• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court will hear three cases over Trump’s financial records

Common Sense 1

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
18,472
Reaction score
13,396
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
The court will make the final decision of whether this is proper for congress to attempt.


Supreme Court will hear three cases over Trump’s financial records

Supreme Court will hear three cases over Trump'''s financial records

The Supreme Court said on Friday that it will hear three cases over President Donald Trump’s financial records next year.
Trump asked the justices to reverse three lower court rulings that would require his longtime accounting firm and two of his banks to hand over financial records to investigators.

The Supreme Court said on Friday that it will hear three cases over President Donald Trump’s financial records next year, and scheduled arguments for its March session.

The arguments are likely to be the most high-profile of the term, and will test the court’s newly constituted conservative majority. A decision is expected by the end of June, in the midst of the 2020 presidential election.

The cases are the first in which Trump’s personal dealings have come before the top court since he became president.
 
Are we the people getting our money’s worth out of SCOTUS? Today, SCOTUS agrees to hear the case in MAR20 and will render an opinion in JUN20.
It’s not like they are overworked, imo!
 
Nancy and Schiff will bring impeachment hearings against any justice who sides with Trump for obstruction and abuse of power :lol:
 
June 2020 - just in time for either damning disclosure or the embarrassing appearance of a cover up.
 
Why Democrats should be nervous: It's a right wing court and the fact that they'd think the case was worthy of a trial at all isn't a positive sign.

Why Republicans should be nervous: Roberts sometimes feels like voting left now and again, and June would be a pretty bad time for awful revelations concerning his tax returns to become public.

My gamble: **** it, let's have the ruling in September. When those revelations go public, they'll most likely be in the public mind come November.
 
Sounds like this is Democrats last ditch Holy Grail effort yo get Trump.


Unfortunately for them, if the IRS hasn't found a crime and you're looking at a 5 judge conservative court, your odds of this helping you are probably sitting in the 2-3% range.




But cheer up. If the UK elections are any indication of the trending view towards socialists, you'll get 4 more years to bitch and whine about Trump. What seems like your favorite thing in the world to do.
 
Sounds like this is Democrats last ditch Holy Grail effort yo get Trump.


Unfortunately for them, if the IRS hasn't found a crime and you're looking at a 5 judge conservative court, your odds of this helping you are probably sitting in the 2-3% range.




But cheer up. If the UK elections are any indication of the trending view towards socialists, you'll get 4 more years to bitch and whine about Trump. What seems like your favorite thing in the world to do.

When you call Democrats Socialists, do you think you're dissuading moderates from voting for them or is it just a nod and a wink to other conservatives?
 
Will the trump appointees recuse themselves as they should???
 
Da_euE_XUAAUtEB.jpg
 
When you call Democrats Socialists, do you think you're dissuading moderates from voting for them or is it just a nod and a wink to other conservatives?



You can pretend the likes of Warren and Sanders aren't socialists if it makes you feel better but everyone knows what they are.
 
Will the trump appointees recuse themselves as they should???

when RBG recuses herself on abortion issues, then maybe you will have a point
 
You can pretend the likes of Warren and Sanders aren't socialists if it makes you feel better but everyone knows what they are.

Neither of them is a socialist. Sanders probably wants to be, but he realizes this is the US.
 
Neither of them is a socialist. Sanders probably wants to be, but he realizes this is the US.


Again you are talking to stone.

These guys still think Hitler was a socialist..
 
Why Democrats should be nervous: It's a right wing court and the fact that they'd think the case was worthy of a trial at all isn't a positive sign.

Why Republicans should be nervous: Roberts sometimes feels like voting left now and again, and June would be a pretty bad time for awful revelations concerning his tax returns to become public.

My gamble: **** it, let's have the ruling in September. When those revelations go public, they'll most likely be in the public mind come November.
So sad you’re not president.
 
I don’t trust the current bunch of federalist society Justices, because they may actually rule in favor of a unitary executive theory...
 
Again you are talking to stone.

These guys still think Hitler was a socialist..

I picked this one. The other one picked me I've got awful lucky today.
 
I don’t trust the current bunch of federalist society Justices, because they may actually rule in favor of a unitary executive theory...

have you ever noticed that GOP justices are far more likely to vote against what is seen as the interests of their side than Dems? example-Bush v Gore-all the dems voted for Gore, as did a republican. On Heller, two republicans and two dems voted against Gun rights.
 
have you ever noticed that GOP justices are far more likely to vote against what is seen as the interests of their side than Dems? example-Bush v Gore-all the dems voted for Gore, as did a republican. On Heller, two republicans and two dems voted against Gun rights.

Do you believe in a unitary executive?
 
Why did was she appointed by someone who may appear before her on that specific issue?

Apparently you don't quite get what the point of being appointed for life is . . .
 
Back
Top Bottom