The build up last night on MSNBC had my phone ringing off the hook. Rachel Maddow proclaimed “we’ve got the Trump returns.” It turned out to be just the 2005 filing. Well, not the 2005 filing, the first two pages. Worse yet, it turned out to be an entirely predictable tax return for a wealthy businessman with tons of deductibles. It seemed like the tax version of Al Capone’s safe with Geraldo Rivera. What was particularly odd is that MSNBC was “all in” — even after seeing that there was little there. Maddow led with a long list of things we want to know from Trump’s tax return. But none of those things were in the return. They lined up experts who seemed a lot like the “weather center” reporters the night before covering the major snow storm in D.C. Reporters literally showed a dusting on cars in parking lots and spoke breathlessly about the possible storm that never came. The tax experts were left in the same curious position — discussing what might have been shown. As a legal commentator, I bowed out. It was like being called as a seismologists to discuss an earthquake that never happened. It is certainly true that Trump and Melania paid is a rate of less than 4 percent on their personal income — $5.3 million. However, they paid an additional $31 million under the alternative minimum tax, or AMT. They used every loophole and tactic to reduce payments but those loopholes were legal and used by many in his tax bracket.
Having said that, the White House and others went too far in raising allegations of criminal conduct by Maddow and MSNBC in reporting on the story. There was also a return to the mantra of the “dishonest media.” There was nothing dishonest in publishing the return. It was clearly overplayed but it was not dishonest to cover the leak.
I have a lot of respect for Maddow, who is as smart as they come and often offers penetrating analysis. However, one had to wonder if MSNBC was played. Why would someone leak a tax return that would seem to support Trump? It is a federal crime to do so with potential jail time of five years. Who would risk it for this? Even CNBC called the story a victory for Trump.
In fairness to Maddow, there is no legal reason that I know preventing President Trump from releasing his tax returns and he should do so. There is a long tradition of such transparency in history and I am very disturbed by the failure to do so in this Administration.
Having said that, the MSNBC seemed intent on riding this story despite the fact that it moved little. Donald Trump earned more than $150 million in the year 2005 and paid $38 million in taxes.
After decrying the illegal disclosure of a return, the White House noted “Before being elected president, Mr. Trump was one of the most successful businessmen in the world with a responsibility to his company, his family, and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required . . . That being said, Mr. Trump paid $38 million even after taking into account large-scale depreciation for construction, on an income of more than $150 million, as well as paying tens of millions of dollars in other taxes such as sales and excise taxes and employment taxes and this illegally published return proves just that.”
Here is the full statement:
“You know you are desperate for ratings when you are willing to violate the law to push a story about two pages of tax returns from over a decade ago.”Before being elected President, Mr Trump was one of the most successful businessmen in the world with a responsibility to his company, his family and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required.
That being said, Mr. Trump paid $38 million dollars even after taking into account large scale depreciation for construction, on an income of more than $150 million dollars, as well as paying tens of millions of dollars in other taxes such as sales and excise taxes and employment taxes and this illegally published return proves just that.
“Despite this substantial income figure and tax paid, it is totally illegal to steal and publish tax returns.
The dishonest media can continue to make this part of their agenda, while the President will focus on his, which includes tax reform that will benefit all Americans.”
I agree with Maddow that MSNBC has a journalistic basis for publishing this return under the First Amendment, even though publication is also a federal crime. I also did not like the reference to “the dishonest media.” There was nothing dishonest about reporting on such a leak. It is wrong to continually accuse media of being dishonest or liars when they are performing their important function under our Constitution. I do believe that Trump is facing a hostile media and that coverage has been at times slanted. However, media remains one of the most important institutions in protecting our liberties.
I also did not appreciate the allegation that MSNBC violated the law. Most leaks technically violate the law but they are at the core of some of the most important historical reforms in our history. From the Pentagon Papers to Watergate, leaks have revealed illegality and dishonestly long shielded by the government. Administrations have sought to find those who steal and release such documents, but have historically respected the right of the media to cover such leaks. Once again, this constant drumbeat against the media needs to end. The White House is perfectly correct in challenging biased reporting and I have seen plenty of instances of such reporting in the last few months. However, Administrations should not throw around criminal allegations against the media for reporting a clearly newsworthy leak. It turned out to be less important than MSNBC suggested and that was something of an embarrassment. However, in light of the President’s refusal to turn over his returns, it was by any definition newsworthy for publication to address some of the long-standing allegations.
