First conviction, they’d be concurrent and highly unlikely he’d get max time. However, this is a first conviction, breaking the glass ceiling for convicting an ex president, in the weakest of the four current trials. Sentences become more likely to be jail up to minimum guaranteed imprisonment for some time, because of sentencing guidelines, as well as the terms getting longer for each conviction.
When you are disappointed, try to remember that we want a justice system that is light on first offenders, and that most other people you wouldn’t want to get the max sentence.
I think that when we are punishing a first time offender, we have to consider the motivation Behind the crime. Was it just to get rich? I think that’s something we can all understand. But was it to cover up treason? I don’t think something like that comes with any leniency.
If the purpose of the crime committed is nefarious, then I think the punishment, regardless of a first time offender, should be appropriate.
Let’s say I’m convicted of trying to cover up hush money. If that money was used to silence someone from telling the world about me breaking the speed limit, it’s not a “big deal.”
But if I’m trying to cover up something big… like an act that is potentially another felony… than it’s a big deal.
First conviction, they’d be concurrent and highly unlikely he’d get max time. However, this is a first conviction, breaking the glass ceiling for convicting an ex president, in the weakest of the four current trials. Sentences become more likely to be jail up to minimum guaranteed imprisonment for some time, because of sentencing guidelines, as well as the terms getting longer for each conviction.
We’ll find out if justice is dead, or if she was just on vacation and turned off her phone.
When you are disappointed, try to remember that we want a justice system that is light on first offenders, and that most other people you wouldn’t want to get the max sentence.
I think that when we are punishing a first time offender, we have to consider the motivation Behind the crime. Was it just to get rich? I think that’s something we can all understand. But was it to cover up treason? I don’t think something like that comes with any leniency.
It was no different than fucking Clinton lying about getting a blowjob in office.
Dude cheated on his wife and was trying to hide it to get elected.
Nothing illegal about that.
Just like with Clinton and Nixon though, it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup.
I think you might be conflating this with the election interference case, similar but different.
I’m not
Would you like to explain why you chose to use treason there?
If the purpose of the crime committed is nefarious, then I think the punishment, regardless of a first time offender, should be appropriate.
Let’s say I’m convicted of trying to cover up hush money. If that money was used to silence someone from telling the world about me breaking the speed limit, it’s not a “big deal.”
But if I’m trying to cover up something big… like an act that is potentially another felony… than it’s a big deal.
Does that make sense?
Ok, it just seemed like you were saying this amounted to treason.
I wasn’t sure, that’s why I asked nicely. 😊