Judge Asks DOJ: Will You Oppose Trump?

Wednesday, April 29, 2026

A federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to explain whether it intends to contest President Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the I.R.S. over the disclosure of his tax returns.

Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 09:33 PM | 13 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Judge Skeptical of Corrupt IRS Settlement with Trump talkingpointsmemo.com/morning-memo ...

[image or embed]
-- Josh Marshall (@joshtpm.bsky.social) Apr 28, 2026 at 1:19 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Perhaps someone should ask (Acting) Attorney General of the United States Todd "Thank You Very Much, I Love You, Sir!" Blanche who got that client, MAGAJesus, who now wants $10 billion, convicted on 34 felony counts, something about this.

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-04-29 09:36 AM | Reply

Why the question?

Just let the DoJ submit its briefs, and make a determination, what better way to scuttle the DoJ.

Now anything the judge does will appear partisan.

#2 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-04-29 12:41 PM | Reply

"the Constitution requires that the two parties in a lawsuit are genuinely opposed to each other"

Huge if true. Hugely unfair to Trump!
--Republicans

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-04-29 01:01 PM | Reply

So can the Judge appoint council to represent We The People, if the judge determines IRS is unable or unwilling to litigate?

That's what normally happens, right?

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-04-29 01:27 PM | Reply

"Now anything the judge does will appear partisan."

#2 | Posted by oneironaut

This is how much of a ------- ----------- drooling imbecile ---- you are.
President sues HIS agency for 10 billion using HIS AGENCY to make the case.

Does your mom prop you up in the morning and hit you on the back so you remember to breathe?
For ----- sake, jump in front of a bus. You deserve nothing better.

#5 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-04-29 10:17 PM | Reply

Why the question?
#2 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Had you actually read the article, you'd know.

Suggestion: Something along the lines of an "Intro US Civics Course for-Non-Citizens" course sounds like something you might consider taking.

#6 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-04-30 06:26 AM | Reply

I am a low income person, but each month I keep subscribed to the NYTimes, where this story originated. Without independent media like the Times, we would be lost to the gaslighting BS artists of the Republican Party including those grifters who are running all of our government at the moment.

#7 | Posted by Hughmass at 2026-04-30 07:29 AM | Reply

No amicus briefs filed in this matter? Asking for the American citizenry...

#8 | Posted by catdog at 2026-04-30 10:38 AM | Reply

"Now anything the judge does will appear partisan."

Only to morons who don't understand the underlying legal concept: opposing parties in a lawsuit must be adversarial.

Are you a moron?

#9 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-04-30 10:54 AM | Reply

"Now anything the judge does will appear partisan."

Partisan for the Constitution, that must really concern you.

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-04-30 11:10 AM | Reply

"I love you sir"

- Todd "I am impartial" Blanche.

#11 | Posted by Nixon at 2026-04-30 11:18 AM | Reply

How many times will Charlie Brown keep trying to kick that football before he learns that Lucy will ALWAYS pull it away no matter what she says beforehand?

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-04-30 12:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

$10 billion is probably what MAGAJeebus thinks Todd "Thank You, I Love You, Sir!" Blanche owes him for field generating the case that netted Old Yeller 34 felony convictions (goes well with his legally-imposed sexual abuser moniker).

#13 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-05-01 06:51 AM | Reply