Trump now immune from IRS investigation

[rightwinger]

Trump makes it clear he is above the law

 

[PeterPilot]

Isn't this nice? It looks like part of the deal of dropping the suit is he can't be investigated by the IRS, him nor any of his companies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/19/us/politics/trump-irs-doj-lawsuit-audit.html?unlocked_article_code=1.jlA.8rF_.f2PERJ-lWivq

I guess when you are investigating him solely because you don't like him, it's known as lawfare and will fall apart as soon as a Trump friendly DOJ takes over.

Donald and his family are above the law. Everybody knows that. Same with Biden, same with Bush & Company. It's as plain as the nose on your face. There is no rule of law in the US.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Donald and his family are above the law. Everybody knows that. Same with Biden, same with Bush & Company. It's as plain as the nose on your face. There is no rule of law in the US.

Same with Clinton, same with Hunter Biden, same with Comey. Want to keep going? Above the law defines those people.

 

[Leo123]

Hire a crook, expect to be robbed.

We did that four years ago.

 

[struth]

Trump makes it clear he is above the law

Actually, he was the victim of a crime. The crime happened because of the negligence of the federal govt

The least they can do is stop these silly audits for a while

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, he was the victim of a crime. The crime happened because of the negligence of the federal govt

The least they can do is stop these silly audits for a while

Trump was a victim of his own irresponsible actions

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Isn't this nice? It looks like part of the deal of dropping the suit is he can't be investigated by the IRS, him nor any of his companies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/19/us/politics/trump-irs-doj-lawsuit-audit.html?unlocked_article_code=1.jlA.8rF_.f2PERJ-lWivq

I guess when you are investigating him solely because you don't like him, it's known as lawfare and will fall apart as soon as a Trump friendly DOJ takes over.

That's absolutely illegal and shouldn't stand

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I am glad lawsuits have already been filed on this fraud..

The legality of the Justice Department's settlement with Donald Trump—which permanently bars the IRS from auditing or pursuing tax claims against Trump, his family, and his businesses—is currently at the center of fierce legal debate. The sweeping nature of the agreement has sparked intense opposition and lawsuits challenging its validity. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Arguments surrounding the settlement's legality fall into two main perspectives:
Arguments the Settlement is Unlawful or Improper: [1]

• Statutory Violations: Critics and legal experts argue the agreement may violate 26 U.S.C. § 7217, which makes it illegal for a president to directly or indirectly request the termination of an ongoing tax audit, and requires IRS officials to report such requests to the Treasury Inspector General.
• Self-Pardon Bypass: Some legal scholars describe the provision as an improper "super-pardon," allowing Trump to bypass standard legal rules that prevent a president from pardoning themselves for tax crimes or civil violations.
• Lack of Judicial Oversight: Unlike previous governmental settlement funds, such as the 2010 Keepseagle case cited by the DOJ, this agreement was finalized and signed entirely within the executive branch without formal federal court approval or review.
• Emoluments Concerns: Because the settlement permanently protects Trump's personal finances from collection, ethics experts argue it grants a direct, quantifiable financial benefit from the government to the sitting president, potentially running afoul of the Domestic Emoluments Clause. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

Arguments Defending the Settlement's Legality:

• Standard Case Closure: Department of Justice officials and spokespersons have defended the sweeping waivers as customary. The DOJ argues that settling a massive $10 billion lawsuit logically includes resolving all related and adverse claims to definitively end the dispute.
• Broad Executive Authority: Proponents of the administration argue that the Executive Branch and the DOJ have the broad constitutional authority to drop government claims, settle litigation, and enter into binding agreements to protect the government against further liability.
• Defense Against Lawfare: The Trump administration has maintained the settlement fund and waivers are legally justified remedies to compensate for the alleged weaponization of federal agencies and the unauthorized leak of his tax returns by the IRS. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Current Legal Challenges:
The legality of the agreement is already facing scrutiny in the judicial system. For example, Capitol Police officers who served on January 6, 2021, have filed a lawsuit specifically attempting to block the settlement and the attached anti-weaponization fund. Legal experts note that because of Trump's standing as a sitting president, challenging the administration in court presents significant procedural and legal hurdles. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

It's absurd, beyond ridiculous

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Trump thinks he is above the law and wants to start a family dynasty.

Sure, make him and his family exempt from all taxation and generational wealth is assured.

MAGAs may be fine with being serfs, but for the rest of freedom loving Americans we will never surrender to to being serfs to the Trump family.

The Democrats dug into Trump's finances going back 15 years and found nothing. There doesn't need to be anymore investigations.

 

[airplanemechanic]

How was he harmed $10 billion or even $1.8 billion?

Apparently you've never heard of punitive damages.

You can be "harmed" 10 grand with the sale of a vehicle by a sleazy dealership, sue them, and the jury award you 250 grand with punitive awards. You don't "just" get the amount you were harmed. You can get much more in punitive recoveries. In fact, if you can prove by a preponderance of evidence, that the harm you received from them was intentional and designed to harm you in some way, punitive damages are almost guaranteed.

It certainly wasn't hard for Trump to prove that he was being investigated for no other reason other than he's Trump, hated by the left, and that they wanted to smear him for the upcoming campaign. They leaked his taxes, which are private. He had a right to sue, and sue the shit out of them. Violating rights comes with a hefty price.

 

[candycorn]

Apparently you've never heard of punitive damages.

You can be "harmed" 10 grand with the sale of a vehicle by a sleazy dealership, sue them, and the jury award you 250 grand with punitive awards. You don't "just" get the amount you were harmed. You can get much more in punitive recoveries. In fact, if you can prove by a preponderance of evidence, that the harm you received from them was intentional and designed to harm you in some way, punitive damages are almost guaranteed.

It certainly wasn't hard for Trump to prove that he was being investigated for no other reason other than he's Trump, hated by the left, and that they wanted to smear him for the upcoming campaign. They leaked his taxes, which are private. He had a right to sue, and sue the shit out of them. Violating rights comes with a hefty price.

Yet he never proved it.

Do the kids of those who were”harmed” (assuming the “harmed party passes away)...get to claim it as well? Like if one of the J6 insurrectionists died in prison; could their kid claim it?

 

[airplanemechanic]

Yet he never proved it.

He didn't prove it to you, but he doesn't have to. He proved it to a jury of his peers.

Do the kids of those who were”harmed” (assuming the “harmed party passes away)...get to claim it as well? Like if one of the J6 insurrectionists died in prison; could their kid claim it?

I have no idea. This has absolutely nothing to do with the OP. Typical whacko off-topic bullshit by you.

 

[rightwinger]

certainly wasn't hard for Trump to prove that he was being investigated for no other reason other than he's Trump,

He didn’t fare too well in his many trials

Being guilty is like that

 

[Old Rocks]

After what the Democrats did with lawfare against Trump and his family, he should be immune from any prosecution. After the democrats let Pelosi make millions on stock trades Trump should be immune from prosecution.

Oh, you mean that we saw the law upheld and a known fraudster and child rapist was convicted on 34 felony counts. Hardly his first run in with the law on fraud. He paid 25 million for his Trump University fraud. I agree that members of the Congress and Senate should not be allowed to deal in stocks. However, the amount that Pelosi has made pales in comparison to the amount the Trump family has made dealing in stocks directly related to his decision.

Trump's 10 Biggest Stock Investments

When he left office, Trump had roughly 90 holdings, mostly ETFs and mutual funds. Now he has stakes in more than 700 stocks and plenty of conflicts of interest.

www.forbes.com

 

[ThisIsMe]

Maybe they should stop using govt as a weapon?

View attachment 1259435

That’s what I just said

 

[Leo123]

Oh, you mean that we saw the law upheld and a known fraudster and child rapist was convicted on 34 felony counts. Hardly his first run in with the law on fraud. He paid 25 million for his Trump University fraud. I agree that members of the Congress and Senate should not be allowed to deal in stocks. However, the amount that Pelosi has made pales in comparison to the amount the Trump family has made dealing in stocks directly related to his decision.

Trump's 10 Biggest Stock Investments

When he left office, Trump had roughly 90 holdings, mostly ETFs and mutual funds. Now he has stakes in more than 700 stocks and plenty of conflicts of interest.

www.forbes.com

None of that is true. Trump never raped anyone and the felony counts were all lawfare. Trump is not indicted or convicted of fraud. Pelosi gave stock tips to her hubby and she personally enriched herself. Trump's family is doing nothing more than they have done running the company. Remember, Trump was already well off before even running. He's not even taking a POTUS salary. You just hate Trump based on Democrat lies and talking points, you have TDS big time.

Your link outlines Trump's dealings and income before he even ran. Why don't you read your own link? Oh yeah, TDS. By contrast, Pelosi didn't have a pot to piss in until she became Speaker, it's obvious she has been giving tips to her hubby.

 

[Leo123]

I hope the US govt, in all of its capacities, can find the courage to give the president and his family even more money.

Trump is taking no money from the government, not even a salary. His family receives no government money either.

 

[LibertyWeeps]

Whats the problem?

The Dumocreeps have done that for many decades.

And just because Trump decides to do it, he's the bad guy????

ROFLMAO

 

[skews13]

Apparently you've never heard of punitive damages.

You can be "harmed" 10 grand with the sale of a vehicle by a sleazy dealership, sue them, and the jury award you 250 grand with punitive awards. You don't "just" get the amount you were harmed. You can get much more in punitive recoveries. In fact, if you can prove by a preponderance of evidence, that the harm you received from them was intentional and designed to harm you in some way, punitive damages are almost guaranteed.

It certainly wasn't hard for Trump to prove that he was being investigated for no other reason other than he's Trump, hated by the left, and that they wanted to smear him for the upcoming campaign. They leaked his taxes, which are private. He had a right to sue, and sue the shit out of them. Violating rights comes with a hefty price.

Actually, his taxes aren't private, and the second he ran for office he had to disclose them.

He's only living on borrowed time right now, and he know's it.

The hefty price will be coming in 2029.

That's when the borrowed time is up, and a Democratically controlled government won't be letting anymore friendly appeals court make anymore decisions that can delay that hefty price from being imposed on him.

And the Supreme Corruption better have their own police to enforce any decisions they make.

And at least a couple of them might being paying a hefty price of their own.

tick tock

 

[WorldWatcher]

Actually, his taxes aren't private, and the second he ran for office he had to disclose them.

Yes they are.

And

Not he wasn't.

The practice of Presidential candidates releasing tax returns is voluntary no compelled by law.

WW

26 U.S. Code § 6103 - Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information

www.law.cornell.edu