No Agreement Reached In Trump NY Tax Returns Dispute | Talking Points Memo

A federal judge who punted on a dispute over President Trump’s New York tax returns on Monday will not get the easy way out he was looking for, the parties said on Tuesday.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1239062
1 Like

Good. It was a ridiculous attempt at shirking responsibility from the start, with the judge essentially throwing up his hands and whining – “This makes me really uncomfortable. You all sort it out and spare me my discomfort.”

Do you duty or resign.

27 Likes

So much for the Rule of Law…

4 Likes

And now this dumbass pawn of a judge will be sucked further into the bowels of this mess… and will grope his way around in the dark desperately trying to figure a way to protect almighty Trump.

19 Likes

Do the right thing judge!

The American People need to know how this illegitimate potus is monetarily rewarding himself in the most high position in the land!

18 Likes

No surprise here. Even if they reached an agreement of some sort it probably could be challenged. This judge simply has to do his job. If it’s too hot in the kitchen, get out.

11 Likes

Whaaat?

How can he use courts personally.
Yet we can’t indict him criminally as POTUS.

This is one hot lawless mess!

This judge needs to step down.
Clearly he doesn’t get what his title is.

16 Likes

One get’s the feeling that this judge is like some challenged child with one of those puzzle boards with the routed out shallow wells that match the puzzle pieces. And he’s desperately pounding on the star-shaped puzzle piece trying to make it fit into the four-leaf clover well.

23 Likes

Judge asks plaintiffs and defendants to figure out the court case for him.
Surprise! They do not do his job, so he is in a pickle.

Trump appointee. No wonder.
Drain the swamp.

19 Likes

Citing a well established legal principle, Trump’s lawyers suggested the returns can be released 21 years after the death of the last Trump descendant living on the date NY passed the law.

5 Likes

Whatever this Judge decides, it’s going to be appealed by the losing side. So why not just make a ruling and issue a stay, if he feels it necessary while it’s under appeal rather than go through these contortions?

Side question: has Trump ever willingly reached a compromise with an opposing party in his life? I ask because he’s one of those, “I must win and you must lose”, kind of guys.

13 Likes

Well, he was just worried that the most powerful man in the world might have something happen that was completely out of his control… something that he couldn’t so much as throw a lawyer at, if you will. How terribly unfair that would be!

5 Likes

I’m confused. This is not like a commercial dispute where the judge can urge the litigants to settle in order to avoid a trial. This is, presumably, about whether the statute passed by NYS is constitutional. How can the judge ask NYS to amend the statute (which is, basically, what he’s proposing) if he hasn’t even gotten to the merits of whether or not it’s constitutional?

I think the answer is that he’s a coward, and is dreading the mean tweet that’s heading his way.

18 Likes

You’re not confused.

8 Likes

https://forums.talkingpointsmemo.com/t/2020-debate-july-30-night-one-since-discobot-wont-make-one-for-us/112907

Made one since discobot wouldn’t

With Trump it’s more like, “My win is you losing - period. I neither know nor care what the dispute is about.”

A Russian slave prostitute can find Trump’s tiny pencil in his voluminous sailcloth suit in the dark, and this judge won’t take that challenge lying down.

2 Likes

This entire mess is all about protecting the monied class, not Trump. It’s terrifying to the wealthiest people that they might ever face real financial scrutiny. The judge is doing everything possible to help the donor class and the rich people who would show up in trump’s returns. BTW, California just passed a law requiring some candidates (including CA gov and POTUS candidates) must release the most recent 5 years federal tax returns. It’s a great idea and would make it impossible to hide financial crimes or tax cheating; and of course sources of income and investments in foreign countries.

2 Likes

Given Judge Nichols’s appointment by Trump, along with Nichols’s complaint about being put in an “awkward” position, his duty in this case should clearly be to recuse himself.

As noted in the article, Trump brought this suit on his own behalf - i.e., not as the executive branch. So Nichols doesn’t even have the weak fig-leaf excuse that a federal judge can impartially adjudicate a dispute between the branches no matter which party appointed him.

Nichols is presiding over a personal case between the man who appointed him and the government. He shouldn’t even be there. He should recuse.

6 Likes

How do you even rule on a case BEFORE the event? Rep. Neal HAS NOT even requested that the state of New York give him the returns. I am not a lawyer, but how is it even a case? Can I sue my neighbor for cutting down my tree because I noticed he owns a saw?

Shouldn’t they be arguing if the New York State law is unconstitutional? I do not understand this at all…Someone help me out here…