CNN: Supreme Court Is Interfering With Democrats Attempts To Get Trump’s Private Records

See, because only lower courts stocked with Democrat supporters should be able to rule on Constitutional issues

Intervening! Keep private records private! How dare they consider Constitutional issues! Congress should be allowed to Demand records of all citizens anytime they want!

(CNN) On the same day that a Democratic-led US House committee voted for articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, the Supreme Court made its own momentous decision to intervene in Trump’s effort to keep his tax returns and other financial records secret.

The justices agreed to resolve in spring 2020 if a sitting president should be immune from any criminal proceeding, whether related to conduct before taking office or even — to use Trump’s famed example – shooting someone on Fifth Avenue in New York. The high court also said it would determine the oversight authority of Congress in paired disputes arising from attempts by House Democrats to obtain Trump’s financial documents.

The eventual decisions would help define the high court in the Trump era, especially as Chief Justice John Roberts has tried to carefully navigate Trump-related litigation and regularly declares that the justices are above politics. (snip)

The acceptance of a case for review does not determine the outcome. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court’s brief order on Friday signals that at least four justices — the number required to grant a case a hearing — believe Trump has a legitimate claim in his assertions that a president should be protected from state investigation while in office and similarly shielded from broad congressional oversight.

Well, we pretty much know how the Liberal judges will vote. I’d be surprised if any of them come down on the Trump’s side, which is the Constitutional side, namely, that there is no requirement in the Constitution for any president to provide financial documents or tax returns

In urging the justices not to hear Trump’s effort to block a subpoena to his longtime accountants Mazars USA, lawyers for the US House noted that House members are elected for two-year terms, so further delays would “prevent the people’s representatives from carrying out their constitutional duties in the limited remaining time they possess.”

Their first duty is to read the Constitution. Article II Section 1 is rather specific

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

That’s the requirement. Period. It’s in black and white. It doesn’t mean things can be added on arbitrarily, and Trump’s lawyers will be able to easily argue that this is a fishing expedition based on partisan politics. You can bet CNN would fight in court if the House or Senate demanded documents for the same reason.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

13 Responses to “CNN: Supreme Court Is Interfering With Democrats Attempts To Get Trump’s Private Records”

  1. John says:

    States Rights!!!
    NY may already have sealed indictments for Trump based on inaccurate mortgage documents some of which resulted in bankruptcies where the lender lost millions

  2. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Recall too that President Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator in a felony hush money scheme that likely impacted the 2016 election. A Cato article makes the point that even this is not necessarily an impeachable offense.

    https://www.cato.org/blog/stormy-daniels-payoff-impeachable-offense

    With the Repubs revamping of the federal courts, Trump’s ownership of the DOJ, Trump is effectively, our new King. Hail to the Chief!!

    • formwiz says:

      Well, that one rests on the testimony of a convicted felon trying to leverage his way out of a jail term.

      You might want to try for something more substantial.

    • Bill589 says:

      Elwood is making stuff up again.
      The Left can not find anything real against Donald, so lies is the only way to go.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Bill,

        President Trump has committed several potentially impeachable acts, but his attempt to corrupt the 2020 election by forcing Ukraine’s help is his most unAmerican and anti-Constitution.

        As we said, Cato reasoned that although Trump’s bribe of Ms. Daniels was arguably a manipulation of our electoral system, it might not be serious enough to warrant impeachment, just as the author concluded Clinton lying about sex should not have led to impeachment.

        The shouting GOPhers in the House were incorrect claiming there needed to be a crime to impeach. They know better so they were just making theater.

        • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

          He didn’t even commit an impeachable act, dipshit!
          As for as Clinton goes, he was charged with 11 seperate counts of impeachable acts.
          Learn some history.

          Lolgfy little sissybitch https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • formwiz says:

          And here we all thought it was the ’16 election with Russia.

          Whoda thunk doing his duty by law was an impeachable offense?

          Cato reasoned that although Trump’s bribe of Ms. Daniels was arguably a manipulation of our electoral system, it might not be serious enough to warrant impeachment, just as the author concluded Clinton lying about sex should not have led to impeachment.

          Well, first, you’re going to have to have something better than the word of a convicted felon that it actually happened because not even Ms Daniels and Avenatti are pushing that one anymore.

          And cato died a long time ago.

          The shouting GOPhers in the House were incorrect claiming there needed to be a crime to impeach. They know better so they were just making theater.

          making theater? What the Hell is that?

          And they’re right, which is why this whole thing is being ignored by the American public. they know it’s a scam.

          And, if Alan Dershowitz is right, the obstruction of Congress thing is going to be blown away, so all you have is abuse of power.

          when you get to have that made into law, you just might have something.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Bill Clinton was acquitted by the Senate on both articles. The votes were not even close.

          We suspect the Senators didn’t consider Clinton’s alleged crimes to be high crimes and misdemeanors against the nation or Constitution. Neither did the American people.

          Trump’s payoffs of Ms. Daniels and Ms. McDougal, using his so-called foundation as a personal piggy bank (using other people’s money), his bilking students out of tens of millions of dollars, his 10 examples of obstruction of justice (related to his campaign’s interactions with Russia) don’t appear to be impeachable to the House, likely because although crooked, if not criminal, they may not reach the level of high crimes and misdemeanors (impacting the nation).

          • formwiz says:

            Bill Clinton was acquitted by the Senate on both articles. The votes were not even close.</i.

            Did that have anything to do with the Demos controlling the Senate at the time?

            We suspect the Senators didn’t consider Clinton’s alleged crimes to be high crimes and misdemeanors against the nation or Constitution. Neither did the American people.

            Perjury isn’t a crime? News to anybody who isn’t a cartoon character.

            And a great many American considered it a crime. Notice the Living Redwood was elected to carry on his glorious tradition. Nor was the Hildabeast elected so he could have a third term.

            Trump’s payoffs of Ms. Daniels and Ms. McDougal, using his so-called foundation as a personal piggy bank (using other people’s money), his bilking students out of tens of millions of dollars, his 10 examples of obstruction of justice (related to his campaign’s interactions with Russia) don’t appear to be impeachable to the House, likely because although crooked, if not criminal, they may not reach the level of high crimes and misdemeanors (impacting the nation).

            Since any payoffs are based solely on the word of a convicted felon who tried to plea bargain himself out of a conviction and the so-called obstruction was so flimsy the hack prosecutor didn’t feel he had evidence to take into court, the whole rant is basically Hypocrite Hare’s word against the world.

            The fact the Empire State waged a political war against on the word of a few disgruntled losers means nothing.

            So the Demos are left with a lot of hot air which they have not been able to sell to the American public and Hypocrite Hare will spend the next 5 years whining about how none of it was impeachable (he kept telling us it was), but he should have been impeached because he isn’t a Commie Hell-bent on running the country into the ground.

            We’ll hear how single payer is so much better (it’s not), the poor, downtrodden working classes are getting gypped (they aren’t), how the Hildabeast won the popular vote (she didn’t, but who cares?), and how Trump has raped his way through 5 continents (that was Willie, but he doesn’t care), and it will all end up as a big nothing because he’s as big a loser like the rest of the Lefties.

            Their time has come and went and the Eminent Mr Surber is probably right in saying there won’t be another Democrat Administration as long as Zippy Ozero is alive, so we’re talking 20, 25 years minimum unless the HIV finally gets him.

  3. formwiz says:

    For those interested, Alan Dershowitz’ tjhoughts

    The Supreme Court of the United States absolutely pulled the rug out of part two of the impeachment referral by granting certiorari, by granting review in a case where Trump challenged a congressional subpoena! And the Supreme Court said we’re going to hear this case!… Think of what that message is – It’s Trump was right!

    So they may only have one article of impeachment.

    Getting sparse out there.

    • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

      So SCOTUS is hinting at the notion that no matter how upset the dems are at Trump they still don’t get to change the rules because they’re losers.

      Kinda like that no one is above the law thingy.

      Or something.

      Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

Bad Behavior has blocked 10862 access attempts in the last 7 days.