Do you agree with the New York Times decision to publish Trump's tax return?

[Panda Express]

The New York Times is risking legal trouble by publishing Donald Trump’s tax return without his consent. Do you agree or disagree with their decision to publish it?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

no they should have realised Donald Trump's feelings would be hurt and that many of his fans would be triggered.

[ProudModerate2]

no they should have realised Donald Trump's feelings would be hurt and that many of his fans would be triggered.

[Landslide Lyndon]

There is absolutely no legal risk. The documents were sent by mail and authenticated.
If Trump dares to sue he will be laughed out of court.

[PeteB]

Of course they should. It is news, does not impact national security, has no immediate negative impact on Trump's IRS audit (since it is from 1995) and the public is hungry for this info about a potential President.  NYT received it without soliciting and has presumably done their due diligence and is staking their own journalistic reputation that it is a genuine document.

The real question is who leaked it. Should it (for example) have come from inside the IRS via Clinton's campaign, that would be non-kosher. But I doubt that. Trump has made so many enemies that this could have originated from so many places.

[Brittain33]

This is the most lopsided poll result on Atlas I can remember. Right now it's running 40-1.

[Arbitrage1980]

It was Trump's fault for not releasing his tax returns on  his own. Now he's paying the price for his foolishness.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

It came from Trump Tower (actual return address), so yes.

[ill ind]

If Trump cant stand the heat, he needs to get out of the kitchen.
Given what we've seem of attacks during the GWB and Obama administrations, he'd be a fool to think he's going to just waltz into the White House and face no whithering attacks.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Of course. This is publicly relevant information.

[HisGrace]

"All news that's fit to print"

The public has a right to know about candidates tax returns. There really ought to be a law about it, especially now that Trump has set a negative precedent by refusing to do it.

[NOVA Green]

Of course they should. It is news, does not impact national security, has no immediate negative impact on Trump's IRS audit (since it is from 1995) and the public is hungry for this info about a potential President.  NYT received it without soliciting and has presumably done their due diligence and is staking their own journalistic reputation that it is a genuine document.

The real question is who leaked it. Should it (for example) have come from inside the IRS via Clinton's campaign, that would be non-kosher. But I doubt that. Trump has made so many enemies that this could have originated from so many places.

[mark_twain]

The New York Times is risking legal trouble by publishing Donald Trump’s tax return without his consent. Do you agree or disagree with their decision to publish it?

I'm sure Trump wants all of America to know just how smart he was with his tax returns...

[ag]

The real question is who leaked it. Should it (for example) have come from inside the IRS via Clinton's campaign, that would be non-kosher. But I doubt that. Trump has made so many enemies that this could have originated from so many places.

Would IRS even have state returns? And why those from 1995?

[Ebowed]

If Donald Trump won't release his tax returns like every other presidential nominee has, then the media will have to do it for him.

It's clear from the 1995 return that Trump is so badly in debt that he is basically owned by creditors that may pose a national security risk to the country.  Now we understand why he's been so secretive.

[ag]

Yes, NYTimes did the right thing.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Indeed. If it's a fake, then the NYT is going to be on the hook for a tremendous amount. As for the leak, if it's an IRS employee, that's grounds for immediate termination. Also, given the date - from 1995 makes me suspicious. Why would this particular return be kept for this long?

In any case, the source isn't something I'd touch with a ten foot pole.

[psychprofessor]

If Donald Trump won't release his tax returns like every other presidential nominee has, then the media will have to do it for him.

It's clear from the 1995 return that Trump is so badly in debt that he is basically owned by creditors that may pose a national security risk to the country.  Now we understand why he's been so secretive.

Exactly, and this is a major point - do people honestly think that he would be the interests of the United States ahead of his business profits? Who is financing him? Would he advocate policy that benefits the people or corporations or other entities that finance him? We need to know who he owes money to and what ALL of the potential conflicts of interest are.

If people were so interested in who was donating to the Clinton Foundation, which is public record, then we need to see all of Trump's tax returns and financial entanglements.

[ag]

Given that return, it is, of course, legitimate to wonder, if the rest of his business is just a Ponzi scheme. The only way he could dispell such suspicions is by producing his most recent returns.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Indeed. If it's a fake, then the NYT is going to be on the hook for a tremendous amount. As for the leak, if it's an IRS employee, that's grounds for immediate termination. Also, given the date - from 1995 makes me suspicious. Why would this particular return be kept for this long?

In any case, the source isn't something I'd touch with a ten foot pole.

The IRS doesn't have state tax returns.  The fact that the leak consisted of State tax returns from multiple states indicates the leak had to come for someone close to Trump, either now or in the past.  Maybe Marla if she got access to his tax returns while they were married, but more likely a disgruntled former employee he stiffed. As complicated as his taxes are, there's a fair number of suspects.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The question of forgery remains. The problem is less, "can we prove this is legitimate", but more, "what's the chain of custody here?"

I'm not a Trump fan, but as the NYT I'd be incredibly hesitant about publishing anything purporting to be the tax returns of someone else.

[ag]

The question of forgery remains. The problem is less, "can we prove this is legitimate", but more, "what's the chain of custody here?"

Trump could easily resolve the problem, if it is fake. He has the originals. He can publish them (and/or authorize the IRS to publish them). If this stuff is fake, he can easily make NYTimes squirm. If he is not doing it, it is his problem.

[Gass3268]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The question of forgery remains. The problem is less, "can we prove this is legitimate", but more, "what's the chain of custody here?"

I'm not a Trump fan, but as the NYT I'd be incredibly hesitant about publishing anything purporting to be the tax returns of someone else.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's not how defamation laws work. The NYTimes is liable for publishing the document, and it's not up to Trump to disprove them, but up to the NYTimes to prove that the document they have is not a fake. 

Given that their source is wholly anonymous, I'm skeptical. There's nothing that indicates any credible path from Trump to the source.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do we have a name for the CPA, and can we confirm that the CPA actually has a connection to Trump?