• 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!

Second verse, same as the first!!

independentusa

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2016
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
9,303
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Trump loses second bid to block House from obtaining financial records
I wonder if any of the Appeals courts will give trump a stay or if the judges first making this decision are correct and there is little chance the Trump lawyers will win in the end? I suspect this is going much faster than the Trump lawyers expected it to go. I do have one question for you out there, who is paying trump's lawyers, Trump or us?
 
Trump loses second bid to block House from obtaining financial records
I wonder if any of the Appeals courts will give trump a stay or if the judges first making this decision are correct and there is little chance the Trump lawyers will win in the end? I suspect this is going much faster than the Trump lawyers expected it to go. I do have one question for you out there, who is paying trump's lawyers, Trump or us?

Trump has a history of weaponizing the legal process. That's how he cheated contractors who couldn't afford to sue for the money he owed them. He relied on his deep pockets to out wait his targets, or break them with expensive and long drawn out legal battles. The only problem is that the judiciary moves faster when it has to. One of the times it has too is when the executive and legislative branches clash. This won't be the long drawn out battle that Trump wants. It could be quite the reverse. All the bad stuff could come out in the last half of 2020.
 
Trump loses second bid to block House from obtaining financial records
I wonder if any of the Appeals courts will give trump a stay or if the judges first making this decision are correct and there is little chance the Trump lawyers will win in the end? I suspect this is going much faster than the Trump lawyers expected it to go. I do have one question for you out there, who is paying trump's lawyers, Trump or us?

I'm sure the forces guiding the New Democratic Party in the House have a long list of Obama Judges who owe them favors.....
 
I'm sure the forces guiding the New Democratic Party in the House have a long list of Obama Judges who owe them favors.....

Well if that is the case that means every trump nominated nudge can be dismissed as a partisan hack right? You guys are pathetically desperate. Congress only has to provide a legislative reason and they have. Game over you trump supporters lost this one and only look like supporters of lawless activity from trump.
 
I'm sure the forces guiding the New Democratic Party in the House have a long list of Obama Judges who owe them favors.....

Nice to know that you have faith in the judicial system. I don't suppose it ever occurred to you that judges have an obligation to the constitution, not to the person who appointed them. Do you know who appointed this particular judge, or do you just assume that Obama did. This is a prime example of the poison of the Trump presidency. He doesn't want anyone to believe in anything but Trump. Everyone lies but Trump. Everyone is corrupt but Trump. Sure.
 
Trump loses second bid to block House from obtaining financial records
I wonder if any of the Appeals courts will give trump a stay or if the judges first making this decision are correct and there is little chance the Trump lawyers will win in the end? I suspect this is going much faster than the Trump lawyers expected it to go. I do have one question for you out there, who is paying trump's lawyers, Trump or us?

Trump's lawyers are being paid for by Trump. Jay Sekulow, Rudy Giuliani and the 17 new lawyers Trump hired to defend his use of executive privilege are all his personal responsibility. The White House attorney, Pat Cipollone, replaced Don McGahn whose role is to advise the President on all legal issues concerning the President and his Administration. He's being paid by the U.S. Govt.
 
Well if that is the case that means every trump nominated nudge can be dismissed as a partisan hack right? You guys are pathetically desperate. Congress only has to provide a legislative reason and they have. Game over you trump supporters lost this one and only look like supporters of lawless activity from trump.

Umm. Well, actually, they need a real reason, which an appeal may agree is required.

But please, do whatever you can to get the New Democratic Party controlling the House to impeach the President. The Nation deserves to see them in action.
 
Nice to know that you have faith in the judicial system. I don't suppose it ever occurred to you that judges have an obligation to the constitution, not to the person who appointed them. Do you know who appointed this particular judge, or do you just assume that Obama did. This is a prime example of the poison of the Trump presidency. He doesn't want anyone to believe in anything but Trump. Everyone lies but Trump. Everyone is corrupt but Trump. Sure.

An interesting comment regarding the Constitution, given the liberal Progressive disdain for it in general.

In fact, many who are, or will, be attacking me, appear to have no knowledge of the document and it's protections whatsoever.
 
An interesting comment regarding the Constitution, given the liberal Progressive disdain for it in general.

In fact, many who are, or will, be attacking me, appear to have no knowledge of the document and it's protections whatsoever.

Nice dodge.:mrgreen:
 
Not a dodge. An observation. But thanks for sharing.

You deflected instead of responding to my points. That's a dodge. It's ok. Feel free to accuse judges of corruption on the basis of conjecture. I understand. It's all you've got.:mrgreen:
 
Trump loses second bid to block House from obtaining financial records
I wonder if any of the Appeals courts will give trump a stay or if the judges first making this decision are correct and there is little chance the Trump lawyers will win in the end? I suspect this is going much faster than the Trump lawyers expected it to go. I do have one question for you out there, who is paying trump's lawyers, Trump or us?
Looks like Congress is two-zip; or is it Trump is oh & two?

Regardless, this is good stuff. If we start getting a run on consistently similar verdicts from multiple federal judges, I think that might make it more unlikely SCOTUS rules against, or perhaps they won't even get involved at all. SCOTUS really dislikes getting involved in inter-branch squabbles. But for them not to get involved, I believe it would require like cases to be adjudicated similarly. If two identical cases split in different jurisdictions, SCOTUS feels more obliged to be a tie-breaker. Though I'm not sure if any of these cases are truly equal, so the tie-breaker impetus may not be there.
 
Looks like Congress is two-zip; or is it Trump is oh & two?

Regardless, this is good stuff. If we start getting a run on consistently similar verdicts from multiple federal judges, I think that might make it more unlikely SCOTUS rules against, or perhaps they won't even get involved at all. SCOTUS really dislikes getting involved in inter-branch squabbles. But for them not to get involved, I believe it would require like cases to be adjudicated similarly. If two identical cases split in different jurisdictions, SCOTUS feels more obliged to be a tie-breaker. Though I'm not sure if any of these cases are truly equal, so the tie-breaker impetus may not be there.
The judges in both cases basically laughed them out of court, and argued they lacked any merit.

The SCOTUS likely won't hear the cases and it's likely the firms will comply before then.
 
Umm. Well, actually, they need a real reason, which an appeal may agree is required.

But please, do whatever you can to get the New Democratic Party controlling the House to impeach the President. The Nation deserves to see them in action.

They did provide a reason, they are looking into strengthening disclosure and ethics laws.

Face facts you and your boy trump have lost this one. :lamo
 
The judges in both cases basically laughed them out of court, and argued they lacked any merit.

The SCOTUS likely won't hear the cases and it's likely the firms will comply before then.

I would think that SCOTUS would be more likely to get involved in the IRS tax return case as that involves a specific law that could be ruled constitutional or not. I think they are more comfortable in such cases.
 
The judges in both cases basically laughed them out of court, and argued they lacked any merit.

The SCOTUS likely won't hear the cases and it's likely the firms will comply before then.
Yep, my take on it too. SCOTUS hates getting involved in inter-branch disputes.
 
Yep, my take on it too. SCOTUS hates getting involved in inter-branch disputes.
I have to say though, I'm really disgusted with how weak the Democratic leadership is making themselves look in these disputes, especially Pelosi.
 
I have to say though, I'm really disgusted with how weak the Democratic leadership is making themselves look in these disputes, especially Pelosi.

Pelosi is afraid going forward with impeachment will benefit Trump the way it did Clinton. Last thing she wants to be labeled as is the Speaker that won Trump the election and lost the House.
 
I have to say though, I'm really disgusted with how weak the Democratic leadership is making themselves look in these disputes, especially Pelosi.
We touched on this before, and I'm still up-in-the-air on this. For example, whether by accident or design, Pelosi got to Trump and caused him to make a political/tactical error today.

I'm fine with the Dems making the investigation more official, and seeing how it goes. Meanwhile she's got to move legislation forward, forcing the GOP and Trump to block it, thereby showing the People the Dems are moving the country forward, while GOP-Trump are obstructing. She's got to show the People the Dems can walk & chew gum, while the GOP-Trump do nothing!

I'm telling you though, Pelosi handled Trump masterfully during the shutdown. I'm not ready to remove my support for her, at this time. Today was quite the win for Dems, and the courts may move much quicker than we realize.

BTW, I didn't follow if the House had their "Presidential Misconduct" vote today. I hope they did.
 
We touched on this before, and I'm still up-in-the-air on this. For example, whether by accident or design, Pelosi got to Trump and caused him to make a political/tactical error today.

I'm fine with the Dems making the investigation more official, and seeing how it goes. Meanwhile she's got to move legislation forward, forcing the GOP and Trump to block it, thereby showing the People the Dems are moving the country forward, while GOP-Trump are obstructing. She's got to show the People the Dems can walk & chew gum, while the GOP-Trump do nothing!

I'm telling you though, Pelosi handled Trump masterfully during the shutdown. I'm not ready to remove my support for her, at this time. Today was quite the win for Dems, and the courts may move much quicker than we realize.

BTW, I didn't follow if the House had their "Presidential Misconduct" vote today. I hope they did.
I'm old enough to remember when Pelosi said "Bush wants a blank check for his wars that we won't give him!" and then proceeded to give him just that. I don't know where this idea that she's a tough leader is coming from, because most of her time in Congress has been spent being a doormat for Republicans, sorry to say. From the unpopular wars and entitlements, all the way to gun control, Pelosi hasn't been much different than any of her contemporaries in caving to the Republican propaganda machine.

When it was the Iraq war, she was afraid of Bush shutting down the government over any bill with a time table for withdraw, to keep funding his deeply unpopular war, and being labeled as not supporting the troops. She literally had the high ground of public support, yet still caved, and mostly because of Republican propaganda. Bush played one of the biggest bluffs in politics and it worked like a charm on her and Reid.

Don't count her reasons for not going for impeachment being based on sound political theory. In all likelihood, she's made the call to not impeach no matter what he does, and I'd bet the reasons are largely a fear of Republican backlash.

It's amazing how both parties fear the Republican base, but neither fear the Democratic one.
 
You deflected instead of responding to my points. That's a dodge. It's ok. Feel free to accuse judges of corruption on the basis of conjecture. I understand. It's all you've got.:mrgreen:

Thanks for sharing.
 
They did provide a reason, they are looking into strengthening disclosure and ethics laws.

Face facts you and your boy trump have lost this one. :lamo

LOL

Riiiggghhhtttt. That's it. Of course. Good for them.

:lamo
 
We touched on this before, and I'm still up-in-the-air on this. For example, whether by accident or design, Pelosi got to Trump and caused him to make a political/tactical error today.

I'm fine with the Dems making the investigation more official, and seeing how it goes. Meanwhile she's got to move legislation forward, forcing the GOP and Trump to block it, thereby showing the People the Dems are moving the country forward, while GOP-Trump are obstructing. She's got to show the People the Dems can walk & chew gum, while the GOP-Trump do nothing!

I'm telling you though, Pelosi handled Trump masterfully during the shutdown. I'm not ready to remove my support for her, at this time. Today was quite the win for Dems, and the courts may move much quicker than we realize.

BTW, I didn't follow if the House had their "Presidential Misconduct" vote today. I hope they did.

If you look at history, both when Nixon and Clinton were under investigation, legislative things still got done with the White House working with the congress. So the idea that the investigation should stop all legislation is because Trump fears the outcome of said investigation and will do anything to stop it.
 
I'm old enough to remember when Pelosi said "Bush wants a blank check for his wars that we won't give him!" and then proceeded to give him just that. I don't know where this idea that she's a tough leader is coming from, because most of her time in Congress has been spent being a doormat for Republicans, sorry to say. From the unpopular wars and entitlements, all the way to gun control, Pelosi hasn't been much different than any of her contemporaries in caving to the Republican propaganda machine.

When it was the Iraq war, she was afraid of Bush shutting down the government over any bill with a time table for withdraw, to keep funding his deeply unpopular war, and being labeled as not supporting the troops. She literally had the high ground of public support, yet still caved, and mostly because of Republican propaganda. Bush played one of the biggest bluffs in politics and it worked like a charm on her and Reid.

Don't count her reasons for not going for impeachment being based on sound political theory. In all likelihood, she's made the call to not impeach no matter what he does, and I'd bet the reasons are largely a fear of Republican backlash.

It's amazing how both parties fear the Republican base, but neither fear the Democratic one.

The reason that the Dems "won" at the polls when the GOP tried to impeach and convict Clinton was that they lost in the Senate. If Clinton had been convicted and forced from office the next election would have gone to the GOp as America loves a winner and hates a loser. Pelosi understands this and know even if they impeach Trump in the House, the GOP controlled Senate will NEVER convict and oust Trump and the Dems will be the losers this time. So Pelosi is hoping that she can investigate and find a smoking gun that will force the GOP to act in the Senate and thus the Dems will not only get rid of Trump, but be seen as winners overall.
 
Back
Top Bottom