Trump sues the IRS for $10 billion over leaked tax records (Update: "settlement" for $1.8B fund for "weaponization victims") (9 Viewers)

[fooferdoggie]

I have no words for this is he suing himself? How do you use the government and knowing trump with the goverment is the goverment going to defend itself against the government? You know he will just be handed the money.. but it was fine sharing other people's tax returns, perfectly acceptable.

MSN

his private lawyer is a government lawyer.

 

[MT15]

All I did was point out the leak actually happened. Didn’t defend anything.

You said that it was a problem that the leak actually happened. It’s not a problem to me. What should be the problem for ANYONE is the fact that this lawsuit even exists. It’s improper and corrupt.

 

[Sendai]

You said that it was a problem that the leak actually happened. It’s not a problem to me. What should be the problem for ANYONE is the fact that this lawsuit even exists. It’s improper and corrupt.

Maybe not problem to you but it is to the IRS. They let it happen. And it’s not supposed to happen.

 

[superchuck500]

There’s no way they can prove $10 billion in damages. I could see courts issuing stays until he’s out of office based on conflicts of interest.

Yeah I agree. There's no way it can go forward with Trump as the president. Then eventually it will become an issue of damages (if the contractor issue isn't dispositive). The statute only allows for actual harm, and there's just no way that Trump can plausibly argue that it harmed him. But there's also punitives available on a fairly low standard (seems to only require intent) - but that still gets back to the contractor issue for USA liability. So there are issues to litigate potentially (and litigation risk opens up settlement negotiations).

If the USA can file a tidy motion to dismiss (e.g. contractor status) and get it tossed quickly that would be acceptable. Any other course of action that involves litigation or settlement is just not acceptable under the conflict rules. It would have to be stayed.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

Maybe not problem to you but it is to the IRS. They let it happen.

You have no proof that the IRS let an employee of a third party leak Trump's tax returns. Your comment at the very best is speculation and is made solely to defend yet another corrupt action by Trump.

If someone makes statements that defend Trump's corrupt actions, then that someone is supporting Trump by defending Trump's corrupt actions.

 

[MT15]

Maybe not problem to you but it is to the IRS. They let it happen. And it’s not supposed to happen.

You sound like Trump’s lawyer.

 

[Sendai]

Yeah I agree. There's no way it can go forward with Trump as the president. Then eventually it will become an issue of damages (if the contractor issue isn't dispositive). The statute only allows for actual harm, and there's just no way that Trump can plausibly argue that it harmed him. But there's also punitives available on a fairly low standard (seems to only require intent) - but that still gets back to the contractor issue for USA liability. So there are issues to litigate potentially (and litigation risk opens up settlement negotiations).

If the USA can file a tidy motion to dismiss (e.g. contractor status) and get it tossed quickly that would be acceptable. Any other course of action that involves litigation or settlement is just not acceptable under the conflict rules. It would have to be stayed.

Ken Griffen’s taxes were released and he sued the IRS. The IRS apologized. He dropped the suit.

And, again, what are the actual damages?

 

[Sendai]

You sound like Trump’s lawyer.

I sound like a citizen disappointed in the IRS ability to manage appropriate security. I expect better from our government.

 

[MT15]

I sound like a citizen disappointed in the IRS ability to manage appropriate security. I expect better from our government.

Funny how you have nothing to say about the absolutely egregious abuses of DOGE and Musk. Quite the conundrum right?

The leaking of a portion of Trump’s taxes - which he promised to release repeatedly and should have released - disappoints you though.

You’re so transparent, lol.

 

[Sendai]

Funny how you have nothing to say about the absolutely egregious abuses of DOGE and Musk. Quite the conundrum right?

The leaking of a portion of Trump’s taxes - which he promised to release repeatedly and should have released - disappoints you though.

You’re so transparent, lol.

Trumps taxes weren’t the only ones leaked. The citizens deserve better.

“

So the answer is no, you wouldn’t stop DOGE from doing what they are doing right now? That was the question, wasn’t it? Would you stop DOGE from doing the illegal unconstitutional things they are doing right now?

You completely avoided answering that question, which tells me everything I need to know.

“I support studying and evaluating the federal bureaucracy. Then planning a rational approach to improving cost and efficiency. Eliminate the unnecessary. Remove bloat.”

That obviously means I wouldn’t let doge even start the way they did.

 

[efil4]

I sound like a citizen disappointed in the IRS ability to manage appropriate security. I expect better from our government.

I would suspect that the contractual liability obligations between sub ( Booz Allen ) and contractor (IRS) are clearly spelled out within the contract/msa.

IRS had no reasonable expectation that an employee of Booz Allen would leak an individual tax information.
I would also suspect there is a transfer of liability in the contract that protects the IRS from subcontractor action (or inaction).

You should be more upset at Booz Allen than IRS.

Booz Allen isn't some mom n pop cybersecurity firm. They are a $12B revenue co.

And others brought suit in 2024 against Booz Allen, not the IRS. And why would Trump wait 2 years to file, file against IRS and while in office?

 

[MT15]

And why would Trump wait 2 years to file, file against IRS and while in office?

I am curious how AI will spin this also.

 

[MT15]

That obviously means I wouldn’t let doge even start the way they did.

Without actually blaming Trump or Musk, and still not answering the question. Would you be in favor of actually stopping DOGE? Holding Trump and Musk accountable for what they did?

 

[MT15]

 

[superchuck500]

Maybe not problem to you but it is to the IRS. They let it happen. And it’s not supposed to happen.

What do you mean they let it happen?

I have read more about it and here is how the DOJ press release on his sentencing described what he did:

What is your basis for asserting that IRS "let it happen"?

 

[superchuck500]

And, again, what are the actual damages?

The burden of proof of "actual damages" is on the plaintiff - Trump would have to have some method of quantifying the damage he sustained as a result of the disclosure. Given that since the disclosure, his net worth has grown dramatically and he was re-elected to be president, there's very little chance that he has actual damages.

 

[Sendai]

What do you mean they let it happen?

I have read more about it and here is how the DOJ press release on his sentencing described what he did:

What is your basis for asserting that IRS "let it happen"?

That it happened under IRS supervision. There are supposed to be security measures in place to prohibit this sort of thing. The IRS failed.

 

[Sendai]

Without actually blaming Trump or Musk, and still not answering the question. Would you be in favor of actually stopping DOGE? Holding Trump and Musk accountable for what they did?

Didn’t see a need to state the obvious.

Again, I’ll leave the whining wailing and gnashing of teeth to others. Not my thing.

 

[Sendai]

The burden of proof of "actual damages" is on the plaintiff - Trump would have to have some method of quantifying the damage he sustained as a result of the disclosure. Given that since the disclosure, his net worth has grown dramatically and he was re-elected to be president, there's very little chance that he has actual damages.

I think it’s meritless. Wouldn’t be surprised if the actual target ends up being Booze Allen. Keep in mind the lawyers representing trump are premiere ambulance chasers. I’m sure there is a long game.