409
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
[-] CodeName@infosec.pub 2 points 9 months ago

He was providing a public service since trump refused to release them like every other presidential candidate has done for decades. This should be considered the same as whistle blowing.

[-] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 9 months ago

Why? No legal requirement to do so, it was literally something that started when a candidate did it to show how honest and transparent he was and caught on. It's not illegal activity to refuse, so whistleblower laws don't apply.

Also, even if they did for Trump's returns, he released a lot more than just Trump's returns so he'd still be in the hot seat.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago

Even Trump deserves the privacy protections guaranteed by law

[-] sndmn@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago
[-] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Only if convicted in a court of law

[-] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago

Jury of his peers are shouting for it.

[-] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 1 points 9 months ago
[-] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Guess he's gonna get an offer he can't refuse

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

The jury selection process would exclude those people who already made a decision

[-] iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

There is a law which requires the IRS to turn over tax records for high government officials when asked by Congress, and Trump ordered his head of the IRS to ignore the orders.

Now admittedly this is not the same as being public, but I don't think that there are rules preventing Congress from publishing this information once received, so it is in practice public.

Plus Trump promised to publish his tax returns, so basically he should be thanking this patriot for saving him the trouble.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The guy is a government employee, but he's not Congress. In fact, we should be able to trust that the government won't publish our records to the public because some guy who works there feels like it.

You allow it in this case, who knows whose records get leaked next time?

[-] iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 9 months ago

You're correct, the leaker is not Congress. Congress was denied the ability to see the President's returns because President Trump and his subordinate broke the law and refused to supply his returns to Congress when asked.

This law does not apply to everyone, just high government officials. I'm the worst case anyone in a high position in the US government would be forced to have financial transparency, and I'm okay with that.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I'm saying for all the people defending the leaker, that wasn't the correct way to do it. Sue in court and see what comes out of it.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago
[-] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Guillotine, got it.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

Very insightful

[-] PrettyLights@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago

You're not allowed to say that here.

Breaking federal law is only bad if you're on the right.

Its insane how hypocritical many LW posters are while claiming they want to save our democracy, freedom, and the rule of law. Laws only apply to people you disagree with.

[-] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 2 points 9 months ago

Of all the laws to pick and choose on, I'll happily pardon this one.

Trump literally said he'd do it and then didn't.

Every other president in recent history has done it.

It's not like someone forced him to eat his hat. He was forced to follow a convention that he'd already told people he intended to follow.

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Trump (like the bulk of the right) believe and act as though laws and norms are used solely to protect yourself and punish those they don't like. Much like the paradox of tolerance, allowing these people to hide behind rules and norms they won't respect themselves isn't healthy for democracy, freedom, or the rule of law - the best way to protect those things is to keep the likes of Trump out of power. You've already seen what he'll do with democracy given half a chance.

[-] PrettyLights@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

Keep him out how? By any means necessary, even illegal and unamerican ways?

Is this the "paradox of democracy" now?

The only way to save law and order is to not follow law and order? Do you realize how Fascist that sounds?

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

No - I mean actually have him face consequences.

Biden has treated him with kid gloves for multiple reasons - mostly because he doesn't want to be seen as uncivil or disturbing the status quo. There's massive scope to do more without getting into illegal territory.

How fascist does it sound, exactly - please enlighten us.

Of course, if we took Trump's recent insistence that nothing the President does can be seen as illegal, Biden could just send SEAL Team 6 to kill him - but this is the attitude we're defending the democracy against.

What does "unamerican" mean to you?

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

He got a longer sentence than many of the January 6th rioters. The reality is he committed a crime against billionaires and the Jan 6th dumbasses only committed crimes against public officials despite the latter criminals being more violent.

But I guess crimes only count when they affect the ultra wealthy plutocrats.

[-] PrettyLights@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

He got a longer sentence than many of the January 6th rioters.

That's not the topic of any of my comments at all.

Many posters are ignoring basic facts of law and how courts work, just because they feel wronged.

Do I think the difference in length of sentence is fair for this leak vs jan 6 rioters? No it's not fair, but that's an opinion unrelated to the speediness of this trial entirely.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

Many posters are ignoring basic facts of law and how courts work, just because they feel wronged.

So what you're saying is that the commenters here are humans with biases and feelings about perceived injustice?! This is a travesty. People should really strive to be as robotic as possible! If a serial killer gets off on a technicality, welp guys that's just how shit works sometimes and you aren't allowed to express feelings about that.

[-] PrettyLights@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Sure, but those same commenters also ridicule the other side for being uneducated and not understanding the law or operating based on feelings rather than facts.

Pot, meet kettle.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

Right yeah the problem we have is then expressing feelings about Hillary Clinton. Not that they are objectively wrong about most of what they think about her and other dems. /s

If they had their facts straight they'd be well within their rights to want her and others locked up

[-] PrettyLights@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

I pointed out something objectively wrong and you had a problem with it.

Why are you talking about Hilary?

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

...you brought up right wingers. You high bro?

[-] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 1 points 9 months ago

You're not allowed to say that here.

And yet they did. Shocking. How does that fit in your narrative?

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

News

23320 readers
3006 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