Judge blocks California tax return law targeting Trump

Judge blocks California tax return law targeting Trump

October 9, 2019 100 By Stanley Isaacs


A FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKED CALIFORNIA’S LAW REQUIRING THE PRESIDENT TO RELEASE HIS TAX RETURNS TO APPEAR ON THE BALLOT. HERE WITH REACTION THE PRESIDENT’S ATTORNEY JAY SEKULO JAY SEKULOW. THE BIGGER PICTURE IS, WE HAVE A REAL COLLUSION UNCOVERED, A REAL QUID PRO QUO AND ONCE AGAIN IT’S A BOOMERANG.>>THIS IS THE ONGOING PATTERN AND PRACTICE OF TRYING TO SHRED THE CONSTITUTION. WHAT CALIFORNIA TRIED TO DO WAS ADD A REQUIREMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION SO THAT IF YOU DIDN’T PRODUCE YOUR TAX RETURNS YOU DO NOT APPEAR ON THE BALLOT. WE CHALLENGE THAT IN FEDERAL COURT. THE COURT INDICATED LAST WEEK THEY WERE LIKELY TO RULE IN OUR FAVOR, THE RULING JUST CAME DOW DOWN. IT IS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IT VIOLATES THE FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, THE PRESIDENTIAL QUALIFICATION CLAUSE, AND EQUAL PROTECTIONS OF THE LAW. THE COURT ISSUED THE FOLLOWING ORDER, THE DEFENDANT ARE ENJOINED FROM ENFORCING PROVISIONS ON THE PRESIDENTIAL TAX, THE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, REQUIRING CANDIDATES TO DISCLOSE THEIR TAX RETURNS AS A CONDITION OF APPEARING. I WILL TIE THIS INTO WHAT YOU HAD MENTIONED IN YOUR MONOLOGUE. THAT IS THE ISSUE OF THE PRESIDENT CALLING HEADS OF STATE REGARDING THIS ONGOING INVESTIGATION OF HOW THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE MATTER — AS JAMES COMEY SHOULD’VE CALLED IT BASED ON HIS PREVIOUS STATEMENTS — HOW THAT STARTED. HERE’S WHAT WE HAVE. MY COLLEAGUE PROFESSOR HARRY HUTCHISON WHO IS A SENIOR POLICY ANALYST FOR THE AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE PRODUCED A DOCUMENT WHICH REFERENCES TWO TREATIES. THIS ONE IS WITH AUSTRALIA, THIS ONE IS WITH UKRAINE. TREATY WITH UKRAINE, A MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS, SAME WITH THE MATTER INVOLVING AUSTRALIA. THE PRESIDENT, WHEN HE MADE CALLS ON BEHALF OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO ENCOURAGE COOPERATION REGARDING HOW THIS ENTIRE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE FRAUD TOOK PLACE, HE WAS NOT ONLY WITHIN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO DO IT BUT AS HARRY HUTCHISON POINTS OUT, IT WAS HIS CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE IN THIS — WHY? HE IS REQUIRED TO FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE CONSTITUTION. THAT’S WHAT HE IS DOING. WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IS INDIVIDUALS — AND THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND. THOSE WHO ARE SO OPPOSED TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING ON ANY FRONT ARE TRYING TO WEAPONIZE THE CONSTITUTION TO MAKE THE EXECUTION OF IT ILLEGAL. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE TWO TREATIES AND THERE ARE OTHER TREATIES WITH OTHER COUNTRIES AS WELL — WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PHONE CALLS IN THE HISTORY OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE, FIRST IT WAS QUID PRO QUO — THEN THEY LOOK AT THE TRANSCRIPT, NO QUID PRO QUO. THEN IT WAS THE PRESIDENT IS ASKING FOR INQUIRIES TO BE MADE ON VARIOUS MATTERS — I GUESS YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. ACCORDING TO THESE TREATIES WHICH IS NOW AN OBLIGATION. THEN IT WAS A COVER-UP — A COVER-UP OF WHAT? THE DOCUMENT WAS RELEASED. AT THE END OF THIS, WHERE IT SITS RIGHT NOW, NOT ONLY DID WE WIN IN CALIFORNIA AND WE WILL WIN ALL OF THIS NONSENSE AS WELL BUT WHAT IS AT STAKE FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. THAT IS WHAT IS AT STAKE HERE.