Furious at the announcement that President Trump had reached a settlement with his own Justice Department in a $10 billion lawsuit over his leaked tax returns, I took to social media to share my disgust. In the same video, I recounted the loss of Congressman Thomas Massie the night before to a Trump-backed candidate and the gloating of his staff and MAGA influencers, claiming the President is the most powerful political force in history.
In haste, frustration, or both, I made a mistake. I said that the agreement would prevent the President and his sons from having their tax returns audited by the IRS in the future. In fact, the agreement states that none of the returns filed prior to May 19th, the date of the agreement, can be audited.
In the post, I made the case that there is no legal, ethical, or moral line that Trump will not cross to win. As examples of these character deficiencies, I listed his assault of E. Jean Carroll, his 34 felony convictions for fraud, and the corrupt, self-dealing settlement agreement. It didn’t take long for MAGA to weigh in.
The comment that caught my eye and that I was sure was not the product of a troll farm was from someone I have worked with and have known for 30 years. In fact, I have a lot of history with this person that I won’t share to protect his identity, but this is not a random commenter.
The comment began with, “CORRECTION:” then proceeded to explain how I had misstated the conditions of the settlement addendum and that it only applied to audits of tax returns prior to the date of the agreement. I stopped and researched for a few minutes, realized the mistake, and admitted it in a reply. I said it was noteworthy that DOJ had issued a clarifying statement because the language was confusing, but that I was wrong.
But I continued with this observation:
“Rather than splitting hairs, the conversation should be about the legal, moral, and ethical considerations of an agreement and what might be in the tax returns of a 79-year-old billionaire that he doesn’t want revealed. I think ‘corrections’ like this miss the plot.”
This non-lawyer, but educated person with a master’s and a doctorate, proceeds to paste the summary of the original lawsuit into the comments and lecture about what our founding fathers intended for the protection of our liberties. However, an actual lawyer, formerly Trump’s White House counsel, Ty Cobb, argues that statutory damages for improper disclosure are $1,000 per instance, nowhere near $1.8 billion.
The more disturbing aspect of this exchange is that the less than 3-minute video I posted doesn’t focus only on the slush fund. It points out the retribution against Thomas Massie for pushing for the release of the Epstein Files, and as mentioned, E. Jean Carroll’s assault and Trump’s fraud convictions. Those undeniable instances, combined with the graft that this agreement represents, and so many other illegal, unethical, and immoral acts of this administration, comprise the “plot.”
And so many people, most considered “upstanding citizens,” are unwilling to call it what it is,
WRONG.