The Cancer of Progs in the Courts

[DGS49]

Trump must give his tax returns to NY prosecutor, judge rules

Donald Trump cannot block a prosecutor's subpoena for eight years of his tax returns, a federal judge ruled on Thursday, in the latest setback in the U.S. president's longstanding effort to keep his finances under wraps. U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan rejected Trump's claims...

www.yahoo.com

So here we have another Prog judge spouting utter nonsense...because that's what they DO!

Asking for EIGHT YEARS of tax returns to ascertain whether and how a single disbursement (possibly two) shows up, when the date of those payments is well-known. No, no, says the Judge...That's not over-broad. That's not a fishing expedition.

The case will be overturned on appeal, or possibly if the world ends with this election, the case will be dropped by the odious prosecutor named Vance.

As an attorney, I call your attention to one little detail in the story. The judge's opinion was OVER A HUNDRED PAGES LONG.

Having read through thousands of cases in my professional life, I can say with near-certainty that whenever a decision is over 50 pages it is total bullshit. It is turning reality on its head. No legitimate "opinion" takes more than fifty pages to articulate, and the only thing that takes that many words is an explanation of how up is really down or black is really white. And you can take that guideline to the bank.

 

[Moonglow]

already a thread on the topic

 

[danielpalos]

Trump must give his tax returns to NY prosecutor, judge rules

Donald Trump cannot block a prosecutor's subpoena for eight years of his tax returns, a federal judge ruled on Thursday, in the latest setback in the U.S. president's longstanding effort to keep his finances under wraps. U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan rejected Trump's claims...

www.yahoo.com

So here we have another Prog judge spouting utter nonsense...because that's what they DO!

Asking for EIGHT YEARS of tax returns to ascertain whether and how a single disbursement (possibly two) shows up, when the date of those payments is well-known. No, no, says the Judge...That's not over-broad. That's not a fishing expedition.

The case will be overturned on appeal, or possibly if the world ends with this election, the case will be dropped by the odious prosecutor named Vance.

As an attorney, I call your attention to one little detail in the story. The judge's opinion was OVER A HUNDRED PAGES LONG.

Having read through thousands of cases in my professional life, I can say with near-certainty that whenever a decision is over 50 pages it is total bullshit. It is turning reality on its head. No legitimate "opinion" takes more than fifty pages to articulate, and the only thing that takes that many words is an explanation of how up is really down or black is really white. And you can take that guideline to the bank.

The right wing is worse. If you are an attorney as you claim, can you tell us why the supreme Court ignored the rules of construction and sacrificed the End to the Means, in DC v Heller?