The nation’s highest court is divided into two segments. SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) has four Justices: John Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonja Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. SCROTUS (Republican anti-Constitutional VD) has five Injustices. John “no stare decisis” Roberts, Pervert Teabag Thomas, Samuel “Scalia Jr.” Alito, Neil “they stole my seat from Merrick Garland” Whoresuch, and Brett Pervert KavaNazi. They have a historic decision to make about whether criminal Fuhrer Trump* may continue to hide records of his financial crimes.
It seems that every 23 years, or about once in a generation, the Supreme Court considers whether presidents must abide by the rules that govern other citizens. In 1974, it unanimously required President Richard M. Nixon to turn over tapes of conversations in the Oval Office. Twenty-three years later, in 1997, it unanimously required President Bill Clinton to respond to a sexual harassment suit.
On Tuesday, almost exactly 23 years after the ruling in the Clinton case, the court will confront an equally significant showdown, this one over President Trump’s efforts to block demands from two House committees and New York prosecutors for his tax returns and other financial information.
The earlier cases were argued in the courtroom, with only those attending able to hear them live. Tuesday’s arguments will be heard by telephone because of the coronavirus pandemic, and the public will be able to listen in…
Inserted from <NY Times>
If you wish to listen in, here is the live broadcast.
Listen Live: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Trump Financial Records Cases
Rachel Maddow interviewed David Enrich. Like the majority of Court watchers, he thinks Trump* does not stand a chance.
Significant Financial Secrets At Stake For Trump In SCOTUS Case
I fear that David Enrich may well be wrong. As obviously open and shut the case against criminal Fuhrer Trump* is, the Nazi Injustices of SCROTUS (Republican anti-Constitutional VD) may all goose-step with their beloved Fuhrer.
RESIST!!
10 Responses to “A Historic Decision”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
If they decide in favor of the Orange Oaf, that will make it all the more important that we vote him the hell out of the Oval Office. Anther four years of this crap, and North Korea will be laughing at us.
Will we have achieved full Fascist status when this case is decided? Follow the 5 bouncing turds to find out!
Gawd! I do hope that they do what’s right and see this through for justice’s sake…but I don’t see or have any good faith with this issue. Yes, the goose stepping is on dt’s side.
How sad. If I did this, I’d be somewhere in jail for years.
Seeing who will be playing a role in the decision, I honestly don’t feel good about it.
It’s a real shame that evil plays so many roles within our justice departments.
David Enrich is right on the money, legally and constitutionally. And yet, he could well be wrong.
But we are sure to learn something – something very important. If we don’t learn what’s in Orange Judas’s financial records, we will at least have learned how deep the corruption goes/
Enrich may or may not be thinking about a couple of votes made by the Trump* appointees which did not toe the party line. I was surprised by those. But that doesn’t mean they will vote righteously on any given case, including this one.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating but with this pudding of a SCOTUS it is hard to eat and it could go either way.
I listened to an hour of the arguments and found that Trump’s lawyers did not sound particularly well prepared. I have absolutely no confidence that SCROTUS will do anything but support their Fuhrer. Watch them do the shimmee-shake!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pwOXie637w&feature=emb_rel_end Ari Melber with Neal Katyal discussing the SCOTUS oral arguments
Sorry, I could not imbed these videos.
I certainly hope that Katyal, Wiley and Enrich are correct and Trump loses his case.
Thanks for the news every one, keep well Tom Cat.🙂
Thanks and Hugs to all.
I’m hearing noise that they may send it back to the lower courts without deciding it. That would put the decision off until after the election. In that way, they can protect criminal Fuhrer Trump, but decide it Constitutionally after it’s too late to matter.
It wouldn’t be the first time Roberts has done that, would it.