786
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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
[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 17 points 9 months ago

And Biden won't pardon him.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 12 points 9 months ago

But he's gonna lock down the border and bypass congress to ship weapons to Israel.

[-] awesomesauce309@midwest.social 9 points 9 months ago

Trump and his base already conflate his many court cases catching up to him as the DOJ sent to stop a political rival. If Biden just pardoned the person who “stole” Trumps taxes, we’d hear about it nonstop til November.

[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Don’t do something because it might piss of the Republicans is not gonna cut it as an excuse.

And as we have all seen, they will straight up invent a reason to complain nonstop until November if they don’t have a real one.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

They never have a real one.

[-] awesomesauce309@midwest.social 2 points 9 months ago

The guy chose to commit the crime. The republicans are looking for anything that sticks in their idiot bases brain and “Biden chooses to pardon anti trump criminal” will be on the fox or oan scroll until it’s burned into their eyes. Pardoning is Biden’s option, but if he does, that helps trump with his base in a tight race. Obviously he wouldn’t pardon.

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago

How many votes for Biden do you lose if the Fox News viewers decide not to vote for him? Are there many people watching that channel who are on the fence?

[-] magnetosphere@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Probably very, very few, or none. I know from a small amount of personal conversations, though, that there are quite a few lifelong Republicans who have absolutely had it with Trump. I don’t think they could bring themselves to vote for Biden, however. They’d just skip voting for President altogether.

[-] awesomesauce309@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

When Haley drops there will absolutely be unallocated repubs angry with trump.

[-] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Fox news viewers don't exist in a vacuum. They actually interact with other people, on a daily basis.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago

So, what, instead Biden should capitulate to avoid offending them?

We're going to hear about this shit nonstop til November anyway, it doesn't matter if Biden pardons him or not. Might as well earn it.

[-] magnetosphere@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago

It would be hilarious if he pardoned him the day he started his second term (not the day after the election, but the day he actually started his term).

Won’t happen, but it’s fun to dream.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

This is why I shouldn't be president. I would be doing petty shit like that CONSTANTLY.

[-] magnetosphere@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago

I shouldn’t be President either. I’d be like “someone on Lemmy made a really thoughtful post. They should probably be a cabinet member!”

[-] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Which is why he should wait until December.

[-] AnonTwo@kbin.social 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

He really shouldn't. What the guy did was still legally wrong, and he probably knew it and weighed he would rather take jail time and commit it. A less scrupulous person could do worse things, which is why those laws are in place.

If he could somehow reduce the sentence that would be great, and if that is on the table he should, but some punishment should still occur.

He's a vigilante hero for what he did, but vigilantes are still criminals. The main issue here is that the punishment is clearly wrong, and the message is wrong, as the judge seems to think this is paramount to treason, which it isn't.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 21 points 9 months ago

A crime of conscience is exactly what pardons are supposed to be for - doing what is right regardless of the legality or consequences

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yes, how could we possibly expect the president to pardon someone who did something legally wrong, that defeats the whole point of pardons! /s

Anyway, have fun arguing that someone who metaphorically ran into a burning building to rescue a baby deserves ~~the maximum~~ any punishment for trespassing, that's some real good moral reasoning that will build a just society, for sure /s

e; ftfy

[-] AnonTwo@kbin.social 7 points 9 months ago

deserves the maximum punishment

I literally said the punishment didn't fit though.

this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
786 points (98.6% liked)

News

23287 readers
1254 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