Chief Justice John Roberts agreed to temporarily put on hold a lower court order requiring the release of former President Donald Trump’s tax returns by the Internal Revenue Service to a Democratic-led House committee.
Here we go again with this charade.
by Anonymous | reply 1 | November 1, 2022 2:21 PM |
The Repugs can now commit any crimes with impunity, and the SCOTUS will help stop all the court cases for them. The US has officially become a shithole banana republic Third World country.
RIP
by Anonymous | reply 2 | November 1, 2022 2:24 PM |
Motherfuckers!
by Anonymous | reply 3 | November 1, 2022 2:24 PM |
The SCOTUS dominated by loyal GOP justices are helping to cover up Trump's crimes..
The system should only work for them an no one else.
by Anonymous | reply 4 | November 1, 2022 2:25 PM |
Bought and paid for.
by Anonymous | reply 5 | November 1, 2022 2:25 PM |
Fuck that lowlife closet case.
by Anonymous | reply 6 | November 1, 2022 2:26 PM |
So, it seems Trump IS above the law, after all.
by Anonymous | reply 7 | November 1, 2022 2:27 PM |
John Roberts has always been a corrupt lying motherfucker.
by Anonymous | reply 8 | November 1, 2022 2:28 PM |
His federalist society was based on history he knew to be false.
by Anonymous | reply 9 | November 1, 2022 2:28 PM |
If you were sooooo pure you could never vote for her then this is your fault!
You are the problem..
by Anonymous | reply 10 | November 1, 2022 2:30 PM |
He's a selfish asshole. He needs to be held to account.
by Anonymous | reply 11 | November 1, 2022 2:31 PM |
Clearly Roberts doesn't give a rats ass about truth. I don't understand why Biden doesn't just expand the court with non trump lovers.It has been done in the past.The pukes would do it in a heartbeat.
by Anonymous | reply 12 | November 1, 2022 2:34 PM |
The GOP could have expanded the court in the past, and chose not too. I'm not sure they would now, either.
by Anonymous | reply 13 | November 1, 2022 2:38 PM |
[quote]The pukes would do it in a heartbeat.
Correct. So if Joe does it now, the "pukes" will do it the next time they hold power, and we'll end up with an ever-escalating number of justices.
by Anonymous | reply 14 | November 1, 2022 2:40 PM |
Someone has to have some dirt on this closeted homo.
by Anonymous | reply 15 | November 1, 2022 2:42 PM |
I don't think there was any doubt that SCOTUS would do this. They're delaying it until the next Congress, which they hope will be in the Repugs' control.
by Anonymous | reply 16 | November 1, 2022 2:45 PM |
Does he give a reason? Like maybe, the Republicans will take over the House in January so he needs to postpone until then? The people of the United Stated are never going to get a look at Trump’s tax frauds. So corrupt.
by Anonymous | reply 17 | November 1, 2022 2:45 PM |
I feel Mitch McConnell's slime all over this.
by Anonymous | reply 18 | November 1, 2022 2:46 PM |
Roberts doesn't state a reason beyond the temporary hold while SCOTUS reviews the case, but it's almost certain that the reason behind it is the delay, r12.
by Anonymous | reply 19 | November 1, 2022 2:46 PM |
Suckass Roberts is scared he's going to be targeted for attack by the MAGATS if he let's them have Jabba's taxes. Every republican judge on the SCOTUS should be impeached and removed from the bench.
by Anonymous | reply 20 | November 1, 2022 2:47 PM |
Don't worry, Merrick Garland will get him in the end.
by Anonymous | reply 21 | November 1, 2022 2:53 PM |
Question - why do they want them (what is the reasoning)?
by Anonymous | reply 22 | November 1, 2022 2:53 PM |
These Christians types live to lie.
It seems these Christian types never opened up the Bible that instructs you lying is a mortal sin.
by Anonymous | reply 23 | November 1, 2022 3:00 PM |
To paraphrase a troll, lying isn't ex-communicable.
So, like it's, like whatever.
The truth is whatever I believe it to be, moment by moment.
by Anonymous | reply 24 | November 1, 2022 3:02 PM |
I know it's impossible for some people not to freak out about this, but this is just a temporary stay by one justice until a response to the application is received and (presumably, given the nature of the case) the whole Court discusses it. Not surprised at all that it happened. And won't be surprised if/when the stay is lifted.
by Anonymous | reply 25 | November 1, 2022 3:03 PM |
The Republicans are about to take over the House. So, they will not wanna get in Trumps tax business. No way the American ppl get to see Trumps tax returns anytime soon.
by Anonymous | reply 26 | November 1, 2022 3:19 PM |
Regarding the several comments about expanding the court, only Congress can expand the court by passing a law to do so. Without a majority in the House and 60 votes in the Senate (or 50 Senators willing to override the filibuster to do this), it will never happen. There is also the concern (though less now than in the past) that expanding the court will just result in a tit for tat every time a different party gains control of Congress.
by Anonymous | reply 27 | November 1, 2022 3:22 PM |
America = forever locked in a Republican 69 rim job
by Anonymous | reply 28 | November 1, 2022 3:29 PM |
Just gotta laugh. America is a joke. An inflated banana republic.
by Anonymous | reply 29 | November 1, 2022 3:39 PM |
[quote] I know it's impossible for some people not to freak out about this, but this is just a temporary stay by one justice until a response to the application is received and (presumably, given the nature of the case) the whole Court discusses it. Not surprised at all that it happened. And won't be surprised if/when the stay is lifted.
Democrats will lose the house next week. We have until January for the committee to get the documents and 'leak' them to WaPo. We're down to the wire.
by Anonymous | reply 30 | November 1, 2022 3:44 PM |
[quote] I know it's impossible for some people not to freak out about this, but this is just a temporary stay by one justice until a response to the application is received and (presumably, given the nature of the case) the whole Court discusses it. Not surprised at all that it happened. And won't be surprised if/when the stay is lifted.
Aren't you the one that said Roe vs Wade would never be overturned?
by Anonymous | reply 31 | November 1, 2022 3:55 PM |
This is standard procedure. Did anyone read the article.
The “administrative stay” is temporary in nature and does not always reflect the final disposition of the dispute. It is a move often made when a deadline approaches to preserve the status quo and give the justices more time to act.
Low information voters.
by Anonymous | reply 32 | November 1, 2022 3:59 PM |
Doesn't the NY Attorney General have the records? Why can't they just get them from her?
by Anonymous | reply 33 | November 1, 2022 4:12 PM |
Repugs are gonna repug. Nothing new here. The question is WHEN are the Dems going to back people than can actually win elections. Digger deeper folks. Be the solution. We have let the country slip away over polarizing issues that make no sense to the mass electorate. For being woke, the left and center needed to wake the fuck up years ago. Too late now.
by Anonymous | reply 34 | November 1, 2022 4:35 PM |
If maga will take back the house, why is maga declaring the election results are fake before votes are counted?
THINK before responding.
by Anonymous | reply 35 | November 1, 2022 6:08 PM |
If Democrats put forth a whole slate of reality tv personalities, former TV news correspondents, professional athletes, and screenwriters as candidates the nutjobs on the right would scream about "liberal elites" being out of touch.
by Anonymous | reply 36 | November 1, 2022 6:08 PM |
These SC justices are afraid of getting pulverized by a hammer while they're sleeping.
by Anonymous | reply 37 | November 1, 2022 6:20 PM |
Then they should retire.
by Anonymous | reply 38 | November 1, 2022 6:21 PM |
Well, the SCOTUS just did right on Lindsey Graham's attempt to keep from testifying before the Atlanta D.A., so maybe they'll do right on this one too.
by Anonymous | reply 39 | November 1, 2022 7:04 PM |
I think Trump actually has a case on this. The Committee’s stated legislative purpose (examining whether the law on automatically auditing the President needs reform) strikes me as a fig leaf. The tax disclosure law should not be used as a weapon to dig around in a political opponent’s tax returns without any legitimate legislative purpose. It’s Trump this time. Next year it will be every Biden. A GOP House will abuse the hell out of this.
by Anonymous | reply 40 | November 1, 2022 8:23 PM |
You're right, R40. We should all be very worried that the GOP will get their hands on Joe Biden's tax returns. They might even get Kamala Harris's as well!
by Anonymous | reply 41 | November 1, 2022 8:36 PM |
Hunter isn’t laughing.
by Anonymous | reply 42 | November 1, 2022 9:03 PM |
I seriously doubt Pres. Biden would give a fat rat's ass if his tax returns were made public. He's not a career criminal, like Trump.
by Anonymous | reply 43 | November 1, 2022 11:10 PM |
They need to be leaked.
This "playing fair" and "taking the high road" stuff has gotten us nowhere.
Hit back, hit hard.
by Anonymous | reply 44 | November 1, 2022 11:23 PM |
R14 why not just keep on adding justices. what does it matter the whole show is corrupt at this point.
by Anonymous | reply 45 | November 2, 2022 12:08 AM |
In biblical terms, it’s like God is on the side of the Pharoah.
by Anonymous | reply 46 | November 2, 2022 1:20 AM |
R40, it's not just that.... "Getting the requested information would let the committee assess whether legislation is needed to “address potentially significant problems with the Presidential Audit Program, presidential conflicts of interest, or other matters in the public interest."
by Anonymous | reply 47 | November 3, 2022 6:39 AM |
SCOTUS is illegitimate. Fuck them!
by Anonymous | reply 48 | November 3, 2022 7:10 AM |
This is a flagrantly transparent action to protect GOP candidates in the midterms.
by Anonymous | reply 49 | November 3, 2022 7:41 AM |
^ So when SCOTUS rejected Trump's classified records fight, that would be a flagrantly transparent action to bolster Dem candidates in the midterms? WTF
by Anonymous | reply 50 | November 5, 2022 10:52 AM |
The IRS always has had Trump's tax returns. If there was anything actually criminal there don't you think either Obama or Biden's appointees would have been prosecuted.
by Anonymous | reply 51 | November 5, 2022 11:06 AM |
Same song, second verse.
Bush v. Gore was all I needed to see when it came to answering the question of whether the USSC could maintain, at least, in the eyes of Americans, some modicum of perceived legitimacy.
As I stated in another thread, the US is a failed "experiment". It's living on the hump's back now and it has been for a long time.
Well, as the Chinese say, "May you live in interesting times". I was born in 1961, so I've seen it all, so that phrase has certainly come true for me.
by Anonymous | reply 52 | November 5, 2022 11:14 AM |
camel hump's back
by Anonymous | reply 53 | November 5, 2022 11:15 AM |
"They're so stupid, they can be robbed, over the phone, by gunpoint".
That describes the populace of the USA.
Speaking of camels, it's somehow poetic justice that the mighty USA! USA!'s final straw is Trump, a skilled Carnival Barker Corrupt Can-Man who managed to, with impunity, rip-off both Democracy and the US Treasury right before our very eyes.
And, the tragic punch-line is that, ultimately, that he could, isn't on him, but on Americans who willingly allowed it.
Turn the oven to OFF. The USA is done.
by Anonymous | reply 54 | November 5, 2022 11:28 AM |
SCOTUS released the to Congress just now
by Anonymous | reply 55 | November 22, 2022 6:54 PM |
Congress can have what it wants and the SCOTUS can't stand in the way.
by Anonymous | reply 56 | November 22, 2022 7:06 PM |
But can the Democratic House turn their investigation over to the Democratic Senate when the GOP takes over the House on January 3rd? If they try, Trump will sue, of course.
by Anonymous | reply 57 | November 23, 2022 8:56 PM |
Trump brags that he's a billionaire and paid just $750 in federal taxes the first 2 years he was president. What a disgrace.
by Anonymous | reply 58 | November 23, 2022 9:02 PM |
R57. The answer is yes. They could form a special committee tomorrow, even. They could then hire the same investigative and legal staff from the House side.
by Anonymous | reply 59 | November 23, 2022 9:07 PM |
[quote]if he let's them have Jabba's taxes.
Oh, dear!
by Anonymous | reply 60 | November 23, 2022 9:18 PM |
^ police princess, rather
by Anonymous | reply 61 | November 24, 2022 4:21 PM |