Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CompuServe)   Supreme Court rejects House's bid to fast-track its attempt to enforce subpoenas seeking Trump's financial records   (compuserve.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Supreme Court of the United States, Sonia Sotomayor, United States, U.S. Supreme Court, President of the United States, United States Constitution, news report, Washington, D.C.  
•       •       •

1949 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jul 2020 at 9:18 PM (14 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



45 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-07-20 6:17:20 PM  
Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?
 
2020-07-20 6:31:32 PM  

puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?


This is not the first time Compuserve has risen from the grave this week.  Someone keeps submitting their links.
 
2020-07-20 7:10:04 PM  

UNC_Samurai: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

This is not the first time Compuserve has risen from the grave this week.  Someone keeps submitting their links.


I'd laugh if too much traffic brought down the site.
 
2020-07-20 9:20:21 PM  
It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.
 
2020-07-20 9:21:22 PM  
Well that's the only time I've ever seen "CompuServe" and "fast" in the same headline.
 
2020-07-20 9:24:11 PM  
So if that article is correct the NY case, is being fast tracked, and would be released to them on Aug 13th? That's good right? Granted it'll only be for the grand juries, that's still good.
 
2020-07-20 9:24:24 PM  

Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.


The article pointed out that "liberal justice Sotomayor" would've allowed it. They could've said "workaholic busybody justice Soto "Mayor of Justicetown" Mayor the bossypants one" would've allowed it, but they prolly had a word limit.
 
2020-07-20 9:25:56 PM  
i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size
 
2020-07-20 9:28:15 PM  

Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.


Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.
 
2020-07-20 9:28:17 PM  
You wonder what the ruling would have been had someone mistakenly typed Clinton in the title rather than Trump.
 
2020-07-20 9:29:58 PM  
Why? Because of course they did.

The #1 take away from Trump v Deutsche Bank and Trump v Mazars is that the Supreme Court approved of delay as an acceptable legal strategy to win a case by running out the clock.  Trump is not the first litigant to exploit the slow motion  tendency of all courts, but it's high time for the courts to realize that they are getting played by delaying tactics.

Then again, the US Supreme Court Justices are smart enough to understand that "getting played" is exactly what they want to happen. It allows them to appear "neutral" while advancing their clearly partisan objectives.
 
2020-07-20 9:35:04 PM  
LOL.  Which one of you a-holes keeps submitting Compuserve links?

/keep it up
 
2020-07-20 9:38:22 PM  

I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.


You know, theoretically the tax returns would have nothing to be weaponized if the president wasn't corrupt.

Also, I guess we can all stop pretending the 1924 shall furnish tax law is .. well, a law.

What other laws become non-laws at the president's pleasure?
 
2020-07-20 9:38:30 PM  

uh_clem: Why? Because of course they did.

The #1 take away from Trump v Deutsche Bank and Trump v Mazars is that the Supreme Court approved of delay as an acceptable legal strategy to win a case by running out the clock.  Trump is not the first litigant to exploit the slow motion  tendency of all courts, but it's high time for the courts to realize that they are getting played by delaying tactics.

Then again, the US Supreme Court Justices are smart enough to understand that "getting played" is exactly what they want to happen. It allows them to appear "neutral" while advancing their clearly partisan objectives.


Yup, that's pretty much how it's going.
 
2020-07-20 9:38:45 PM  

puffy999: UNC_Samurai: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

This is not the first time Compuserve has risen from the grave this week.  Someone keeps submitting their links.

I'd laugh if too much traffic brought down the site.


<I read article>
<Wife reads article>
<I start to close tab>

Wife: "Wait, hold on!! Compuserve is still around? What the hell?"
Wife: "I be the first commen...."

<I open the discussion tab..>

We both start laughing.
 
2020-07-20 9:39:01 PM  

I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.


The 3 branches should all have their taxes public. Oh and...

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-20 9:40:24 PM  

puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?


I wonder if Prodigy is allowed? They did get in trouble for accessing files on users hard drives.
And those type of shenanigans don't fly on today's modern internet.
 
2020-07-20 9:50:25 PM  

I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.


I would buy that argument if I could believe their decision would have been the same for a Democratic President with a GOP Congress.

I can't and I don't.
 
2020-07-20 9:54:09 PM  

SirAdrianDangerous: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

I wonder if Prodigy is allowed? They did get in trouble for accessing files on users hard drives.
And those type of shenanigans don't fly on today's modern internet.


Prodigy...man that takes me back.  I remember there was some maze game I played on it.  I met some minotaur who asked a math problem.  I was like 7 so I didn't know what the answer was.  I wonder how that game ended.
 
2020-07-20 9:54:50 PM  
The only thing more dated than CompuServe news links is reading them on Fark.

/Good job subby
 
2020-07-20 9:59:36 PM  

Gergesa: SirAdrianDangerous: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

I wonder if Prodigy is allowed? They did get in trouble for accessing files on users hard drives.
And those type of shenanigans don't fly on today's modern internet.

Prodigy...man that takes me back.  I remember there was some maze game I played on it.  I met some minotaur who asked a math problem.  I was like 7 so I didn't know what the answer was.  I wonder how that game ended.


I don't think I ever played it but was this the game? https://mashable.com/article/pr​odigy-o​nline-madmaze/
 
2020-07-20 10:04:26 PM  

Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.


Abject cowardice in every way.

Too cowardly to openly embrace Trumpist fascism.

Too cowardly to bring it to heel.

So they try to do the least possible with the maximum amount of foot dragging.
 
2020-07-20 10:11:11 PM  

Public Call Box: So if that article is correct the NY case, is being fast tracked, and would be released to them on Aug 13th? That's good right? Granted it'll only be for the grand juries, that's still good.


Also comes with free frogurt - that's good! But the frogurt is also cursed.
 
2020-07-20 10:14:01 PM  
Remember, all the subpoenas die with this Congress. It looks like presidents don't have to comply with anything since everything takes longer than two years.
 
2020-07-20 10:25:13 PM  

UNC_Samurai: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

This is not the first time Compuserve has risen from the grave this week.  Someone keeps submitting their links.


Probably someone on a Prodigy account.
 
2020-07-20 10:26:37 PM  
Yes, I'm old.
 
2020-07-20 10:31:54 PM  

puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?


THAT is the story here. Compuserve? WTF?

lh3.googleusercontent.comView Full Size

 
2020-07-20 10:37:10 PM  

Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.


Yeah, and that's a big problem because Congress has pretty much stopped legislating and kicked the can over to the Supreme Court. That poor can just can't catch a break.
 
2020-07-20 10:45:31 PM  

Chuck87: Gergesa: SirAdrianDangerous: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

I wonder if Prodigy is allowed? They did get in trouble for accessing files on users hard drives.
And those type of shenanigans don't fly on today's modern internet.

Prodigy...man that takes me back.  I remember there was some maze game I played on it.  I met some minotaur who asked a math problem.  I was like 7 so I didn't know what the answer was.  I wonder how that game ended.

I don't think I ever played it but was this the game? https://mashable.com/article/pro​digy-online-madmaze/


Yeah, that is the one.  I remember it from how I was amazed by colors on a computer screen.  Before that I only had green text on a darker green background.

*Puts an onion on his belt*

You kids today are lucky!!!  When I was your age we didn't have all this new fangled technology!
 
2020-07-20 10:48:12 PM  

I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.


It seem like if there was any evidence Trump Was a Russian asset, they would  have just impeached him and the financial records would be a moot point.  I kinda doubt the he's been filing a lot of evidence of treason with the IRS every year.

Just a little note to you guys from the real world, not sure you can still understand the language we speak here.
 
2020-07-20 10:50:46 PM  

Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.


Like every other politician in power. Its always the future's problem. Debt, facism, wars, pensions, corruption, democracy dying...

All those politicians are old coonts. They push the bad news to the future, when they'll be rich enough to GTFO or they'll be dead. They have zero skin in the game and they dont want any part of it.
 
2020-07-20 10:51:17 PM  

thanksagainandagain: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

You know, theoretically the tax returns would have nothing to be weaponized if the president wasn't corrupt.

Also, I guess we can all stop pretending the 1924 shall furnish tax law is .. well, a law.

What other laws become non-laws at the president's pleasure?


This.  I don't see why it's such an issue if their is nothing to hide. He's used the audit excuse to the end of its rope.  Even Rudy came out saying they're done.
 
2020-07-20 10:54:00 PM  

Gergesa: Chuck87: Gergesa: SirAdrianDangerous: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

I wonder if Prodigy is allowed? They did get in trouble for accessing files on users hard drives.
And those type of shenanigans don't fly on today's modern internet.

Prodigy...man that takes me back.  I remember there was some maze game I played on it.  I met some minotaur who asked a math problem.  I was like 7 so I didn't know what the answer was.  I wonder how that game ended.

I don't think I ever played it but was this the game? https://mashable.com/article/pro​digy-online-madmaze/

Yeah, that is the one.  I remember it from how I was amazed by colors on a computer screen.  Before that I only had green text on a darker green background.

*Puts an onion on his belt*

You kids today are lucky!!!  When I was your age we didn't have all this new fangled technology!


I had a high school friend who was supposedly blowing his whole paycheck from Shoney's on some airplane game on AOL, back when you had to pay per hour.  That sounded crazy to me.  Anyways, if you are interested in finding out what happens at the end of Mad Maze it looks like there are some play throughs on Youtube.  I did a quick search and found a part 1 and a part 2 on there.  Here's part 1:

Let's Play Mad Maze E01 P01
Youtube 4DcEoRbdwsQ
 
2020-07-20 10:55:39 PM  

GrinzGrimly: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

It seem like if there was any evidence Trump Was a Russian asset, they would  have just impeached him and the financial records would be a moot point.  I kinda doubt the he's been filing a lot of evidence of treason with the IRS every year.

Just a little note to you guys from the real world, not sure you can still understand the language we speak here.


He was impeached. He wasn't convicted. The GOP Senate would not allow testimony.

And try harder. Not everyone is as forgetful of facts as you.
 
2020-07-20 10:57:05 PM  

lolmao500: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Like every other politician in power. Its always the future's problem. Debt, facism, wars, pensions, corruption, democracy dying...

All those politicians are old coonts. They push the bad news to the future, when they'll be rich enough to GTFO or they'll be dead. They have zero skin in the game and they dont want any part of it.


BSAB?
 
2020-07-20 10:59:28 PM  

Summoner101: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

I would buy that argument if I could believe their decision would have been the same for a Democratic President with a GOP Congress.

I can't and I don't.


Blaming the House? For the president not following the law? For his attorneys arguing for adjudication in one forum, and impeachment in the other -- the very definition of bad faith arguments? Jesus H.
 
2020-07-20 11:00:42 PM  

thanksagainandagain: Summoner101: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

I would buy that argument if I could believe their decision would have been the same for a Democratic President with a GOP Congress.

I can't and I don't.

Blaming the House? For the president not following the law? For his attorneys arguing for adjudication in one forum, and impeachment in the other -- the very definition of bad faith arguments? Jesus H.


Point being, don't buy that House is to blame bullshiat.
 
2020-07-20 11:00:56 PM  

thanksagainandagain: GrinzGrimly: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

It seem like if there was any evidence Trump Was a Russian asset, they would  have just impeached him and the financial records would be a moot point.  I kinda doubt the he's been filing a lot of evidence of treason with the IRS every year.

Just a little note to you guys from the real world, not sure you can still understand the language we speak here.

He was impeached. He wasn't convicted. The GOP Senate would not allow testimony.

And try harder. Not everyone is as forgetful of facts as you.


I'll bet there was all kinds of BOMBSHELL testimony that went unheard and none of those folks over wondered on over the CNN to tell the story and become a hero.   Also, please note he was not impeached for anything to do with Russia, you're blending your conspiracy theories (in addition to incorporating fantasy.)
 
2020-07-20 11:09:05 PM  

GrinzGrimly: thanksagainandagain: GrinzGrimly: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

It seem like if there was any evidence Trump Was a Russian asset, they would  have just impeached him and the financial records would be a moot point.  I kinda doubt the he's been filing a lot of evidence of treason with the IRS every year.

Just a little note to you guys from the real world, not sure you can still understand the language we speak here.

He was impeached. He wasn't convicted. The GOP Senate would not allow testimony.

And try harder. Not everyone is as forgetful of facts as you.

I'll bet there was all kinds of BOMBSHELL testimony that went unheard and none of those folks over wondered on over the CNN to tell the story and become a hero.   Also, please note he was not impeached for anything to do with Russia, you're blending your conspiracy theories (in addition to incorporating fantasy.)


You're the one who conflated impeachment with Russia, not me.

You brought up impeachment, though, although you don't seem to know how it works. Go Google yourself some training wheels. You sure as hell aren't defending Trump worth a damn.

But you go on claiming things are hoaxes like your bunker-lovin' hero. You have no rationale, and no rebuttal of the facts worth hot piss from a cold mare.
 
2020-07-20 11:49:11 PM  

thanksagainandagain: GrinzGrimly: thanksagainandagain: GrinzGrimly: I_told_you_so: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Actually the logic is SCOTUS does not want to see any Presidents personal financial records weaponized for clearly partisan purposes. The House screwed up in their request for the President's financial records under the guise of a legislative purpose. They should have clearly come out and said there is credible evidence that Donald Trump is a compromised Russian asset. This should have been part of the impeachment investigation along with the Mueller investigation obstruction.

It seem like if there was any evidence Trump Was a Russian asset, they would  have just impeached him and the financial records would be a moot point.  I kinda doubt the he's been filing a lot of evidence of treason with the IRS every year.

Just a little note to you guys from the real world, not sure you can still understand the language we speak here.

He was impeached. He wasn't convicted. The GOP Senate would not allow testimony.

And try harder. Not everyone is as forgetful of facts as you.

I'll bet there was all kinds of BOMBSHELL testimony that went unheard and none of those folks over wondered on over the CNN to tell the story and become a hero.   Also, please note he was not impeached for anything to do with Russia, you're blending your conspiracy theories (in addition to incorporating fantasy.)

You're the one who conflated impeachment with Russia, not me.

You brought up impeachment, though, although you don't seem to know how it works. Go Google yourself some training wheels. You sure as hell aren't defending Trump worth a damn.

But you go on claiming things are hoaxes like your bunker-lovin' hero. You have no rationale, and no rebuttal of the facts worth hot piss from a cold mare.


Follow me quickly and I'll catch you up: There was this whole big investigation led by a guy named Mueller to find out if Trump was a Russian agent. If they'd found evidence of that, the House would have impeached him for that and he would have been removed by the Senate.  Nobody would be talking about financial records, because the point would be moot. This is all totally separate from the question of the Ukraine impeachment which you brought into this, not me.
 
2020-07-20 11:58:01 PM  

puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?


I love that if  you hover the tab, the full title is "US Supreme Court Declines to fast-track Trump financial dispute - Netscape News".
 
2020-07-21 12:13:30 AM  

xrayspx: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

I love that if  you hover the tab, the full title is "US Supreme Court Declines to fast-track Trump financial dispute - Netscape News".


This was on the About CompuServe page (https://www.compuserve.com/home/abou​t.​jsp):

Other key features of CompuServe 7.0 include:

Support for the latest Windows operating system, Windows XP, for greater compatibility, an;
 
2020-07-21 12:26:50 AM  

GrinzGrimly: Summoner101: It's almost like they were trying to kick the can down the road rather than doing their actual jobs.

Yeah, and that's a big problem because Congress has pretty much stopped legislating and kicked the can over to the Supreme Court. That poor can just can't catch a break.


No, Congress uses model legislation. That is how they stopped legislating. The Supreme Court of course realizes that model legislation is written by the tortfeasors in multiple previous cases (literally it is). So SCOTUS is stuck in an adversarial position not against Congress, but against previous plaintiffs that have stolen (or "captured" as the kids say) the righteous sheen of the "will of the people."
 
2020-07-21 12:31:21 AM  
Ah yes the Roberts court motto: "justice delayed is justice perfected. As long as we wait until after the ruling would have mattered we can be on the right side of history without the hassle of inconveniencing lawbreakers."
 
2020-07-21 1:58:19 AM  

Gergesa: SirAdrianDangerous: puffy999: Compuserve?

Is AltaVista still banned?

I wonder if Prodigy is allowed? They did get in trouble for accessing files on users hard drives.
And those type of shenanigans don't fly on today's modern internet.

Prodigy...man that takes me back.  I remember there was some maze game I played on it.  I met some minotaur who asked a math problem.  I was like 7 so I didn't know what the answer was.  I wonder how that game ended.


Butt stuff.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.