Days before the first debate, something mysterious happened in Washington. Without anybody knowing, President Trump’s long sought after tax returns appeared in the New York Times. As Americans read the paper, Democrats worked feverishly to aid Biden with ammunition ahead of meeting Trump for the first time. While the subject of his tax returns did come up, some are more concerned with who leaked the documents and if it warrants criminal charges.
It’s cliché, but timing is everything when it comes to Trump’s tax returns making an appearance. Just days before the debate, Biden’s camp knew they had minimal information on Trump, so what happens – Trump’s tax returns appear in the news. For Joseph diGenova, a former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia who knows President Trump, the so-called “leaker” is definitely in violation of the law, and criminal charges should be pressed against them.
Talking to reporters, diGenova said, “If you obtain tax information, first of all, if you obtain it from the government — that’s 100% a crime if it was an IRS worker. If it’s an accountant or a lawyer who gets it as part of their duties and discloses it, that’s also a crime. It’s a different type of crime, it could be fraud, or it could be all sorts of different types of crimes. Obviously it’s theft of the property and then the illegal disclosure.”
Because of the friendship that diGenova and President Trump share, diGenova is unable to make inquires without it appearing extremely bias. With that in mind, diGenova believes William Barr’s office in Washington D.C. should perform and investigation into the DOJ’s tax division. He also suggested another investigation in the Department of Treasury to find out if it was a treasury worker who leaked the documents.
Why not simply go to the source of the article? That would be the New York Times and when the article was first released, their very own Dean Baquet issued a statement with the documents. It read, “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.”
While the New York Times uses the strategy of hiding behind the First Amendment, the problem is about how the documents were obtained. Above, the word legally is in bold because only the writer and the paper know if they were obtained illegally. The answer should be simple – if they were acquired under the legal rules of the law then why hide the source?
This piece was written by Jeremy Porter on October 4, 2020. It originally appeared in DrewBerquist.com [1] and is used by permission.
Read more at DrewBerquist.com:
James Comey’s Comments on Hunter Biden Surprise Many, Says He Would Be Concerned as FBI Director [2]
Trump Approval Rating Up [3]
Debate Commission Wants To Change Rules To Benefit Biden [4]