this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
342 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2534 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] charonn0@startrek.website 199 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Littlejohn is charged with one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax returns and return information and faces up to five years in prison if convicted.

He should have violently stormed Congress instead. You only get like 3 months for that.

[–] downpunxx@kbin.social 118 points 1 year ago (2 children)

littlejohn is what a patriot looks like because what he did is what patriots are supposed to do in the face of fascism

[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. Hope he holds his head high during trial.

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He’s probably going to need a gofundme.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

He’d be swimming in dough

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

Well ...

In addition to the former president’s tax documents, Littlejohn is also accused of stealing IRS information on “thousands of the nation’s wealthiest people, including returns and return information dating back more than 15 years.” Littlejohn then sent that tax information to a second unnamed news organization.

If it was only Trump's tax returns, then I might agree with you. It wasn't targeted specifically and only at Trump; it was an extremely wide net that was cast, and we don't know who the rest of the people are. Based on the information publicly available, this appears more like an attempt to sell the information, or act illegally based on some fringe principle.

[–] ronalicious@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

read that too... ok maybe, but my sympathy for the 1% is a bit diminished atm.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I get it, that's fair. But justice means protecting the rights of people you don't like, or of people who are exercising their rights in ways you don't like.

Does that run counter to my saying I might agree if it was only Trump's tax returns? Maybe it does a little bit. I feel comfortable leaning on that Trump was openly fraudulent, corrupt, and criminal by the time Littlejohn swiped the records.

But it definitely runs counter to being okay with someone making off with tax returns of people only described as "thousands of the nation's wealthiest people," with no other context. I have far fewer mitigating factors (really only one, wealth) to lean on there, even if I have my suspicions about the integrity of "thousands of the nation's wealthiest people.

It's a very fuzzy area, and I think that reasonable people can make sound arguments either way. I suppose what I can do is be pleased with the results of Littlejohn's actions, and believe that his being criminally charged for them, and think that his motivations were probably unrelated to patriotism.

Shit's complicated, yo.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 10 points 1 year ago

A person can do something wrong but you can still appreciate that someone did it. Like that guy who shot the YouTube harasser or people who punch Nazis. I don’t want to live in a nation where that kind of lawlessness is commonplace or accepted, but I’d buy those folks a beer after they are released. And if I were interviewing to hire someone who had a criminal record but it was for punching Nazis I think that would be neutral at worst.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Sounds like was planning on exposing tax crimes by wealthy people. If he was trying to sell it etc he wouldn’t be sending it to a news organization, right?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Maeve@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Justice means the wealth would be more equitably distributed, imo, and nothing indicates the data was sold.

Also, people really need to skip the NYT. Propublica got it right.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who cares what rich people think. We are constantly bombarded by propaganda meant to divide the pleebs and keep them from realizing the ruling class is robing us blind.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] solstice@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

He should've posted them all online. As a cpa with a bit of rare downtime on my hands I'd love to volunteer to review returns for the irs. I know all the errors and omissions, tricks and and gimmicks, goofs, fuckups, whoopsies, you name it. 20% commission for the recovered taxes seems fair compensation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tax returns in US should be public to anyone and everyone, like they are in many countries.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are they? Where? It seems odd to me that a government would disclose how much everybody makes.

[–] Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Here in Finland it is public. Reality is that nobody actually cares how much normal people make.

If you want to know how much your CEO or boss pockets money, why is it a bad thing. It is good for income equality.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jonne@infosec.pub 6 points 1 year ago

The reporting by ProPublica based on those records is definitely in the public interest, though.

Everyone's tax returns should be public, IMHO.

Sounds like a hero to me

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 117 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Dude was arrested for showing everyone what trump was obligated to show, but illegally hid from everyone.

This is America.

[–] CrazyEddie041@kbin.social 76 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Not to defend Trump in the slightest, but it was my understanding that the President isn't actually required to release his taxes; it's just a tradition that literally every other presidential candidate has conformed to. You know, to show that they're trustworthy, which is why Trump never released his.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 55 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep, Trump showed how much of the government actually runs on norms and traditions instead of actual laws. Even some of the laws that he did break (like the Presidential Records Act) don't actually specify penalties because Congress assumed it wasn't necessary.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The funny thing is, his tax returns were fairly unremarkable. I'm a cpa and my background is largely with high and ultra high net worth individuals and their businesses, so people like trump are my bread and butter. I reviewed his returns when they first leaked and honestly nothing jumped out at me as particularly noteworthy or interesting at all. All I can speculate is that he's just a stubborn asshole and simply didn't want to release them.

[–] OrangeJoe@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I always thought the big "issue" people were expecting wasnt that the tax returns were going to show anything illegal or noteworthy, but rather they would instead just show that he is worth way less than he goes around claiming.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He did also promise he would do it but then refused to follow through

[–] UristMcHolland@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

And his plan for healthcare reform is going to be released ~~next month too~~ any time now.

[–] dezmd@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

If you're running for President, you either disclose your tax returns or you don't run. The tradition is there for a reason. I fully support jury nullification for this Littlejohn guy.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not a legal requirement, just the "right thing to do"

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah. How the hell can that not be a legal requirement for a position like "president"?

It should be a requirement for any public office

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It should be, but nobody has ever refused before I believe.

[–] Alixxxaneveah@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 1 year ago

Turns out the founding fathers could not account for a situation where half the voting public wants everything to burn.

[–] guacupado@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I can't wait to find a redcoat that hates this guy but loves Snowden.

[–] flossdaily@lemmy.world 59 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If storming the capital gets your 3 months, then exposing Trump's fraud should get you... A medal of honor?

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but this is America. Where democrats run the show, but conservatives do whatever they want with impunity.

[–] devil_d0c@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

Damn poor guy. I'll put 20 bucks on his books for Ramen. Dudes a true patriot.

[–] TwoGems@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The rich deserve to be exposed for the countless crimes they've committed over the decades with tax dodging. Good on this man. It speaks volumes of how shitty our country is though when January 6th insurrectionists get less time than this guy might though.

[–] Alixxxaneveah@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 1 year ago

Sadly, a jury of his peers will be people who make just enough that they are suddenly concerned about their tax return privacy despite being a W2 earner.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Maybe he and Trump can be cellmates!

[–] firewyre@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

The hero we needed. Good job sir.

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Why are tax returns not public property? In Sweden you can look up anyone's tax info.

[–] damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
A man named Littlejohn, so sly,
Stole Trump's taxes as they caught his eye,
For his audacious feat,
A national hero's seat,
Damnthefilibuster says, let him fly!
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Federal prosecutors announced charges Friday against a contractor with the Internal Revenue Service who allegedly stole the tax returns of a high-ranking government official.

A source familiar with the matter told CNN that official is former President Donald Trump.

The man, 38-year-old Charles Edward Littlejohn, worked with the IRS from 2018 to 2020, according to court documents.

Though the official is not named in court documents, a source familiar with the investigation told CNN the tax returns in question were Trump’s.

“Both news organizations published numerous articles describing the tax information they obtained from the Defendant,” court documents said.

The New York Times and ProPublica both published articles based on tax records of the former president and other wealthy Americans around the same timeframe – in 2020 and 2021, respectively.


The original article contains 308 words, the summary contains 130 words. Saved 58%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›