SCOTUS rules on subpoenas of Trump financial records (Update: 2d Cir. rules against Trump) (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

In the criminal grand jury case (Vance - the New York case), the SCOTUS rules that a sitting president is not immune from a state grand jury request. It is a 7-2 opinion (with Roberts joining the 'liberals' and Gorsuch and Kavanaugh concurring). Case is remanded for resolution based on "defenses available" to any person subject to that kind of subpoena.

 

[FullMonte]

I think this shows an issue with the legal system that may need to be addressed. I think that someone needs to look into the process, and perhaps change things so that the defendant has, basically, one chance to object to a subpoena/request for documents. If they object, the plaintiff should be required to show ALL reasons why the documents are needed, and the defendant should spell out their objection to each of those reasons.

There shouldn't be a system that allows for a defendant to indefinitely delay the release of documents by objecting and appealing to one facet of the request, and then when that is finally shot down, go through the entire process again for another facet...and another...and another..

 

[SaintForLife]

Still remains that we have nothing to indicate that Mueller either sought or obtained Trump’s tax returns. Just speculation which was put forth as proof.

We are all speculating, but there are more indications that Mueller got his tax records than he didn't get his tax records.

 

[MT15]

Not in my mind, especially since we have recently learned how the DOJ was limiting Mueller from the very beginning. IMO it’s more reasonable to think that Trump actually gave away something with his famous proclamation that his finances were “off limits”. Makes me wonder if he received that assurance from Rosenstein.

 

[SaintForLife]

Not in my mind, especially since we have recently learned how the DOJ was limiting Mueller from the very beginning. IMO it’s more reasonable to think that Trump actually gave away something with his famous proclamation that his finances were “off limits”. Makes me wonder if he received that assurance from Rosenstein.

The DOJ was limiting Mueller according to who?

 

[superchuck500]

I think this shows an issue with the legal system that may need to be addressed. I think that someone needs to look into the process, and perhaps change things so that the defendant has, basically, one chance to object to a subpoena/request for documents. If they object, the plaintiff should be required to show ALL reasons why the documents are needed, and the defendant should spell out their objection to each of those reasons.

There shouldn't be a system that allows for a defendant to indefinitely delay the release of documents by objecting and appealing to one facet of the request, and then when that is finally shot down, go through the entire process again for another facet...and another...and another..

It's actually atypical - cases aren't usually litigated piecemeal like this. In fact, there are rules against that (appeals of individual issues that aren't the final resolution of the merits are called 'interlocutory' and appellate review can only be had under specific, limited circumstances). So typically, parties don't get to do to what Trump has done here.

But the assertion of executive privilege is a special circumstance, (it can only be asserted by or on behalf of the president) and the privilege, if applicable, can render the whole action unenforceable. So that peculiar defense was raised and it went all the way to the Supreme Court, where it was denied and sent back to the district court for usual proceedings on the basis that the privilege does not apply - and that's where we are now.

But with the special circumstance of executive privilege gone, Trump becomes an ordinary litigant and this current challenge is it - there won't be another round, unless there is some peculiarity that requires a remand, but that doesn't appear to be in the cards. Like I said in the previous post, the Second Circuit will very likely be the last higher-court review he gets - it would be very unusual for the Supreme Court to take up a subpoena dispute from ordinary litigants.

 

[FullMonte]

The DOJ was limiting Mueller according to who?

According to numerous articles stating that Rosenstein told Mueller not to look into Trump's business ties to Russia.

DOJ kept investigators from completing probe of Trump ties to Russia: report

The Department of Justice in 2017 narrowed the scope of its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, cutting short a probe into President Trump’s business ties to Moscow, The N…

thehill.com

 

[SaintForLife]

According to numerous articles stating that Rosenstein told Mueller not to look into Trump's business ties to Russia.

DOJ kept investigators from completing probe of Trump ties to Russia: report

The Department of Justice in 2017 narrowed the scope of its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, cutting short a probe into President Trump’s business ties to Moscow, The N…

thehill.com

The New York Times article that the Hill article was based on seems to contradict itself:

But law enforcement officials never fully investigated Mr. Trump’s own relationship with Russia, even though some career F.B.I. counterintelligence investigators thought his ties posed such a national security threat that they took the extraordinary step of opening an inquiry into them. Within days, the former deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein curtailed the investigation without telling the bureau, all but ensuring it would go nowhere.

...Members of the special counsel team held early discussions led by the agent Peter Strzok about a counterintelligence investigation of the president. Those efforts fizzled when Mr. Strzok was removed from the inquiry three months later for sending text messages disparaging Mr. Trump.

Andrew McCabe, Ex-F.B.I. Official, Will Not Be Charged in Lying Case (Published 2020)

The decision to decline charges appears to be a move to distance the Justice Department from President Trump, who has long attacked Mr. McCabe.

www-nytimes-com.cdn.ampproject.org

Even Strzok appears to contradict the claim:

Applebaum: A recent New York Times report suggests that the Justice Department secretly took steps in 2017 to narrow the investigation, precisely so that it would not touch on the president’s long-standing relationship with Russia.

Strzok: During the time I worked at the Special Counsel’s Office, I didn’t feel such a limitation. When I discussed this with Mueller and others, it was agreed that FBI personnel attached to the Special Counsel’s Office would do the counterintelligence work, which necessarily included the president. But that’s an extraordinarily complex task, one of the most difficult counterintelligence investigations in the FBI’s history.

‘Who’s Putting These Ideas in His Head?’

The former FBI agent Peter Strzok worries that Americans will never learn the full story about Trump’s relationship with Russia.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[superchuck500]

Oral argument at the Second Circuit today:

 

[superchuck500]

 

[Ayo]

This is not good news. Hundreds of millions of debt coming due and he doesn’t have the money? And no domestic banks to loan it to him? That’s a pretty dangerous position for a head of state.

750 bucks in taxes in each of the last couple years?

Yikes.

And after he criticized Obama for “only” paying $162k in taxes on 790k income one year?

Yikes.

I would imagine this story to get dragged out for maximum coverage. Wonder what else there will be.

 

[Nebaghead]

That’s worst than I thought. Especially the part about the IRS audit that he could owe almost a 100 mil.

 

[Ayo]

and his first year as President, expenses at his golf course... where he golfed on our dime, went up 500%?

This just confirms what's long been common knowledge, that he's been bilking the taxpayers for his own profit.

 

[Ayo]

I think that as they dig, we're going to see more and more shadiness come out. To his followers, it won't matter. I know this. But it's still newsworthy even if nothing moves their dial.

Also not a surprise the extent to which he manipulated his taxes for nepotistic purposes.

 

[Optimus Prime]

To his supporters it will just be proof of how business savvy he is

 

[Nebaghead]

To his supporters it will just be proof of how business savvy he is

Might influence some independents.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

Guys, he's already said it's "fake news" so this story is dead. And we're going to hear glowing stories about how it means that he's just a smart businessman, even though he's been actively hiding this stuff and litigating against having to provide it to anyone for at least five years. He'll actually have wanted it to come out and leaked it himself to own you libs.

 

[Mr. Blue Sky]

I’ve managed to avoid this board for a while, not accidentally- but decided to pop back in here since I’ve been skeptical for years about how much of a ‘successful businessman’ the Donald is.. I want to see the error of my ways, and to learn how he’s actually smart for being able to avoid paying his fair share of taxes.. I am hoping to be enlightened, and possibly learn a thing or two about how I’m just ‘playing into his hands’.......


I’m all ears.

 

[Mr. Blue Sky]

And after he criticized Obama for “only” paying $162k in taxes on 790k income one year?

Yikes.

not surprising.

All Trump does, all day every day, verbally and through Tweets- is projection... If he criticizes ANYONE for ANYTHING, then rest assured that Trump himself is guilty of the same thing.