction. It is literally a daily occurrence nationwide

The POTUS - since Watergate - has enjoyed essential immunity while in office from direct criminal prosecutions under the auspices of the job being too prevalent for a POTUS to effectively mount a criminal defense.

Such immunity *might* also protect a POTUS from even being investigated for criminal activity until they are out of office

We will find out tomorrow morning if that latter level of short-term immunity will hold

 

[SgtLanquel]

The defense was led by Jay Sekulow....an astonishing integer when one would think that if Tiny's claims had legal merit he could have his pick of 100+ highly distinguished law firms across North America

But the defense remains boiled down to his assertion that as POTUS he should enjoy 100% immunity from investigation of his company and personal finances prior to Jan 20, 2017

In his claims, no level of suspected bank fraud, tax fraud, campaign finance fraud, international money laundering, tax evasion merits criminal investigation.

The last two Presidents to claim such blanket 100% immunity were Nixon (lost his argument at SCOTUS in 1974 by an 8-0 vote) and Clinton who lost his case in 1994 by a 9-0 vote

Only three results likely (w presumption that both decisions will fall same direction*)

A) Trump's appeals are upheld, reversing the decision of the four preceding court levels, in what would most certainly be a maximum 5-4

B) Trump's appeals are denied in what would be most likely a 9-0, but possibly lower if one or more of the rightys decides it's time to ignore precedent of Nixon&Clinton cases. In this case Mazars, Deutsche Bank and others named in the trio of subpeonas would turn over pertinent info within a few weeks of the mid-July decision

C) Pretty much same as B, but with attached caveat that those named in the subpeonas are compelled to produce BUT they can retain the info until AFTER Trump leaves office


Also, contrary to the yabba yabba of Tiny-cultists, no one behind or otherwise supporting the cited subpeonas gives a crap how "rich" Tiny is (or not), though that will be a provocative revelation at some point

Rather, the interest is in examining whether his finances and businesses have been involved with federal felony activities as was demonstrated in the language of the subpeonas which must cite one or more probable causes to believe such crimes may have taken place.

There are any number of wholly qualified ex-federal prosecutors who have covered these three cases extensively

If you are aomeone TRULY interested in the true legal aspects in play, take your pick and read up

It will prove far more illuminating than reading the HSO of random sports betting dudes on the rxforum offshore room

-----

*There is a lighter, but nonetheless tenable POV that suggests a "D" in which Tiny could prevail in the appeal vs House Oversight while still getting wiped out in both cases vs State of and County of NY

Reposting the above ^^^ as it essentially lays out the only three (or maybe four) outcomes as of tomorrow July 9

 

[cybersharp]

The Supreme Court just ruled -- minutes ago -- that Trump's Tax return
records CAN be revealed!

Expect ANOTHER liberal-news media feeding frenzy about this....

 

[cybersharp]

Trump-company X spent $$11 million on Bathroom renovations in 2003!

Building inspectors claim they were unnecessary!

Film at 11! face)(*^%