Donald Trump seems to be struggling to be ready until the end of —and beyond— keep track of your financial records and taxes of the past years in the hands of the public Prosecutor’s office in New York. The Supreme court decided against last week with seven Yes votes and two, that the President of the United States can not block the delivery of data, the claiming of a grand jury investigation. The judgment of far-reaching political, was limited to the presidential than a few decades ago in the Watergate affair, or the case of Lewinsky. Now, the defense of the Republican plan to appeal against the court summons.
To make the President’s lawyers magnate and advanced in a statement on Wednesday, the formal complaint before the 27. July, according to a statement quoted by Reuters. The Manhattan district attorney handling the case, Cyrus Vance, in that most of the arguments have already been rejected by the Supreme court, but even so, it is not the enforcement of the summons, the high court blessed the last week until 27 July. Judge Victor Marrero a hearing this Thursday has planned.
To do the New York case, with the payments opaque, Trump has claimed before the elections in November 2016, not to mention two women, had extramarital sex. The judges had to decide a summons similar, derived from a number of requests for information returned from the house of representatives, but in this case, the question to the lower courts.
The office of the public Prosecutor of New York has asked to be clarified in the contract, tax returns, personal and business eight years, to hide whether Trump manipulated the accounts of the Trump organization with the inorder, the payments to a film actress pornographic artistic name is Stormy Daniels. Trump’s lawyer has reimbursed the employee, the time, Michael Cohen, those payments. Cohen is also in the economic treatment with Karen McDougal, model Playboy.
The summons you receive the information, you are directed to the auditor, Mazars, although there is the trump card, the brought before court, to prevent their delivery, of the claims his “immunity” as President. “No citizen, not even the President, is, in principle, on the obligation to provide together the evidence, if required, in a criminal process”, noted the President of the Supreme judge John Roberts, who was responsible for the preparation of the opinion of the majority of the court.
Subscribe to the newsletter a week to the elections in the United States