>A federal judge in Miami has reopened scrutiny of the settlement used to end Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. U.S. District Judge Kathleen M. Williams ordered Trump’s lawyers to explain by June 12 whether the case should be formally reopened because the court may have been the victim of fraud.>The judge has not found that fraud occurred. Williams said she wants to investigate allegations that the agreement was “premised on deception” and may have been structured to avoid judicial scrutiny. The dispute remains at an early procedural stage.>The settlement created a $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund.” The Justice Department says the fund is intended to compensate people who claim they were harmed by government “weaponization” or politically motivated legal action. Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization agreed to drop their IRS lawsuit with prejudice in exchange for the fund’s creation and a formal apology, according to the DOJ.>The court’s renewed scrutiny followed a filing by 35 former federal judges from both parties. They urged Williams to examine whether Trump and his own administration used the lawsuit to construct an agreement benefiting his allies while preventing the court from reviewing the deal. Those claims are allegations, not established findings.>The settlement is now under pressure in multiple courts. In a separate case, a federal judge in Virginia temporarily blocked further action on the fund until at least June 12. The combined rulings raise a broader question about whether executive-branch settlements can be used to create major compensation programs without normal congressional appropriations or sustained judicial oversight.This is a legal test whether the plaintiff and the defendants can be the same people, and reach a settlement structured as such it does not require courts review and bypasses Congress to get access to the special settlements funds the gov allocates every year.
>>536064614>structured as such it does not require courts reviewall settlements require judicial reviewopening a judicial investigation in response to a public petition is seriously unprecedented. the judiciary is supposed to be above politics and populism. it's akin to an inquisition, which violates the xommok law and the separation of powers.
>>536065539*common law
>>536065539>all settlements require judicial reviewthis is called a settlement but on Paper is just "pinky promise", not a court approved one. Ergo the whole thing now being under review, cause this was a handshake agreement between Trump and Trump Controlled DOJ/ IRS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5waWbsMgjQ
>>536065984>not a court approved onewhy are you lying again?all settlements require judicial review
>>536066091Watch the fucking video and stop arguing with me.
>>5360655391) if you had actually read the filing you'd know it's NOT unprecedented. That's the whole fucking point you moron. This is something the courts are specifically empowered to do and have done in the cases that were cited.2) what is actually unprecedented is a president bringing a sham lawsuit claiming insane fake damages and then having his administration "settle" the lawsuit that he was never gonna win and never intended to actually be litigated.
>>536066298>stop arguing with meno :^)if your video says a settlement didn't require judicial review, it's a stupid and factually incorrect video.we don't let anyone appeal by petition, only people with standing. that sets us apart from civil law systems like spain and italy that don't separate judicial and executive power.
>>536066607>it's NOT unprecedentedabsolutely isyou can allege universal standing to intervene in a court-approved settlement, but your allegations will fall on deaf ears. there was a case and controversy, it was settled, the judge approved.the trump family and the IRS are not the same entity. you clearly have no idea what you're talking about and all you can say is "watch muh youtube video" like a loose change enthusiast
>>536066778NIgger WHAT COURT APPROVED THE SETTLEMENT??
>>536066607>cheeto nigger alleges leftoids weaponized courts against him (true)>cheeto nigger makes a fool of himself by demanding money over it from his own government>leftoids then vindicate cheeto nigger by weaponizing courts against him againYou are literally not capable of learning.
>>536064614MIGA will seethe because of this
>>536066778Sweet Baby Jesus you're a fucking moron. The court is explicitly allowed to revisit judgements when there is fraud under the fed rules of civil procedure. If you had read the filing you'd know there's precedent allowing "unrelated" parties to bring this to the court's attention like Kem v Wilder. It's all in the filing, go fucking read it.Youtube video? What the fuck are you babbling about?
>>536067003>>cheeto nigger alleges leftoids weaponized courts against him (true)by making sure the process were slow, by the book, on crimes basically done in the opening??WeApOnIzEd
>>536067003God damn you're fucking stupid. Trump has broken laws and needed to answer for it in court. That's not being "weaponized" that's just how it works. On the other hand we have Trump accidently publicly tweeting orders to his AG that he didn't care if the cases against his enemies were weak they need to be brought anyway in violating of long standing DOJ policy.
>>536067117>The court is explicitly allowed to revisit judgements when there is fraudnot in response to a citizen petition, do you understand? a tip-off is not the save as a petition/plea. this isn't italy, the judges hold no executive power and parties need standing to assert a failure of case and controversy which is what you're alleging here. "I paid some of those taxes" doesn't give standing.>kem v wilderlol, you don't even know what you disagree with me aboutand that's not what fraud means>>536066907the court settlement described in OP was approved by the judge, like all settlements that occur after litigation has started.
>>536067273>God damn you're fucking stupidif you wanted to lead with this you shouldn't have pissed away all your credibility first
>>536067283>not in response to a citizen petition,Oh gee wiz if only a group of dozens of retired judges had filed a motion explaining why the court can do that...maybe that would help you. Oh wait...they did!Answer this pussy, have you read the motion or not? If you have explain why you think it's wrong. If you haven't go read it and shut the fuck up. It's simple as that, I'm not wasting any more time holding your hand.
>>536067283>by the judgewhich judge?
It's insane how creepy and ugly he looks now. Looks like some creature out of star wars frankly.
>>536067385>a group of dozens of retired judgesthere's a word for this - citizensit's not even about their authority per st but the presiding judgea judge does not receive petitions, only pleas from parties with standings and the occasional amicus.I can give a judge the most compelling argument in the world but without me personally having standing, he is powerless to be swayed.there's only so many ways I can repeat the same simple concept to you with different wording. what is it about long format youtube videos that makes people so moldable in the moment they're watching, yet so mentally inflexible for the rest of their fucking life as if that one video the watched was an apparition of Truth itself? sad.
>>536067410there was only one presiding judge, this wasn't an appellate level case
>>536068116Tell me the name of the judge that allowed this. It should be easy for you to prove.
>>536068088I asked you a simple yes/no question and you dodged it like a little bitch.I'll ask again: did you read the motion or not?Also why the fuck do you keep going on about youtube? I've never even mentioned it.
>>536068177explain to me exactly how a judge's name constitutes proof that a plaintiff can't dismiss his case with prejudice due to a settlement without also subjecting that settlement to judicial review.let's same his name is smith. how do you get from "judge smith is his name" to "OH, that PROVES the federal civil procedure rules require timely notice and filing of any settlement after litigation has already begub, which will then be subject to review. because his name was smith."please enlighten me now.
>>536064614I just farted and it smells awful
>>536068208>you dodged ittry reading my post again>why the fuck do you keep going on about youtube? read the thread moronwhy are you posting complete non sequitur? are you blind and typing randomly regardless of the thread subject? then get a screen reader like a normal blind person you useless faggot.if there was not in fact a case and controversy here the judge would not have allowed the settlement. any further action is up to congress, not a bunch of retired wannabe inquisitors. go be a literal fascist (italian style) somewhere else. if you want to learn about the common law, ASK.
>>536069007CAUSE YOU FUCKING NIGGER THERE IS NOT JUDGE. You can name "judge smith" cause NO JUDGE have approved this "settlement" You fucking cocksucker.
>>536066607>2) what is actually unprecedented is a president bringing a sham lawsuit claiming insane fake damages and then having his administration "settle" the lawsuit that he was never gonna win and never intended to actually be litigated.That's a left wing conspiracy theory. Trump would never do that.
>>536064614>scrutiny followed a filing by 35 former federal judgesI literally could not have a lower opinion of a person than a "former judge"
>>536069468>That's a left wing conspiracy theory.>IRS Leaks Your Tax returns>Sue IRS>time Travel>Become President >You now control the IRS>You are both the defendant and the plaintif >You Settle with yourself out of courtPlease tell me what part of this DOES NOT SEEM ILLEGAL to you?
>>536065539The supreme court has been in violation of the constitution for literally centuries. Now they protect a Jewish pedophile criminal organization.
>>536069412you're not making any sense anon
>>536069034Are there any publicly traded rope companies? Is kick legally authorized to stream executions with TTS enabled?
>>536070176>>Become President>>You now control the IRS>>You are both the defendant and the plaintifhappens thousands of times under every president, a consequence of separation of powers. the constitutional cure available is that congress can pass a law removing the issue from SC jurisdiction. you don't care to learn any of this or.you'd be asking questions.
>>536071204>happens thousands of times under every president,cite me some cases
>>536070176Time travel is currently not regulated by any human government. Violating causality and entropy are completely legal.
>>536064614Shitlibs are trying lawfare again?
>>536071246off the top of my head, one of the gay marriage cases under obama, and the obamacare case under trump. the DOJ decided to side against itself and reach a settlement. that's working as designed (separation of powers).you still didn't ask about how congress can cure it, even though I brought it up three times, it's obvious you don't care about the law or the underlying separation of powers issues.
>>536065539>opening a judicial investigation in response to a public petition is seriously unprecedentedTweeting at congressional and White House officials is also something that didn't happen for over 240 years of American history.
>>536064614Obama did this about a dozen times, instead of one big slush fund, and no one said shit back then.His buddies would sue the government over whatever bullshit they had (environmental laws, sexual harassment laws, EEOC bullshit) and the Obama DOJ would immediately "settle" for big cash payouts. Not only was it a way to funnel government money to his buddies, but it also set up "precedent" when courts reviewed similar cases later.Not one judge said jack shit about it back then.
>>536073134>Tweeting at congressional and White House officials is also something that didn't happen for over 240 years of American history.actually, radical pamphleting (pamphleteering?) featured prominently in early american political history
>>536066607Nonsense. President Trump is all about making America great again. He'd never do that.
