Oh, look: The judge who ruled Trump has to surrender financial records to Democrats is an Obama donor
During his Monday night program, top talker, constitutional expert, and bestselling author Mark Levin suggested that if he were in charge of the GOP when it wins back the House in 2020, he would subpoena all of the financial records of all judges sitting on the D.C. Circuit.
Why? Because it is in the public’s interest to know whether these judges had financial conflicts of interest when issuing their rulings.
After all, Levin noted, that’s why Democrats in the House are demanding eight years’ worth of POTUS Donald Trump’s tax returns and financial records; to see if he is making executive decisions in ways that would boost his business interests (which he has turned over to his children while he’s president, by the way).
Levin’s instincts serve him well. Must have something to do with being in Washington for a number of years as a Justice Department chief of staff during the Reagan administration.
Sure enough, the federal judge who ruled (in a remarkably short time) that the president and head of the Executive Branch should indeed be forced to turn over his financial records to the Legislative Branch was an avid donor to the president who appointed him to the federal bench: Barack Obama.
Oh look, the Federal Judge who just ruled that President Trump must turn over his financial records to Congressional Dems, also just so happens to be an Obama-Biden donor. I'm sure one has nothing to do with the other though. Nothing to see here folks!https://t.co/LYncbOD45I pic.twitter.com/2EGAe5r0oc
— Andrew Surabian (@Surabees) May 20, 2019
As The New York Times reported Monday:
President Trump’s accounting firm must turn over his financial records to Congress, a Federal District Court judge ruled on Monday, rejecting his legal team’s argument that lawmakers had no legitimate power to subpoena the files.
But Mr. Trump vowed that his legal team would appeal rather than permit the firm, Mazars USA, to comply with the subpoena and the ruling, so the legal fight is far from over.
The ruling by the judge, Amit P. Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, was an early judicial test of the president’s vow to systematically stonewall “all” subpoenas by House Democrats, stymieing their ability to perform oversight of Mr. Trump and the executive branch after winning control of the chamber in last year’s midterm elections.
Now we know where Mehta’s decision comes from. Talk about a major conflict of interest.
No doubt the president will appeal this decision, and he should. He’s not just a ‘normal’ American citizen, he’s the head of a co-equal branch of government and as such, should not be subjected to any political witch hunts by members of the opposition party. POTUS has to do this in order to protect not just his own privacy, but the presidency itself from further lunatic Democrats.
What’s more, the Democrats don’t need the president’s returns and financial information to ‘conduct oversight.’ Congressional committees don’t conduct criminal investigations, and besides, if there were something amiss regarding the president’s financial dealings and business interactions, the IRS or federal prosecutors would have found them by now and charged him.
And didn’t Robert Mueller just finish an investigation into all of this?
As for Mehta, at 47 and with a lifetime appointment to the federal bench, he isn’t going anywhere (unless Congress miraculously regains its sense of obligation and begins impeaching judges for bad conduct someday soon). So he’ll just have to be rendered moot by POTUS Trump’s continued appointments of constitutionalists to the federal bench.
This article originally appeared at The National Sentinel and was republished with permission.