President Trump Loses the Tax Return Battle | LegalEagle’s Law Review
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 07. 2020
- ⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
The Supreme Court rejects President Trump’s claim of absolute immunity. When do we see his taxes? Get CuriosityStream AND Nebula for less than $15 per year (26% off!) curiositystream.com/legaleagle
⚖️⚖️⚖️Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my PRELAW COURSE:
legaleagle.teachable.com/p/pr...
©©©©© Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you (15% OFF!):
www.copyrightcourse.com/yt
★ A Few of My Favorite Things★
🕵️♂️My Custom Suits: legaleagle.link/indochino
👔My Ties: fave.co/2ImLY9I
📎My Tie Clips/Bars: amzn.to/2WIQ6EE
🔲My Pocket Squares: amzn.to/2UfsKtL
💈My Hair Product amzn.to/2Ui2aQx
📸My Video Camera Setup www.amazon.com/shop/legaleagle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to Real Law Review by LegalEagle; a series where I try to tackle the most important legal issues of the day. If you have a suggestion for the next topic leave your comment below.
And if you disagree, be sure to leave your comment in the form of an OBJECTION!
Remember to make your comments Stella-appropriate. Stella is the LegalBeagle and she wields the gavel of justice. DO NOT MESS WITH STELLA.
★More series on LegalEagle★
Real Lawyer Reacts: goo.gl/hw9vcE
Laws Broken: goo.gl/PJw3vK
Law 101: goo.gl/rrzFw3
Real Law Review: goo.gl/NHUoqc
All clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Typical legal disclaimer from a lawyer (occupational hazard): This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos!
========================================================
★ Tweet me @legaleagleDJ / legaleagledj
★ More vids on Facebook: ➜ / legaleaglereacts
★ Stella’s Insta: / stellathelegalbeagle
★ For promotional inquiries please reach out here: legaleagle@standard.tv
⚖️ What should I cover next?
🚀 Get CuriosityStream & Nebula to watch the best documentaries and my extended RANT: curiositystream.com/legal
The Bostak v Clayton County ruling and it’s impacts for litigation against religious organizations
Movie Review! Primal Fear 😎🤓
You should cover Juliana et al v US. Some super interesting thinking about rights there.
Trial of Tim Heidecker!
Nix v. Hedden might be a fun light hearted one.
I love how Trump's defences are "You can't do this to the President - I'm immune." Instead of "I'm not corrupt."
The man can't breathe without lying. I'm surprised he hasn't fallen back on the Nixon line "I'm not a crook." Or would that be telling too much of the truth? He's turned the White House into the House of Untruths, a condition that the Fire in 1812 pales in comparison to.
There was never a question of corruption, but the only thing that is worse about Trump than any popular politician is his attitude. WHICH RAISES THE QUESTION: Why does the USA tolerate a static corrupt two party system? Because our minds are enslaved.
To be perfectly fair here, "I am not corrupt" true or false is NOT a valid legal defense.
@@stephenwright8824 that is literally your opinion because you gave no proof. But that's ok because I respect your opinion and agree he lies and exaggerates too much
Well, the last time a president tried "I am not a crook!" he still ended up out of office before the end of his term...
Honestly, every public official should have to make their tax records public, along with the donations they receive and where they come from. We need to know where the money goes and who's funding them, this is crucial.
Finally, a sensible argument I can agree with.
This is especially true for Trump who has not distanced himself from his company and properties. I am President Trump; you can come to my DC hotel. If you pay for the penthouse suite, there might be a backdoor passage to the Oval Office. Wink Wink. Nothing is wrong; nothing to see.
What about everyone? People get pay for being hurt at work and lie and go on vacation and legally break the law
I believe there's a bill for that sitting on McConnell's desk right now. It was one of the first things the 2018 House passed.
@@Danielguy101 that's still fraud... or it's just a weak requirement of injury. Either way, "everyone" isn't a public representative. As a citizen, I don't care if Bill down the street screws his company for a vacation, but I do care if my senator does.
I sort of feel like "There are thousands of local DAs waiting to prosecute me" isn't the great argument it might have sounded like in his head.
It sounds that way to you because you are liberal. How many presidents do you think would have been prevented from doing their job if lawyers on the opposing political party could prosecute them. Be realistic
@@mustang8206 Objection, ad hominem! Also just because republicans would do it doesn't mean thats what democrats are doing, I know that its hard to imagine not being as corrupt lol.
@@imnotgivingmynametoamachine683 "I know that its [sic] hard to imagine not being as corrupt" sounds to me like another ad hominem.
If it could be done legally, I can imagine there would be plenty of people from both parties taking advantage of it to harass politicians they don't like, especially ones in offices that influence policy. That said, the way he stated it doesn't convey that he fears politically motivated legal harassment; it comes across more like he's using the office to hide from prosecution. In other words, either poor word choice on his part or a Freudian slip.
@@mustang8206 If there is reason to prosecute the president for something, yeah, I want him prosecuted. Any president, any party.
Remember when conservatives stood for law and order?
I think my fav argument by the House was “he claims his taxes have been under audit for three years. An audit shouldn’t take that long, so we must investigate if the IRS is actually taking that long.”
i loved the then head of the irs tweeting "being audited does not stop you from releasing your taxes"
Nothing says “I’m ethical and transparent” as denying multiple court orders to release the tax returns.
Its because its unconstitutional.
lol has trump or his administration literally ever claimed to be ethical and transparent though?
As he said it's not legally required to release them
unarmed black man wait, you think that’s not my real name? Hahahaha wow, that’s a first.
What court orders?
One thing im getting from this is that there really needs to be a clause in the law to suspend any statute of limitations whilst any official holds office to stop them from using office as a way to hide from prosecution.
I'm legit shocked there isn't already one in there.
If not mistaken that there is a rule which could apply. When an individual is no longer within reach of US law, the statute of limitations is frozen for that time.
It was put in place to ensure someone could not leave the country to wait out a statute of limitations.
@@mattjohnston2 It's one of those things where they didn't imagine the system would become so corrupt and abused that they would need to create such a specific law. The framers expected the highest office to be held only by people of the highest moral standing, and if they failed that then Congress and Senate would have the power and morality to do the right thing and remedy the situation, all without the need for specific laws to make sure that at least afterwards the official can be prosecuted.
What i find fascinating is, this tactic is old as dirt. Becoming Pontifex Macimum in Rome was used like this too iirc
And how about barring them from holding office if they’re convicted?
“You can’t accuse me, it would distract me”
Yeah, that second point was echoing in the back of my mind as I listened. "How would a subpoena make him look bad....unless there was some obvious wrongdoing in it?"
4:05 I'm pretty sure "We've sort of... moved on from this particular scandal" is now the United States' national motto
For most... not really. Not till he's gone.
it's scandal fatigue, every new terrible thing is in the news cycle till a new horrible thing that will make ad space sell for more replaces it it, that, every few days/weeks for 4 years.
The Ostrich Syndrome.
We need more people who are actual doctors, lawyers, and statisticians to become popular on CZcams. Keep doing what you do.
Edit: Suggestions From the comments - Doctor Mike, Chubbyemu, Medlife Crisis, Dr. HopeSick (Check comments for more, also seems like thunderfoot has some love/hate y’all can argue that one.) Thanks y’all!
Well doctor mike is a good start on the medical field...
Chubbyemus is also good for medical videos
@@reecehaire9124 I was just about to recommend Chubbyemu as well. Second that!
CZcams doesnt like real info. They keep banning videos from this nuclear scientists thunderf00t who debunks science bs and I know youtube banned 2 doctors a month or 2 back for making a vid about the stats of covid
@@thekyleprojekt7996 I just discovered Thunderfoot 3 days ago when i came across the "self filling water bottle" video. I subbed instantly.
"Possible?" Individual 1 "ran a successful campaign for president." Who else could that possibly be?
If you'd ask Trump? Obama of course!
Hillary somehow.
He’s a lawyer. It’s like how you have to say allegedly when someone hasn’t been charged or convicted yet. You know, they know, we all know, but we play the word game because it is important.
Plus Cohen said during his testimony that Trump was Individual 1.
It's also funny that he says, "it's impossible to know" while showing a headline on screen that says "Individual 1 is Donald Trump." iTs ImPoSsIbLe To KnOw!!!1
"No one is above the law"
Teddy Roosevelt denouncing me in Civ 6 after Brazil declared war on me
Never played Civ 6 but I loved III, IV and V!
And I and II, TBH.
@@davidfortier6976 V is perfection after a couple dlcs. 6 has some interesting ideas like districts instead of fitting all buildings into one square city and keeps the same unit movements making you care about positioning. But it feels like you can never do everything and the AI's diplomacy seems off every time. It often feels like everyone's either playing nice or blaming you for fighting your rivals. Also I really hate how frequent barbarians are in 6, they've been in every game to encourage some early military and you could even farm them a bit in 5, but now they seem a lot stronger and if a scout gets back to their camp after spotting your cities you're just done.
7:17 "He argued that, under Article II and Supremacy Clause, a sitting President enjoys absolute immunity from state criminal process."
No man in America should be absolutely above the law.
“Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason.”
― Mark Twain
It really is crazy just how quickly a baby's diaper compromises its morals in the face of lobbyist dollars.
Too bad that’s not law with the house and the senate....
@@imveryangryitsnotbutter And how a politician starts to smell untoleratably after a few minutes.
@Roof Korean ...
@Roof Korean Ok...but our current system works even less. So maybe don't play the dichotomy game.
"The Self Proclaimed Billionaire whose company has filed for Bankruptcy 6 times."...
Something about that sentence doesn't seem right
It should be 10 or more like the big billionaires.
When you buy whole companies, you also buy their debts, better to file bankruptcy, settle their debts, and restructure before putting more money into them...sometime people just want the brand or the structures and property.
filing bankruptcy is actually a good business tactic because you don’t have to be bankrupt to file it. Therefore, he has something to hide because he didn’t have to pay dues because he filed it.
Ben McKay Your company does have to be “technically” bankrupt (unable to pay what is owed without such protection) even if you do not have to be.
@@Projolo Something you will learn as you get older is that most people don't succeed on their first try. The people who try again and again are the ones who become successful.
I just don't understand a world where 'I don't wana' is a legal defense and everyone goes along with it as if its normal
*country
I remember times when commuting the sentence of a criminal acquaintance was an extraordinary event.
@@lrrrruleroftheplanetomicro6881 Bebe Rebozo.
@@donaldfschiff1229 Now that was 10 intresting minutes on wikipedia. thx!
Trump said he'd release his returns when elected, and then he'd do it after the inauguration, and then he was like "no I'll release them after my first 100 days in office", and then has the nerve to be all butthurt when people are like "where are the tax returns you said you were gonna release?"
Also, this is petty, but he's never been attractive. I don't get it. People act like he was some kind of heartthrob in the 80s, but he looked like a thumb even then.
He looks like Grimace from the McDonalds stuff
I mean, that cover from Mary's book is all the confirmation I need that he looks like he steals panties.
@Nospam Spamisham Do you want to try that again in english this time?
@Nospam Spamisham you are deluding yourself.
Ever heard of beer goggles? I guess being a millionaire has a similar, more powerful effect lol.
"Individual 1, who would run an eventually successful Presidential campaign..." Lmao
I *knew* that Jimmy Carter was up to something!
Yeah impossible to ascertain who that is, because the name is redacted... Not sure if he was being dead pan, or really didn't read the indictment?
@drew pedersen DAMN YOU ELECTORAL COLLEGE!!!!
Came here to say this, thank you
timestamp?
If Presidential immunity is absolute then your nation has an elected King.
If presidential immunity is absolute, then the FBI would've taken down this video before you could type your comment.
@@henryyin2471 Presidental immunity has absolutely nothing to do with CZcams comments and whether the FBI can and will take them down
@@henryyin2471 This is one of those comments where you tried to be smart with a witty comeback-analogy and utterly *failed*. Good job, sir.
@@henryyin2471 oh, so like Trump tried with Bannon and Mary Trump's books? Yeah, he's obviously trying.
There is no immunity from a subpoena when it asks you to release your tax information.
Hey just a thought, don’t his own actions prevent him from doing his duty? Like, if he chooses not to be briefed on important things, or when he improperly speaks to foreign powers, etc.. or the 300 something days he’s spent playing golf?
They don't "prevent" him from doing anything because they're his choices. Absolutely stupid, incompetent and immoral choices but, still. He's simply electing not to perform his duties or do them with the lowest amount of effort and time as possible. Nothing is preventing him he's just choosing not to lol.
@@eternyti His daddy's money got him into college, his daddy's money got him started in business, his daddy's money (illegally) tried to keep his casinos afloat. Since his daddy's money cannot fix the presidency, he has no other play.
@@doctornietzsche6723 haha slow down there man, his dad only gave him 1 mil and the rest trump made himself. Now I'm all for talking about what trump did wrong but you have to be factually correct with your arguments. Everyone likes to point out his 6 business failures but fail to realize he has had a 96% success rate in businesses succeeding. What you're saying is disingenuous.
Also to the original poster, every president takes a lot of time off. Trump took less time off than Obama but you never see people bitching about that. Please pick a better point. The rest of the points you made don't have enough information behind them to say if that happened or didn't happen.
@@hawks3109 Watch the video. His dad gave him far, far more than 1 million
@@hawks3109 but legalsmeagol said so, he wouldn't lie to is would he?
(He's a lawyer, it's his job to lie without specifically lying)
Well, in the military; a person's finances have a part to play as to whether or not a person will be granted a security clearance of some type.
Was just thinking the same thing. Because someone being in debt can put national security at risk by being more likely to do compromising or nefarious acts.
I've noticed an annoying tendency for there to be no laws against doing something that *most* people are too principled to do. Seemingly because they feel there's no need for a law there.
Presidents not releasing their tax returns, pardoning criminals who were convicted for giving that president unlawful aid...
and I'm willing to bet that, if/when Trump loses the election, he'll resign from the presidency before Biden takes office so that Pence can pardon him of all his federal crimes.
Oh, also there's a bill just sitting in congress, H.R.669, that would prevent the president from launching a nuclear first strike against a foreign country rather than going to congress for a declaration of war as intended. I'd really prefer for that topic not to come up. Holding the world ransom isn't something I would put past this president.
Anachronity The founders seemingly had an annoying tendency to view people as being more honorable than they actually are.
Heck, how long did it take to get an actual law on presidential term limits? Or actually writing down who gets to take over if the president gets shot?
Credit checks and finance reviews are done for employment in the private sector too.
@@jamieflowers534 I was about to mention that. However most employers do the most rudimentary of checks. Now, it is a different story if you want to work for a financial institution, or work in a capacity where you come into contact with money. Although even this has an unfair flip-side.
"Would interfere with his ability to perform his duties as president"...like interfering with his ability to play golf.
Yes the president should be chained to their desk and never do anything else.
@@lennysmileyface The man spent a lot of time talking crap about Obama when he went golfing. Then he said "I won't have time for golf, I'll be working, working so hard, so much work, no time for golf," and then he spent a massive amount of time golfing. Much more golfing than Obama did. So he complained then did exactly what he was complaining about but worst. It's the hypocrisy of it. If he hadn't been a hypocrite, nobody would care. "LOOK AT HIM, GOLFING!" said Trump, then goes golfing.
Don't forget about all the time he's spent waiting for the pandemic to magically disappear!
@@eduardomantilla2143 Kinda makes me wish someone would follow him around with a loudspeaker, endlessly repeating his own lines at him while he's doing things he said he wouldn't do. On camera, of course.
Trump pre-election: "Obama is always playing golf!"
Trump post-election: *Playing golf twice or thrice as often as Obama, AT LEAST.*
“Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.”
― Plato
"Good men don't need rules. Today is not the day to find out why I have so many."
-The Doctor
@The 99% shut up
@@foreversocal1 nah but Plato was kinda full of shit.
@@jvniprbrry the 99% is a troll account.
@The 99% more like the 0.1% you are lol
His sister RESIGNED as a judge to keep her part hidden!
eric veneto that, in itself, is a travesty of rule of law. She gets off free and KNEW it was illegal.
Not that she retired or anything.
@@glorialewis8227 They are a family of crooks -including the father. We should not be surprised at this point.
And her pension. Andy McCabe lost his!
Trumps Lawyer: Told the truth to Congress and is sitting in a cell.
Roger Stone: commited 7 felonies including lying to Congress to protect Trump and his sentence was just commuted just before it started by Trump who pardoned him
If thats not textbook corruption, I dunno what is....
To me, a Fin (person from Finland) this is just insane... in Finland tax records are public info. So if i want, i can go to a tax office and say "i want the tax record of Sauli Väinämö Niinistö" and i do get them.. and yeah, that is our president. And every year, magazines publish the tax records for the ~100 richest people... so there is this transparency, where we see who pays their taxes to Finland and who use off shore.... whats the word.... tax planning services (tax avoiding is illegal, tax planning is not).
But yeah.... if LegalEagle lived in Finland, i could just go and ask hes tax records... and he could do same to me, if he knew my name (i do think you need to know the name of the person you want to get the tax record, you can't just ask for them all)
Wait so you can see how much anyone in the country makes in a year?
@@TheEnoEtile yes. As long as the money is made withing Finlands tax laws and/or reach. We see how much people make.
I remember the company i worked in and we saw how much our CEO made. We got some glares on the elevator. :D
@@TheEnoEtile They do the same in denmark. I'm not entirely sure if you can get anyone's taxes but the ones of public figures (such as politicians or judges) and companies have to be out there for everyone to see.
@Nospam Spamisham
There's a middle ground that should be met here tho. I'm not saying every individual has to show the world their income nor their taxes nor anything like it. But if you're a public figure (such as a president, a senator or a judge) you should be obligated to disclose your taxes to the public.
Just so that the people know if they're voting a fraud or not.
@Nospam Spamisham That is racially insensitive. And only real men would allow what Finland does./ It's justice and transparency and anti-corruption. To oppose it is for weak men.
I was looking for something good to watch and you delivered right on time.
Same here. 5am Hawaii time. 🤙🏽
@@benjaminx9531 i'm jealous
Same
Same uwu
I also think the same
"$60 million"
"small loan"
I would love to have a "small" loan of $60 million.
Same
That's a pittance in the world of New York real estate.
I would pay off my student loans with that.
I would love to have a "small" loan of a hundredth of that
Got to love the mindset that justifies people lying by an order of magnitude because reasons."Hey IRS i i only made $1,000 this year, not $50,000. I mean compared to the national budget it is just a pittance. Also just ignore the $500,000 that i gained through "gifts" that i didn't report"
When you said the famous Vance I immediately thought “Bob Vance? From Vance refrigeration?”
Public: All politicians should release their tax records.
Politicians: No problem, I will release my personal tax records.
Also politicians: Pushes shell company(s) tax records out of public view.
"Only a small amount"
"$1M" (or more)
Pick one.
Trump: yes.
Trump: i have many billions and started with only 1 (pats his shoulder)
Steve jobbs: started from his garage and created a trillion dollar company (died a legend)
@@muaries12
But they were a group of three at first, then two later.
Recursive Triforce and you think Trump started out solo? When you have that money, the only difference is that you pay people for the ideas (or say you will) rather than start a partnership with them.
$999.999 is also a pretty big amount. Anything over $10.000 is a big amount already IMO.
Mr Cohen said individual 1 was Donald Trump in his testimony. Not that it means anything, the last 3 + plus years has shown us that if you are rich enough, powerful enough, and have no scruples you can get away with anything for a while. It also showed us that the system only works when everyone plays their roles in good faith and conscience.
When people just lean back and expect the system to correct itself, to the point of shirking their own duties within that system, it should not be a surprise for things to deteriorate steadily into whatever the frick one can even call the current state of US politics, law and what little justice remains. It would be nice if people had noticed it happening, and done something about it, though. I mean... this isn't news. George Carlin and Jello Biafra, to name a few, were talking about largely the same shit, decades ago. Step up, people.
Well people expect a certain floor of terrible behavior.
"No one would ever lie about _that_ "
"Oh come on, nobody is _that_ corrupt"
"It _can't_ be as bad as you say"
But it is, it's exactly as bad as they say, most of the allegations against trump are shit that you couldn't even make up because it would come across as unrealistic if it hadn't actually happened. Reality truly is stranger than fiction.
Hey, LegalEagle, when can we expect a video on Roger Stone's sentence being commuted by Trump? Your channel is amazing, by the way :) Thank you!
Summary
Perjury is knowingly telling a lie under oath, about something that is important to the case. To prosecute a false statement, the government needs to prove somehow that the witness intended to lie, rather than he was mistaken or confused over the facts. To eliminate ambiguity, confusion and opportunities for lying, lawyers often reject common-sense definitions in favor of legal definitions, which are more carefully defined. A witness who answers a legal definition accurately, in spite of what common sense says, is not committing perjury. The only requirement for a defendant is to answer questions accurately; he is not obligated to help the prosecution bring himself down, and has a constitutional right to fight vigorously in his defense. In Clinton’s case, no accusation of perjury survives these observations.
The humor concerning the identity of Individual 1 was so dry, I had to put an olive in it.
"Let's get down to brass tacks" but CZcams's auto captions shows "let's get down to brass tax."
The algorithm is trying out puns
Homophone puns are wonderful though
@@chrisstoltz3648 I'm getting flashbacks to the South Park Family Guy episode lol
Christopher Stoltz W E E D E A T E R
Brass tacks? Brass tax? What we need is a steel boot to put in Trump's brass balls.
@@JacquelineUnderwood that's neat to consider, they're not homophones in my idiolect!
"a very small loan" - more money than most people will ever earn in their life
"actually far more than that" - yeah that sounds right
"Loans from Forign investors" - i look forward to finding out which Putins own those debts to Putin
lol
I didn't get that last part.
Also, it's not a small loan to us mere mortals, but for billionaires a million dollars is like for you a 100 dollar loan.
Yeah it's nice and a place to get started, but you really can't do shit with it can ya.
@@drkrn Ehhhh if it's really just a million (before inflation) then maybe he could get a tiny bit of bragging rights (despite the fact that far wealthier people than Trump like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs started out with FAR less than he did which makes his entire bragging point basically moot). But even that's undercut by the fact that he got SIGNIFICANTLY more to start with (apparently over 60x more and after being adjusted for inflation already made him 1/10th of a billionare) and then gets another few hundred million in his inheritance.
Trump trying to brag about how he's a "self-made billionare" is like someone getting 999 thousand dollars from their parents and then earning a thousand dollars to call themselves a "self-made millionare". I mean if you argue the semantics of that then I guess it's true but other than that, anyone with a functional brain would look at that and scoff at that claim.
@@drkrn He actually got 400 million dollars then 800+ million in property with a shell company though.
@SCOTT THOMAS "I mean only the smallest of loans, it was in small bills, so that's what makes it a small loan"
@SCOTT THOMAS Failed casinos are convenient ways to launder money i hear.
I really enjoy these professionally produced videos. Thanks so much for always helping us ‘Think Like a Lawyer”.
You forgot during the sarcasm that "Individual One, who launched and subsequently won his bid for President" (or something to that effect) in the court documents.
It's just... impossible to know who that could refer to. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I could never be a reporter or a lawyer...I feel my mind would explode with 1. having to listen to trump knowing lie over and over... and 2. knowing he's abusing the system and the people who cover for him
People I know have remarked the same about me and I have thought this about myself too.
When I'm watching a program and they cut to Trump or any of his immediate minions talking (like his Barbie press secretary Kayleigh McEnany or that cryptykeeper Kellyanne Conway) I just get infuriated and turn off the sound. If I was there in person, I'd throw a shoe at him every time he lies. But then again, who has several dozen pairs of shoes at any one time?!
I love how people call Trump “smart” for more than likely not paying taxes but if someone else doenst- it’s the end of America.
I think you forgot about the fact that when the lady on CNN went over those couple of pages that they were able to get. They thought they would find that he was dodging taxes and taking loopholes. What they actually found was that he actually paid more in taxes than CNN MSNBC and several other major networks all paid combined.
@@Jason2425able I'm sure if this was true, Trump wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to release his full tax returns like every president has done before him
@@Jason2425able -- and let's not forget the way Bernie scoffed when asked why he paid less taxes than he should have -- while vowing to make others pay more
He's not smart. He's just realized that when you're rich, you don't have to be smart. You can just break the rules and literally anybody with power is too afraid to touch you.
@@jijonbreaker -- he hasn't broken any rules -- he's smart enough to us the loopholes that Congress put in place with the current tax code -- If they have a problem with Trump using those tax loopholes ; why don't Congress change them? Cause then they couldn't use them their selves ---
Signed up for Curiousity Stream, and I would never had if not for Nebula. Thank you Legal Eagle for all your hard work.
Can you do an episode on Harvard and MIT’s lawsuit against ICE?
Yes yes YEESS
This is a such a great idea. Tell me did you graduate from MIT or Harvard?
What I really like is that yes, it’s clear that our premium legal eagle does not like Trump, but his legal opinions are always stated such that it is clear what is law, legal opinion etc and his own feelings.
And yet you provide not a single example of those lies. I don't think whataboutism holds up as a defence in a legal setting #notlegaladvice
Nospam Spamisham Here is a list of everything illegal Trump has did within the past four years in his presidency that could get him legally prosecuted or is unconstitutional! The trail of evidence starts with Trump’s attempt to get James Comey, the FBI director responsible for overseeing the investigation into Trump’s relationship with Russia during the 2016 election, to drop an investigation into National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, essentially obstructing justice which is considered a crime against justice itself since it undermines the validity of the legal system.
When Comey refused, Trump fired him.
Trump made two more attempts at stopping the investigation by trying (unsuccessfully) to fire Robert Mueller, Comey’s predecessor. Then, Trump ordered White House Counsel Don McGahn to create a false record indicating that no attempts took place - McGahn refused.
Trump has repeatedly attempted to intimidate or influence witnesses in proceedings against him.
In all, Robert Mueller’s investigation revealed multiple instances where there was “very substantial” evidence that Trump had committed obstruction of justice.
The Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause prohibits the president from accepting personal benefits from any foreign government or official.
Trump has retained his ownership interests in his family business while he is in office.
Thus, every time a foreign official stays at a Trump hotel, or a foreign government approves a new Trump Organization project, or grants a trademark, Trump is in violation of the Constitution.
Trump has repeatedly pushed his properties as avenues to secure his favor, and multiple foreign officials have stayed at his properties while lobbying his administration.
Saudi officials and an Iraqi Sheik stayed at his hotel when lobbying for their interests. China approved multiple trademarks for his family’s brands while negotiating trade policies.
Trump promoted his club in Doral Florida for the 2020 G-7 Conference, and then the White House announced the multi-million dollar contract was awarded to Trump’s own resort after Trump’s suggestion. Ultimately, this contract was canceled despite his attempts to abuse his position.
And every time he goes to golf at a Trump property, he funnels taxpayer money into his family business-violating the Domestic Emoluments Clause.
To date, Trump has spent over $100 million taxpayer dollars to golf and vacation at his own properties.
Donald Trump publicly called on Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s “missing” emails on July 27, 2016. Five hours later, Russian hackers attacked Clinton’s personal office for the first time.
In the middle of the 2016 election, Trump’s son was invited to meet with a Russian national regarding “information that would incriminate Hillary and…would be very useful to” Donald Trump. Donald Trump Jr. was told it was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort took the meeting.
Paul Manafort and Rick Gates met with Konstantin Kilimnik, likely a Russian spy, multiple times in the summer of 2016 to provide him with internal campaign polling data detailing the Trump campaign’s midwestern strategy.
2020
Trump used U.S. military aid to pressure Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 elections and must be impeached because no one is above the law.
He illegally withheld $400 million dollars of military aid to Ukraine and in a call with the President of Ukraine, asked them to “do us a favor” by investigating Joe Biden’s family and a debunked conspiracy theory (that has been pushed by Russian intelligence) alledging Ukraine hacked the DNC’s computer servers.
White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney admitted in a press conference that Trump had withheld military aid to Ukraine to pressure them to investigate his rivals for the 2020 election. He told the public to “Get Over it” as the White House does this “All the time”. Other State Department officials made it clear to the Ukrainian government that the aide would not be released unless the Ukrainians investigated the Biden family for the purpose of helping Trump win re-election.
Trump told the press that, in addition to Ukraine, China should investigate the Bidens specifically and said “If they [China] do what we want, we have tremendous power” in ongoing trade negotiations.
After this occurred, a Trump aide claimed that the Chinese had, in fact, given him information on Hunter Biden’s business dealings in the country.
Multiple witnesses confirmed in the public impeachment hearings before the House Intelligence Committee that Trump was attempting to bribe and extort Ukraine into helping his reelection.
When Trump gave cover to the neo-Nazis who rioted in Charlottesville and murdered a protester, he violated his obligation to protect the citizenry against domestic violence.
When Trump encouraged police officers to rough up people they have under arrest, he violated his obligation to oversee faithful execution of the laws.
Trump and his rhetoric have been cited in numerous criminal proceedings as being the inspiration and justification for political violence.
When faced with impeachment in the House, Trump has alluded to his supporters engaging in insurrection to keep him in power - a rallying cry readily picked up by his supporters.
President Trump threatened to withhold aid from Ukraine if its Prime Minister did not investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son. Using taxpayer dollars to manipulate an important ally against Russia and attack a political rival is a clear abuse of presidential power.
Furthermore, this administration tried to conceal the whistleblower complaint that brought this corruption to light and label the civil servant who filed it as partisan.
In addition, Trump’s decision to pardon Joe Arpaio, who was convicted for contempt of court after ignoring a court order that he stop detaining and searching people based on the color of their skin, amounted to an abuse of the pardon power that revealed his indifference to individual rights, equal protections, and the separation of powers.
Pardoning this conviction goes against the Fifth Amendment, which allows the judiciary to issue and enforce injunctions against government officials who flout individual rights.
High-ranking administration officials involved in foreign affairs have signaled that Trump does not have the capacity to make informed decisions in the event of a military crisis.
Even worse, his actions could spark a needless confrontation stemming from misunderstanding or miscalculation.
We see this in full effect every time Trump tweets or makes a public statement taunting and threatening the North Korean regime.
The president may be the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States,” but that does not give him the right to behave in reckless or wanton ways that put millions of lives at risk.
If he is unfit to perform his duties as Commander in Chief, he cannot be allowed to remain in the position.
President Trump has repeatedly pressured the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate and prosecute political adversaries like Hillary Clinton; now, the DOJ has reopened the Clinton email investigation in an attempt to scandalize his opponents. Persecuting political opponents is a impeachable offense.
This is not based in concerns with national security, law enforcement, or any other function of his office-it is an attempted power play, plain and simple.
Trump also pressured the Ukrainian government to investigate Joe Biden, his potential opponent in the general election, by leveraging US military aide to help his reelection prospects.
Trump and Attorney General Barr have asked foreign intelligence agencies to assist in an investigation to discredit Robert Mueller, hoping to undermine the credibility of the damning Mueller Report.
There’s no question that these actions constitute an outrageous and inappropriate abuse of executive branch powers and serve as clear grounds for impeachment.
President Trump has repeatedly attacked the concept of an independent press and free press, the First Amendment.
He’s called critical coverage “fake news” and journalists “the enemy of the American people,” made threats to change libel laws and revoke licenses, and his battles with CNN led him to try to interfere in the AT&T/Time Warner merger.
His Administration has repeatedly and baselessly revoked press credentials for critical coverage.
He has dismissed the murder of a critical journalist, citing the economic partnership the US has with the offending nation.
This demonstrates his unwillingness to respect and uphold the Constitution, and disdain for the crucial foundations to our free society.
President Trump has violated immigrants right to die process. Enforcing its new “zero tolerance” policy, the Trump administration separated as many as 3,000 immigrant children from their parents at the southern border. This policy was meant to deter families from attempting to cross the border.
The children and their families have been held in internment camps and cages with what lawyers call “inhumane conditions.”
Due to negligence, the Trump administration has no plan to reunite all children with their families, even deporting some parents while their children remain detained.
Currently, the Trump administration is in court trying to enforce a policy allowing the administration to detain migrants indefinitely in violation of their constitutional rights.
Trump has also violated campaign finance laws. Donald Trump knew disclosure of his extramarital affairs with Stephanie Clifford (A.K.A. Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal could hurt his chances at winning the 2016 election.
At the direction of Trump, Michael Cohen and American Media, Inc. (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer bought the rights to the women’s stories and forced them to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements to prevent them from going public for the purpose of protecting his campaign.
Cohen admitted to making illegal, hush-money payments to hide Trump’s affairs in the fall of 2016, just weeks before the election.
Federal prosecutors, and Trump’s co-conspirators Cohen and AMI, all say that Cohen made the payments at Trump’s direction, “in concert with the campaign,” and with the intention of helping Trump win.
Trump made illegal reimbursements to Michael Cohen for this crime while President, discussing the illegal scheme while in the Oval Office.
Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator because he directed Cohen to “cause an unlawful corporate contribution” and an “excessive campaign contribution” by paying the two women hush money with the intent to influence the election.
@E ZA he did get impeached, and there'd be even more evidence then there already was if Trump and his crony's had't stopped witnesses from testifying.
E ZA he got impeached
Thank you SO much for making these very knowledgeable videos.
👍👍👍
"The self proclaimed billionaire..." hahahahahaha. Was that intentional or a wonderful accident?
Trump is a "self-proclaimed" billionaire. Forbes regularly lists him as such too, but they use his figures, with some adjustments. Most people don't know of the case DONALD TRUMP v. TIMOTHY L. O'BRIEN. where trump sued the author for questioning his net worth. The deposition of Trump for the case was hilarious!
@Kev Warriner I hate to say but a president is effectively above the law if the law won't be enforced.
I bet if his tax records were seen it would be discovered he is NOT a billionaire...that he is flat busted broke.
@@raybin6873 His *_income_* taxes won't tell you his net worth, only how much money he is declaring, to the IRS, that he made for that year. But it is well established that Trump is not a billionaire, and may very well have never been one.
@@g1a1r1y3 - I agree it would be speculative to determine his "billionaire" status...but some info could be garnered from tax records - info that I would trust much more than anything he would say.
they need to make all financial information of all elected politicians public.
Or like here in Finland. Every single citizen's tax returns. You can just ask the tax officials anyone's tax info. Would be fun to look at someone like Jeff Bezos's tax returms
Why?
@@BigB14 I agree!
@@BigB14 many politicians become millionaires while in office many get "GIFTS" for pushing or blocking bills.
@@BigB14 ,
Don't you find it interesting that 'Career Politicians,' paid at most 200,000 a year, find ways to make tens of millions of dollars in a six year period?
I would also like to highlight that it was only 2012 when the U.S. government made laws preventing a politician from using insider information to make profit on the stock exchange, and that was an uphill battle getting signed into law. Less then a year later, Congress had slashed those laws so they no longer applied to many positions in the government, and made it a lot easier for the rest to get around them simply by filing a piece of paper. This is the behavior of your politicians when someone tries to hold them liable for actions the rest of us would be jailed for.
The year 2020 would be a very interesting year for this set of laws, as it saw many politicians selling and buying stocks using insider information. These people where sitting on committees that knew before the rest of the public, dumped all their shares in companies that where hurt by the market drop and bought shares in companies that make money off pandemics. Yet only one person is being seriously investigated, for being that obvious in his actions, and I am not holding by breath that he will be punished at the end of that investigation.
So, I ask you:
If the Government isn't going to stop this sort of behavior, it is up to the voters to do so... correct?
But how then do the voters know which politicians are putting their own bank accounts above the country?
7:16
Me responding to Trump in my mind.
🤦🏼♂️ "Here in The Netherlands we have a saying which goes a little like this, Er staat geen man boven de wet. Roughly translated it means, No man's above the law."
That's common in pretty much every country, america tho doesn't care
In america, only democrats are above the law.
@@danielanderson2030 yeah sure
@@marcomenabue7717 I urge you to take a look at Russia.
@@danielanderson2030 even though it's the GOP who constantly let Trump get away with corruption? Foh
Excellent discussion. Thank you!
When they make the biopic about Trump, it should be called "The Lying King"
If he has nothing to hide, then he should show the American people.
Bro, do you even constitution?
Sounds like Vague Turtle is offering to publish all his bank records. After all, if you have nothing to hide...
@@twokool4skool129 they arent the president lmao
I have a problem with the whole "if you have nothing to hide then just show it". I don't have anything to hide on my phone but I still have a passcode on it and don't let people, including friends and family members, use it. Now in a situation where there is evidence of wrongdoing and revealing that information will show there isn't wrongdoing, then you can have a reason for being suspicious, but if there isn't evidence of wrongdoing, only claims that aren't backed up, then someone shouldn't have to reveal private info for them to not be accused of that wrongdoing. Otherwise anyone could make a claim against anyone else and force them to lose their privacy.
@@twokool4skool129 Vague Turtle isn't someone that is of concern that may affect our daily lives. Donald Trump on the other hand is a president that is getting elected by the general public that can affect decisions to the general public. That information is critical for one's decisions if they should vote for said person. Vague Turtle isn't someone in that position. The records of the average Joe are not as shady as some business practices seen from basically every businessmen in the world. Please know the difference before you comment, it is not the same scenario and whatever he may release does not affect you or me.
Absolutely everyone running for any public office should have his tax returns be subject to investigation.
I agree... no more women for office.
Why tho
@@pgtmr2713 ... Fuckin what?
@@pgtmr2713 sod off
By law a President will have his tax records checked by the IRS every year that he is in office and if warranted, make a report to the House.
I got an ad for nebula, by this guy, in the middle of the video, with the yellow bar and everything. I’m scared.
Trump: "this will hurt my public opinion"
Me: "LMAO... ok... I'm pretty sure that can't get any lower 😆"
Yeah the people who don't like him can't think any less of him and to the people who do like him he can do no wrong, doesn't seem like he's got anything to lose
“Laws are spider webs through which the big flies pass and the little ones get caught.”
― Honore de Balzac
I’ll just be thinking like a lawyer while I’m waiting on my COVID-19 test results.
Update: My results came back negative. I just have a sore throat. Thank you for all of the well wishes, everyone!
hope you're ok!
Good luck!
F
We're rooting for you
Congrats on the negative ^_^
Drink warm water and avoid sweets while you have a sore throat.
Aaaaand while I was watching this, Justice Ginsberg has been admitted to hospital. Again.
Any bets on a rapid replacement of her should she fail to pull through for yet another time?
Scotia Dragoon god I hope she pulls through. Not a fan of who the trump admins are putting in 😞
Releasing his tax returns would interfere with him reforming his duties? He has yet to perform his duties/obligations
When we have a litigious criminal in office and there is no law requiring him to release tax returns, he won't. Even if the law said he should, he would fight it
There are a lot of new laws regarding presidents and presidential candidates that will be enacted because of this administration. Laws about revealing tax returns, about divesting from business interests, about nepotism... Laws we never actually had to have before because they were common sense matters of ethics that were followed voluntarily.
@@gabea6657 I'd vote for neither. Both are absolute garbage.
Gabe A dude calling him a shady businessman is an understatement.
I care about his TAXES because if he is not paying his taxes why should I pay mine ?
Because he's paid more taxes in one year than the two of us will make in a lifetime.
Because you can't afford a team of lawyers to keep the IRS at bay like he can.
@@scttiedsntknow Taxes are proportional, you idiot. He *should* pay more than every viewer of this video *combined* because he's going to use and abuse more people and resources than *every viewer of this video COMBINED!*
longliverocknroll5 Saying that he will “abuse more people” is not the correct argument for the point you are trying to make. You could have just put the real reason why he has to pay more in taxes without using an ad hominem 🙄, but you didn’t
@@5gonza541 Trump *will* abuse more people. That's not "ad hominem", that's a fact.
Trumpists: “What about (fill in random Dem name) and and what they did in (fill in the fantasy ‘scandal’)-gate?”
I see you've met them before
Obamagate is true lol.
Dr. 2avAge is that when Pres. Obama ate Dijon mustard?
Oh, this is the saddest thing ever, I must agree. I ran into a Pizzagate dude the other day. I felt kinda bad for him; he seemed to have the entire menu memorized, what each pizza was worth in terms of child prostitutes. He was super upset, too, like he was the only person who knew. Poor guy.
@@xela167 ... Im talking about Obama spying on the Trump campaign. don't r/wooosh me.
Watched the ad at the end because I appreciate what you do!
Absolutely. The president, vp, cabinet members, and Congress should all have to reveal at least their tax returns. Knowing how these people are compensated or who they owe is essential to democracy.
I believe that all publicly elected officials should be subject to financial oversight and public exposure. They are public servants - not immune from, or above the law - and have a responsibility to the People to prove their worthiness and/or honesty. Just sayin'...
I have a question: How would it look like if the president gets arrested?
Like the most beautiful day anyone has ever seen.
Which is worse? A dishonest, unethical criminal with all that power and total immunity or arresting him while he is president. We have already seen enough to know how dangerous and destructive the first option is.
It doesn't matter. VP Pence will bail him out before anything happens just like Ford did for Nixon. That is why we should get rid of presidential pardon; it obstructs the laws and due process.
His jumpsuit would match his cheeto dust fake-ass tan
Hi. Thanks for making the specific case so clear for someone who is not familiar with US laws and procedures! :)
Criminal cases would distract me from my job, too. Yet somehow I remain prosecutable.
Your job isn’t that important
You aren't enforcing the laws of the most powerful country on earth
Brent Switzer That’s not the point!!! If you stop being so small-minded and learn the US Constitution you wouldn’t utter such nonsense! Even after listening to an attorney explain the Presidency does not give you supremacy of the law! SCOTUS just ruled that & the Constitution premise that all are equal under the law! BTW I am a Certified Paralegal...Pickup a book next time you comment!
Jerry Weaver ok, boomer.
How do you know? He might be a heart doctor saving peoples lives.
I nominate every elected and appointed official release their tax returns, from the Supreme Court to Speaker of the House to President.
SECONDED!
I am told it is up to the citizen to ensure their elective body is held to a high standard, via the vote.
Yet, how else is a citizen meant to be informed which politicians are literally selling out their country?
They should also be forced to wear their donor's logos on their suits like Nascar drivers. Lets see how far they want to push a law in say... blocking municipal broadband with a giant COMCAST logo printed on their forehead.
@@denoflions4021 SECONDED!
@@denoflions4021 agreed
I want all elected government officials to release their records.
Legit question about the sponsor. I already have curiousity stream .. how do I get nebula if I've already prepaid a year? Any help appreciated
Could you please add subtitles as well? I lost my hearing and I can barely hear anything but I love this channel and I would like to keep watching. Thank you. :)
Seconded!
My hearing is... decent... but accessibility options are something all media producers need to keep in mind!
First view of this channel. As UK Solicitor and advocate, we here ( over the pond ) hear in the media about the politicisation of American Justice. Justice Roberts ( if he were English ) Lord Justice Roberts is admirably clear . Will subscribe . Best Richard Bartram
Hi Mr Stone! I never write comments on the videos. Just to tell you that I find super interesting what you do!! I see all your videos. Thank you for bringing such an interesting content!
As someone from the U.K. it would be helpful for you to explain what a Grand Jury is, what powers it has & what happens at the end of this process. It's not something we have over here & would be nice to know a little more about it. Thanks
It definitely should have an episode on it, for I am of mixed opinions as to it's overall usefulness.
More I ponder it the more I think the U.K. did the right thing dissolving the Grand Jury in 1933.
a jury, typically of twenty-three people, selected to examine the validity of an accusation before trial.
Basically it's like a regular jury (but the process for selection is different) but there is no regular court case. only the prosecutor and any witnesses they call in are heard. the defense has zero input here. then the jury decides if what they've heard is enough to indict the defendant. there's a pretty popular saying that a grand jury will even indict a ham sandwich which basically means they will indict anyone for anything.
Thanks for that. I didn't know we also had that system.
@@nickjacobs1770 Apparently, there's no judge. I guess in the UK it's the Crown Prosecution Service (which is part of our government) who have the same role as the grand jury. If they give the green light then there's going to be a trial.
Funny he wants to hold everything to a high standard except himself
I mean, with a base like his, not like he'll ever really _have_ to...
@@seand.g423 i hope you understand that both parties have a base of fanatics that turn a blind eye to corruption and filth to unbelievable extremes. We are given a choice of two piles of crap and hoping that we can smell out which is worse before they get into office. Do you honestly think a good person would put themselves through the trashcan fire our campaign system has become for the good of this country? Do you think a good person could win party support to even become their candidate, or even have the access to finances to support their campaign? We've got some deep issues with what the entire system has become, and its pretty apparent that we have reached the stage of looking for the next Zaphod Beeblebrox, just another "attention getter" to distract us from the real root of the problems. The people are no longer voting for a president, we are blind voting for a party, and because of that we have lost the safeties that were designed to stop us from ever reaching this point.
@@secretmedicine6011 I gave you a thumb up for the part about both parties and fanatics. But it's clear that you think corruption and scandalous leadership is something new. There was a time in the U.S. where voters were bribed at the voting booth. And even the original public impression of our first president was based on a story created with much exaggeration and falsehoods---this designed to provide a vulnerable revolution with a hero to rally around. The heroic and positive stories we believe about our leaders are often or mostly false, and their worst aspects are as often kept in secret, but maybe it's better to believe in a fake good thing than nothing at all.
That's the republican way.
@ This is clear bias I share many center views not really going with a party, but democrats have done many filthy things, so have republicans both are just as shitty
She was a Judge, and gets to keep her pension.
He’s President.
Despite screwing rents for people.
The rage is just so intense.
Hi Devin! Another awesome vid, these are keeping me sane during this pandemic haha! On your next video, could you cover the topic of the unmarked federal officers grabbing people in Portland? I lived in Oregon a few years and have a lot of close friends living in the city. It’s a very unsettling situation
The military runs a credit check on you to see if you’re in debt or not. I think for the job of presidency, the same should be done since you can influence policy.
Is that true?
@@KazeShikamaru Depending on your security clearance, the military does a deep dive into your life. For my husband's clearance, they did credit checks, background checks, and interviewed our neighbors.
I can't speak for the military, but if you work for a defense contractor you will get a thorough background check, you are required to disclose all debt, who you owe money to, all interactions you have with law, including traffic stops. Failure to do so could get you fired. I know a guy who got fired because he signed a pro legal marijuana petition without disclosing it. Seriously. This stuff seems to be taken very seriously unless you are president I guess...
@@KazeShikamaru yep. If you have significant credit card debt they will let your commander know even if you have a settlement figured out
Goro Majima it’s a very thorough and intrusive process. Even for just a minor clearance. Most people can’t get it if they’ve been bankrupt or have debts (more than a house/car) or have certain domestic issues or even small history with the law.
He’s literally got so many lawsuits. Even lost/paid and settled ones. So many reasonable accusations. I mean can’t we find a better person than that?
In my head I kept adding "Vance refrigeration" whenever you said Vance in the video
You're not alone. I did the same.
Thank you so much for your formal work and teaching. Better call Saul Vibes
Awesome video 🦅
7:04 wait, is that one of Cohen's lawyers suppressing a chuckle? Ha!
Edit: left edge of the screen
He totally is!
I am curious, I did some WebMD style legal research(not always a great idea lol,) and would it be possible for the Sioux tribe to press criminal charges against Donald Trump for committing an act of domestic terrorism or even treason against them based on the events of July 4th?
....no? Wtf
How did he commit treason or domestic terrorism? You talking about fireworks?
Not a Lawyer, but the largest problem with your statement is thus:
Domestic Terrorism and Treason have a legal definition in U.S. law.
Please show this mock court just how Trump provided aid to a nation whom the United Stats is actively at war with (Treason) and/or what violent acts has Trump personally carried out, with the intent to affect the conduct of his own government (Domestic Terrorism).
As much as I dislike Trump, the answer to your question is a clear 'No, we wouldn't even get into a court with such a claim.' The Sioux nation, being a separate sovereign entity (at least on paper), would need to prove a treaty violation between themselves and the United States government in order to proceed. To my knowledge, the individuals who made the decision on behalf of the United States government, such as Trump, wouldn't be named as part of that procedure. The most the courts could do is order the United States government to once more obey the treaty they signed with the Sioux people.
Alas, even if Trump ordered the U.S. military to occupy all of Sioux's lands and kill their leaders....
All we ca do is ask the Republican controlled Senate to Impeach him.
5:12 I think saying “allegedly siphoned cash...by just making up purchases” is misleading. The NYT article screenshot says “maRking up,” which IIUC means claiming what they bought was more valuable than it was. I ̶d̶e̶m̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶a̶ ̶r̶e̶t̶r̶a̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ request clarification
Will you be doing a 2020 "most important decisions" overview? Just subscribed - love your videos!
I've been waiting for this video for a while now. Glad to see you have uploaded it.
Yea me too
I'm curious to see how much the average person stacks up against Trump as far as cash "value"
The man is up to his eyes in debt
If he has net worth, then he has no net debt. That's what net worth means.
@@SnabbKassa what's his real net worth?
He still led a successful life that ended with becoming president of the United States. Live long and prosperous, then die with a lot of debt and a big middle finger to the racketeering IRS, that's the American dream... If he was at a point in his life where debt mattered anymore, it might be a different story. God bless.
Sadly, the USA is up to her eyes in debt.
@@Yelkwood9 "He still led a successful life"
Difficult NOT to do when u start it with several million dollars under your belt.
Thank you for making jargon accessible to the layman and in doing so revealing why it matters
*looks directly into the camera*
"These are not serious legal scholars at this point."
Man. Thank you for all of your hard work.
IDK but trump looks like discount Owen Wilson and I cannot stop laughing
No disrespect to Owen Wilson intended
What if this whole time Owen Wilson was a discount President Trump *dun dun dun
@@slauderek3195 president of 2024 owen wilson
Haha you’re ruining my beautiful image of Owen Wilson!!
Wow
Diamond creepa
I think having to release your tax returns should be mandatory for all those in elections for public office!
I think it would also help not to have the Office of Government Ethics (which reviews the executive branch) serve at the pleasure of the head of the executive branch.
If only there were a phrase for that... incompatible goals? No. Conflicting interests? Hmm not catchy enough. Multiple interests in conflict? 😋 I kid of course, but they should be an independent judiciary body.
Very interesting thank you
You are a good man, just thought I would throw that out there, keep up the great work as a model citizen legal eagle
"let's dive in and get down to brass tacks"
Somebody's been watching too much Better Call Saul
I HATE how often Saul said Brass tacks. I've physically rolled my eyes EVERY time after Season 3
I wondered why I got deja-vu from him saying that. I, too have been watching too much BCS
There is no such thing as too much BCS
Had this been anyone else, he would've been constantly on about them showing their taxes, but now that it's him, there's a thousand and one excuses. 🙄
RIGHT?!?! He was the one leading the charge for Obama's birth certificate. What a chump
This is classic narcissistic behavior. Rules apply to everyone else, but not me.
I am honestly less interested in the legal arguments regarding whether president Trump should be required to release his taxes and am more interested in how incomprehensibly dumb partisan divides and entrenchment are in this country. Because Trump's a 'Republican' Republicans and conservatives nationwide will rally behind Trump and back his decision to break from precedent and ignore any implications that come from that decision whereas Democrats will cry outrage. If Hillary had been elected, however, and refused to produce her taxes you would see the exact same split but reversed - Democrats would rally behind her and her decision not to release her taxes and Republicans would cry outrage. Regardless of who the president is, and regardless of legal requisite, breaking from precedent and giving shoddy, fake reasons as to why you can't release your taxes and then simply refusing when those bogus reasons are debunked is pretty telling and shady behavior. If someone can't recognize that simply because of what party they are affiliated with then they should really learn how to start thinking for themselves and stop letting their party think for them.
@@fiftysquiggly yes I believe America has become to divided we can barely agree on anything and it's sad because in the end we are all Americans, it disappointing that so many dont think for themselves and only listen to their party
Your work is amazing. I love seeing your videos to gain an unbiased legal perspective of current events. It's Bittersweet to see the Trump administration give you content to post about. And speaking of which you should make a video on the GOYA controversy and ethics violations!
This is the most convincing ad for Curiosity Stream I've ever seen...really shows the superior, persuasive powers of a lawyer.
He argues about it preventing him from fulfilling the obligations of the office, when really he just means it'll take away from his golfing.
I just noticed the sheer handsomeness of this man's face. He could model.
I think a lot of people would argue against Trump's handsomeness, but you're entitled to your opinion.
@@drewb2444 Pstt. He's not on about trump
Drew Bee funny
@@drewb2444 Objection! 😂😂😂😂😂
Foxy Lovelace you’ve won CZcams
I'm 3rd year Law Student in a South African university and I have interest in political, legal & current affairs both at a national & international level. I find your channel quite informative, educational & entertaining at the same time. Thank you 🙏🙏🙏
Trump: “I have total immunity”
People: “why?”
Trump: “because I’m president.”
People: “that’s now how the law works.”
Trump: “I should still be allowed to block subpoenas.”
People: “why?”
Trump: “Because subpoenas will make people hate me.”
People: “even if that was true, that’s not how the law works.”
Trump is exposing how damaging the right actually is to nonpolitical people....these 4 years have been a real eye-opener and I believe we will see that reflected in the elections in Nov. Im not a Biden fan, but he will win by a landslide.
You missed part of that..
Mitch McConnell: "Mrrrrr who cares about the law as long as he kowtows to Evangelists."
@tom stevens The polls show otherwise. At the moment Biden is squashing Trump in popularity and in swing states. It remains to be seen if this will continue on until november.
tom stevens
Didn’t she win the popular vote?
@@sirapple589 Hillary Clinton won the popular vote vs Donald Trump, yes. That is true. However, she thought Trump was such an idiot that nobody would vote for him, and that since she had a vagina and boobs that people would just line up to elect the first women president. Her campaign was extremely flawed, she won more and more votes in states where it doesn't matter how many more votes you get than the other since it's winner-take-all. This is why the electoral college needs to be abolished and why winner-take-all cannot be a thing. So, yeah, polls showed 91%, popular vote was 51%, and she still lost because she could not excite anybody who wasn't already excited about the idea of a president with two X chromosomes. Joe Biden hasn't exactly been exciting people, either. 54% in the polls? Doesn't mean shit.