17 Comments
User's avatar
David Daniels's avatar

District courts have had enough. We would still have a strong democracy if SCOTUS would have the same wisdom and not insert their personal beliefs in the place of lower court decisions.

L.D.Michaels's avatar

Improper? It was a fraud on the American people! The time has come for the legal profession to officially denounce it and pursue punitive measures against the perpetrators.

Peter Nicoll's avatar

Insane Truth Social post in 3....2.....

Thank you for this deep dive.

David J. Sharp's avatar

“Improper”? A blatant combination of corruption and stupidity … all gaze upon the emperor’s nakedness, and gasp aloud.

Nancy's avatar

At least the decision makes sense! It's wonderful to hear good news amidst all of the immorality, grift, and corruption. (I think those nouns are a bit redundant!)

Lance Khrome's avatar

Most notable, IMHO, was the chronology of trump's bogus "lawsuit" noted by the court: the perp of the actual tax leak to the NYT, Charles Littlejohn, pleaded guilty in October, 2023, and sentenced January, 2024. Nothing heard from the trump camp until late January, 2026, when the POS sued — as a PRIVATE CITIZEN, the IRS for — LOL! — $10 billion. So, two-plus years after the guilty plea, and SIX years after the Times actually reported on Littlejohn's revelations comes a trump "lawsuit".

What changed? Simple, trump now owns DoJ, owns the DoJ top officials, and had appointed the newest IRS Director, and thought that it was time for an easy-peasy dip into the public treasury and taxpayer dollars. And after YUUGE pushback, he pushed for a "settlement" for $1.8 billion — not for him, mind — to be paid out to "victims" of "weaponized" govt. prosecution...oh, wait, there's more: a day AFTER the "settlement" was published, an "amendment" was added giving trump, all the little trumps, and all of trump's companies "immunity" from any and all tax investigations and penalties that may have resulted, UP TO the date of the memorandum. And THAT was the key to the "settlement", let's be honest here.

Thank you, Judge Kathleen Williams, for doing the absolute right thing and 86-ing this bullshit, self-serving, rotten "settlement".

Cycledoc's avatar

How low can you go.

I guess you can start a war to benefit Israel and to keep open the straits of Hormuz. And then decide to block traffic at the straits and charge 20% of the cargo value for passage. And then claim that we are the good guys. Delusions and dementia don’t mix well.

Andrea RIfelli's avatar

Thank you, once again, for the clarity and the quotes. Very helpful. Can't wait to see djt's meltdown. BTW, has he released the $$ to E Jean Carroll yet?

GeorgeC's avatar

The court released it late last week (it was in an escrow-like account as a condition of appeal {I don't recall the actual name of the account, but it was court-managed so Cheetolini couldn't continue to renege on his obligations}).

Ed Luwish's avatar

I kept looking for the sanctions applied to the lawyers who pulled this deception. It was a frivolous lawsuit at best, and lying by officers of the court at worst, grounds for disbarment. At least Judge Williams noticed the stench of the lawsuit and the so-called settlement, and sprayed a bit of perfume on it. If she hadn't, it would have been grounds for her impeachment, since you don't have to be a lawyer to see the criminal behavior behind the fraud. It was so obvious to be laughable, but after a few "ha-has" the sober conclusion is that this is a serious crime against the court by people who should know better.

Deb CJ's avatar

Love it. Thank you for all the great detail!!

Justme's avatar

Not one word about this on ABC World News Tonight with David Muir.

Jacobs-Meadway Roberta's avatar

It is high time that judges began imposing appropriate sanctions on lawyers bringing bogus suits and lawyers who make blatant misrepresentations to the courts and refuse to make proper discovery and who taint grand jury proceedings, among other actions that no litigator in private practice would think of engaging in if they intended to continue to practice law.

Ken M's avatar

Bingo! Judge Aileen Cannon should read this opinion to see what real justice looks like. Of course, it will be appealed by the Grifter-in-Chief, and the "not political" SCOTUS will reverse if it comes before them.

Gerard John Sheehan's avatar

And a fun read . . . !

Gerard John Sheehan's avatar

Or, Trump hoisted by his own Unitary Executive pétard . . .

jlc's avatar

Is this judgement likely to hold? Or can we assume there will be the usual appeals?