Larry Flynt Offers $1M Reward for Mitt Romney Tax Returns

[highplainsdem]

Source: Adweek

It’s no secret that Larry Flynt, the often-controversial founder and publisher of Hustler magazine, is not a fan of Mitt Romney. (Maybe that’s because the Republican nominee has said that he supports federal obscenity laws—which aren't exactly good Flynt’s business.) It’s also no secret that Romney opponents have been dying to get their hands on his unreleased tax returns, which, they claim, could prove that the candidate hasn't been paying his fair share of taxes. Now, Flynt is joining their cause by offering a $1 million reward for Romney's tax information.

Flynt is taking out full-page ads in this Sunday’s edition of The Washington Post and Tuesday’s USA Today that promises “up to $1 million” for the dirt on Romney’s “unreleased tax returns and/or details of his offshore assets, bank accounts and business partnerships.” (But before you go calling the Hustler hotline, be aware that Flynt will need “documented evidence of your claims.”)

-snip-

Read more: http://www.adweek.com/news/press/larry-flynt-offers-1m-reward-mitt-romney-tax-returns-143474

[Kingofalldems]

1. Yep

[Cali_Democrat]

2. Go Larry!!

[RKP5637]

3. K&R !!! n/t

[d_b]

4. haha

love larry

[NMDemDist2]

5. so maybe those guys in TN will collect?

we can only hope....

[99th_Monkey]

36. Thumb Drives meet Mr Flint. ~nt

[former9thward]

43. Fake story meets fake offer.

[lexw]

46. Agreed

[xocet]

67. History seems to indicate that Flynt is willing to expend some monies though how much is unclear...

However, you may be right about the "fake story" part of things. That remains to be seen.

ROLLING STONE
Checking in With LARRY FLYNT
On trial and under attack, the HUSTLER publisher is taking on his most ambitious project yet: making porn stars of the GOP
February 18, 1999
By NEIL STRAUSS
Photographs by MARY ELLEN MARK
...

Flynt thrives on conflict, especially when he thinks he's right, and now leaning forward in his chair ‑ he delivers his knockout blow. "I may not decide who the next speaker of the House is going to be," he begins, raising his voice, "but I sure as hell decided who it was not going to be."

Few argue this point. "But for Larry Flynt, Bob Livingston would be speaker ‑ that is a fact," echoes Democratic strategist James Carville in a separate interview. And all it took was money. In October, Flynt spent $85,000 for a full‑page ad in the Washington Post, offering up to $1 million to anyone able to provide evidence of "illicit sexual relations with a congressman, senator or other prominent officeholder." He received 2,000 responses. Within a week, the two private investigators he had hired narrowed the pool down to forty‑eight and then, a month later, to twelve lucky finalists, whose stories were well‑documented enough to pursue. But even before Flynt played his hand, one of his most formidable targets folded. On December 18th, Livingston, the Louisiana Republican who was about to become speaker of the House and second in line to the presidency, announced that he would resign his seat. Making a vague admission of "marital infidelity," Livingston complained about having been "Larry Flynted," but a full‑on Flynting promises to be a far more excruciating experience ‑ one supported by embarrassingly specific evidence for which Flynt is paying nicely. The week after the Falwell taping, Flynt held a press conference to charge that in 1983, Georgia Rep. Bob Barr ‑ a Republican who is an avid abortion opponent and a member of the pro‑life caucus ‑ drove his then‑wife to and from an abortion clinic and paid the doctor's bill. To support the claim, Flynt produced a signed affidavit from Barr's ex‑wife, Gail Vogel Barr, and a clinic receipt. Immediately after Flynt's announcement, Barr released a statement saying that he "never suggested, urged, forced or encouraged anyone, including my ex‑wife, to have an abortion." But Barr, a member of the House Judiciary Committee and the first House member to call for Clinton's impeachment, would not address specific questions as to whether he'd paid the bill.

Though Flynt is in the midst of assembling cases against more Republicans, he says Livingston will be spared. (So will Newt Gingrich, who was under Flynt's microscope before stepping down as speaker.) "I spoke with Livingston's wife last week," Flynt says. "She was a very nice lady. She said she didn't want the details of the investigation published. The suffering was already done. The guy retired, so what's the point?"

...

http://www.maryellenmark.com/text/magazines/rolling%20stone/920S-000-018.html

Publisher Larry Flynt levels accusations at Rep. Bob Barr
January 12, 1999

...

Flynt is offering up to 1 million for information about sexual indiscretions by members of Congress. He wouldnt (sic) say how much he paid Gail Barr for her affidavit, but said he found her destitute and made a generous financial offer.

Gail Barr declined comment.

...

http://articles.cnn.com/1999-01-12/politics/flynt.01_1_hustler-magazine-publisher-gail-barr-bob-barr?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS

[FreakinDJ]

6. Think what you want about his smutt but he has defended 1st amendment

more then most

[Cha]

11. I don't thnk at all about

his line of work.. but, I do think about how he offers a Million Buck$ to out Hypocritical A$$holes and now the big Liar Hider, mittbot. Yeah!

[notadmblnd]

17. And paid a very high price too

[Cha]

7. Brwawawawawawaaaa!

Larry Fooking Flynt!

[april]

8. So Good !

[truthisfreedom]

9. "...which aren't exactly good Flynt’s business." Edit, edit, edit, adweek. What has happened to

news reporting? Are writers in such a hurry they leave words out and nobody catches it?

[CitizenPatriot]

50. It's not that they are in a hurry

it's that online publishing doesn't pay, and so copy editors are gone.

Newsweek just admitted they have no fact-checkers on staff now.

Internet content is free to us for the most part. Advertising does not pay the bills. Print journalists are being laid off. Top outlets are having to go pay walls in order to try to pay the bills. Without funding from some source other than ads, there is no money to pay for the sort of perfection we are used to.

Irony? Guess who's stepping in to fill the gaps? That's right-- "Free" content is being provided by well funded right wing organizations that write news and shoot packages provided for free to local tv stations and papers. It is not identified that this news is coming from a right wing funded agenda.

But it is perfect.

[hlthe2b]

10. As much as I love the thought, I can't help but think Flynnt would get in big time legal problems

if he published these. I'm not sure what he could do with them without opening himself to legal criminal action.

[Major Nikon]

14. He can publish them all he wants and it wouldn't be illegal

The Privacy Act only applies to the government.

[former9thward]

44. Ahh, no.

How many of your clients are in prison? I bet a lot. It is a felony to distribute the contents of anyone's tax returns to anyone not authorized to see them.

[Major Nikon]

47. Cite?

Be sure and list the exact statute, if you can, and please don't say 26 USC 6103 as that would not apply to Flynt.

[former9thward]

51. 26 USC 6103(a)(3)

covers anyone who has a legal right to look at return information. Anyone else would have to have gotten it illegally. Flynt is soliciting for someone to commit a felony because that is the only way someone could either get the information or pass along the information.

[Major Nikon]

53. I'm not sure how you figure that

Rmoney disclosed his returns to the McCain campaign during his VP vetting. As such, lots of people would have had very legal access to them, and since they aren't listed by 6103 as anyone who is forbidden from disclosure, they can do with them whatever they want. Rmoney might have some type of nondisclosure agreement (doubtful), but even then the best he would ever have is a civil suit and that's if he could ever find out who disclosed them, which is also doubtful.

[greyghost]

60. Exactly eom

[greyghost]

59. It's only a felony if you work for the IRS. eom

[greyghost]

63. Spot on eom

[sabrina 1]

12. He missed his calling, well I guess that's debatable, but he would have been a great

political strategist to combat the ruthless, lying, cheating Rovian tactics that have destroyed this country's politics.

He's pretty fearless and doesn't worry too much what the 'right' thinks of his tactics. And the difference between him and Rove is that he doesn't rely on lies and smear campaigns, he gets the facts.

[Incitatus]

13. Back in the news again!

[russspeakeasy]

15. If it weren't for that pesky "documented evidence"

wording, I could have provided them weeks ago.

[tuvor]

16. What happened to the group who claimed to have the returns and wanted a million dollars ransom? n/t

[defacto7]

19. ongoing investigation....

but now it's much quieter... wonder why?

[former9thward]

45. Its what happens when you pull off a hoax

and the FBI begins to investigate.

[MjolnirTime]

70. awww, you don't like this story, do you? I wonder why.

[former9thward]

71. I guess you get your rocks off when people get excited

by fake stories on the internet. You are not alone. You have plenty of company which is why there are so many fake stories making the rounds.

[Jackpine Radical]

20. Larry's calling their bluff.

If they got the goods, he's got the million.

I think his offer & the price were in response to that earlier story. In fact, I recall a call for someone on DU to do exactly what he did.

[Live and Learn]

39. +1 That is his style. nt

[cosmicone]

18. Larry did bring down

soon to be anointed speaker of the house Livingston which made the repukes elect Dennis Hastert.

I don't know if there will be any takers at $1 million but at $5 million, any junior accountant in PriceWaterhouseCoopers may take the bait.

Anyone who releases the returns will never work again and will have huge legal bills.

[Jackpine Radical]

21. I understand Paraguay is nice this time of year

and a mil goes a long way down there.

[defacto7]

22. if money actually changed hands..

he would be some kind of accessory to a crime. It would be a criminal act.

My opinion... I'm no lawyer.

[cosmicone]

24. No. Larry is a journalist

and Romney is a public figure. People's right to know trumps privacy -- ask any paparazzi.

The person in trouble would be the one who obtains the info and sells to Larry Flynt.

[former9thward]

48. People love to practice law on DU.

And they are almost always wrong as are you. Federal law makes it a felony to access anyone's tax return information. It is a felony to give that information to anyone else. If Flynt printed anything it would be a felony. He is also soliciting for someone to commit a felony which is another felony. If matters not a whit that Romney is a public figure. Go back to law school if you even went to one.

[defacto7]

52. that was my "guess"

Thanks for the free legal info!

[Major Nikon]

55. Posting anonymously and then trying to claim educational superiority is a hoot

Making educational/career claims on the internet which are completely unverifyable in an attempt to claim the intellectual high ground is a pretty commonly used tactic. Believe it or not, you're not the first to try this and you won't be the last.

If you are what you say you are, your posts should speak for themselves and you would have no need to make such claims.

Just sayin'

[former9thward]

74. "Posting anonomously"?

You say that as an accusation. Pretty much everyone here does that if you hadn't noticed. Please show where I said I had "educational superiority". If I post something and someone disagrees then they will challenge it if they want to bother. I do the same thing. That is why it is called a discussion board although many don't like the discussion aspect of it.

[greyghost]

62. Guess what? YOU ARE WRONG. It is a felony for IRS employees to reveal tax info.

It is not a felony to print any info he obtains there is NO LAW to prevent it.

[former9thward]

72. It is not just the IRS.

Federal law covers both public and private individuals who access tax returns. Anyone else would be doing it illegally. So to solicit anyone to give him tax return information is to solicit a felony. Try to defend the world's #1 misogynist again. You will come up with something.

[Kurovski]

75. Why...

why are we suddenly talking about the Pope?

[greyghost]

78. No, it doesn't. Why let reality interfere with your dislike of Mr Flynt?

Last edited Sun Sep 9, 2012, 10:18 PM - Edit history (2)

[greyghost]

61. Your opinion is wrong. Only members of the IRS can be charged for revealing tax info.

Paying people for information happens everyday.

[ruffburr]

23. Hustle that Mitt

I hope the info is really out there and it's bona fide So larry can publish it for all too see, The look on mitts face would be worth a million

[cosmicone]

25. What is great is that

Mitt won't be able to silence Larry by offering some of his millions.

[McCamy Taylor]

27. K&R

[NBachers]

28. I was hoping Larry would unleash his millions when Rush had that viagra / Dominican Republic thing

I'm sure there was plenty of dirt to be dug, if the Dominican victims weren't murdered to tie up loose ends.

[LadyHawkAZ]

29. Larry, I loathe your publication

but you are awesome sometimes.

[tanyev]

30. How do you like that free market, Mittwitt?

[windowpilot]

31. Drip, Drip

N/T

[Dickeylee]

32. Good ol Larry...

Larry has made his living coming up with 4,307 different ways to photograph lady parts of all sizes. Whooda thunk that you could make a living doing that? Not Jerry Springer!

[caveat_imperator]

38. It's a more honest living than being a teabagger/rethuglican, at least.

[condoleeza]

56. Really? becoming a millionaire by objectifying women is a more honest living?

apples/oranges, neither of them give a rats ass about how women are portrayed as anything other than property.

[Politicalboi]

33. Looks like the Cock brothers

Need to up the ante. 2 Million, do I hear 2 million?

[clydefrand]

34. Larry, give that person

that million soon...oh, I so hope this happens.

Now to the person who gets the million, be sure you have a safe haven.

Will your really let this info out? Come on, do it NOW!

[olddad56]

35. If Larry can't find any takers for his million, maybe he can donate it to a Demo PAC

[Ken Burch]

65. If Larry REALLY wants to screw Mitt over...

He should endorse him on the cover of his magazine...

[proud patriot]

37. woo hoo for Larry

[valerief]

40. We love our Larry! nt

[SleeplessinSoCal]

41. Looking forward to Romney offering $2 million to not give them to Flynt.

[darkangel218]

42. wgat happend to the guys who said they had the taxes

[lexw]

49. Good question...

where is Karl Rove?

[Segami]

54. LOL! ..Go Larry Go!!

[ArcticFox]

57. Capitalism at work!

Now, the invisible hand will deliver those returns to the highest bidder.

[CoffeeCat]

58. The Mittster must...

...have to call over Marlin Perkins with his elephant tranquilizer gun, in order to knock out his anxiety so he can sleep.

Seriously, it is highly possible that we will see his returns, if indeed those hackers are legit. I still wonder if that hacker/ransom story isn't a Rove-generated farce.

I guess time will tell. Regardless, Rombey must be scared shitless.

[Ken Burch]

64. Of course, if Larry Flynt handed you a check...you'd want to wear gloves when you grabbed it.

God knows where that piece of paper...and his hands...have been.

[NecklyTyler]

66. Larry better move fast, or he will miss out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014219267
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014219729

[PearliePoo2]

68. Oh my, this is funny as hell!

Hope little Mittens doesn't soil his "magic undies" over this.

[warrprayer]

69. Many will disagree

... but Larry is kind of the modern Ben Franklin.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

73. Not a man to piss off

Just ask the Republican Congress during Monicagate.

[MrMickeysMom]

76. Larry Flint...

... for the rest of the world...

[PossumSqueezins]

77. He should offer $500K to anyone seeing Mittens drink Caffeine

or strap his 5 wives to the roof of the car.

[closeupready]

79. Oops sorry for double posting.

K&R