The Supremes

“I definitely see it. I just don't care cause I'm a trump guy”

Right or wrong. That sums it up best. Trump guys and gals do not care. He’s their guy.

I do give Flip credit. He tells it like it is.

@erotic, I definitely see it. I just don't care cause I'm a trump guy

And this is the issue.

Both HFT and Flip are not seeing the law issue. They are seeing the persons involved. The laws, imo, should be blind to the people, and apply to all.

Personally, I don't want the checkers to be hamstrung in their ability to do their job.

Now, if you want to walk this down a step in the process. New York state got a grand jury to get this to happen. The state's attorney did not just wake up and say, "I have ultimate power, give it to me." And if you look at congress, it was not one person, it was a committee.

If this wasnt Trump, I'd agree, the taxes should be shown but he's my guy so fuck the libs.

Erotica, where does legal end and harassment begin? Seeking Trump's returns is harassment. How about SEEKING Owebama, Hillary, Shiff, Nadler, and ETC?????

Actually you are missing the point.

You are arguing the why, not the legality. Whether they are legally allowed to do it is the point. That is what the Supreme's need to determine.

Erotica, you are so mixed up. The Democrats only want to go through Trump's tax returns to find something to criticize him on. Not that it is illegal. Trumps' C P A is by law an agent of the I R S. The I R S has reviewed his returns and found them LEGAL So what is there to want to go through them????? ONLY TO GIVE HIM TROUBLE. GIVE IT UP HILLARY LOST THE ELECTION 3 YEARS AGO.

So they decided to take up the case regarding Trump's taxes. This could have two outcomes. Either the third party releases them as compelled by the court, or the court states it does not have to.

If you believe that no one is above the law, then this is very easy to determine.

If Congress demanded that my accountants release my records to them, what choice would they have? They would have to release it to Congress.

Why does it change if I was president? Would that not put me 'above the law?'

It's going to get very interesting while this happens and this could be a 2020 election surprise.

If you look at this logically, what precedent is there for a 3rd party to not release documents that were legally subpoenaed? There is none.
If you look at this from a ramification perspective, the precedent has been established, the last ~8 presidents have released their financial data and they were able to perform their presidential duty.

Now if the Supreme's rule that the 3rd parties have to release now what? We can feel confident that it will be released in some manner. If Gphmert can, in public hearings, name a whistleblower with no punishment, what's to stop another congressman from doing the same with Trump's info?

As I suspect, the Senate will not remove Trump. They need and want him too much, he is their bitch. But let's say that this info is released . . . and we see that Trump has been taking money from some foreign countries for his own benefit, ala emoluments, will the House vote to impeach him again? I bet they do. Then what? What will the republicans do then? Will they still want to keep him? As Fred is so quick to announce . . . 2020 is right around the corner. There are 35 Senate seats up for re-election in 2020. The dems need to keep the 12 they have and then need to pick up 3 (if Trump loses) or 4 (if Trump wins.) That means Mitch is gone.

Right now it's interesting because there are some states that could see some serious replacements. You could see Maine, Arizona, Colorado and North Carolina flip. There is the question of who goes up against Jones in Alabama and that could flip back to a Republican. Graham is also losing his base. He has a 2 point lead. Why does this matter?

Because it impacts the Supreme's. If the Supreme's rule for Trump, you will see a backlash of single issue voters. They will vote just to control the Supreme's. If you think that Guns, Abortion, Marijuana are single issue votes, this could turn into something higher. While there may be a core group that doesn't want Trump to lose this case, the solid majority of the country doesn't want a monarchy. They want the president held in check.

So let's see what the Supreme's do with this. If they stay with the status quo, Trump will lose and the precedent set back with Nixon will survive. If they don't, wow, shit's gonna hit the fan.