Joe Biden’s lawless Department of Justice seems to be handing out a sweetheart deal to a man who openly admitted that he intended to use his position at the IRS to break the law solely to benefit Democrat political goals to destroy Donald Trump and others.
Charles Edward Littlejohn, who said he joined the Internal Revenue Service with the express purpose of using his access to steal former President Trump’s personal tax information — which is a federal crime — seems set to face little or no jail time for his crimes, thanks to the DOJ’s purposefully weak prosecution.
It has been revealed that Littlejohn sought to be hired as an Internal Revenue Service consultant for the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton and had vowed to “try to access the President’s tax returns if given the opportunity,” his lawyers said during his court case.
It is illegal to improperly access, copy, remove or release the tax returns of any American citizen.
Indeed, the IRS itself has a page on its website assuring all taxpayers that they have a “right to confidentiality” in the agency’s “taxpayer bill of rights,” which says in part, “Taxpayers have the right to expect that any information they provide to the IRS will not be disclosed unless authorized by the taxpayer or by law.”
So, by his own admission, Littlejohn’s chief goal in taking a job giving him access to data held by the United States government was specifically to break the law and to violate people’s rights by stealing their tax returns for political gain.
Former IRS contractor Charles Edward Littlejohn, who stole and helped publicize the confidential tax records of Donald Trump and an estimated 7,500 other wealthy Americans, could face little or no jail time https://t.co/LdoZevgK96 pic.twitter.com/c035Ajlf3D
— IndictedTrump2️⃣⏺2️⃣4⃣? (@RealTrump2020_) January 25, 2024
This criminal excused his crime as a “moral” action because he was upset that Trump had not released his personal tax returns like other candidates have. Presidential candidates have usually released their tax returns, though it is neither a requirement nor the legal duty of a candidate to do so.
But according to this crook’s own lawyers, he claimed that Trump’s refusal to release his tax documents “made him feel he did not have any other choice but to act.”
In the end, the documents that Littlejohn illegally accessed and then leaked did not implicate Donald Trump in any real tax evasion or skullduggery, but that is beside the point. The point is, Littlejohn purposefully set out to violate the trust Americans place in civil servants, to violate the law and to violate Donald Trump’s rights. All to further the Democrat Party’s political agenda and to get Joe Biden elected.
Despite this open admission of his guilt — indeed, his outright defiance of the law — Joe Biden’s corrupt DOJ refused to prosecute Littlejohn to the full extent of the law and instead allowed him to plead guilty to only a single felony charge.
The DOJ offered Littlejohn a sweetheart deal, even though he had nothing to offer them in return.
You see, Littlejohn did not just steal Donald Trump’s tax information. He stole the returns of some 7,500 people that he deemed to be too wealthy and leaked them all.
But despite that Littlejohn proudly stated in court that he felt he was morally right to break federal law 7,500 times, the Biden DOJ gave him a nice little plea deal to plead guilty to only one count, a deal that “does not account for the fact that he leaked thousands of individuals’ tax returns. His [sentencing] range would be the same today if he had leaked only a single return,” according to RealClearInvestigations.
Former IRS contractor Charles Edward Littlejohn, who stole and helped publicize the confidential tax records of Donald Trump and an estimated 7,500 other wealthy Americans, could face little or no jail time when he’s sentenced later this month, because the DOJ allowed him to…
— Peter Schweizer (@peterschweizer) January 25, 2024
Ultimately, for the single biggest theft of IRS taxpayer data in U.S. history — all done for political purposes — Littlejohn seems to be on track to no more than a mere 60 months in prison.
His lawyers are even arguing for just a few months. They claim that he was morally right to do what he did because he leaked the info only to “reputable news organizations — the New York Times and ProPublica — that he knew would handle the information responsibly.”
It also seems highly likely that the judge who is set to decide the punishment on Jan. 29, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, will agree with the criminal’s attorneys, as she has a reputation for handing out extremely lenient sentences.
As for these so-called “reputable news organizations,” they have refused to turn over the data and delete any copies, despite the fact that they are in possession of stolen data, meaning that the 7,500 victims have no assurances that the media won’t continue to make use of illegally obtained taxpayer information.
Missouri Republican Rep. Jason Smith was outraged by the sweetheart deal Biden’s DOJ is handing to an admitted criminal who used his crime to benefit Joe Biden.
“When the criminal leaker was finally caught, we expected that he would face severe consequences for his actions that would both punish him while also serving to deter future, similar misconduct,” Smith said, adding that the sentence requested by his attorneys of four to 10 months “comes nowhere close to having a deterrent effect on government employees who might be thinking about breaking the law.”
The outrage, though, rolls off the backs of Democrats like water off a duck. That is because, in their view, the laws, and government offices and agencies should be used as weapons against Americans who disagree with their political agenda. Neither Joe Biden nor his party care much of anything about propriety or justice. They feel every part of government is a political tool they should be able to use to destroy their opponents.
And anyone who uses government to destroy a Democrat’s opponent will be afforded as much leniency as they can get away with giving to them.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
