Forums

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by ferrets_bueller

Since any declaration by me concerning music would be met by contempt, derision and condescension, I'll switch to law and politics.

One of my favorite cases to cite is The Chimney Sweeper's Jewel, Armorie v. Delamarie, 1 Strange 505 (1722). Whenever the opportunity arises, I cite this for the proposition that an adverse inference arises when a party in exclusive possession of something refuses to produce it. In that case, a chimney sweep found a ring, gave it to a jeweler, and asked for an appraisal. The jeweler lowballed the value, and refused to return the stone, returning only the setting to the chimney sweep.

At trial the jeweler refused to produce the jewel. The court held the chimney sweep had superior title, and that damages would be the maximum value of a stone that would fit in the setting. There was an adverse inference against the jeweler who hadn't produced the stone.

We are the Chimney Sweeps. Trump is the Jeweler. The stone is his tax return(s). By adverse inference, his tax returns contain information which would disqualify him from the Presidency. This has both logic and law on the side of the Chimney Sweeps, unlike, just to pick an example out of thin air, the fabrication of Trump's nonsense about Obama's Kenyan birth.

Let the trial begin! Trump has the proof. Let him produce it or resign.

Thank you. That will fit perfectly into a brief I am writing, and it is the perfect smackdown for a very arrogant sumbitch I am opposed by.