Trump Weighs Legal Action Against MSNBC, Reporter Over Tax Return Release

Funny when you think about it. Trump's been in office for less than 60 days and they could dig up his tax returns. Barry was in office 8 long years and no one could obtain his college transcripts.

Personal attorneys working for President Trump are weighing possible legal action against the cable news network MSNBC and a private journalist for reporting a portion of the president’s 2005 tax returns, a move the Trump legal staff believes could have violated federal privacy laws, the FOX Business Network has learned.

Trump’s tax returns were published Tuesday by DCReport.org, a website operated by David Cay Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter. They were simultaneously aired on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show.” 

Legal experts say any case would be a long-shot given First Amendment protections for journalists and an important Supreme Court precedent that dates back to the famous 1971 “Pentagon Papers” case. Trump would also have to show that the journalists were complicit in stealing his tax returns—which both Johnston and Maddow have denied. 

“Trump’s lawyers could try and sue but they will get the crap kicked out of them in court,” said veteran white collar attorney Stanley Arkin. “It’s the First Amendment. What are they going to sue them for? Stealing the returns? Nobody made any money out of it. Nobody was bribed.”

White House spokeswoman Hope Hicks would neither confirm nor deny the president’s interest in a possible lawsuit against MSNBC or Johnston.

In a statement, MSNBC told FOX Business: “There is no legal prohibition against journalists publishing these tax returns. It is protected by the First Amendment and Supreme Court precedent.

Johnston, who obtained the tax documents before appearing on MSNBC, wrote a biography called “The Making of Donald Trump” in 2016 and won the Pulitzer Prize at The New York Times for exposing loopholes and inequities in the U.S. tax code. He didn’t respond to emails or telephone calls for comment. During the MSNBC broadcast, Johnston said he received Trump’s tax documents anonymously through the mail.

Trump, a billionaire real estate mogul with business interests around world, has refused to release his tax returns, citing an ongoing audit by the Internal Revenue Service. The move has been controversial since it broke from recent protocol dating back to the presidency of Richard Nixon in which presidents released their tax returns to disclose possible conflicts of interest.

Democrats in Congress have claimed that a full airing of Trump’s tax returns could show conflicts involving his real estate and branding empire and his White House dealings.

Trump maintains no such conflicts exist now that he has handed over operational duties of the Trump Organization to his sons, Eric and Donald Jr.

The 2005 tax documents aired by MSNBC and published by Johnston, however, provided no evidence to substantiate possible conflict of interest claims; the two pages of Trump’s 1040 tax forms showed little more than that Trump earned $153 million in income in 2005, and paid $38 million in taxes.

In fact, some political commentators have suggested that Trump himself leaked the forms because they portrayed his tax issues in a relatively positive light, namely that he made a lot of money and paid an effective tax rate of 24%, which is higher than what former President Obama paid in 2015 and even what large corporations pay to the government.

Still, people close to President Trump say he was incensed by their release, believing possibly that the documents were stolen, and that Johnston and MSNBC should not have aired what he believes to be illegally obtained personal information.

On Wednesday morning, Trump tweeted out: 

Does anybody really believe that a reporter, who nobody ever heard of, "went to his mailbox" and found my tax returns? @NBCNews FAKE NEWS!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 15, 2017

After another MSNBC host, Joe Scarborough, suggested Trump himself leaked out the documents, Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen tweeted: 

.@JoeNBC As #potus @realDonaldTrump personal attorney, I know who has his taxes. You better have proof to back up your claim and big mouth!— Michael Cohen (@MichaelCohen212) March 15, 2017

Later that day, the president told Fox News host Tucker Carlson: “I have no idea where they got it but it’s illegal and they’re not supposed to have it and it's not supposed to be leaked…It’s certainly not an embarrassing tax return at all, but it’s an illegal thing they’ve been doing it, they’ve done it before and I think it’s a disgrace."

During the presidential campaign, The New York Times published a portion of Trump’s 1995 New York State tax returns, which showed then candidate Trump took a $916 million loss on his taxes that year. The large loss would have allowed Trump to cancel the same level of taxable income over nearly the next two decades. Marc Kasowitz, an attorney for Trump, wrote The Times that it was illegal to publish the returns, but no lawsuit was filed.

People with knowledge of the matter say Cohen is now at the center of the debate over whether to file a lawsuit for the latest tax disclosures. Cohen would neither confirm nor deny whether he and Trump are contemplating a lawsuit.

Legal experts say one federal law at the center of possible legal action would be the Unauthorized Disclosure of Information Act, which makes it illegal to publish an unauthorized tax return or “return information” without receiving authorization from the individual whose taxes are being reported on.

According to the federal statute, any violation of the law “shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment of up to five years."

Still, various First Amendment precedents protect journalists from such sanctions. In 1971, the US Supreme Court ruled against the Nixon administration, which tried to stop The New York Times and other news outlets from publishing the so-called Pentagon Papers, which were a classified government study of US involvement in Vietnam.

In the landmark ruling, the court said the government needed to show a heavy burden of proof to upend the First Amendment and stop the publication of the documents involving the machinations of public officials.

Legal experts tell FOX Business that other precedents would shield journalists from legal action unless reporters were directly involved in a theft of the tax documents, which Johnston has denied. In fact, Columbia Law School Professor John Coffee said if Trump went ahead with a lawsuit, he could end up in the same position as Richard Nixon was in in 1971 during the release of the Pentagon Papers.

“MSNBC is in the same position as The New York Times,” if Trump sues as the president, Coffee said. “If Trump sues as an individual, he will then be subject to discovery and depositions, which he will not like.”

Trump Weighs Legal Action Against MSNBC, Reporter Over Tax Return Release

Brazile admits she forwarded town hall questions to Clinton camp

This was her original statement.

“As a Christian woman, I understand persecution, but I will not sit here and be persecuted,” Brazile said. “Your information is totally false.”

So any integrity she seemingly had is out the window. She is both a liar and a cheat two qualities held in high regard at CNN so I'm surprised she got fired.



BTW...she has a lot in common with Rachel Maddow. Besides being Democrats.

Speaking of Brazile's integrity what about Killary knowingly receiving questions 'under the table'? 
Nevermind...we're talking about a Clinton.

--------------------------------------------------

Former interim Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile admitted Friday that she forwarded Democratic primary town hall questions to members of Hillary Clinton's campaign – something she had previously denied.

In an essay for Time published Friday, called “Russian DNC Narrative Played Out Exactly As They Hoped,” the Democratic strategist said she had in fact passed on topics, despite saying she had not when her communications with the campaign were leaked by WikiLeaks in October.

“[I]n October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign,” she wrote.

In October, emails from Clinton campaign Chair John Podesta's account were released by WikiLeaks showing that Brazile – then a CNN contributor – had forwarded questions ahead of a March primary debate.

In one email, Brazile told Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” the night before a March 6 CNN primary debate in Flint, Michigan.

“Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint,” Brazile wrote.

The following night, Clinton and primary rival Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt. were asked questions about the lead poisoning in Flint, although that exact question was not asked.

In another email, dated Mar. 12, she passed on to Palmieri a question on the death penalty set to be asked in a Mar. 13 town hall and said: “From time to time I get the questions in advance.” After Palmieri responded, Brazile wrote back: “I’ll send a few more.”

However, in an interview with Fox News on Oct. 19, Brazile denied helping Clinton during the primaries. She said she was being persecuted and questioned the credibility of the hacked files.

“As a Christian woman, I understand persecution, but I will not sit here and be persecuted,” Brazile said. “Your information is totally false.”

CNN and Brazile parted ways after the emails were leaked.

In the essay, Brazile said she will “forever regret” the decision to leak the questions to the Clinton campaign.

“My job was to make all our Democratic candidates look good, and I worked closely with both campaigns to make that happen. But sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret,” she wrote.

Brazile admits she forwarded town hall questions to Clinton camp

What does she do when not hunting down Trump's tax returns?

What does she do when not hunting down Trump's tax returns?

Snowflakes 101: University of Arizona distributes 20-page booklet on how to deal with microaggressions - recommending the offended say 'OUCH' and the offender 'OOPS'

I would love to stand up in a class at this university and shout (((Trump))) and watch the bastards go into convulsions!

------------------------------------

In an attempt to create a more respectful campus environment, the University of Arizona has released a booklet on handling microaggressions.

The 20-page packet discusses a number of guidelines for inside and outside the classroom for teachers and students to follow.

One section titled 'Oops/Ouch' discusses one possible method to use in identifying and reacting to microaggressions in a classroom.

One section titled 'Oops/Ouch' discusses one possible method to use in identifying and reacting to microaggressions in a classroom

The guideline reads: 'If a student feels hurt or offended by another student's comment, the hurt student can say 'ouch.' 

'In acknowledgment, the student who made the hurtful comment says 'oops.' If necessary, there can be further dialogue about this exchange.' 

The suggested 'oops/ouch' approach is one of a number of possible intervention strategies professors can use in classroom scenarios that may make marginalized groups uncomfortable provided by the booklet.

The definition of a microaggression is also lined out in the booklet, which was approved by the University's Vice Provost for Inclusive Excellence Jesús Treviño, Ph.D.

The suggested 'oops/ouch' approach is one of a number of possible intervention strategies professors can use in classroom scenarios that may make marginalized groups uncomfortable

He was hired in May 2016 to help promote diversity and inclusion on the school's campus.

A microaggression is defined as 'the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.'

These include perpetuating a number of race-based or gender-based stereotypes which often aren't considered offensive, but have subtle underlying tones of heteronormativity, sexism, and racism. 

MICROAGGRESSION EXAMPLES

Continuing to mispronounce the names of students after they have corrected you time and time again 

Professor: 'Is Jose Cuinantila here?' Student: 'I am here, but my name is Jesús Quintanilla.'

• Scheduling tests and project due dates on religious or cultural holidays 

'It has just been pointed out to me that I scheduled the mid-term during Rosh Hashanah, but we are okay because I don't see any Jewish students in the class.'

• Setting low expectations for students from particular groups or high schools 'Oh, so Robert, you're from Pine Ridge High School? You are going to need lots of academic help in my class!' 

• Calling on and validating male students and ignoring female students during class discussions 

'Let's call on John again. He seems to have lots of great responses to some of these problems.' 

• Expressing racially charged political opinions in class assuming that people with those racial/ethnic identities do not exist in class 

'I think illegal aliens are criminals because they are breaking the law and need to be rounded up and sent back to Mexico.'

• Singling students out in class because of their backgrounds 

'You're Asian! Can you tell us what the Japanese think about our trade policies?' 

• Denying the experiences of students by questioning the credibility and validity of their stories 

'I've eaten and shopped plenty of times in that part of town and it's nothing like you describe it. How long have you lived there and who are you hanging out with?' 

• Assigning class projects that are heterosexist, sexist, racist, or promote other oppressions 

'For the class project, I want you to think about a romantic relationship that you have had with a member of the opposite sex. Think and write about your observations.'

• Not respecting students gender pronouns, especially students who use gender neutral pronouns 

'Alex, you use 'they/them' pronouns. No, that's too confusing. They is plural. I'm going to use him for you.' 

• Using heterosexist or sexist examples or language in class. 

'Atoms sometimes attract each other like this male and female here. At the same time, atoms sometimes repel each other like these two males here.' 

• Assigning projects that ignore differences in socioeconomic class status 'For this class, you are required to visit four art galleries located in the downtown area. The entrance fees vary, but I am sure you can afford it.' 

• Assuming that all students are from the U.S and fully understand American culture and the English language (i.e., be aware that there may be international students in the class) 

'What do you mean you have never heard of The Cosby Show? Where have you been hiding?'

• Discouraging students from working on projects that explore their own social identities 'If you are Native American, I don't want you to write your paper on Native Americans. You already know everything about that group and besides you will be biased in your writing.'

• Asking people with invisible disabilities to identify themselves in class 

'This is the last time that I am going to ask. Anybody with a disability who needs extra help, raise your hand!' 

• Making assumptions about students and their backgrounds: 

'You're Latino, and you don't speak Spanish? You should be ashamed of yourself!' 

Snowflakes 101: University of Arizona distributes 20-page booklet on how to deal with microaggressions - recommending the offended say 'OUCH' and the offender 'OOPS'

Chelsea Clinton cashes in on Elizabeth Warren rally cry with new children's book 'She Persisted' after her global health tome is massive flop

I'm sure you heard this past January Chelsea released her worldwide health book 'Governing Global Health: Who Runs the World and Why?'

The book proved to be a dismal failure for Chelsea, who claimed she never even bothered to promote the book in the wake of her mother Hillary's defeat in last year's election.

That might explain why the book performed so poorly, and just two months after its release is number 128,444 on the Amazon bestsellers list. But Chelsea should look at the bright side.

Pelosi's book is #477,717 on Amazon's bestsellers list selling like 3,000 copies!

----------------------------------------

Chelsea Clinton will be releasing her first children's book it was announced on Thursday, with the former first daughter penning a collection of stories about remarkable American women. 

'She Persisted' will hit bookshelves this May, and tell the true-life tales of 13 women 'who never took no for an answer.'

The collection of stories was inspired by Elizabeth Warren according to a release sent out by publisher Penguin Young Readers, and as evidenced by Chelsea's decision to use the Massachusetts senator's rally cry for the title of the book.

That rallying cry was born out of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's attack of Warren on the Senate floor in February when she opted to read a letter written by Coretta Scott King criticizing Jeff Sessions while debating his nomination for Attorney General.

After she refused to stop reading the letter, which broke an arcane rule that states no Senator shall impugn a fellow Senator, McConnell stood at his podium and said: 'She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted.'

And after all that it appears that Chelsea will be the first to cash in on the popular catchphrase, with a spokesperson for Penguin offering no comment when asked by DailyMail.com if any of the proceeds from the book will be going to charity. 

Yes...The Clinton Foundation.

Teamwork: Chelsea Clinton (above in 2014 with Warren) will release a children's picture book this May that was inspired by Senator Elizabeth Warren's refusal to be silenced

I'm sure her new book is headed for the same fate as 'Governing Global Health: Who Runs the World and Why?' I wonder in the foreword if Indian squaw 'Lizzie' will discribe how she used to skin buffalo back when she was with the Cherokees?

Chelsea Clinton cashes in on Elizabeth Warren rally cry with new children's book 'She Persisted' after her global health tome is massive flop