The New York Times and their criminal act of publishing Donald Trump's private Tax Return is against the law as they know, they did it anyway, let them pay. Donald Trump took business losses that offset future profits, it's done every day. The cash settlement that the New York Times will have to pay Donald Trump, will at last, end the life of New York Times and bury the old gray bitch forever, bury it for good. Any small business man, or huge corporation can do the same thing Donald Trump did, and I'm confident that millions file the same way.. so what was the point of the illegal document .... all political. Now, The New York Times will pay the price for breaking the law.. costing them hundreds of millions of dollars.. it was illegal.. it was wrong.. so let's see what the DOJ does or the Attorney General of New York State.. if they do nothing.. the New York Times just destroyed the Hillary Clinton campaign.. It is thought that there is a chain email from Hillary Clinton operatives and the New York Times that may be a reality, WikiLeaks will find it.

It's legal action time against the New York Times.. They knowingly broke a federal law...The New York Times and their criminal act of publishing Donald Trump's private Tax Return is against the law as they know, they did it anyway, let them pay. 

The New York Times, loves the elite establishment, it's their bread and butter, but now, they went criminal.  There will be a national boycott of the New York Times and of course they will say it doesn't care because they care more about the truth.. but the New York Times never published the extreme scandals about the Bill and Hillary Clinton gang.. wonder why?

Donald Trump took business losses that offset future profits, it's done every day.  

The cash settlement that the New York Times will have to pay Donald Trump, will at last, end the life of New York Times and bury the old gray bitch forever, bury it for good.  

Any small business man, or huge corporation can do the same thing Donald Trump did, and I'm confident that millions file the same way.. 

so what was the point of the illegal document .... all political.  

Now, The New York Times will pay the price for breaking the law.. costing them hundreds of millions of dollars.. it was illegal.. it was wrong.. so let's see what the DOJ does or the Attorney General of New York State.. 

if they do nothing.. 

the New York Times just destroyed the Hillary Clinton campaign.. It is thought that there is a chain email from Hillary Clinton operatives and the New York Times that may be a reality, WikiLeaks will find it.

The New York Times just published Donald Trump’s tax returns without his “affirmative authorization” as required by law. This violates the plain language of the law, and is considered criminal if “willful.”  In tax laws in general, and First Amendment cases as well, courts compel a definition of willful that requires the individual know the law and know the law prohibits them from doing what they did. Here is where The New York Times runs into true trouble.

Prior to receiving or publishing these documents, Executive Editor Dean Baquet acknowledged in a public forum with Bob Woodward and Laura Poitras that “lawyers would say this is crossing a line” and “you know what your lawyers would tell you: if you publish them, you go to jail.” In criminal willfulness prosecutions, this is as close as you get to a “smoking gun” of willful intent to break the law: public admission the person knows they would be breaking the law, but advocating it anyway.  Worse yet, because Baquet is a “key employee” with authority to bind the company, this conduct could be considered a crime of The New York Times as a company.

The only defense proffered so far by supporters of The New York Times is the First Amendment. A key Supreme Court constraint on the First Amendment defense is that the newspaper obtain information “lawfully.” A seminal case in this respect is the famous footnote 8 from the Florida Star case in the Supreme Court where the court left open the question whether “in cases where information has been acquired unlawfully by a newspaper or by a source” the government may legally “punish not only the unlawful acquisition, but the ensuing publication as well.”

http://www.clintontarium.com