Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NewsCenter28

(1,835 posts)
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 04:53 AM Dec 2019

Circle the dates on your calendars, ladies and gentlemen: Looks Like Next Friday IS IT!

SCOTUS is likely to order all of Mr. Toad's financial information turned over to us that day, Friday Dec. 13, 2019. I don't see them granting cert to Toad and once we have that info, he won't be able to continue as President. No way!

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/politics/trump-supreme-court-financial-documents-house-subpoena/index.html

In all, three separate cases pertaining to Trump's records -- two of which concern House subpoenas -- are before the justices. Ginsburg's order signals that all of the petitions could be considered by the court December 13 during its regularly scheduled closed-door conference. No documents are expected to be released until the Supreme Court acts.
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Circle the dates on your calendars, ladies and gentlemen: Looks Like Next Friday IS IT! (Original Post) NewsCenter28 Dec 2019 OP
That would be my perfect Friday 13 malaise Dec 2019 #1
A House vote to impeach would be nice, too, though. calimary Dec 2019 #3
We could get our top two presents malaise Dec 2019 #4
I'll be very happy with impeachment. calimary Dec 2019 #17
Ditto malaise Dec 2019 #18
Let it be. MontanaMama Dec 2019 #2
....are you suggesting that.... Sancho Dec 2019 #5
Well still no equivalence for the repugs. Even if you add child rape. BSdetect Dec 2019 #6
Believe it when I see it Sherman A1 Dec 2019 #7
Hold up the impeachment articles until we see if he complies on this Captain Zero Dec 2019 #8
It's not what you think it means..... getagrip_already Dec 2019 #9
"expedited schedule with a decision due by June" Silent3 Dec 2019 #10
Well, would 2021 work better? getagrip_already Dec 2019 #11
No, the week after next would do better. Silent3 Dec 2019 #13
Its a delicate dance for them... getagrip_already Dec 2019 #15
:) So would I. Thanks for the explanations. Hortensis Dec 2019 #19
No, this seems like the kink in the system; a despot like Trump can time out his crimes and have uponit7771 Dec 2019 #20
What's the constitutional question? Buckeyeblue Dec 2019 #12
Only the laughable claim to privelage the wh is making... getagrip_already Dec 2019 #14
hopefully they duck the case. mopinko Dec 2019 #16

calimary

(81,267 posts)
17. I'll be very happy with impeachment.
Tue Dec 10, 2019, 02:25 AM
Dec 2019

The House votes yes, and BOOM! It’s in the history books. For all time. First line of his obituary. Period. Full stop, as they say.

We’ll have left a mark. A permanent mark. Stick that next to your Sharpie and smoke it, donald. You’re MARKED. For all time.

Of course I’d love to see him impeached and removed, but I’ll take the big black mark, that asterisk of ignominy by his name in all the history books, now and forevermore amen. And I’m torn between rooting for impeachment and removal, or just leave him impeached, forced to walk for the rest of his life with that ball and chain of shame around his ankles, having big been rendered permanently damaged goods, and keep Mike Pence out of the Oval Office!

Sancho

(9,070 posts)
5. ....are you suggesting that....
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 07:55 AM
Dec 2019

...since a blue dress is evidence of an office affair which leads to impeachment, that...

BANK RECORDS and TAX RETURNS showing money laundering, insurance fraud, campaign finance abuse, sexual harassment, and tax evasions may be evidence???

Captain Zero

(6,805 posts)
8. Hold up the impeachment articles until we see if he complies on this
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 08:58 AM
Dec 2019

If he refuses, it is a slam dunk article of impeachment.
He will have directly refused an order of the courts.

getagrip_already

(14,750 posts)
9. It's not what you think it means.....
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 10:20 AM
Dec 2019

Yes, they will meet on the Dec 11th (not the 13th) to meet on whether to hear the mazor case. That is the case where his accounting firm has to turn over his tax returns to NYS.

It only takes 4 justices to decide to hear the case, which many analysts expect will happen. If they do, it will be on an expedited schedule with a decision due by June. If they pass on hearing it, and don't send it back to the lower courts for some reason, the lower court decision will stand.

They will likely also decide whether to pass on the other cases, including this one, at the same time. But if they decide to hear mazor, they will also likely extend the stay on this case (another is already under stay by the appelate court pending scotus review).

This is all normal. What isn't normal is trhe speed the justices are working. Normally, a plaintiff has 90 days to file an official appeal. In mazor, they gave the doj 2 weeks. If they had let the process stand, the case probably wouldn't be heard this term.

But again, people who watch the court for a living are guessing they will hear mazor, but that in the end they will rule to release all documents and honor all subpoenas. That's the difference between 5 votes and 4.

Silent3

(15,212 posts)
10. "expedited schedule with a decision due by June"
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 11:02 AM
Dec 2019

June? Only by a very curious idea of the word "expedited".

getagrip_already

(14,750 posts)
11. Well, would 2021 work better?
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 11:50 AM
Dec 2019

Becajse that is the alternative. Im no expert, but from what they say it is highly unusual for scotus to hear a case in the same term it is presented, especially this far into the term when the calander is already set.

So normally, if they agree to hear a case mid term, it would not be heard until the following term, which starts in october.

So hearing arguments in open court in jan or feb is a BIG deal.

Also, while the decision is due by june, it doesnt have to be in the last wave of decisions. They could issue it earlier.

But it is still possible they will pass on hearing the case, in which event the op would be correct.

There is no dispute in the circuits to resolvr here. All of the decisions have been united. There is no case law in dispute; the doj and trumps lawyers are claiming privelage that doesnt exist.

If 4 justices vote to hear the case, it will be a combination of delay and wanting to deliver a make no mistake decision. To do otherwise would largely disable two branches of govt.

Silent3

(15,212 posts)
13. No, the week after next would do better.
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 12:11 PM
Dec 2019

Yes, I know that's not possible, but I'm sick and tired of seeing obvious delay tactics based on totally laughable legal grounds rewarded.

This case, and other various cases regarding Congressional subpoena power, are a national priority. The decks should be cleared to rush them all through with all possible speed, ahead of all other cases.

These cases are really quite simple. The arguments for defying Congress are patently absurd, claiming almost complete presidential immunity and lack of accountability. We shouldn't have to waste time pretending that "fairness" somehow requires months and months of painstakingly marshaled arguments and deliberations which redound only to the benefit of the President at the expense of the entire country.

There's due process, and then there's farce. Pushing this off until June is deeply, deeply into farcical territory.

It's very sad to know that there are probably at least four partisan hacks on the Supreme Court willing to play into the delay game, and I won't believe for a moment any such decision would be made for high-minded legal principles.

getagrip_already

(14,750 posts)
15. Its a delicate dance for them...
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 12:17 PM
Dec 2019

If the four horseman decide to hear the case as a delaying tactic, it may not wotk out the way thry intended.

For example, what if roberts concludes that not only can a potus be investigated, he coild also be indicted at the federal level while in office?

How would that work out for them?

Id wait till june for that.

uponit7771

(90,339 posts)
20. No, this seems like the kink in the system; a despot like Trump can time out his crimes and have
Tue Dec 10, 2019, 07:21 AM
Dec 2019

... the courts work on their "expedited" schedule to get away with trashing the country.

We have a text book genocidal racist (defined by the UN Article II) in office, people will deny that because ... that's what humans do.

We don't have time for USSC schedule.

Buckeyeblue

(5,499 posts)
12. What's the constitutional question?
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 11:57 AM
Dec 2019

The constitution seems very clear on congress being able to subpoena. Even the craziest of the crazy's would not be able to identify an exception.

getagrip_already

(14,750 posts)
14. Only the laughable claim to privelage the wh is making...
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 12:12 PM
Dec 2019

There is no question of existing law or precedant, and no conflict between circuits that needs to be resolved.

That doesnt mean 4 justices wont want to hear it anyway, if for no other reason than to send a big fu to the wh.

One can dream.

For example, with the argumrnts made, the court could easily rule that a potus not only could be investigated, they could be indicted, at least on the federal level.

That has never been decided by any court.

One can dream.

mopinko

(70,103 posts)
16. hopefully they duck the case.
Sat Dec 7, 2019, 07:24 PM
Dec 2019

i can see scotus taking a case that has some imaginable basis in law, but if they take this case, they are complicit.
they could duck it and say- hey, the courts ruled, there is no issue here, hand the shit over.

if they take every piece of shit case that gets dragged up to them, imma move to ireland. i hear my people callin me.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Circle the dates on your ...