Trump declares himself above the law.

[oxmixmudd]

Trump's lawyers also never said or implied that the President was above the law. The argument is that the Constitution protects the president from frivolous and politically motivated lawsuits, and that the responsibility is on Congress to take action if they determine it's necessary.

Doesn't matter whether they say those words. If the information that would show the president has violated the law can't be gathered, then no charges can be brought against him, either in the courts or in the congress (impeachment) and he is then effectively above the law.

Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

If it is impossible to gather evidence to show the President has done something against the law, then he is effectively above the law. Trump is taking this idea to the absolute extreme by refusing not only State subpoena's, but congressional subpeona's - thwarting the only remaining avenue of checking the Presidents power - impeachment. At this time, unless the courts act to rebuff him, President Trump has pushed the line to the point he is above the law. Yet MM (and others?) are DEFENDING the idea.

Our republic cannot survive if its fundamental principles are violated - especially the principle of separation of powers and checks and balances. Annoying as it might be when those checks get 'in the way' of what our particular party or group might want to happen, we can't yield or give in to the temptation to abandon them for convenience. We can not let any one entity of the three branches (especially the executive branch) be above the law or be without the capacity to be removed or stopped if they go rogue. That path leads to unchecked single person rule. And that would be very, very bad. Trump must yield to the congressional subpoena's, and it he won't, we the people must reject that move and take the steps necessary to let the white house know this is not acceptable and force him to comply. This is not a dictatorship or monarchy and we do NOT want it to head in that direction.


Jim

And his tax returns are going to reveal a crime, how?

[Mountain Man]

This is just another underhanded attempt to get Trump's tax returns and he is blocking it. How is that him being a dictator or above the law?

Trump's lawyers also never said or implied that the President was above the law. The argument is that the Constitution protects the president from frivolous and politically motivated lawsuits, and that the responsibility is on Congress to take action if they determine it's necessary.

[oxmixmudd]

This is just another underhanded attempt to get Trump's tax returns and he is blocking it. How is that him being a dictator or above the law?

If it is impossible to gather evidence to show the President has done something against the law, then he is effectively above the law. Trump is taking this idea to the absolute extreme by refusing not only State subpoena's, but congressional subpeona's - thwarting the only remaining avenue of checking the Presidents power - impeachment. At this time, unless the courts act to rebuff him, President Trump has pushed the line to the point he is above the law. Yet MM (and others?) are DEFENDING the idea.

Our republic cannot survive if its fundamental principles are violated - especially the principle of separation of powers and checks and balances. Annoying as it might be when those checks get 'in the way' of what our particular party or group might want to happen, we can't yield or give in to the temptation to abandon them for convenience. We can not let any one entity of the three branches (especially the executive branch) be above the law or be without the capacity to be removed or stopped if they go rogue. That path leads to unchecked single person rule. And that would be very, very bad. Trump must yield to the congressional subpoena's, and if he won't, we the people must reject that move and take the steps necessary to let the white house know this is not acceptable and force him to comply. This is not a dictatorship or monarchy and we do NOT want it to head in that direction.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

I had no doubt you'd defend the idea the president is above the law - IF trump stood behind it.

And yet when I pointed out Trump's capacity to keep congress at bay over these subpoena's puts himself above the law, we had this from maxvel just a day ago with lots of amens from the peanut gallery - including you:

Who here has said that Trump is above the law? People not agreeing with you that a particular act Trump is accused of is actually breaking the law IS NOT the same as them saying he is above the law.
You persist in this kind of misrepresentation of other's positions; attack their integrity, morality and question their very salvation on the basis of that misrepresentation; and then act surprised when they attack you in response.

So - when I point out that Trump is positioning himself to be above the law, the idea is mocked. "What moron would say such a thing?" being the implication.

And yet - when TRUMP actually invokes the idea FOR REAL, you say "Oh, that's what the framers intended all along ..."

I know you can't see the ... what is the word for that ... oh yes 'hypocrisy', but nevertheless, Trump again proves he is right about those that follow him. The is no principle violated, no immoral deed too low.


Jim

[Sparko]

This is just another underhanded attempt to get Trump's tax returns and he is blocking it. How is that him being a dictator or above the law?

[Mountain Man]

Now, the rest of the story...

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, names Vance and the president's tax preparer, Mazars USA, as defendants. It argues that the Manhattan district attorney should not receive Trump's tax returns because "'[v]irtually all legal commenters agree' that a sitting President of the United States is not 'subject to the criminal process' while he is in office.”

“The framers of our Constitution understood that state and local prosecutors would be tempted to criminally investigate the President to advance their own careers and to advance their political agendas,” the lawsuit adds. "And they likewise understood that having to defend against these actions would distract the President from his constitutional duties. That is why the Framers eliminated this possibility and assigned the task to supermajorities of Congress acting with the imprimatur of the nation as a whole."

Jay Sekulow, the president's lawyer, commented on the constitutionality of Vance's probe in a statement Thursday, saying, “In response to the subpoenas issued by the New York County District Attorney, we have filed a lawsuit this morning in Federal Court on behalf of the President in order to address the significant constitutional issues at stake in this case."

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...s-tax-returns/

[oxmixmudd]

Well, well well, the wannabe dictator is putting his cards on the table. According to the presidents lawyers in a suit filed in N.Y. regarding the release of his taxes, the president can not be investigated or prosecuted for any reason. So he now believes that he really can shoot someone in broad daylight and not be prosecuted regardless. Not only that, but the lawsuit asserts that the criminality of all of those around him as well as that of his companies can't be investigated or prosecuted either. Have you woke yet Trumpsters?

I had heard about that. Sounds exactly like what I said was the situation in the other thread that people here were mocking me for. Will they wake up now?

[JimL]

Well, well well, the wannabe dictator is putting his cards on the table. According to the presidents lawyers in a suit filed in N.Y. regarding the release of his taxes, the president can not be investigated or prosecuted for any reason. So he now believes that he really can shoot someone in broad daylight and not be prosecuted regardless. Not only that, but the lawsuit asserts that the criminality of all of those around him as well as that of his companies can't be investigated or prosecuted either. Have you woke yet Trumpsters?