Posted on 11/04/2019 11:31:50 AM PST by kiryandil
In a ruling Monday morning, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied President Donald Trumps request for a preliminary injunction protecting him from a grand jury subpoena for his tax returns.
The court in an opinion written by Chief Judge Robert Katzmann rejected the notion that the president is immune from all state criminal processes...
(Excerpt) Read more at law.com ...
He’s appealing it to the SC.
Is it too late to get some judge somewhere to issue an order opening Obamas college records?
Because inquiring minds still want to know why those records are sealed.
You find the Man, we’ll find the Crime.
“Ruth Bader Corpseburg is in charge of the Second Circuit.”
I heard that this morning. Not sure how it works. If she decides to let the Second Circuit’s decision stand, does that end it, or will an appeal to full SCUTUS still be possible?
I’m guessing that it’s a big enough case that she won’t decide, and the whole court will take it up.
“Actually, it was a three-judge panel, not the Second Circuit en banc.”
Well I hear the 2nd circuit may flip soon if McTurtle would get moving on a couple pending judge confirmations, so maybe there’s a chance to put the kibosh on it at the 2nd circuit.
Remind me again - why are we afraid of tax records?
SCOTUS WILL RULE AGAINST THE APPEALS COURT. THE PRESIDENT HAS NOT BEEN CHARGED OR INDICTED, ERGO, TAX RECORDS SHOULD NOT BE RELEASED.
Absolutely! This whole Trump tax return issue is headed to the Supremes.
[[What is the crime?]]
Being a republican and being rich
I think you might be right that it's a big enough case.
The Democrats are not considering the Unintended Consequences here.
If people start believing that the tax system is political, Katie bar the door.
Like the ruling in general. Judicial process that’s’ not a burden on the President should proceed (see: Clinton).
A line has to be drawn though and I’d like the SC to draw a clear one.
Also it seems to me there are grounds to limit or disallow the subpoena. But I’m no lawyer.
Good one. :)
If those two women did get money, it wouldn’t be a crime.
It was unrelated to a criminal offense.
This prosecutor doesn’t know that?
He should be disbarred.
Not only that but wouldn't his returns be filed by his vast cadre of tax attorneys?
The tax records may show he has a loss carryforward from his losses in the casino BKs of long ago. Losses can be taken till used up. IOW, it is an attempt to undermine his business credibility because the common dolt does not know you sometimes lose on investments. Also, they will then allege he paid no tax. Maybe they should subpeona Barry’s drug sale records and see if he paid tax on them??
Those who keep the records want cooperation from respondents. Cooperation goes down when respondents realize that their personal information is no longer confidential.
I just worked an operation for the 2020 Census.
Confidentiality is a HUGE issue in collecting information from respondents.
Imagine a tax respondent being able to say "You lie!" to a tax agent over confidentiality - with the proof right here in Trump's case.
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.