Is it tricky to judge though? I think the reason why such stories get more attention is because they shouldn't be decided inside a black box. This person admit

Is it tricky to judge though? I think the reason why such stories get more attention is because they shouldn't be decided inside a black box. This person admitted guilt, he also admitted that at the time he made the deal with Brockman he knew it was sketchy. He only tried to course correct when he knew he was being investigated. If this individual makes a mistake, I can understand the leniency but essentially he made a deal that he knew at the time to be wrong and knowingly kept defrauding the government till he couldn't anymore due to discovery, and essentially came out of it with not so much as a scratch, maybe some stress from all this. And he's continued to whitewash the narrative around this with 'philanthropy'. In my opinion it shouldn't be about him being fined more than he aimed to save. That essentially encourages others to strike similar bargains with other bad actors as the net result is the consequences are relatively small compared to the upside.