—
My my my — don’t just you love it when the good guys win for a change.
Turns out that most US Courts actually believe in the structure of the Constitution — unlike Donnie-Dimwit who has never even read our founding document.
Turns out, the president is not above the law.
A federal appeals court held on Friday that Trump’s claims that he is immune to congressional oversight have no basis in law.
If the Supreme Court does not interfere with this decision, that means the House Oversight Committee will soon gain access to many of Trump’s financial records — potentially including his tax forms.
The case, Trump v. Mazars USA, is an especially significant one because it represents House investigators’ best opportunity to shake records loose from a president who’s offered maximal resistance to any attempt to make him disclose information that he does not want disclosed. The House committee seeks financial records that Trump turned over to his accounting firm, Mazars USA, and the firm has indicated it will comply with the committee’s subpoena if it is ordered to do so.
Trump cannot simply refuse to turn over these records because they aren’t under his control.
[...]
[...]
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' 2-1 decision involving Mazars USA represented a major victory for the House amid wide-ranging congressional investigations of the president. But the case could be appealed to the full circuit or the Supreme Court.
"Contrary to the President's arguments, the Committee possesses authority under both the House Rules and the Constitution to issue the subpoena, and Mazars must comply," Judge David Tatel wrote in the majority opinion.
[...]
Jay Sekulow, counsel to the president, said the White House is reviewing the court's lengthy ruling, which totals 134 pages, including a dissenting opinion from one of the appellate judges.
"We continue to believe that this subpoena is not a legitimate exercise of Congress' legislative authority," Sekulow said.
Rep. Elijah Cummings, chair of the Oversight committee, lauded the court's ruling as a "fundamental and resounding victory" for congressional oversight and checks and balances.
www.usatoday.com — 10-11-2019
Given the history between the the Supreme Court and the DC Circuit Appeals Court, there is a very good chance that the Supreme Court will let the DC Appeals decision stand:
Empirical SCOTUS: The singular relationship between the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court — Scotusblog, Oct 3, 2019
The new Supreme’s session starts soon has just restarted. So we shall see. Stay tuned.
— —
PS. Who is on the Supreme Court freaking matters. This issue should always be hammered home with Independents — every chance we get.
Do they really want a Kavanaugh Kangaroo Court for the foreseeable future?
Do they really … ?
[‘Frat-boy’ Brett is only 54 years — that like 15 in Supreme Justices’ years.]
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Well that’s the road were on, IF Dems are once again denied the White House, by false bot-news stories — both foreign and domestic.
Say HELLLLO! to your Judicial Future, America!
.
.
.
Well, at least there’ll be BEER … and lot’s of conservative fireworks!
— — —
PSS. Isn’t it long past time there was a Law requiring that Presidential Candidates HAD TO turn over their Tax Returns? Call it the Trump Tax Legacy Act. Enough of this Scout’s Honor BS.
No longer should shady charlatans be able to worm their way into the People’s House — Not on our on-going watch!
...
Americans need to know, if their Presidential Candidate is a Crook — BEFORE we Vote!
— to paraphrase Resignation-Richard Nixon:
— — — —
PPSS. Trump’s Lawyer B.G. (Before Giuliani) testified to Congress, concerning Trump’s tax practices:
Michael Cohen’s recent public congressional testimony was a startling moment in recent history. His allegations that Donald Trump routinely evaded taxes and committed other financial fraud should result in an immediate request to the Treasury to turn over President Trump’s business and personal tax returns.
According to Cohen, Trump falsely inflated his assets to get bank loans, then deflated them to evade taxes. Cohen noted that Trump abused his charitable trust, reimbursing a straw purchaser of a Trump portrait costing $60,000 and accepting a $150,000 payment for a speech, which may have been done to avoid taxes. And Cohen testified that Trump may have even written off hush payments to his former mistresses.
thehill.com — Mar 8, 2019