this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
308 points (99.0% liked)

politics

27678 readers
3556 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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

[–] Catma@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

[–] hector@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago (1 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?

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 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.

[–] hector@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago (1 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.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 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.

[–] hector@lemmy.today 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

If you say so, I do not share your faith.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Doesn't matter commissioners do not decide settlements.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who hires the IRS lawyers that do decide them?

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 0 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 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."

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 22 hours ago (1 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.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 21 hours ago (1 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.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 0 points 21 hours ago (1 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??

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

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.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Dumb people love memes, look at this administration for example.