Judge orders Trump accounting firm to hand over records to Congress

Ralph said:
Yep.....your ad hominem statement void of any objective documentation certainly cleared that right up.:laugh: Again.....do you really think this is over because an OBAMA appointee has sided with the deep state? And of course there was no Muslim Ban.....the courts stopped it....not. The Illegals can stay in the states and not be forced back into Mexico....just ask the 9th circuit......WRONG. Trump has won every major decision he set out to win. ;) From the Muslim Terrorist ban to the Mueller Time. As always...….as stated by Mark Twain, Figures don't lie but liars sure as hell figure. Just present the number of times Mr. Trump has lost a court battle "since becoming POTUS". Truth? When someone comes after Trump instead of Trump suing another and going after them....Trump has won 42 suits and lost but 19. Ask the Porn Star and her creepy Porn lawyer. Question? Where is this democrat self professed TRUMP basher that can beat Trump in a presidential race? :thinking: I have not seen him on CNN or MSNBC in months....I wonder why? Its not good to piss off the TEFLON DON, now the most powerful man on the planet.
Click to expand...


trumps actual win rate is about 6%. Why are you such a knuckle dragger? https://www.propublica.org/article/...p-losses-fred-barbash-washington-post-q-and-a
 
Question? Just what act of legislation from the left wing congress requires a personal financial record of the POTUS? Where is the constitutional requirement that makes a presentation of personal finances a requirement from the POTUS? Congress has no authority to mandate a POTUS do anything other than his duty of being the chief executive officer and commander in chief. Neither of those duties requires a detailed personal finance record from the President before he assumed the office of president.

What act is the left attempting to legislate? This is no impeachment hearing.....they can't demand evidences like a grand jury. Congress is a legislative body, not a Judicial or Executive Body.....congress is not superior to either of these checks and balances branches of government. In other words....Congress has no authority to prosecute anyone, and its more than absurd to suggest that the DOJ handed the ball off to congress in order to continue to prosecute the POTUS of a crime that has never been named....but is in search of existing. Its the duty of the Executive Branch to execute law.....its the duty of the Judicial Branch to Ajudicate Law....its not the duty of Congress to do either job. If Mueller gave you the goods to impeach. IMPEACH AWAY....but don't piss down the backs of THE PEOPLE and attempt to tell them relax its only raining......again, this is no impeachment hearing, its a simple oversight hearing, Congress has no special authority.
 
Last edited:
katzgar said:
trumps actual win rate is about 6%. Why are you such a knuckle dragger? https://www.propublica.org/article/...p-losses-fred-barbash-washington-post-q-and-a
Click to expand...

As I said, Figures don't lie But LIARS sure as hell figure. Present the number of times that Trump has lost since becoming POTUS surrounded by the best legal constitutional minds on earth? Why are you so PREDICTABLE in parroting fake opinion left wing sources? :palm: Because you don't have the mental capacity for critical INDEPENDENT THINKING nor the skills of articulating an actual personal thought. :thinking: Every post that you present begins and ends with some personal ad hominem attack. Its left wing mentality personified. Its group think....and mob mentality. You can't even comprehend simple English text. The majority of these law suits are trivial in nature when TRUMP was a private citizen....suing and being sued for entertainment purposes more than anything else.
 
Ralph said:
As I said, Figures don't lie But LIARS sure as hell figure. Present the number of times that Trump has lost since becoming POTUS surrounded by the best legal constitutional minds on earth? Why are you so PREDICTABLE in parroting fake opinion left wing sources? :palm: Because you don't have the mental capacity for critical INDEPENDENT THINKING nor the skills of articulating an actual personal thought. :thinking: Every post that you present begins and ends with some personal ad hominem attack. Its left wing mentality personified. Its group think....and mob mentality. You can't even comprehend simple English text. The majority of these law suits are trivial in nature when TRUMP was a private citizen....suing and being sued for entertainment purposes more than anything else.
Click to expand...


I already did that. Maybe your nurse can read it to you. Have your nurse read this to you... https://www.techwalla.com/articles/how-to-open-a-hyperlink
 
katzgar said:
I already did that. Maybe your nurse can read it to you. Have your nurse read this to you... https://www.techwalla.com/articles/how-to-open-a-hyperlink
Click to expand...

Who'd a thought it? More parroting and another personal ad hominem personal attack? I have read the propaganda that proves that Figures don't lie but liars sure as hell figure. ;) If you have read one, you have read them all. Trump has won 42 times since becoming POTUS and lost 19 times on minor trivial cases. :thinking: Hell, the state of California has sued Mr. Trump over 50 times in pointless meaningless harassment suits. We are talking IMPORTANT presidential authority cases. In the end.....as far as California goes. Mr. Trump just stopped California from sucking on Federal Tit in denying them over 1 Billion TAX DOLLARS in their rail transit scam. Trump's a winner. ;) If he can't deny them federal tit milk in one way....he finds another.
 
Last edited:
It appears that the loon can't present the number of times that Trump has lost since becoming POTUS surrounded by the best legal constitutional minds on earth?
 
Ralph said:
Who'd a thought it? More parroting and another personal ad hominem personal attack? I have read the propaganda that proves that Figures don't lie but liars sure as hell figure. ;) If you have read one, you have read them all. Trump has won 42 times since becoming POTUS and lost 19 times on minor trivial cases. :thinking: Hell, the state of California has sued Mr. Trump over 50 times in pointless meaningless harassment suits. We are talking IMPORTANT presidential authority cases. In the end.....as far as California goes. Mr. Trump just stopped California from sucking on Federal Tit in denying them over 1 Billion TAX DOLLARS in their rail transit scam. Trump's a winner. ;) If he can't deny them federal tit milk in one way....he finds another.
Click to expand...


your drugs are confusing you again
 
It appears that the loon can't present the number of times that Trump has lost since becoming POTUS surrounded by the best legal constitutional minds on earth?
 
Earl said:
McConnell prevented a far left judge who would have legislated from the Supreme Court from being nominated to the Supreme Court.

Good job, McConnell.
Click to expand...

He was a middle of the roader. Garland was not a far lefty. That is a typical right wing lie.
 
Bill said:
Washington (CNN)A federal district judge has told the accounting firm Mazars it will need to turn over Donald Trump's accounting records from before he was President to the Democratic-controlled House Oversight Committee.
In a 41-page opinion, Judge Amit Mehta of the DC District Court rejected Trump's attempt to block the committee's subpoena, asserting that Congress is well within its authority to investigate the President.

Mehta's opinion will now likely become fodder for other judges to consider as Trump and his Cabinet try to hold off Congress from getting his business records, such as through the IRS, banks and in other court fights.
Congress specifically can probe the President for conflicts of interest and ethical questions, Mehta wrote.

"History has shown that congressionally-exposed criminal conduct by the President or a high-ranking Executive Branch official can lead to legislation," Mehta wrote, citing the Watergate investigation by the Senate.

"It is simply not fathomable that a Constitution that grants Congress the power to remove a President for reasons including criminal behavior would deny Congress the power to investigate him for unlawful conduct -- past or present -- even without formally opening an impeachment inquiry," he added.

Mazars has seven days until it will have to comply with the subpoena, Mehta said in his opinion Monday, but the judge refused to halt the subpoena after that. Another court would have to do so. Trump's team has not yet appealed the ruling.


"The court is well aware that this case involves records concerning the private and business affairs of the President of the United States. But on the question of whether to grant a stay pending appeal, the President is subject to the same legal standard as any other litigant that does not prevail," Mehta wrote.​
Click to expand...

The Obama appointee if full of SHIT. According to the SCOTUS, there must "BE" (as in CURRENTLY EXISTING) "legislative purpose" for such information demands from any citizen.

The sleazeball just AUTHORIZED ANOTHER FISHING EXPEDTION , "IN SEARCH OF A CRIME"....which will NEVER STAND UP ON APPEAL...


While it is true that IRS Code 6103(f) appears to give the committee the power to get tax returns, the statute must be exercised in a way consistent with Congress’ constitutional authority. The Supreme Court has said Congress has broad authority to conduct inquiries but that its authority is not unlimited. In the 1881 case Kilbourn v. Thompson, the Supreme Court held that Congress can’t use its powers to delve into someone’s private financial matters unless there is a proper legislative purpose. In 1957, the Supreme Court held in Watkins v. U.S. that a congressional information demand must relate to a “legitimate task of the Congress” and noted that Congress is not a “law enforcement agency” that can seek information to uncover or expose crimes.



YET, ANOTHER, ATTEMPTED TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE CONSTITUTION by the HOUSE DUNCECRATS, and OBAMIDIOT LEFTOVERS in the JUDICIARY....
 
Grokmaster said:
The Obama appointee if full of SHIT. According to the SCOTUS, there must "BE" (as in CURRENTLY EXISTING) "legislative purpose" for such information demands from any citizen.

The sleazeball just AUTHORIZED ANOTHER FISHING EXPEDTION , "IN SEARCH OF A CRIME"....which will NEVER STAND UP ON APPEAL...


While it is true that IRS Code 6103(f) appears to give the committee the power to get tax returns, the statute must be exercised in a way consistent with Congress’ constitutional authority. The Supreme Court has said Congress has broad authority to conduct inquiries but that its authority is not unlimited. In the 1881 case Kilbourn v. Thompson, the Supreme Court held that Congress can’t use its powers to delve into someone’s private financial matters unless there is a proper legislative purpose. In 1957, the Supreme Court held in Watkins v. U.S. that a congressional information demand must relate to a “legitimate task of the Congress” and noted that Congress is not a “law enforcement agency” that can seek information to uncover or expose crimes.





YET, ANOTHER, ATTEMPTED TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE CONSTITUTION by the HOUSE DUNCECRATS, and OBAMIDIOT LEFTOVERS in the JUDICIARY....
Click to expand...

The law is for protection of the citizens for ensuring that the IRS is not corrupt. It isnt for investigations into someone's private financial matters. It is the Ways and Means Committee's duty to evaluate the operation of the Internal Revenue Service in its administration and enforcement of the tax laws."
 
Last edited:
Grokmaster said:
The Obama appointee if full of SHIT. According to the SCOTUS, there must "BE" (as in CURRENTLY EXISTING) "legislative purpose" for such information demands from any citizen.

The sleazeball just AUTHORIZED ANOTHER FISHING EXPEDTION , "IN SEARCH OF A CRIME"....which will NEVER STAND UP ON APPEAL...


While it is true that IRS Code 6103(f) appears to give the committee the power to get tax returns, the statute must be exercised in a way consistent with Congress’ constitutional authority. The Supreme Court has said Congress has broad authority to conduct inquiries but that its authority is not unlimited. In the 1881 case Kilbourn v. Thompson, the Supreme Court held that Congress can’t use its powers to delve into someone’s private financial matters unless there is a proper legislative purpose. In 1957, the Supreme Court held in Watkins v. U.S. that a congressional information demand must relate to a “legitimate task of the Congress” and noted that Congress is not a “law enforcement agency” that can seek information to uncover or expose crimes.



YET, ANOTHER, ATTEMPTED TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE CONSTITUTION by the HOUSE DUNCECRATS, and OBAMIDIOT LEFTOVERS in the JUDICIARY....
Click to expand...

They have legitimate purposes as the judge noted in his ruling.

Please stop eating so much dogshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top