Biggest news in the 2005 Trump tax release

[bigtree]

...is the WH response.

Laurence Tribe? @tribelaw
Biggest news re this Trump tax return is that White House dared to threaten @maddow by saying (wrongly) that her publishing it would be illegal

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[global1]

1. It Could Be Interpreted That They Were Egging Her On....

to make them public - if they wanted them made public and actually leaked them on purpose.

They bet on her taking the bait. And she did.

[bigtree]

3. more impact from all of the handwringing over the reporting

...than from the actual substance reported.

They got that part right.

[pat_k]

7. No "taking the bait" needed. As a "possibly illegal act" some "hype" is guaranteed.

How this played out is very helpful to DT:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8793243

[MFM008]

2. Ill take door number 2

[KittyWampus]

6. STOP SPAMMING GD WITH THIS.

[MFM008]

8. I love this picture

I think it's quite appropriate for the topic.

[kstewart33]

4. Why leak to a known enemy?

No secret that Johnston detests Trump. Who with his close connections to Rachel would pass it on to her.

Better to leak it to Hannity for some very loving coverage.

[pat_k]

5. I'm guessing 2005 1040 paints a "better picture" that any other in the last 20 yrs.

I can see him leaking it (or having it leaked at his direction) so he can say "Look, I paid a higher percentage than Romney in 2005."

Also:

1. He knows such a "leak' would get the spotlight (And he helped shine that light with his "Rachel is a criminal" press release).

2. He knows that a 1040 without schedules says very little, and so any bruhaha would be seen as "overblown."

3. He knows this would get coded in the public mind as a "Tax return release event" that ended up with "nothing to see here" It sets up the expectation that if other returns are ever released, those 'release events" will also end with "nothing to see here." Of course, this was not actually a "Tax return release event" because it didn't include schedules, but that doesn't stop our brains from generalizing. It's what our brains do.


Of course, the 1040 does have some information. e.g., How much less he would have paid if there were no Alternative Minimum. (And he wants to get rid of it.) Having a concrete number to cite when they try to end AMT is helpful.

And David Cay Johnston's point that DT has NO excuse for not releasing 2016 (can't be under audit if just filed) is useful