criminal investigation

WASHINGTON — Former U.S. Rep. Billy Long of Missouri was confirmed on Thursday to lead the Internal Revenue Service, giving the beleaguered agency he once sought to abolish a permanent commissioner after months of acting leaders and massive staffing cuts that have threatened to derail next year’s tax filing season.

The Senate confirmed Long on a 53-44 vote despite Democrats’ concerns about the Republican’s past work for a firm that pitched a fraud-ridden coronavirus pandemic-era tax break and about campaign contributions he received after President Trump nominated him to serve as IRS commissioner.

While in Congress, where he served from 2011 to 2023, Long sponsored legislation to get rid of the IRS, the agency he is now tasked with leading. A former auctioneer, Long has no background in tax administration.

Long will take over an IRS undergoing massive change, including layoffs and voluntary retirements of tens of thousands of workers and accusations that then-Trump advisor Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency mishandled sensitive taxpayer data. Unions and advocacy organizations have sued to block DOGE’s access to the information.

The IRS was one of the highest-profile agencies still without a Senate-confirmed leader. Before Long’s confirmation, the IRS shuffled through four acting leaders, including one who resigned over a deal between the IRS and the Department of Homeland Security to share immigrants’ tax data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and another whose appointment led to a fight between Musk and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

After leaving Congress to mount an unsuccessful bid for the U.S. Senate, Long worked with a firm that distributed the pandemic-era employee retention tax credit. That tax credit program was eventually shut down after then-IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel determined that it was fraudulent.

Democrats called for a criminal investigation into Long’s connections to other alleged tax credit loopholes. The lawmakers allege that firms connected to Long duped investors into spending millions of dollars to purchase fake tax credits.

Long appeared before the Senate Finance Committee last month and denied any wrongdoing related to his involvement in the tax credit scheme.

Ahead of the confirmation vote, Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, sent a letter to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles blasting the requisite FBI background check conducted on Long as a political appointee as inadequate.

“These issues were not adequately investigated,” Wyden wrote. “In fact, the FBI’s investigation, a process dictated by the White House, seemed designed to avoid substantively addressing any of these concerning public reports. It’s almost as if the FBI is unable to read the newspaper.”

Democratic lawmakers have also written to Long and his associated firms detailing concerns with what they call unusually timed contributions made to Long’s defunct 2022 Senate campaign committee shortly after Trump nominated him.

The IRS faces an uncertain future under Long. Tax experts have voiced concerns that the 2026 filing season could be hampered by the departure of so many tax collection workers. In April, the Associated Press reported that the IRS planned to cut as many as 20,000 staffers — up to 25% of the workforce. An IRS representative on Thursday confirmed the IRS had shed about that many workers but said the cuts amounted to approximately the same number of IRS jobs added under the Biden administration.

The fate of the Direct File program, the free electronic tax return filing system developed during President Biden’s Democratic administration, is also unclear. Republican lawmakers and commercial tax preparation companies had complained it was a waste of taxpayer money because free filing programs already exist, although they are hard to use. Long said during his confirmation hearing that it would be one of the first programs that come up for discussion if he were confirmed.

Long is not the only Trump appointee to support dismantling an agency he was assigned to manage.

Linda McMahon, the current education secretary, has repeatedly said she is trying to put herself out of a job by closing the federal department and transferring its work to the states. Rick Perry, Trump’s energy secretary during his first term, called for abolishing the Energy Department during his bid for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination.

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

Former Los Angeles Times reporter Maya Lau filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday against Los Angeles County, former Sheriff Alex Villanueva, a former undersheriff and a former detective, alleging that a criminal investigation into her activities as a journalist violated her 1st Amendment rights.

The suit comes less than a year after a Times article revealed that Lau had been the target of an L.A. County Sheriff’s Department probe that “was designed to intimidate and punish Lau for her reporting” about a leaked list of deputies with a history of misconduct, Lau’s attorneys alleged in an emailed statement.

Lau’s suit seeks unspecified damages to compensate her for alleged violations of her dignity and privacy, as well as the “continuous injuries” and anxiety she says in the complaint that she has faced in the wake of the revelation she had been investigated.

The suit details “six different counts of violating Ms. Lau’s rights under the U.S. constitution and California state law, including retaliation and civil conspiracy to deny constitutional rights,” according to the statement by Lau’s attorneys.

“It is an absolute outrage that the Sheriff’s Department would criminally investigate a journalist for doing her job,” Lau said in the statement. “I am bringing this lawsuit not just for my own sake, but to send a clear signal in the name of reporters everywhere: we will not be intimidated. The Sheriff’s Department needs to know that these kinds of tactics against journalists are illegal.”

The Sheriff’s Department said in an emailed statement that it had “not been officially served with this lawsuit” by late Tuesday afternoon.

“While these allegations stem from a prior administration, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department under Sheriff Robert G. Luna is firmly committed to upholding the Constitution, including the First Amendment,” the statement said. “We respect the vital role journalists play in holding agencies accountable and believe in the public’s right to a free and independent press.”

Villanueva said via email that he had not yet reviewed the complaint in full and that “under the advice of counsel, I do not comment on pending litigation.”

“What I can say is the investigation in question, like all investigations conducted by the Public Corruption Unit during my tenure as Sheriff of Los Angeles County, were based on facts that were presented to the Office of the Attorney General,” he said. “It is the political establishment, of which the LA Times is a part, that wishes to chill lawful investigations and criminal accountability with frivolous lawsuits such as this one.”

A spokesperson for the county counsel’s office declined further comment. The other defendants in the lawsuit, former Undersheriff Tim Murakami and former Detective Mark Lillienfeld, did not respond to requests for comment Tuesday afternoon.

In December 2017, The Times published a story by Lau about a list of about 300 problem deputies. A lengthy case file reviewed by The Times last year found that department investigators launched an initial probe into who provided Lau with the list. The agency’s investigation began when Jim McDonnell was sheriff in 2017. The Sheriff’s Department ultimately dropped the investigation without referring it for proscution after, as Lau’s complaint says, it “turned up no evidence connecting Ms. Lau to any crime.”

The case file reviewed by The Times last year stated that, after Villanueva became sheriff in 2018, he revived the investigation into Lau, which the complaint alleges was part of an “unlawful conspiracy” conducted as part of a policy of “retaliatory criminal charges against perceived opponents of LASD.”

Lillienfeld led the investigation, and Villanueva “delegated to Undersheriff Murakami his decision-making authority” in the probe, which Murakami ultimately referred to the state attorney general’s office for prosecution, Lau’s complaint says. In May 2024, the office declined to prosecute her, citing insufficient evidence.

But Lau alleges that the damage was already done and that her rights under the 1st Amendment and California’s Constitution had been violated. “If LASD’s actions are left unredressed,” according to the complaint, “journalists in Los Angeles will be chilled from reporting on matters of public concern out of fear that they will be investigated and prosecuted.”

The Sheriff’s Department told The Times last year that its probe of Lau was closed and that the department under Luna does not monitor journalists.

David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, a nonprofit free speech and press freedom advocacy organization, told The Times last year that reporting on leaked materials involving a matter of public concern is typically “protected under the 1st Amendment” even if a reporter is aware they were obtained illegally.

“You’re not authorized to break into a file cabinet to get records. You’re not authorized to hack computers. But receiving information that somebody else obtained unlawfully is not a crime,” Snyder said.

The saga of the leaked records began in 2014, when Diana Teran compiled a list of deputies with histories of disciplinary problems. Teran was working for the Office of Independent Review, which conducted oversight of the Sheriff’s Department until it closed down that July.

In 2015, Teran was hired by the Sheriff’s Department to serve in an internal watchdog role. In 2017, according to the investigative file reviewed by The Times last year, she heard that Times reporters including Lau had been asking questions about the list.

After investigating further and learning that the reporters had asked about specific details that matched her 2014 list, she grew worried that it had been leaked.

On Dec. 8, 2017, The Times ran an investigation by Lau and two other reporters that described some of the misconduct detailed in the list, from planting evidence and falsifying records to sexual assault. Some of the deputies on the list, the reporters found, had kept their jobs or been promoted.

Sheriff’s department investigators interviewed Teran and other department officials who all denied leaking the list. The investigation was dropped before Villanueva became sheriff in November 2018.

Several months later, Lillienfeld was assigned to investigate allegations that Teran and other oversight officials had illegally accessed department personnel records, reopening the probe into the leaked list.

Lillienfeld’s inquiry produced an 80-page report that was part of the case file reviewed by The Times last year. It detailed potential times when the list could have been leaked by Teran and stated that she denied doing so.

In fall 2021, Murakami sent the 300-page case file – which identified Lau, Teran, L.A. County Inspector General Max Huntsman, an assistant to Teran and an attorney in Huntsman’s office as suspects – to California Atty. General Rob Bonta. There was no probable cause to prosecute Lau, according to the complaint.

“Undersheriff Murakami alleged that Ms. Lau had engaged in conspiracy, theft of government property, unlawful access of a computer, burglary, and receiving stolen property,” the complaint says. “Ms. Lau did not commit any of these crimes.”

Bonta declined to prosecute the case.

“The retaliatory investigation against Ms. Lau is one example of how Alex Villanueva used the LASD to target and harass his political opponents,” said Justin Hill, an attorney at Loevy & Loevy representing Lau. “Our communities suffer when governmental leaders try to silence journalists and other individuals who hold those leaders accountable. This lawsuit seeks to re-affirm the protected role that journalism plays in our society.”

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has opened a criminal investigation into Motown singer Smokey Robinson after four of his former staffers accused him of sexual assault and wage theft.

Robinson, 85, was sued earlier this month by three former housekeepers and a former personal assistant who allege that the singer, whose legal name is William Robinson, forced them to have sex with him and also failed to pay minimum wage or overtime pay.

The suit, which was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, also accuses the singer’s wife, Frances Robinson, of regularly screaming at the employees, using ethnically pejorative words and failing to do anything to prevent her husband’s sexual abuse despite allegedly being aware of his actions.

The couple’s attorney, Christopher Frost, has denied the allegations. Details of the Sheriff’s Department’s probe were not immediately provided Thursday.

“The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Special Victims Bureau is actively investigating criminal allegations involving William Robinson, a.k.a. ‘Smokey Robinson,’” said department spokesperson Nicole Nishida. “The investigation is in the early stages, and we have no further comment.”

Frost said the Sheriff’s Department is required to investigate the allegations because the women filed a police report after filing the lawsuit.

In a statement, Frost called the police report “a desperate attempt to prejudice public opinion and make even more of a media circus than the Plaintiffs were previously able to create” and said his clients welcome the investigation.

“The record will ultimately demonstrate that this is nothing more than a manufactured lawsuit intended to tarnish the good names of Smokey and Frances Robinson, for no other reason than unadulterated avarice,” the statement read.

The lawsuit states that the women previously had reservations about reporting Robinson’s alleged abuse to authorities for several reasons including fear about immigration status, losing their livelihoods, public humiliation and intimidation by Robinson and his influential friends.

Attorneys representing the four woman — who filed the lawsuit as Jane Does — said they were pleased to learn that the Sheriff’s Department had opened an investigation into their clients’ claims of sexual assault.

“Our clients intend to fully cooperate with LASD’s ongoing investigation in the pursuit of seeking justice for themselves and others that may have been similarly assaulted by him [Robinson],” attorneys John Harris and Herbert Hayden said in a statement.

The civil lawsuit accuses the Robinsons of negligence, sexual battery and sexual assault, false imprisonment, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, gender violence, and a hostile work environment, in addition to labor violations related to wages, breaks, meal periods, and holiday and overtime pay, according to the complaint.

The women allege that the “Tracks of My Tears” singer required them to have various types of sex with him — vaginal, oral and digital — over the years at his houses in Chatsworth, Bell Canyon and Las Vegas.

Jane Doe 1 worked for the Robinsons from January 2023 until February 2024. Jane Doe 2 worked from May 2014 to February 2020. Jane Doe 3 worked from February 2012 to April 2024, and Jane Doe 4 worked from October 2006 to April 2024.

Times staff writers Christie D’Zurilla and Richard Winton contributed to this report.