this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
874 points (98.7% liked)

News

23310 readers
3558 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The man who stole and leaked former President Donald Trump and thousands of other’s tax records has been sentenced to five years in prison.

In October, Charles Littlejohn, 38, pleaded guilty to one count of unauthorized disclosures of income tax returns. According to his plea agreement, he stole Trump’s tax returns along with the tax data of “thousands of the nation’s wealthiest people,” while working for a consulting firm with contracts with the Internal Revenue Service.

Littlejohn leaked the information to two news outlets and deleted the documents from his IRS-assigned laptop before returning it and covered the rest of his digital tracks by deleting places where he initially stored the information.

Judge Ana Reyes highlighted the gravity of the crime, saying multiple times that it amounted to an attack against the US and its legal foundation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 76 points 9 months ago (32 children)

They made an example of them. That judge is well enough off to be thoroughly upset that somebody might release their crooked tax documents.

Honestly I think they should slip something into the law, for this type of leak if the person was lying and you release the document proving them lying that you get a slap on the wrist.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Yeah. I mean, considering what they could have done, though, I'd say 5 years is less of a slap on the wrist, and more of a whack with a yardstick.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Five years is literally the worst sentence you can get for the crime he pled guilty to. From how it's worded, the most recommended penalty for that crime appears to be a $5000 fine and maybe a little jail time.

They "threw the book at him" by all definitions of the word.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

So, they gave him the maximum sentence, and the pro-Trump judge was pissed the sentence couldn't be any higher? What a piece of shit.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

Apparently Ana Reyes was appointed by Joe Biden. You can't really call her a fascist, but her delusional liberal view of the world make her an indirect but effective supporter of fascism: If the inequality caused by the insane concentration of wealth and the resulting systemic corruption and injustice is not addressed, it causes degradation of material conditions and creates a fertile ground for fascism. But this they don't want to hear.

In my view the wealth inequality violates the intent of the constitution and Littlejon is a political prisoner.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I can't speak for whether the judge was pro-Trump. It doesn't sound (from other replies) like that was the case.

I think it's more that the everyone in the System (from prosecutors to judges) have a strong dislike for whistleblower crimes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Could have done worse. Whistleblowers generally deserve significant leniency though I feel. Especially for a crime where no one was injured.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

He got the maximum sentence under §7213

I mean, they could have disappeared him or thrown in a bunch of bullshit charges. But for what he did, he got as bad as it gets. The DOJ page even said they sentenced him so harshly to send a warning to people who consider repeating his behavior.

Whistleblowers are always punished harshly on purpose.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Whistleblowers are always punished harshly on purpose.

yeah we gotta fix that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Wait. Was this a felony? Okay, then I guess he's not getting off lightly. Sure, he's in prison for only 5 years, but after he gets out he's still a felon. That means no voting, no gun ownership, no passport so he can't leave the country, ever.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

Wait, felons can't get a passport so they leave the US? That kind of makes them political prisoners.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I thought the same as you, but it seems it's not so bad. You can vote after a felony sentence in the US, but maybe not right away and sometimes you have to settle court fines first.

Guns take longer and maybe never if your crime was violent or involved gun laws.

For passports, it seems most certain to be a no if your crime involved trafficking, smuggling, or anything to do with another country.

I think this guy can expect these rights restored after his sentence. But you're still right that the conviction will likely be a continuing problem in other ways. I doubt he could be hired as CPA or anywhere else involving confidential records.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I mean, in the eyes of the judge and the lawyers, the crime was premeditated, covered up, and the defendant is remorseless. Pretty clear grounds to give the maximum penalty allowed by law.

I believe the tax records for large corporations and the upper class should fax higher scrutiny without having to be publicly leaked.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

No the judge was far more extreme then that:

“What you did in attacking the sitting president of the United States was an attack on our constitutional democracy,” Reyes said. “We’re talking about someone who … pulled off the biggest heist in IRS history.” The judge compared Littlejohn’s actions to those of the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack, noting that, “your actions were also a threat to our democracy.” “The fact that he did what he did and he’s facing one felony count, I have no words for,”

She practically admitted that her thinking was politically motivated. And that even though democracy in the US was and still is in danger and wealth inequality severely undermines the democratic vote of citizens, there is absolutely no excuse to resist against tyranny using illegal means. She's not a fascist, but she'd make an excellent nazi. Yes Godwin's law but that is how that worked. If Trump wins again democracy in the US could literally end but she sees no morally justifiable reason to resist.

PS: Or she just doesn't understand that extreme wealth inequality and rise of fascism are linked, and you cannot fight the one without fighting the other.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Just like the sentencing for the insurrectionists right? Oh wait...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

True, however, power concedes nothing without a demand. The only thing the powerful fear is losing that power. You can call for higher scrutiny of the upper class and corporations all you like, but they won't do it unless forced to. And they're also the ones who write national policy, so good luck writing a law to force them to do anything. It will be shoved into a shredder the second it enters the DC city limits.

[–] Tristaniopsis 11 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I think he was given the maximum to keep the peace and not allow the dimwits to say he was a Dem puppet.

I have a feeling that in the background he’ll likely be treated ok.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

So if his sentence is altered by possible violence, ie 'keep the peace' then that means terrorism works on the government. File that one away for later, could come in handy.

[–] Tristaniopsis 1 points 9 months ago

Let’s not give them ideas. Uh… I mean validate their previous behaviours.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Honestly I think they should slip something into the law

Remind me again who are "they" exactly, and what are their incentives?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They are lawmakers.

Incentives would be to engage whistleblowers, forcing all to be more transparent in cases where no one is physically harmed.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Okay. Now pretend for a moment we are talking about the real planet Earth with the existing legislators of it's actual countries.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

You get approximately 0% of the change you never seek.

load more comments (29 replies)