Trump tax return leaker sentenced to 5 years in prison
A former IRS consultant, Charles Littlejohn, was sentenced to a five-year prison term for leaking the tax returns of former President Donald Trump and other affluent individuals to the media. This decision was made by Judge Ana Reyes, appointed by President Biden, during a district court session on Monday. Reyes emphasized the severity of Littlejohn's actions, equating them to an assault on the nation's constitutional democracy. She highlighted that targeting a sitting president equates to targeting the presidential office and, by extension, democracy itself.
Littlejohn's attorneys had sought a more lenient sentence of 12 to 18 months, citing his belief in the public's right to know about Trump's tax payments. However, Judge Reyes stressed that Trump was not legally obligated to disclose his tax records. The case was likened to the January 6 Capitol attacks, underscoring the need to protect elected officials from such breaches.
The Justice Department commended the sentencing, with Acting Assistant Attorney General Nicole M. Argentieri emphasizing the message it sends about the consequences of violating laws meant to safeguard sensitive tax information.
The New York Times and ProPublica, which both received and reported on the leaked information, expressed concern over the sentence's severity. The Times had previously published a significant report in September 2020, revealing Trump's minimal tax payments, while ProPublica shared data on various wealthy individuals' tax strategies.
Senator Rick Scott, one of the victims whose tax details were leaked, attended the sentencing and supported the maximum penalty. House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith lauded the decision, viewing it as a firm stance by the U.S. judicial system against such crimes.
In defense, Littlejohn's lawyers argued that his actions were fueled by frustration over Trump's refusal to release his tax returns and a growing concern for income inequality. However, Judge Reyes dismissed these justifications, emphasizing the right to privacy and questioning the actual impact of the leaks. She pointed out that legal means have since made similar information available, thus negating the perceived benefits of Littlejohn's unlawful actions.