President Donald Trump is suing the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Department, and is seeking $10 billion in damages.

Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization sued the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department in federal court in Miami on Thursday, following the leak of their tax returns by a former IRS employee in 2019 and 2020.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [S] 170 points 9 months ago (17 children)

LOL OMG broad day light THEFT of US treasury.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 9 months ago (15 children)

    You mean to suggest Scott Bessent and Pam Bondi won't treat this lawsuit fairly and impartially? How dare you!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (14 children)

    It's not a criminal complaint, it's civil. The doj has fuck all to do with civil matters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (13 children)

    The DOJ defends civil litigation against the federal government as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (12 children)

    The oig hires outside for politically involved cases. The doj has to stay at a distance and that doesn't negate the obligation to provide proof of actual damages.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    That sounds like a very reasonable custom and norm for an independent, non-conflicted DOJ. (Sorry, deadpan is hard online.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    It's not custom it's legal precedent, if they ignore it that just means eventually he's up for clawback with interest and any profit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Thanks, this is not a sealion question: do you have something to further read about this or support this? I'd like to understand how the DOJ is actually bound. The DOJ has been run by Bondi as Trump's private law firm, regardless of their mandate, and I expect that to continue.

    My initial suspicion is that anything short of a Supreme Court ruling (and possibly not even that) will force compliance by the DOJ, but after-the-fact compliance may be meaningless as well. It'd be quite typical for Trump/Bondi to fully "defend" and settle the case with taxpayer money already in Trump's account before any challenges complete, followed by appeals, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    28 cfr 50.15

    (10) If conflicts exist between the legal and factual positions of various employees in the same case which make it inappropriate for a single attorney to represent them all, the employees may be separated into as many compatible groups as is necessary to resolve the conflict problem and each group may be provided with separate representation. Circumstances may make it advisable that private representation be provided to all conflicting groups and that direct Justice Department representation be withheld so as not to prejudice particular defendants. In such situations, the procedures of § 50.16 will apply.

    The oig not the commissioner would act on behalf of the IRS because the commissioner is a conflicted party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (1 child)

    Thanks for this. I don't think it applies here.

    50.15 says this is when employees are sued in their individual capacity for official duties. Inter-defendant conflicts of the type in 50.15(a)(10) are typically for when multiple defendants have competing interests and that presents a conflict to joint representation. At best, I see provisions regarding whether the DOJ is not obligated to pay money damages for an employee's wrongdoing ((a)(8)(iii))

    The situation here may just be too corrupt. Trump is suing with private counsel a third party government agency that is technically not him, but the issue is that the captured DOJ itself also is now de facto personal counsel to Trump. The IRS and Treasury are defendants that should be represented by the DOJ, except that the DOJ is irreparably conflicted. So it is Trump, by DOJ proxy, deciding whether to give himself money out of the public's pocket, and the fact that he filed the suit itself suggests his answer is "yes, I deserve it."

    And, despite this, no private litigation counsel could even address this, because the DOJ would still retain authority to settle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    What is that supposed to mean, use your words.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    That's the DOJ official documents of proof my man. See, it's all in your head. This administration is draining the swamp! /s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Took you a week to come up with that gem did it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 126 points 9 months ago

    You mean the tax returns he was supposed to voluntarily release, himself?

  • source
  • [–] 107 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    All the presidents combined for the last century have only amassed $40 million in wealth while in office despite the whining and complaining by the right about the Clintons or Obama. All of them, combined, a century’s worth…$40 million

    Trump has stuffed his pockets with $3 billion in since he got elected. In one year.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 70 points 9 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 64 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    They will end up settling out of court for half that and he'll laugh all the way to the bank. Another grift executed.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    A 0.1% settlement is still $10m.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago

    He just accepted a gold bar and Rolex in exchange for removing tariffs on Switzerland. Even if that were a 1 kilo gold bar, that's $160,000. He got all his tech goons to contribute $1M to his inauguration.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 63 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    I'll never forgive the assholes that voted this piece of shit into office again. I feel dumber every time I read this childish bullshit, and sad for humanity seeing the homuculi that applaud stupidity.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 49 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I am so sick and tired of this fucking LEECH. Everything about that thing is horrid. Every little thing. Zero redeeming qualities. He is a disgusting parasite.

    The world would be better place...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago

    His stupidity, lack of historical knowledge, and his vainglory that has led him to surround himself with Yes Men and the like are all redeeming qualities in a sense because they stop him from achieving his callous agenda as much. But no he does not have any traditional virtue.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 43 points 9 months ago

    I feel the same about all of these headlines.

    No matter how conservative you are, how can you support this? Its just nuts.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 9 months ago

    He’s suing all of us. We are the government.

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    Trump: I would like to sue the Office of the President of the USA for $10 billion dollars.

    Taxpayers: But, you are the President.

    Trump: Oh great, I’ll settle with myself for $5 billion dollars. Send a check.

    Taxpayers:

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Americans: what a brilliant man.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 9 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Say what you want, he got himself to become a president. Obviously he did something right.

    That something being lying, cheating, frauding, being stupidly lucky as well as removed which somehow is that combo that makes giant idiots rise to the top...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago*

    Obviously he did something right.

    Hillary: "Donald, my close personal friend and Epstein associate, would you mind running in the Republican primary and sabotaging their campaign so I can be president?"

    Trump: "Absolutely. Would love it. Really looking forward to you winning. Unless you don't! Haha. But seriously, good luck out there. Can't wait to receive a bunch of kickbacks under your administration."

    2016 was literally "What if The Producers ran for President"?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 9 months ago

    It's not only for $10b because his lawyer 'intepreted' "a hundred hundred gazillion bigly dollars" at an actual amount rather than trying to explain how numbers work.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago (25 children)

    How can he show damages when all the other presidents released theirs?

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago (24 children)

    That's the best part: he doesn't have to. He can just order IRS to settle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (23 children)

    No he can't. The IRS legal team isn't an executive function.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (9 children)

    Doesn't matter commissioners do not decide settlements.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    Who hires the IRS lawyers that do decide them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago* (6 children)

    OMG! The good news just keeps coming and coming

    "On September 24, 2025, federal judge Ana C. Reyes ruled that the administration unlawfully fired 17 inspectors general, but refused to reinstate them, noting that Trump could simply re-fire them after providing the congressionally mandated 30 days' notice."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (5 children)

    That's not new, he's getting sued by a handful of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    Didn't you read the part about the judge refusing to reinstate them?

    So you still believe the people that decide settlements for IRS are independent of the administration even though Trump can just fire them at will... That's why everyone laughed at you. Now I feel stupid for providing arguments. I should have just laughed as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    The judge didn't refuse to reinstate them they ordered the white house to and the white house refused, that's why they're being sued.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Wrong:

    https://federalnewsnetwork.com/agency-oversight/2025/09/trump-unlawfully-fired-17-agency-igs-judge-finds-but-wont-reinstate-them/

    "A federal judge found President Donald Trump unlawfully fired several agency watchdogs early in his second term, but won’t reinstate them to their government oversight jobs."

    "Reinstatement would also be challenging, because the Senate has begun confirming some of their successors.

    In August, the Senate confirmed Cheryl Mason as the permanent IG for the Department of Veterans Affairs — replacing Michael Missal, the previous VA inspector general and one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Other agency watchdog offices continue to operate with acting IGs."

    Maybe the will appeal to the Supreme Court. This one is still independent, right??

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    The judge can't, it's not that they won't. It's portrayed in the media as refusal but if you actually read what's in pacer you'll find out that's not the case.

    Reinstatement would also be challenging, because the Senate has begun confirming some of their successors.

    Yeah that doesn't change the fact they were removed illegally nor does it have anything to do with the judge being a factor.

    They don't need to at this point and it would behoove them to wait as long as possible because back pay is from the time of notice, the judge is technically just helping them make a case for far more backpay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    That's all great but you do realize that those fired inspectors don't make any decisions now?That the newly confirmed guy that Trump chose is making the decisions now? Like, you still live in some parallel world where laws mean something while in the real world Trump is making illegal decisions every day and everyone obeys them. I bet once he gets the $10B from IRS settlement you will still claim that the money are not really his.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] -3 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    Oh you infantilizing winter moron. Make an actual argument not a veiled insult.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Yhe irs' leadership is appointed by prez snd can be fired at will. They can order the legal team, and or fimd ways to get them out.

    I remimd you he sued parts of the federal government already and they settled with him, what did he Sue again I can't recall at the moment. I think at least two lawsuits one with the FBI was it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    The oig isn't and the oig is who would appoint outside counsel since everyone involved in conflicted.

    He didn't, and they didn't. He certainly threatened to I'll give you that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    I presume you are referring to the office of Inspector general, and they can be fired by the president he is fired several already last year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    That would make the oig as conflicted as the IRS commissioner in which case it would dump out to Congress to choose.

    That said the oig for Treasury is a very large office for an oig and that's a very tall tree to chop down by millimeters, trump would be dead before all conflictions are litigated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 42 points 9 months ago (9 children)

    Based on what little I know of this, myself only being versed in Bird Law, doesn't the IRS enjoy sovereign immunity as a governmental entity? They can just declare that they do not agree to being sued.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Yeah, but they're an executive agency, so Trump can just fire anyone who says no, until they get to someone who will agree to let the lawsuit proceed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Their counsel has to provide a vigorous defense of the IRS so they can't walk into court and agree with Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Are any of their remaining staff capable of providing a vigorous defense?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    He's stealing our money

    OUR. FUCKING. MONEY.

    obligatory: fuck izrael too

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 9 months ago

    Eat my ass you irredeemable cunt

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    He better be careful. Not even the Joker said he would go against the IRS in Batman.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    That's because the joker never was in charge of the federal government.

    That being said, I think joker as president would be a nice step up... he's chaotic as hell, but he hates indiscriminately, he explicitly will not work with nazi's (If I recall a crossover had him meet red skull, who he opposed the second he realized he was a real nazi).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 9 months ago

    What a doofus. He could've asked for 10 billion and fifty dollars. Now he's going to be 50$ short some day.

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I can’t believe it took this long for someone to realize they can just openly plunder and get away with it. Or that we sit around and let it happen.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    There've got to be laws against that, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    "You see, I'm demanding maybe the most anyone has ever demanded. They come up to me and tell me: sir, no one has ever demanded this much. I sued them for eleventyseven zillion dollars"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago

    you gotta use the translator:

    “The IRS wrongly allowed a rogue, politically-motivated employee to leak private and confidential information about President Trump, his family, and the Trump Organization to the New York Times, ProPublica and other left-wing news outlets, which was then illegally released to millions of people,” a Trump spokesperson said in a statement.

    “The IRS employee exposed factual, damning information about President Trump, his family, and the Trump Organization to the New York Times, ProPublica and other left-wing news outlets, which was then obviously released to millions of people,” a rational person should take from that statement.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    What damages? How about we dig into all the fraud on avoiding paying taxes on all that money daddy gave him?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago

    Watch the fucking system eat itself alive

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›