The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
So the cap of your post is that it is wrong to be angry? Because that's how I'm reading it. Is anyone else reading it this way?
Not at all - that was not my intent. The close of my message was meant to communicate that in my experience working directly with the system I've gained some perspective that has helped me to not be so angry, and so I'm sharing that perspective.
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
So the cap of your post is that it is wrong to be angry? Because that's how I'm reading it. Is anyone else reading it this way?
I think lying to the FBI is a ridiculous charge in violation of the first amendment and it’s prejudicial. I’m not particularly bloodthirsty re: this specific charge and sentencing. I don’t want lengthy sentences for people who lie to the FBI because the FBI can interrogate and harass individuals regardless of the political context.
+2
Options
Bloods EndBlade of TyshallePunch dimensionRegistered Userregular
It just dawned on me.
So many of the people who helped Donald get elected will be unable to vote the next time it comes around due to felony charges.
+38
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
So many of the people who helped Donald get elected will be unable to vote the next time it comes around due to felony charges.
This is where I get torn between feeling of revenge vs. what I believe in. I actually think it's bullshit that felons can't vote.
Certainly, and it'd be nice if they (republicans) stopped trying to further disenfranchise voters.
Maybe like many other social issues, actually knowing some people who have been stripped of that (small r) right might help change their minds, but as a party that's pretty eager to disenfranchise as many Democratic voters as possible, there is some schadenfreude to be found all the same, at least until they start coming around on the matter.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
So the cap of your post is that it is wrong to be angry? Because that's how I'm reading it. Is anyone else reading it this way?
I think lying to the FBI is a ridiculous charge in violation of the first amendment and it’s prejudicial. I’m not particularly bloodthirsty re: this specific charge and sentencing. I don’t want lengthy sentences for people who lie to the FBI because the FBI can interrogate and harass individuals regardless of the political context.
The FBI still has to deal with the same limitations as a local PD with regards to suspect's rights ~IE you don't have to say jack shit to them and you can ask for legal representation who will tell them to blow it out their pants if they aren't charging you~ so while they can theoretically harass you endlessly all they're doing is setting themselves up for a massive lawsuit if they can't actually present a case against you.
No, the real value of "lying to the FBI" is that it allows for a minor sentence to be handed down as a gesture of contrition by a guilty party that has agreed to flip and also encourages others to co-operate with an investigation to the best of their ability.
Padaopoulos can not guarantee he didn't tell trump about russia, what the fuck does that mean?
He totally told Trump about Russia but doesn't want to admit it.
Didn't he bring up Russia and Trump meeting up with Putin during a campaign meeting?
He testified that he told Trump and co, in person, about the meeting requests, and Sessions was for it; but the emails he sent in the days after he learned about the emails were more vague.
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
I agree with the sentiment that criminal sentencing should be treated as a means of protecting the public from possible repeat offenses rather than a tool for vengeance, and the consequences of being a convicted felon often accomplish more in that regard than the prison time for many white collar crimes. However, the concern is that such light punishments can easily fail the second purpose of convictions, which is to act as a deterrent to others. If you can make more money off a scam then you'll be fined if you get caught, how many people will abstain from taking the risk? In this case, the establishment will look after their own, so while Papadopoulos may not be able to work in a direct political capacity again, before long he'll be appearing on conservative news media circuits as a talking head, or receiving some other form of patronage, so how much risk was there in doing what he did?
And, of course, I'm sure you can understand how it doesn't feel like justice when the people who have the least to worry about get the slightest punishments, while the people who struggle the hardest often get the worst the system has to offer.
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
Not really, no.
All the 'lifelong implications' are entirely artificial, and meant only to be used against minorities and the poor. The truth is, that if you're white and connected, being a felon doesn't actually matter that much, at least not in the ways you're talking about.
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
Not really, no.
All the 'lifelong implications' are entirely artificial, and meant only to be used against minorities and the poor. The truth is, that if you're white and connected, being a felon doesn't actually matter that much, at least not in the ways you're talking about.
Yeah. Papadopoulos isn’t going to be denied a job due to a criminal records check coming back positive. That’s a scenario that happens when the hiring manager doesn’t know a candidate. Papadopoulos will get future jobs due to his contacts and fame in conservative circles. Think tanks, committees, conservative magazines and the like. They will already know his background: if fact, it will be a plus as he probably seems like a cool rebel to them. The only problem might be he will not be able to get government security clearance.
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
Assuming (generously) that he doesn't get pardoned in a fit of presidential spite, what if any consequences does he have any realistic possibility of actually experiencing?
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
Not really, no.
All the 'lifelong implications' are entirely artificial, and meant only to be used against minorities and the poor. The truth is, that if you're white and connected, being a felon doesn't actually matter that much, at least not in the ways you're talking about.
Studies have shown that, all other factors being equal, white felons have a better chance of being hired for a job than black non-felons.
These coffee boys getting away with stonewalling Mueller is disheartening
I mean, Miller isn't getting away with it entirely. He's being held in contempt. I just don't know what penalty he's facing. I'm sure it won't be enough.
These coffee boys getting away with stonewalling Mueller is disheartening
I mean, Miller isn't getting away with it entirely. He's being held in contempt. I just don't know what penalty he's facing. I'm sure it won't be enough.
my guess judging by how George Paupadapolus (sp, I know) was sentenced for actually being guilty and pleading as such, will be maybe a small fine
These coffee boys getting away with stonewalling Mueller is disheartening
I mean, Miller isn't getting away with it entirely. He's being held in contempt. I just don't know what penalty he's facing. I'm sure it won't be enough.
my guess judging by how George Paupadapolus (sp, I know) was sentenced for actually being guilty and pleading as such will be maybe a small fine
Contempt is an odd case - it can be criminal or civil. On the civil side (which this would be) if a judge finds you in contempt (for example, for refusing to testify) during the proceeding, he/she can put you in jail for as long as you continue to refuse to testify. In this case it looks like the judge decided not to do that and that Miller is appealing the finding of contempt.
Criminal contempt would be an after-the-fact just for punishment type of situation, and it maxes out at six months.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Wait the judge is finding Miller in contempt but not going to put him in jail, and Miller is still appealing that he is not in contempt?
"You're officially not cooperating with the court but I guess I'll let it slide."
"NUH UH YOUR HONOR"
I can't wait for that new thread smell. Or maybe it's the smell of witches burning.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Wait the judge is finding Miller in contempt but not going to put him in jail, and Miller is still appealing that he is not in contempt?
"You're officially not cooperating with the court but I guess I'll let it slide."
"NUH UH YOUR HONOR"
I can't wait for that new thread smell. Or maybe it's the smell of witches burning.
My guess there is that the judge is allowing for the possibility that the appeal will have some merit, and since it may take time to review they've decided not to have Miller sit in jail while he's waiting. That's a fair call.
If the appeal is overruled and it's held that he has to testify, I'm guessing he'll stop fighting and agree to it. Otherwise he may well end up sitting in jail until he has a change of heart.
0
Options
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
The important part here is "He went to jail". At white collar crime levels that alone can be inconceivable.
Part of the problem withe white collar crime is the disparity between punishment based on the damages done when you compare it to what the rest of society faces for less. People causing billions of dollars of harm face less penalty than someone who smoke a little pot.
So no it's not okay that he goes to prison for just fourteen days. Yes, good he goes to prison, but it's a fucking joke of a sentence.
More significant than any amount of jail time he might have received (between 0 and 6 months) is the fact that he's now a convicted felon, which carries more lifelong implications for his future prospects than the unpleasantness of a couple of months in jail would have amounted to.
I understand and empathize when people are upset to see white-collar criminals seemingly getting off easy with light prison sentences, but I think an important aspect of the purpose of the criminal justice system ends up being lost in the emotional desire for what basically amounts to vengeance. Felony convictions in many cases will serve their purpose in that they effectively bar the convict from ever again working in whatever industry previously employed them, thus protecting the public.
I say all this just to nudge people away from the fringes of "thieves and liars should be put away for life!". I'm in your camp -- I wish they went to prison for longer! -- but I get why they don't and having some perspective helps me not be as angry about it.
Not really, no.
All the 'lifelong implications' are entirely artificial, and meant only to be used against minorities and the poor. The truth is, that if you're white and connected, being a felon doesn't actually matter that much, at least not in the ways you're talking about.
Yeah. Papadopoulos isn’t going to be denied a job due to a criminal records check coming back positive. That’s a scenario that happens when the hiring manager doesn’t know a candidate. Papadopoulos will get future jobs due to his contacts and fame in conservative circles. Think tanks, committees, conservative magazines and the like. They will already know his background: if fact, it will be a plus as he probably seems like a cool rebel to them. The only problem might be he will not be able to get government security clearance.
Aren't there laws banning convicted felons from doing certain work if they got convicted for breaking the rules doing that work, or at least crucial aspects of that work? e.g. can't practice law because you broke it.
not that there isn't a cushy job waiting for these guys, but I thought the point was that being banned is a way of preventing the crime in the future. like, the implication wasn't that he would suffer like any regular convicted felon, because that suffering is fucked up. that whole thing where companies won't hire felons isn't actually part of the justice system.
the implication is that they won't be able to do the job they built a career in. which seems to me to be part of the punishment. that in some cases people will become more popular because of the crime they did and how cool it was shouldn't be a factor.
Posts
Not at all - that was not my intent. The close of my message was meant to communicate that in my experience working directly with the system I've gained some perspective that has helped me to not be so angry, and so I'm sharing that perspective.
So many of the people who helped Donald get elected will be unable to vote the next time it comes around due to felony charges.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Certainly, and it'd be nice if they (republicans) stopped trying to further disenfranchise voters.
Maybe like many other social issues, actually knowing some people who have been stripped of that (small r) right might help change their minds, but as a party that's pretty eager to disenfranchise as many Democratic voters as possible, there is some schadenfreude to be found all the same, at least until they start coming around on the matter.
The FBI still has to deal with the same limitations as a local PD with regards to suspect's rights ~IE you don't have to say jack shit to them and you can ask for legal representation who will tell them to blow it out their pants if they aren't charging you~ so while they can theoretically harass you endlessly all they're doing is setting themselves up for a massive lawsuit if they can't actually present a case against you.
No, the real value of "lying to the FBI" is that it allows for a minor sentence to be handed down as a gesture of contrition by a guilty party that has agreed to flip and also encourages others to co-operate with an investigation to the best of their ability.
Probably should still strip them of the right to vote if they were doing something like voter tampering or illegal campaign financing, though.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
He totally told Trump about Russia but doesn't want to admit it.
Didn't he bring up Russia and Trump meeting up with Putin during a campaign meeting?
He testified that he told Trump and co, in person, about the meeting requests, and Sessions was for it; but the emails he sent in the days after he learned about the emails were more vague.
Medium has a great timeline/roundup of Papadopoulos articles up to Nov 2017:
https://medium.com/@Brian_Whit/the-george-papadopoulos-file-a-timeline-5c699c3aae4b
I didn't meet with Russians because I love America.
Punctuation!
Loving America obviously wasn't the reason he met with Russians.
But your Honor, I need leniency!
I agree with the sentiment that criminal sentencing should be treated as a means of protecting the public from possible repeat offenses rather than a tool for vengeance, and the consequences of being a convicted felon often accomplish more in that regard than the prison time for many white collar crimes. However, the concern is that such light punishments can easily fail the second purpose of convictions, which is to act as a deterrent to others. If you can make more money off a scam then you'll be fined if you get caught, how many people will abstain from taking the risk? In this case, the establishment will look after their own, so while Papadopoulos may not be able to work in a direct political capacity again, before long he'll be appearing on conservative news media circuits as a talking head, or receiving some other form of patronage, so how much risk was there in doing what he did?
And, of course, I'm sure you can understand how it doesn't feel like justice when the people who have the least to worry about get the slightest punishments, while the people who struggle the hardest often get the worst the system has to offer.
Oh my god this. So much this.
I had to reread the tweet in order to not read the implied "I met with them because I love myself".
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Not really, no.
All the 'lifelong implications' are entirely artificial, and meant only to be used against minorities and the poor. The truth is, that if you're white and connected, being a felon doesn't actually matter that much, at least not in the ways you're talking about.
Yeah. Papadopoulos isn’t going to be denied a job due to a criminal records check coming back positive. That’s a scenario that happens when the hiring manager doesn’t know a candidate. Papadopoulos will get future jobs due to his contacts and fame in conservative circles. Think tanks, committees, conservative magazines and the like. They will already know his background: if fact, it will be a plus as he probably seems like a cool rebel to them. The only problem might be he will not be able to get government security clearance.
And fucking D'Souza
Assuming (generously) that he doesn't get pardoned in a fit of presidential spite, what if any consequences does he have any realistic possibility of actually experiencing?
Studies have shown that, all other factors being equal, white felons have a better chance of being hired for a job than black non-felons.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
pleasepaypreacher.net
Eh its how the process works, I mean you can't throw charges at someone for not complying beyond not complying. Its a good thing.
pleasepaypreacher.net
my guess judging by how George Paupadapolus (sp, I know) was sentenced for actually being guilty and pleading as such, will be maybe a small fine
"minor participant who rolled on the President for leniency" is not how you get the badge of honor. Liddy and North didn't talk.
Contempt is an odd case - it can be criminal or civil. On the civil side (which this would be) if a judge finds you in contempt (for example, for refusing to testify) during the proceeding, he/she can put you in jail for as long as you continue to refuse to testify. In this case it looks like the judge decided not to do that and that Miller is appealing the finding of contempt.
Criminal contempt would be an after-the-fact just for punishment type of situation, and it maxes out at six months.
"You're officially not cooperating with the court but I guess I'll let it slide."
"NUH UH YOUR HONOR"
I can't wait for that new thread smell. Or maybe it's the smell of witches burning.
Could be a fine that he’s appealing
My guess there is that the judge is allowing for the possibility that the appeal will have some merit, and since it may take time to review they've decided not to have Miller sit in jail while he's waiting. That's a fair call.
If the appeal is overruled and it's held that he has to testify, I'm guessing he'll stop fighting and agree to it. Otherwise he may well end up sitting in jail until he has a change of heart.
Aren't there laws banning convicted felons from doing certain work if they got convicted for breaking the rules doing that work, or at least crucial aspects of that work? e.g. can't practice law because you broke it.
not that there isn't a cushy job waiting for these guys, but I thought the point was that being banned is a way of preventing the crime in the future. like, the implication wasn't that he would suffer like any regular convicted felon, because that suffering is fucked up. that whole thing where companies won't hire felons isn't actually part of the justice system.
the implication is that they won't be able to do the job they built a career in. which seems to me to be part of the punishment. that in some cases people will become more popular because of the crime they did and how cool it was shouldn't be a factor.
Nat Cassidy is an actor and a little levity is welcome every now and then.
I would totally play that game.