Posted on 09/29/2023 5:16:53 PM PDT by grundle
A former contractor who worked with the Internal Revenue Service until 2021 was accused of disclosing tax return information of a high-ranking government official and "thousands of the nation's wealthiest people" without authorization, according to criminal information filed Friday in Washington, D.C.
Although the court documents do not reveal the name of the government official, a person familiar with the matter confirmed to CBS News that it is former President Donald Trump.
Charles Littlejohn, 38, of Washington, D.C., allegedly obtained Trump's tax return information and gave it to a news organization, the court documents said. He has been accused of one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax returns and return information, and if he's convicted, he could face a maximum five years in prison.
The government also alleges that Littlejohn took tax return information belonging to thousands of the richest people in the country and disclosed it to a different news organization.
Prosecutors said the news organizations — which the person familiar with the matter confirmed were The New York Times and Pro Publica — published "numerous articles" based on the information obtained from Littlejohn, according to the court documents.
An attorney for Littlejohn did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A spokesperson for Trump has also not yet responded to a request for comment.
The New York Times and Pro Publica have not been accused of any wrongdoing.
Pro Publica said in a statement to CBS News, "We have no comment on today's announcement from the DOJ. As we've said previously, ProPublica doesn't know the identity of the source who provided this trove of information on the taxes paid by the wealthiest Americans."
The New York Times declined to comment. But when the Times published its extensive reporting on Trump's tax returns in September 2020, then-editor Dean Baquet wrote, "Some will raise questions about publishing the president's personal tax information. But the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the First Amendment allows the press to publish newsworthy information that was legally obtained by reporters even when those in power fight to keep it hidden. That powerful principle of the First Amendment applies here."
String the Nazi biatch up.
Possession of stolen property. Those media criminals need to go to prision.
Just one problem, NY Times...the information wasn’t “legally obtained.”
One of many reasons to scrap the tax code is precisely because it mandates disclosure and sharing of all sorts of private info, putting the many people who handle it on the position of being able to criminally leak it, accidentally leak it, lose it, or otherwise misuse it. These abuses quite simply wouldn’t be possible with e.g. a point-of-sale sales tax collected on retail purchases.
It’s ok though, because it hurt Trump.
Exactly what I was going to say. The New York Times is full of it on this issue. They published information that was not legally obtained and that’s the key difference.
What’s the over under on a suspended 6 month sentence……
Isn’t Little John one of Robinhoods companions? Fake name ?
Good points but politically this would be tough to do.
If we tried to scrap the Internal Revenue code and replace it with some sort of sales tax or consumption tax, then the Liberals and the media would howl how we are raising taxes on the poorest of Americans. They will talk about how a sales tax is a regressive tax etc etc.
I would like to see some overhaul of the tax code but politically that’s going to be tough to do.
Prosecutors said the news organizations — which the person familiar with the matter confirmed were The New York Times and Pro Publica — published “numerous articles” based on the information obtained from Littlejohn, according to the court documents.
Has the New York Times ever been pro-America?
This is a strong case to do away with the IRS which does not protect the secrecy of federal tax returns. This clown got his hands on the tax returns of MANY of America’s wealthy people and ran to a news organization with the information.
The IRS leaks like a sieve and should be stripped of all of its power and budget and eliminated as a federal agency.
The actual NRST proposal has a rebate that basically covers the tax expenditures of those at the poverty line, and which amounts to basically free money for those spending below it. Every taxpayer would get this rebate, but it becomes increasingly insignificant to higher earners.
OK, now they do.
It is an illegal source.
What will they do with the illegal data?
Oh, right, they will just let it ride.
as accused of disclosing tax return information of a high-ranking government official and "thousands of the nation's wealthiest people" without authorization, according to criminal information filed Friday in Washington, D.C.
Anyone care to guess how many prog's data is published vs. how many normal American Citizens that are registered Republicans?
Prog = 0
Republican = everything they got illegally.
But the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the First Amendment allows the press to publish newsworthy information that was legally obtained
What the prog "journalists" have is I-L-L-E-G-A-L.
And the prog will not so much as bat an eye because of it, they are complete and utter sewage scum.
.
It’s none of the governments business knowing what I make. If you want to tell them what you make go ahead.
“Mr. President please raise my taxes”. Heard it somewhere.
Must be as thick as the New York phone book.
Nothing will happen to this communist. We all know this.
bkmk
None of this was legally obtained.
Bankrupt those media organizations.
Personal tax information was stolen so the NYT and ProPublica are technically guilty of receiving stolen property and making a profit from it (newspaper and other media sales,donations).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.