╌>

IRS Contractor Leaked Information Of 405,000 Taxpayers — But We’re Supposed To Be Concerned About DOGE?

  
Via:  Jeremy in NC  •  one week ago  •  30 comments

By:   Brianna Lyman

IRS Contractor Leaked Information Of 405,000 Taxpayers — But We’re Supposed To Be Concerned About DOGE?
A new letter reveals an IRS contractor leaked the tax information of 405,427 taxpayers to news sources under the Biden administration.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


A new letter released by the House Judiciary Committee reveals that under the Biden administration, an IRS contractor leaked the tax information of 405,427 taxpayers to news sources — including that of President Donald Trump. Yet Americans are supposed to be concerned about DOGE?

For weeks Democrats have cried wolf over Elon Musk and DOGE supposedly plotting a "hostile takeover of the Treasury Department" and putting sensitive taxpayer information at risk. Democrats feigned outrage that DOGE would have "access to the management and disbursement of trillions of dollars and the highly sensitive information of millions of Americans." They even held a press conference attacking DOGE for being granted read-only access to the Treasury Department's payment system.

Unsurprisingly, the left-wing press has echoed these faux concerns.

"Elon Musk's DOGE presence at the IRS raises concerns about taxpayer data security, refund delays," CBS News' Aimee Picchi wrote.

The Washington Post's Jacob Bogage and Jeff Stein wrote that "Musk's DOGE seeks access to personal taxpayer data, raising alarm at IRS."

But for all the "concern" and "alarm" ringing going on, it seems Americans have more reason to be concerned with employees of the Treasury Department than a billionaire who legitimately doesn't need or want taxpayer information.

According to a letter that Department of the Treasury Acting Commissioner Douglas W. O'Donnell sent to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan on Feb. 14, Charles Littlejohn "inappropriately accessed or leaked" the information of 405,427 taxpayers, 89 percent of whom are "business entities."

Littlejohn had previously been charged in 2023 for allegedly disclosing tax return information to two news organizations that were not explicitly listed. This taxpayer information was leaked to ProPublica, which used the data "to report its 'Secret IRS Files' series," according to ProPublica.

"The vast dataset contained details on thousands of wealthy Americans, and ProPublica reported dozens of stories based on an analysis of it," ProPublica said. ProPublica's Editor-in-Chief Stephen Engelberg denied knowing the identity of the source when charges were made public.

A second leak by Littlejohn that included information regarding a "high-ranking government official" "appears to match The New York Times' reporting on the taxes of Donald Trump," ProPublica reported.

But Musk and DOGE are the real concerns?


Red Box Rules

No personal insults
No death wishes of any individual
All of NT's rules apply

PS

Calling members "trolls" or "dishonest" and "MAGA" references will result in your comment being deleted.


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1  seeder  Jeremy Retired in NC    one week ago
"Elon Musk's DOGE presence at the IRS raises concerns about taxpayer data security, refund delays," 

We've heard that pathetic whining from the Democrats and the left since DOGE was implemented.  Turns out it's NOT DOGE that is the concern, it's the IRS itself.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1    one week ago

Turns out it's NOT DOGE that is the concern, it's the IRS itself.

You're missing the whole point.  DOGE getting taxpayer info is just as serious about leaks concerning taxpayer info.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.1.1  seeder  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    one week ago
You're missing the whole point. 

I'm not missing anything.  The manufactured outrage is targeted at the wrong people.  Has been from the start.  Once you realize that, things will go much easier.

 
 
 
George
Senior Expert
1.1.2  George  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    one week ago

That entire comment is a lie, 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1.3  Ozzwald  replied to  George @1.1.2    one week ago

That entire comment is a lie, 

Your entire reply is a lie.

 
 
 
George
Senior Expert
2  George    one week ago

256

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  George @2    one week ago

256

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Expert
2.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1    one week ago

C’mon Jim, that’s just different.

Trust me bro

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1    one week ago

People could ignore the thirteen year old.  The nineteen year olds have been actively inserted into our government. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
2.1.3  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    one week ago
People could ignore the thirteen year old.

Wait... hold on..... so we ARE ... in fact... allowed to ignore bullshit on social media??  

I was told earlier that was not the case.

Oh, and "how dare you".

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
3  Sean Treacy    one week ago

Biden Admin also gave access to the IRS database to student interns.  Literally hundreds of people had it. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
4  Sean Treacy    one week ago

Steal 400,000 tax returns and send them to a left wing advocacy group?  1 felony count.  

Mislabel a non disclosure agreement as legal expenses (depending on which expert you ask) ?  34 felony counts.  

Good to be a criminal democrat. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1  seeder  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sean Treacy @4    one week ago
Steal 400,000 tax returns and send them to a left wing advocacy group?  1 felony count.  

Kind of pathetic isn't it.  Summarizes the incompetence of the previous DOJ pretty good though.

 
 
 
George
Senior Expert
5  George    one week ago

Democrats subpoena a private citizen's tax forms and then release them to the press for political gain, and now they have the audacity to be upset that someone is auditing the auditors, Democrats no longer even have the illusion of possessing integrity when it comes to trump. 

 
 
 
Thomas
PhD Guide
6  Thomas    one week ago

The entire premise of this article is non-sequitur. The fact that somebody has leaked in the past has no bearing on whether leaks can occur in the future. But the possibility that leaks can occur is directly relatable to the number of people with access to that information. So, yes, there is greater concern over more people having access to that data, especially ones that have not been cleared through the proper channels.

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Sophomore Quiet
6.1  Igknorantzruls  replied to  Thomas @6    one week ago

didn’t i just see where 20 or so Doge employees just quit over something or other ?

 
 
 
Thomas
PhD Guide
6.1.1  Thomas  replied to  Igknorantzruls @6.1    one week ago

They were existing government employees who got restructured under the DOGE umbrella. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
6.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Thomas @6    one week ago
But the possibility that leaks can occur is directly relatable to the number of people with access to that information.

Mathematically irrefutable.  However, according to ProPublica, DOGE has about 100 employees.  The IRS had over 100,000.  An organization the size of the IRS will have normal operating turnover every 30 days on a scale much larger than the entire DOGE staff, so the numerical risk becomes trivial.  

So, yes, there is greater concern over more people having access to that data, especially ones that have not been cleared through the proper channels.

Do we know that one way or the other?  The whole thing is certainly a cowboy tech-bro operation, so it would not be out of the realm of possibility that they circumvented proper channels.  But it would seem that somebody would have thought to get these people clearance.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
6.3  seeder  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Thomas @6    one week ago
The fact that somebody has leaked in the past has no bearing on whether leaks can occur in the future.

It's an example that the manufactured outrage is targeted at the wrong people.  Has been from the start.  Once you realize that, things will go much easier.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Expert
6.3.1  Sparty On  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.3    one week ago

Never think for a second that many are not fully aware of it.    Problem is those folks have an agenda to push and push it they do.    Reality is meaningless to them in such cases.

 
 
 
Thomas
PhD Guide
6.3.2  Thomas  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.3    one week ago

No, it was your contention that one person leaked so what was wrong with giving all the information to a few more people when we have no idea what their purpose is. That is, why do they need the tax information of all the people in the US? We have virtually no clear view of anything that they are doing. So far, it has been a slipshod and chaotic slashing of people with no regard to performance, or what the jobs actually were. Cutting jobs to cut jobs is not the way to go and maintain the efficiency of the government. It is the way to destroy the efficiency and efficacy of the congressionally mandated departments.

Go on, celebrate, one day you will figure out that by destroying the government, they are actually destroying the people and the nation. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
6.3.3  Jack_TX  replied to  Thomas @6.3.2    one week ago
We have virtually no clear view of anything that they are doing.

Did we have a clear view of what the rest of the IRS was doing?

It is the way to destroy the efficiency and efficacy of the congressionally mandated departments.

In the same way it destroys my ability to play the violin.  

I don't play the violin, BTW.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
6.3.4  seeder  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Thomas @6.3.2    one week ago
No, it was your contention that one person leaked

I never said one person leaked.  I pointed out that the ARTICLE stated ONE person was charged with the leak.  Read the article.

 
 
 
Thomas
PhD Guide
6.3.5  Thomas  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.3.4    6 days ago

A distinction without a difference.

 
 
 
Thomas
PhD Guide
6.3.6  Thomas  replied to  Jack_TX @6.3.3    5 days ago

Did you know that I fart Rainbows?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
6.4  JBB  replied to  Thomas @6    one week ago

[]

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
6.5  Split Personality  replied to  Thomas @6    6 days ago

The real crime occurred in 2019 and again in 2020.  

This is a five year old story and the perp has been in jail for over a year serving out a 5 year sentence.

The Exceptional crime was that parts of DJTrumps tax returns were leaked.

How dare the Biden DOJ treat Trump fairly.

1 felony = 5years

34 felonies = 0 years

CMTSU

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
6.5.1  seeder  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Split Personality @6.5    5 days ago
34 felonies = 0 years

You misspelled misdemeanors.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
6.5.2  Split Personality  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.5.1    5 days ago

I used the NY State Criminal Code dictionary. jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7  Sean Treacy    one week ago

The entire complaint is: "Oh Boy, someone from DOGE MIGHT use private information for political purposes!  Just like the partisan democrat who stole 400,000 tax returns for partisan purposes and not a single Democrat cared. But it would be the end of democracy if someone from DOGE  did what the partisan democrat already did."

 
 

Who is online


Krishna
Jack_TX
Greg Jones


55 visitors