Legally, Thursday was a very bad day for Donald Trump – as the Supreme Court ruled against his efforts to block the turning-over of his financial documents to a New York grand jury, which could lead to major problems for him once he leaves office. This opinion will echo well beyond Trump’s presidency. It is a victory for the rule of the law at a time when it has been under withering attack, in words and actions, from the executive branch.
Politically, however, Thursday was a pretty darn good day for Trump – as it cemented the fact that the public isn’t going to get a look at his tax returns before the November election. The court rejected the US House’s attempt to get a look at Trump taxes, which would have ensured they would have leaked publicly and, even in the case of the New York grand jury, the court remanded it back to a lower court – meaning that Trump isn’t giving his financial records to anyone just yet.
These twin rulings avoid an election doomsday scenario for Trump: The public release of a detailed look at his financial history before he faces voters for a second time. Trump is – and will remain – the lone major party presidential candidate (or president) to release zero past tax returns. (Joe Biden released his 2017 and 2018 tax returns last summer.) Which in the live-to-fight-another-day worldview of Trump is a win. Trump has long used the legal system to delay unsavory outcomes for him. This is that.
If that seems counterintuitive, it’s largely because of the complicated nature of the two cases that the court ruled on Thursday. The cases were similar, but not the same. And they carried differing stakes for Trump. In my opinion, why would Biden debate Trump without Trump first releasing the tax returns that he promised to release when he was a candidate? Biden has released his without going to the Supreme Court in an effort to avoid disclosure. Why not accept Thomas Friedman’s modest proposal for such disclosure as a condition of debating and appoint a fact-checking group to monitor the debates and comment in real-time on the truth of the facts each debater asserts?
[ATTACH=full]312807[/ATTACH]
He’s like all other presidents in one way: He’s not above the law.
If you’re the president of the United States, you don’t stand above the law. But if you’re a member of Congress seeking the president’s personal records in order to exercise oversight of the executive branch, you better not overreach. That, essentially, is how the Supreme Court ruled in a pair of opinions released Thursday morning. Both cases, Trump v. Vance and Trump v. Mazars, involved efforts to gain access to President Donald Trump’s tax returns, bank documents and bookkeeping records. Trump’s lawyers and the Justice Department contended that the president didn’t have to comply with the subpoenas — and could block his financial advisers from complying — because the requests were overly intrusive and undermined the sweeping immunity from criminal investigations any president should enjoy while in office.
[MEDIA=twitter]1184524243956097025[/MEDIA]
The Court’s 7-2 ruling in Trump v. Vance is a seminal and landmark rebuke of this imperial view of executive authority.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. is conducting a probe into the Trump Organization’s efforts to mask hush money paid to two women who said they had sexual encounters with Trump. The D.A. wants to explore whether, as part of those maneuvers, Trump’s team falsified business records. Trump’s lawyers argued that prosecutors like Vance should have to meet a heightened standard when seeking any president’s personal papers. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, disagreed, citing previous rulings involving former presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
Will I see Trump’s taxes?
Maybe eventually, but not before the November presidential election. That’s for a couple of reasons. Take the congressional case — the Supreme Court said that the case has to go back to the lower courts and that Congress has to better define what it is looking for from the president.
That could mean more hearings and appeals and the case eventually finding its way back to the Supreme Court. That would certainly not happen before November.
Trump's Fortune Could Be In Jeopardy With Supreme Court Decision : NPR
Politics is about strategies.
Trump Strategy on his taxes are obvious:
There are some clues from last year’s congressional testimony from Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen.
“It was my experience that Mr. Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes, such as trying to be listed among the wealthiest people in Forbes, and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes,” Cohen said.
Biden would be a wimp if he makes the clown exploit debates for a clown show…
The winner of the election will be declared after all the votes are counted.