Trump Now Says He Won in 2016 Because He Didn’t Release His Taxes

Surveys have repeatedly shown a majority of voters want to see the president’s returns.

Dave Hedstrom/Zumapress

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

On Saturday, the president made his ire for the Democrats’ ramped up efforts to obtain his tax returns known on Twitter, where he claimed that he won the 2016 election in part because he did not release those records, and implied that the question of his taxes has already been litigated in the eyes of the public: “The voters didn’t care,” he wrote.

Trump’s tweet reiterated, almost verbatim, a line his administration has repeated time and again to explain the president’s continued refusal to release his taxes. By voting him into office, the reasoning goes, voters actually signaled that they didn’t care they weren’t available, or perhaps even that they would prefer he keep them private. “Voters knew the president could have given his tax returns. They knew that he didn’t. And they elected him anyway,” Trump’s chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, said last month on Fox News. “That’s an issue that was already litigated during the election.”

Extensive polling, however, disputes this idea. Dozens of surveys have shown that a majority of Americans, across party lines, want to see Trump’s tax returns. Slate has a great roundup of relevant data from before and after the 2016 election: An August 2016 Quinnipiac University poll, for instance, found that more than a third of respondents who were inclined to vote for Trump also believed he should release his returns. In a Washington Post/ABC poll taken in January 2019, 60 percent of respondents agreed that House Democrats should “use their congressional authority to obtain and release Trump’s tax returns,” while only 35 percent disagreed. 

A poll taken earlier this month found that 60 percent of Americans believe the public has a right to know about Trump’s finances. 


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend