The "Leak" of President Trump's Tax Return

Rachel Maddow, on her television program, disclosed that two pages of President Trump's 2005 federal income tax return had been released by some unknown source. Her guest, a tax expert, speculated that it might have been leaked by Mr. Trump himself to divert attention from other embarrassing disclosures including the lack of evidence for his baseless charge of wire-tapping by his predecessor and the investigation of ties between his campaign and Russian hackers who interfered in the recent election.
Today, during an interview with Tucker Carlson on the Fox network, President Trump labeled the release of his return a crime though he hastened to add that it did not reveal any adverse information about him. Tonight, on Fox, Sean Hannity, in furtherance of his campaign to disparage career civil servants, called the release of the tax return a felony and urged a criminal investigation to uncover and prosecute the leaker. His guest, Newt Gingrich, concurred and denounced the presumed felons within the IRS.
What all of the accusers overlooked, or ignored, is that the tax return is clearly stamped "Client's Copy" (as could be seen when Ms. Maddow held it up to the camera). Since client copies are not filed with the IRS it seems indisputable that no one at IRS was the source of the leak. Indeed, what seems compelling is that either the "client", Mr. Trump, or his tax preparer had to be the source of the disclosure.

In a World Where Hacking is Good and Leaks about Hacking are Bad

Trump and his supporters are very sensitive and much offended whenever the subject of  Russian hacking is raised. That unprecedented incursion into the conduct of an American election is no big deal because, they argue, there is no proof that the Russians penetrated voting machines and actually changed how ballots were recorded or tallied. Besides, the information about Clinton was true, so there is no reason to complain about its disclosure. As the Trumpites see it, the focus of the press on this historic breach constitutes an unjustified assault upon the legitimacy of the president's election.

While the absence of vote count manipulation is not disputed, the real concern, which has not been measured, is the extent to which, if at all, the disclosure of hurtful information about the Clinton campaign may have influenced the way citizens voted. Given the closeness of the election in many key states, even a small shift in voter sentiment driven by the Russian leaks could well have altered the outcome. Obviously, Trump and his minions believed the hacked information was significant as demonstrated by their incessant invocation of that material in the course of the campaign.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, and leaks from US government sources suggest the likelihood that Trump aides conspired with the Russians to affect the election, the Republicans are in full throat decrying the dastardly practice of disclosing information without authorization and, perhaps, in violation of law. Never mind that the information may be true, that the Trump campaign may have broken laws and time-honored precedents in bargaining for Russian assistance by among other things,  promising relief from sanctions in exchange for that assistance. Now the authenticity of the information is unimportant. The only thing that matters is the manner in which it was obtained. Thus, Republicans demand an investigation, not into Russian meddling but into who in the intelligence community made public the existence of evidence pointing to the involvement of the Trump campaign with the Russian hackers or those directing them.

Can one cite a better example of the old adage, "it all depends on whose ox is being gored"

President Trump and the Courts

Re "White House: Judge Did Not Chide Trump" (front page, Feb. 10):
To his credit, Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch expressed, though rather mildly, his displeasure with President Trump's disparagement of the judiciary. Typically, Donald Trump's first reaction was to accuse Senator Blumenthal of lying when he quoted Judge Gorsuch and to raise the issue of the senator's past fabrication of military service. When it was established that Judge Gorsuch had, indeed, made the quoted comments, the president's next tack was to deny that the comments were directed at his demeaning of jurists and the judicial process. Now, a spokesman for Judge Gorsuch has confirmed that the judge was addressing the president's tweets when he described himself as demoralized and disheartened.
So, once again, President Trump has demonstrated his disregard for the truth and his knee-jerk response to criticism by levying personal attacks and offering disingenuous explanations. This president, almost daily, provides proof of his lack of judgment, veracity and presidential demeanor. What's to come can only be imagined.


Gerald Harris

The Trump Inaugural

Granted Trump was not yet born when the expression "America First" described a movement which was sympathetic to fascism, isolationist and smacked of anti-Semitism, so he can't be expected to have learned, first-hand, its ominous undertone. What is troubling, however, is that his adoption of that credo, and its invocation as a theme of his inaugural address, demonstrates either his ignorance of history or, worse, a willful conveyance of a hateful philosophy.
It is of little comfort that Trump may use the concept not to call up its original connotation, though it does, but rather to describe his vision of an America that would elevate self-gain and close-mindedness over traditional values of generosity and openness which underlie this country's greatness.

Trump, Russia and Sanctions

Although Russia's unprecedented and dangerous meddling in the US election has been proven to the satisfaction of most open-minded Americans, Trump continues to express doubt and claims to be awaiting the findings of his own investigative team (probably the same team that looked into Obama's citizenship and "found things they can't believe").
While many suggest that Trump's reluctance to confront Russian misconduct is driven by his economic entanglement with Kremlin figures, I believe his principal motivation is his egotistical concern that his election may be seen as having been aided (and tainted) by Russian hacking thus, once again, putting petulant pride before national interest.
Most Republicans, true to form, are attempting to divert attention from Trump's unseemly stance by attacking President Obama, accusing him of imposing weak sanctions after waiting too long to act.

A Most Dangerous Time

:


This is a most dangerous moment in the life of this nation. Organized groups, claiming that their cause of white supremacy  (embracing religious, racial and ethnic bigotry) has been empowered by the electorate, have moved out of the shadows and openly engage in Nazi rhetoric and symbolism including the straight-armed salute. The press is demonized and individual journalists are regularly threatened and harassed. History teaches that these signals are the precursors of escalating hatred, violence and ultimate atrocity on what was once believed to be an unimaginable scale. These stirrings are mirrored in other areas of the world.
Brave and forceful leadership is urgently required to counter this incipient catastrophe before it rages beyond control. Even if Donald Trump were so inclined, and he appears not to be, he has neither the moral standing nor ethical fiber to staunch the dark forces he has knowingly or inadvertently unleashed.
Others, including the out-going president, responsible members of both political parties, religious leaders of all faiths, labor unions, business heads, professional associations and governments worldwide must all address and condemn the emerging virulence before it becomes an unstoppable contagion. Only immediate awareness of the danger and a coordinated and determined resistance can preserve our country as it was conceived and governed and protect the rights and lives of all of its citizens.

Leaks from the FBI

Just days before FBI Director Comey informed senators that his agency would be investigating additional emails pertinent to Hillary Clinton's use of a private server, former mayor Rudy Giuliani told a Fox News interviewer that something big would break in a couple of days that would turn the election around. He refused to be specific, smiling slyly and saying, in substance, "you'll see, we have a couple of things up our sleeve."
Patently, he had been informed illegally of the investigators' progress and intended action. The only source of such information had to be a leak from the FBI. If Comey has any regard for the eroding reputation of his agency, and for the nonpolitical enforcement of the law, he has an obligation to immediately question Giuliani under oath about the sources of his ill-gotten information and to take action against those who betrayed their duty, and public trust, to act in a lawful and nonpartisan way in conducting a federal investigation.