Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
- Thread starter Superbadbrutha
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #42
I think this judge that made such a ruling is deep state. He seems to be part of the Democrat hate that they should be in charge of American life. I wonder if political strings in the Hillary camp had his FBI file conveniently tucked away to get such a ruling. They did it in the Russian investigation using the top brass in the FBI. Hannity said there were about 1% bad cops and 99% good Cops in the FBI. I think this Obama judge is just one more of a long line of ordered attacks on President Trump.All Hussein appointees should be impeached and removed from office. They are all globalist and Marxist pigs that exist only to subvert the US Constitution.
Democrats have becoming overbearing Slobovian House Apes. We need a special counsel to look into Obama picked judges trying to take out the President of the United States. I hope that judge has a quick trip to as much accountability as he is demanding Trump, who has been completely cleared of any collusion whatsoever with the Russians.
But overbearing Nadler has lost it and is trying to order Trump and his team back on the carpet when they've again, done nothing wrong.
I'm sick of Democrat conspiracies.
Yea anybody that doesn't bow down to Trump is a member of the so called DEEP STATE. I hate to tell you this, but this country doesn't evolve around Trump.
- Thread starter
- #43
More baseless insults. More bitching and moaning from you. So childishly tiresome.That's all you do ass clown is bitch and moan.
Waa Waa, trick I'm Little Baby.
- Thread starter
- #44
^^WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Fake news.
Trump is not in any "records dispute", jackass.
See folks this is what happens when you are a dumbass Trump Humper, reality just doesn't matter anymore.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President. It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law. He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court. When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
Jo
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #46
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President.
Uh yea, it's called oversight.
It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law.
How is he breaking the law?
He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court.
No he can't because his firm is not a part of the gov't.
When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
That's all Republicans are these days.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President.
Uh yea, it's called oversight.
It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law.
How is he breaking the law?
He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court.
No he can't because his firm is not a part of the gov't.
When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
That's all Republicans are these days.
It will be overturned because the warrant is for an investigation into the president. It doesn't matter what the status of the firm is.
No..it's not oversight it's political snooping
based on partisan hackery. Why do you think the staff lawyers are trying to rebrand it
as an ethics research motion???? You partisan hack you...because they already know it won't get by executive privilege.
Yes the Obama appointee is trying to
Soft-play congressional intent by rewording
The query and thus injecting himself into the motion improperly .... something that is uniquely common to progressive judicial hacks of the Obama era. His bosses will straighten him out.
Jo
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #48
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President.
Uh yea, it's called oversight.
It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law.
How is he breaking the law?
He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court.
No he can't because his firm is not a part of the gov't.
When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
That's all Republicans are these days.
It will be overturned because the warrant is for an investigation into the president.
Of course it is, who else would they be investigating?
It doesn't matter what the status of the firm is.
Of course it matters.
No..it's not oversight it's political snooping
based on partisan hackery. Why do you think the staff lawyers are trying to rebrand it
as an ethics research motion???? You partisan hack you...because they already know it won't get by executive privilege.
Yes the Obama appointee is trying to
Soft-play congressional intent by rewording
The query and thus injecting himself into the motion improperly .... something that is uniquely common to progressive judicial hacks of the Obama era. His bosses will straighten him out.
Jo
You're a Trump Humper and you know he is riding dirty and will be found out.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President.
Uh yea, it's called oversight.
It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law.
How is he breaking the law?
He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court.
No he can't because his firm is not a part of the gov't.
When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
That's all Republicans are these days.
It will be overturned because the warrant is for an investigation into the president.
Of course it is, who else would they be investigating?
It doesn't matter what the status of the firm is.
Of course it matters.
No..it's not oversight it's political snooping
based on partisan hackery. Why do you think the staff lawyers are trying to rebrand it
as an ethics research motion???? You partisan hack you...because they already know it won't get by executive privilege.
Yes the Obama appointee is trying to
Soft-play congressional intent by rewording
The query and thus injecting himself into the motion improperly .... something that is uniquely common to progressive judicial hacks of the Obama era. His bosses will straighten him out.
Jo
You're a Trump Humper and you know he is riding dirty and will be found out.
Wow....what an incredibly weak and Ill informed response. But then again that's what you do.
So...since it is an investigation into the President......DOOFUS......executive privilege is alive and well. See how you step on your own dick when you make unsubstantiated claims?
It doesn't matter what I know or don't... Brainless boobie..... What matters is your rediculous notion that there is no executive privilege right after you admit that it is an investigation into the president.
No matter.....it was far too easy to dispatch your amaturish stupidity.
Yawwwwwwn
I need better opponents.
Jo
- Thread starter
- #50
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President.
Uh yea, it's called oversight.
It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law.
How is he breaking the law?
He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court.
No he can't because his firm is not a part of the gov't.
When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
That's all Republicans are these days.
It will be overturned because the warrant is for an investigation into the president.
Of course it is, who else would they be investigating?
It doesn't matter what the status of the firm is.
Of course it matters.
No..it's not oversight it's political snooping
based on partisan hackery. Why do you think the staff lawyers are trying to rebrand it
as an ethics research motion???? You partisan hack you...because they already know it won't get by executive privilege.
Yes the Obama appointee is trying to
Soft-play congressional intent by rewording
The query and thus injecting himself into the motion improperly .... something that is uniquely common to progressive judicial hacks of the Obama era. His bosses will straighten him out.
Jo
You're a Trump Humper and you know he is riding dirty and will be found out.
Wow....what an incredibly weak and Ill informed response. But then again that's what you do.
So...since it is an investigation into the President......DOOFUS......executive privilege is alive and well. See how you step on your own dick when you make unsubstantiated claims?
It doesn't matter what I know or don't... Brainless boobie..... What matters is your rediculous notion that there is no executive privilege right after you admit that it is an investigation into the president.
No matter.....it was far too easy to dispatch your amaturish stupidity.
Yawwwwwwn
I need better opponents.
Jo
Amazing you RIP off a whole book of bullshit and you think it makes you looks smart.
The DOOFUS is you dumb ass Trump Humpers who misinterpret the law in order to try and cover for your false God.
The accounting firm is not a gov't dept, so how in the hell can he claim Executive privilege, please explain that.
Daryl Hunt
Your Worst Nightmare
- Banned
- #51
Uh, no they don't or they'd get a court ordered search warrant to find specific documents.Uh they have a legitimate reason.
They are digging through the garbage hoping something will turn up. That's all.
They don't need a court order to dig through the trash. It's been established when you put your trash out it's not protected information at that point. You,like trump, need a better class of lawyer.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,765
- 2,220
Where did Barr say he was Trumps wingman like that pile of shit Eric "Free BJs" Holder said about his status as Obama's wingman?…...and you said that with a straight face. The AG is Trump's personal lawyer, but that is ok in the mind of a Trump Humper.
Exactly where in the Constitution does it say the President must turn over his financial records to Congress?? ....This judge followed the Constitution.
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 1
The Constitution says nothing about congressional investigations and oversight, but the authority to conduct investigations is implied since Congress possesses “all legislative powers.” The Supreme Court determined that the framers intended for Congress to seek out information when crafting or reviewing legislation. George Mason of Virginia said at the Federal Convention that Members of Congress “are not only Legislators but they possess inquisitorial powers. They must meet frequently to inspect the Conduct of the public offices.”
Investigations & Oversight | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives
They pretty much have to affirm the ruling. Donald hasn’t polluted the court that much yetWASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Nowhere at all.Exactly where in the Constitution does it say the President must turn over his financial records to Congress?? ....
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 1
1. It doesn’t HAVE to say it in the constitution. The law is clearly writtenExactly where in the Constitution does it say the President must turn over his financial records to Congress?? ....This judge followed the Constitution.
2. The job of Congress is oversight. Or do you think that an only be done to Democrats?
Only in trump idiots’ imaginations.Yes, that's the talking point that was handed to you, isn't it?Oh, look...yet another Obama appointee more loyal to Obama than to the law.WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
…...and you said that with a straight face. The AG is Trump's personal lawyer, but that is ok in the mind of a Trump Humper.
Have you ever even tried thinking for yourself?
Both of Ear's AGs probably should have served time
Translation: We like to make up BS legal wording in order to make people believe it's in the Constitution in order to get our way. ...Congress’s oversight authority derives from its implied powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances.
Translation: We don't believe in the Constitution even when it is there.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge in Washington ruled Monday against President Donald Trump in a financial records dispute with Congress.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, said Trump cannot block a House subpoena of financial records. He said the Democratic-led House committee seeking the information has said it believes the documents would help lawmakers consider strengthening ethics and disclosure laws, among other things.
The committee's reasons were "valid legislative purposes," Mehta said, and it was not for him "to question whether the Committee's actions are truly motivated by political considerations."
Judge rules against Trump in records dispute with Congress
Does a higher court overturn this ruling?
How much longer can the Trump Administration stonewall the Congress.
Trump's accounting firm is not a part of the Gov't, so he can't use executive powers.
Wrong...Congress is making this an investigation into the President.
Uh yea, it's called oversight.
It certainly is no surprise that an Obama appointee is trying to break the law.
How is he breaking the law?
He can use executive privilege and yes it will be overturned by a higher court.
No he can't because his firm is not a part of the gov't.
When he is out of office that will no longer be the case but then there will no longer be any incentive to investigate. See this us what happens when you spew propaganda for political partisanship.
That's all Republicans are these days.
It will be overturned because the warrant is for an investigation into the president. It doesn't matter what the status of the firm is.
No..it's not oversight it's political snooping
based on partisan hackery. Why do you think the staff lawyers are trying to rebrand it
as an ethics research motion???? You partisan hack you...because they already know it won't get by executive privilege.
Yes the Obama appointee is trying to
Soft-play congressional intent by rewording
The query and thus injecting himself into the motion improperly .... something that is uniquely common to progressive judicial hacks of the Obama era. His bosses will straighten him out.
Jo
It will not be overturned. It is oversight.
Brain dead trumpkins shouldn’t comment on anyone else’s intellectYou just did, moron.A Trump Humper accusing someone of bitching and moaning, you can't make this shit up.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 8
- Views
- 151
- Replies
- 167
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 28
- Views
- 611
- Replies
- 28
- Views
- 504
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 226
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 195
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 45
- Views
- 283
- Replies
- 51
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8301
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 477
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-