Trump Fails to End New York Lawsuit Over His Charity

a reply to: Phage

No!

But I am still chuckling

In a few minutes It will reduce to a grin.

That could last a long time.

Back on topic.

Just because a NY Judge or a State AG think they can do something, this will fizzle as soon as it hits the SC, as it will because the Office Of President is being asked to do something that has never been done before.

This is just a fishing expedition that will never get off the ground.

They will start throwing buses next.

Every time a cooky Judge tries one of these silly tactics they get whacked down by the SC.

Guess who has the SC.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

No!

Darn. I thought you might have gotten the point of the question. Because I didn't.

This is just a fishing expedition that will never get off the ground.

Then why has Trump settled so often?
The presidency provides immunity? Is that it? I did not know that.

a reply to: Phage

My 'No!' was not because I don't know, it was because it is funny that you don't get it. BTW, I am still smiling.

Then why has Trump settled so often? The presidency provides immunity? Is that it? I did not know that.

Has he? To small things, yes. No it is not and I have no answer to your bent for sarcasm.

P

a reply to: Mahogany

Yeah the issue here is the NY AG is trying to assist her democratic allies in obtaining Trumps personal financial information. She is going to use his foundation to try and gain access to the other. Nancy Pelosi already announced an investigation into TRumps finances.

My guess is Mueller already got them and found nothing, which is why it was never leaked. Pelosi and the NYAG wants info for 2020 and given Clinton is going to run again they are going to go all out to try and destroy Trump to do it.

The other wrench in their gears is 2 fold.
1 - New York state laws prevents the state of new york from bringing charges against a person who was already charged or pardoned at the Federal level.
2 - The US Supreme Court is set to hear a case dealing with a guy who was charged at the state and federal level for the same crime. His challenge calls into question the doctrine of separate sovereigns. Because the Federal / State government are separate they can charge a person for the crime at both levels and it does not violate the 5th amendment. The speculation is scotus will make a ruling that does away with the separate sovereign doctrine. This would effectively stop the Democrats plan of using Federal and State laws to prosecute Trump and his associates to make them immune from pardons.

This lawsuit out of New York is prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecution since they are refusing to apply to law equally.

On Friday, the Manhattan supreme court justice Saliann Scarpulla found that the president was not “immune” from state lawsuits, as Trump has claimed in other litigation.

Pointing to Clinton v Jones, a 1997 US supreme court decision which permitted a sitting president to be sued, Scarpulla noted that the commander-in-chief is “subject to the laws” for unofficial acts, which would include involvement with a charity prior to taking office.

Scarpulla recognized that the supremacy clause of the US constitution, which holds that federal law “shall be the supreme law of the land”, bars state courts from getting in the way of presidential duties.

But in this case, she said, “the allegations raised in the petition do not involve any action taken by Mr Trump as president and any potential remedy would not affect Mr Trump’s official federal duties”.

Very distinct parsing there

the petition do not involve any action taken by Mr Trump as president

Could be a trial balloon for further to come from the Mueller investigation
It's not about President Trump,
It's about Candidate Trump and the Syndicate Family

a reply to: rollanotherone

You know the tea baggers became the trumpsters right?

originally posted by: pheonix358

Anything other than this hit piece?

Well, there's The Guardian, there's The Hill, there's USA Today , there's CBS, there's ABC, there's even Fox News if you're so inclined. Search engines are your friend...

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: rollanotherone

You know the tea baggers became the trumpsters right?

You sure about that? You say it as fact. When did Trump appoint Bachman to his cabinet?

The reality is, people who voted for obama also voted for Trump.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Mahogany

Yeah the issue here is the NY AG is trying to assist her democratic allies in obtaining Trumps personal financial information. She is going to use his foundation to try and gain access to the other. Nancy Pelosi already announced an investigation into TRumps finances.

My guess is Mueller already got them and found nothing, which is why it was never leaked. Pelosi and the NYAG wants info for 2020 and given Clinton is going to run again they are going to go all out to try and destroy Trump to do it.

The other wrench in their gears is 2 fold.
1 - New York state laws prevents the state of new york from bringing charges against a person who was already charged or pardoned at the Federal level.
2 - The US Supreme Court is set to hear a case dealing with a guy who was charged at the state and federal level for the same crime. His challenge calls into question the doctrine of separate sovereigns. Because the Federal / State government are separate they can charge a person for the crime at both levels and it does not violate the 5th amendment. The speculation is scotus will make a ruling that does away with the separate sovereign doctrine. This would effectively stop the Democrats plan of using Federal and State laws to prosecute Trump and his associates to make them immune from pardons.

This lawsuit out of New York is prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecution since they are refusing to apply to law equally.

You make it sound like Trump and his family did not steal the millions of dollars and there is nothing to see.

I understand your approach, it is much easier than accepting having been wrong for the last 2-3 years.

But what happens if he and his family is found guilty of theft and lying and scheming military veterans and so on. What happens if that turns out true and the lawsuit stands?

What if?

a reply to: Mahogany

Looks like another theory of yours is shot in the ass.

😎oh🤷well😎

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Mahogany

Looks like another theory of yours is shot in the ass.

😎oh🤷well😎

??

Wrong thread or talking to yourself?

Explain what theory you're talking about and explain how whatever theory you are talking about is wrong.

a reply to: Cassi3l

Partially correct. Potus can be subpoenaed / sued etc for issues arising before he became President. Anything occurring while he is President falls under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Genuine question here, why wasn't Clinton under the doctrine of sovereign immunity when he was impeached forying under oath about his relationship with Llewinsky?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

REAL Liberalism is genuinely wanting to Help those Less Fortunate than yourself .

Are you sure about that?

Of course I do . I am a Man of Conviction regardless of your Belief or Disbelief of that Mr. Bootae . Then there is the Idea of " God Helps those Who Help Themselves " , and I don't Mean Stealing ...........