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

politics

19145 readers
2223 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
[–] [email protected] 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.

[–] [email protected] 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

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. Hope he holds his head high during trial.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He’s probably going to need a gofundme.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

He’d be swimming in dough

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 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.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 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.

[–] [email protected] 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.

[–] [email protected] 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)
[–] [email protected] 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)
[–] [email protected] 12 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)
[–] [email protected] 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)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (8 children)

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

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 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?

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago

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

[–] [email protected] 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.

[–] [email protected] 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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Maybe he and Trump can be cellmates!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

The hero we needed. Good job sir.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

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

[–] [email protected] 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)
[–] [email protected] 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 ›