Most likely the president will pardon him, cause that’s the system we’re in now
@Ray213, nah, even though I think he did nothing wrong. Trumps not going to give him a pardon. He should, but he won't, because the system we're in now.
@That one lurker, Trump 2020!
@That one lurker, Oh come on. He was found guilty on everything he was charged for. One account of obstruction of an offcial proceeding, five accounts of false statements under oath, and an account of witness tampering.
But sure, he did nothing wrong.
@K1l, he was questioned by the investiger team over the Russian collusion conspiracy, they think he gave false testimony. So they slap him with obstruction and the five accounts of false statements.
The "lie" by the way was over his involvement with WikiLeaks was. He had boasted several times on shows and radio of being close to WikiLeaks.
On the witness tampering, it looks like a secound hand comment that I'd have to look into.
Overall it looks like they through in everything they could to get him to strike a plee deal.
So yes, I think 50+ years is to much for a Jurys tax.
@K1l, well the last old white guy to stand up in congress and lie got off with nothing and then wrote a book about it.
So I guess you only get a pass if your last name is Clinton.
@pleroma77, Clinton was impeached for it, even if not kicked out of office (two different things).
Trump likely faces a similar situation. He may be impeached, possibly even kicked out. But it’s unlikely that he’ll go straight from president to prison.
@Canis Arktos, no the impeachment was over a different issue (his sexual misconduct), him lying to Congress during both the inquiry and impeachment would be a separate thing. It was this huge thing at the time that he lied to Congress.
He stated ‘I have never had sexual relations with that woman’. Then the investigators whipped out the blue dress.
While I understand charging him with lying to Congress was discussed I don’t believe they ever did. Then he latter admitting to lying in his book.
The big difference here though is while Clinton probably did lie to Starr he also got up in front of Congress and lied on national tv, whereas Stone’s lies to Mueller after being raided at 4am require a flowchart to figure out how he lied.
I’m not saying that he shouldn’t get punished but as literally nothing he said (according to Mueller himself) was actually criminal (the Wikileaks stuff he supposedly lied about) I can’t see more than a fine and time served being warranted.
@pleroma77, the only part you said I take issue with is the reason of impeachment. I’m looking it up now and the scandal was initiated surrounding issues of sexual harassment and later (accurate) claims of extramarital affairs. That was the initial scandal. The impeachable offense was lying under oath. As well as “abuse of the powers of his office” (I’m assuming a reference to sexual advances to staffers. *snicker* pun wasn’t intended but I’ll leave it there. This is still funny pics.
I’ve just skimmed three sources but I’ll admit that I’m not a lawyer and I’m skimming. If you’ve got a source to say otherwise I’ll hear it.
@Canis Arktos, nope you are 100 right I went and conflated his second issue with Paula Jones and got it all outta wack. Paula Jones is the one he had to just pay a fine for lying and lost his license over.
@pleroma77, see you know more about this than me. I’m assuming you’re talking his lawyering BAR license thing?
If I may take this friendship we’re forming and throw it in a meat grinder, what do you think about the trump stuff? Specifically, he hasn’t yet lied under oath, but it seems as though there is a not insignificant AMOUNT of evidence (we can discuss quality separately if you feel it appropriate) that he is, to steal words from the Clinton side, engaging in “abuse of the powers of his office”. The detail you know about the Clinton side make me inclined to value your thoughts so... what’ve you got?
@Canis Arktos, The problem with that is evidence of what. The current hearings are about Ukraine but it’s still unclear what ‘crimes’ occurred. The two crimes talked most about are ‘quid pro quo’ and ‘bribery’.
The quid pro quo isn’t a crime, although law limits ‘what’ could can be asked for one leader asking for something from another is by definition above all but the constitutional law.
In this case the implication is that he violated campaign laws to dig up dirt on Biden. However all three ambassadors and other witnesses stated in court that while the aid was held temporarily it was released before any Ukrainian even knew about it and that no exchange was asked for.
Now bribery is a more serious charge but is basically the same as qpq with one big difference. That some unlawful activity is exchanged. In this case we’re back to the Biden stuff but implying that the info is fabricated.
Now I’ve been paying attention to the hearing and three things have stood out. Cont...
1. No one on the call has indicated they believed anything unlawful has occurred, including those that said they disagreed with his policy regarding Russia and Ukraine.
2. When asked no member of either the ambassadorial staff or state department who spoke to trump could testify that any requirement were placed on the aid, or that anything was asked regarding Biden.
3. The whistleblower didn’t testify or have any of the closed testimony read in.
Basically I want to see some real evidence, a blue dress, a tape recording, even someone that can actually say they were involved in the deal. Maybe that’s Giuliani maybe not.
@pleroma77, cool, so not a meat grinder yet. Awesome.
Ok, so I agree with you the quid pro quo is perhaps not illegal and hence not impeachable. Cool, done. I mean, in my internet bubble (that’s why I value this conversation because the internet seems to think I’m super left... I’m not) they have shown again and again the clips of trump admitting he asked for the investigation into the Biden’s, after having denied it. Same with... is it Mulvany? Chief of staff/Harry Potter looking dude? Totally admitted it on camera. But perhaps not impeachable so...
Some are calling it extortion. If it meets those criteria I guess it is.
I had heard, though I’ll admit to not having confirmed the timing, that at the time of the call the money had not been sent and had been held up. Then, arguably after getting found out, they released the funds to avoid looking bad.
Now, the charity money toward his campaign fund. Illegal in a few ways and kinda sleazy.
@Canis Arktos, Anyway, I may not be hyper left (actually independent arguing for centerist candidates) but I never did like Trump. I can’t say Id be sad to see him go but I just hope it happens the right way. I certainly don’t hate him enough to give up my ideals for this country and set a harmful precedent.
But hey, I said it when he was elected and my dad said it after having voted for him. It’s only four years. (My dad is pissed at politicians and figured a trump White House should show the level to which he was displeased. He went on to say we likely have the dumbest president of all time.) I don’t find that last bit helpful to the dialogue but I did find it interesting. It gives a different view of “trump supporters” than news outlets on either side have shown.
Personally, I’m rooting for Yang or Mayor Pete since the Reps won’t be offering someone new. You ever want to throw a Rand Paul or Mitt my way again I’ll hear you out. Both have their flaws but dont we all.
Roger Stone’s Nixon tramp stamp is the most innocent part of his body.
@liberachi , danm liberachi... I’m getting no love from you today ahahahah. All good!
Free roger stone!!