Another Dem that drank way too much of the Kool Aid. (Page 6/9)
randye JAN 29, 09:22 PM

quote
Originally posted by blackrams:


Rumor confirmed.

Rams



Is anyone seriously surprised?
rinselberg JAN 30, 05:38 AM
The so-called "Dem who drank the Kool Aid" was sentenced to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine, and 3 years of supervision after release from prison.

Since this was a federal case, I expect he would be remanded to a federal prison. If my small online research informs me accurately, he will not be eligible for parole. There are a few special categories of federal prisoners who are eligible for parole, but he is not any of those circumstances. So unless he were to be pardoned or have his sentence commuted, I expect he will serve out his full 5 years in federal confinement.

The judge imposed the maximum sentence for the case that the DOJ prosecutors made against him. His lawyers had asked for a lesser sentence.

It's been described in news reports that I've seen as the longest period of confinement in federal prison that has ever been meted out to a "leaker," although some have expressed dissatisfaction with the case, saying that the crime merits a more severe sentence, and that the DOJ, despite literally having "made a federal case out of it," did not make a severe enough federal case to do proper justice in this circumstance. Among the cohort who expressed dissatisfaction with the perceived lack of severity in DOJ's prosecution of the case was U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes herself—if memory serves me.

According to the news reports, Charles Littlejohn stole and leaked IRS information about some or several thousands of federal tax filers, one of whom was the serving President of the United States, Donald Trump. He was looking for what he considered the very wealthiest among federal tax filers... and certainly not those who could be expected to spontaneously rhapsodize "I'm a man of means by no means," to reminisce about that Roger Miller classic, "King of the Road."

He leaked the confidential IRS tax filer information to reporters from the New York Times. It's been inferred from media reports that emerged afterwards that Littlejohn exposed IRS data about Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and "the" Bill Gates, among other well known figures. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) came forward publicly as one of the victims.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-30-2024).]

olejoedad JAN 30, 06:48 AM
His sentence creates a precedent for future sentencing.

He should have gotten five years for each return he leaked.
blackrams JAN 30, 07:51 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

His sentence creates a precedent for future sentencing.

He should have gotten five years for each return he leaked.



So, if he was prosecuted and found guilty of one count. He got five years (of which he probably won't serve the whole sentence) for providing President Trumps tax return. 7499 other American taxpeyers get no justice? Seems a bit lacking to me.................

Rams
rinselberg JAN 30, 08:15 AM
Why do you think he will not serve the entire 5 years? I don't think he's eligible for parole, as a federal prisoner. Are you expecting him to be pardoned, or to have his sentence commuted, or for some other development that would nullify his conviction?

Actually, I think I'm starting to agree, that it's not a severe enough sentence, considering what he is guilty of. That's because of some of the news reports that I've scrolled though since my first encounter with the story.

But I'm not inclined to believe that there was a decision within DOJ to go easy on him just because President Trump's IRS data was among the confidential IRS records that he compromised.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-30-2024).]

blackrams JAN 30, 08:26 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

Why do you think he will not serve the entire 5 years? I don't think he's eligible for parole, as a federal prisoner. Are you expecting him to be pardoned, or to have his sentence commuted, or for some other development that would nullify his conviction?

Actually, I think I'm starting to agree, that it's not a severe enough sentence, considering what he is guilty of. That's because of some of the news reports that I've scrolled though since my first encounter with the story.

But I'm not inclined to believe that there was a decision within DOJ to go easy on him just because President Trump's IRS data was among the confidential IRS records that he compromised.




I'll just say this, I won't be surprised to see his name on a pardon list just prior to President Biden's departure in Jan.

Rams
82-T/A [At Work] JAN 30, 08:38 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:

His sentence creates a precedent for future sentencing.

He should have gotten five years for each return he leaked.




Seriously... all politics aside, this is a really bad take. This is not unlike what California is doing for people who commit theft under $1000 bucks or whatever the limit is. They knew they had to do something, because it would be even worse if they did nothing... but with the sentencing they did, they essentially made it OK to leak tax returns.

Future court cases of this same nature will attempt to incarcerate at a much higher punishment, but it can ALWAYS be appealed, and this will always be the defense going forward. I hate ideological Democrats for this... literally undermining the rule of law.
ray b JAN 30, 09:02 AM

quote
Originally posted by olejoedad:


Serious question....

Was it a reliable source or the voices in your head (again)?




that is common in believers hearing gods or devils ?

no it was a report on normal media you know news about the orange crook
facts the rightwing minions will never say
olejoedad JAN 30, 09:15 AM
You're the one that seems to be preoccupied with those subjects......just sayin'.
BingB JAN 30, 11:36 AM

quote
Originally posted by williegoat:

This case sheds light on the reason our Leftist friends are submissive to their masters. They know that they could find themselves in the crosshair of the same diabolical machine, so they carry water for a system that they know is irredeemably corrupt, as a form of dues. They hope that when they fall out of favor with their keepers, they can present their subservience as a penance, a plea for mercy.

The Left operates on three primary motivations: fear, hatred and greed.




So when the DOJ convicts and punishes someone from "the left" it is proof of their corrupt motives?

Then what does it mean when the DOJ does NOT convict or punish an accused who is from "the left"? Isn't that ALSO considered proof of the corrupt motives of the left?

Your mental gymnastics never fail to amaze me. You can take two totally conflicting result and bend them BOTH back to prove corrupt motives from the left.

And you see no problem with that at all.