I'm really asking.
My knowledge of US politics and law is basically all from TV, so if John Spencer didn't explain it on The West Wing, I don't understand it.
What is the actual difference between testifying and testifying under oath?
Basically there are two separate laws, one about lying under oath and one about lying in general.
Section 1621 covers general perjury, and stipulates that anyone who "willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true" is guilty of perjury and shall be fined or imprisoned up to five years, or both. Section 1001 covers false statements more generally, without requiring an oath. The section stipulates that "whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully" falsifies or conceals information, including before a congressional committee's inquiry, may also be fined or imprisoned up to five years.
I'm really asking.
My knowledge of US politics and law is basically all from TV, so if John Spencer didn't explain it on The West Wing, I don't understand it.
What is the actual difference between testifying and testifying under oath?
Basically there are two separate laws, one about lying under oath and one about lying in general.
Section 1621 covers general perjury, and stipulates that anyone who "willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true" is guilty of perjury and shall be fined or imprisoned up to five years, or both. Section 1001 covers false statements more generally, without requiring an oath. The section stipulates that "whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully" falsifies or conceals information, including before a congressional committee's inquiry, may also be fined or imprisoned up to five years.
I'm really asking.
My knowledge of US politics and law is basically all from TV, so if John Spencer didn't explain it on The West Wing, I don't understand it.
What is the actual difference between testifying and testifying under oath?
Basically there are two separate laws, one about lying under oath and one about lying in general.
Section 1621 covers general perjury, and stipulates that anyone who "willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true" is guilty of perjury and shall be fined or imprisoned up to five years, or both. Section 1001 covers false statements more generally, without requiring an oath. The section stipulates that "whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully" falsifies or conceals information, including before a congressional committee's inquiry, may also be fined or imprisoned up to five years.
I'm really asking.
My knowledge of US politics and law is basically all from TV, so if John Spencer didn't explain it on The West Wing, I don't understand it.
What is the actual difference between testifying and testifying under oath?
Basically there are two separate laws, one about lying under oath and one about lying in general.
Section 1621 covers general perjury, and stipulates that anyone who "willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true" is guilty of perjury and shall be fined or imprisoned up to five years, or both. Section 1001 covers false statements more generally, without requiring an oath. The section stipulates that "whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully" falsifies or conceals information, including before a congressional committee's inquiry, may also be fined or imprisoned up to five years.
Somebody said to me yesterday — I won't tell you who — that if the Russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those e-mails, you would have never seen it. ... You would have never had any evidence of them, meaning that they're super confident in their deception skills and hacking. My point is, all of the information isn't on the table yet.
Then he admitted the source was the President
I wonder where that idea came from ...
But when Mr. Trump met Mr. Putin in Hamburg, Germany, two weeks ago, he did not utter similar suspicions, at least in public. In fact, he emerged to tell his aides that the Russian president had offered a compelling rejoinder: Moscow’s cyberoperators are so good at covert computer-network operations that if they had dipped into the Democratic National Committee’s systems, they would not have been caught.
It's weird he would trust Putin over his own national security advisors, who said Russia was definitely involved.
One of them said he was great and it was an honor to meet him and what a great handshake he has, and one of them tried to tell him something important that wasn't how great he was and what an honor it was to meet him and what a great handshake he had.
It's not hard to see why he picked his side.
Explaining why Russia's capabilities are not that amazing and how pretty much no one's abilities are that amazing would probably take time and he would stop listening after five seconds.
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Explaining why Russia's capabilities are not that amazing and how pretty much no one's abilities are that amazing would probably take time and he would stop listening after five seconds.
Also, Russia likes it when people know they did it
Instead, Kushner paints a picture of himself as a loyal, overworked, under-experienced senior adviser to his father-in-law during a novice campaign that was never staffed up to win.
“I am not a person who has sought the spotlight,” Kushner says in his opening statement, according to a copy provided to POLITICO. But he explains that after Trump clinched the Republican nomination, his father-in-law asked Kushner to be the point of contact for foreign governments, and he was in touch with emissaries from 15 different countries, including Russia. To put his hectic life and schedule into context — and explain away his presence at a meeting where a Russian lawyer was hawking opposition research about Hillary Clinton — he also writes that he typically received about 200 emails a day during the campaign, and often didn’t read through every exchange.
In his opening testimony, he walks through each of his four meetings with the Russians, downplaying all of them to brief, pro forma interactions that lead to no follow-ups.
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Trump's tweets are what is known as "Whataboutism", which, coincidentally, is a favored technique from the USSR.
Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery in British English) is a variant of tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda. When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, the Soviet response would be "What about..." followed by an event in the Western world
Instead, Kushner paints a picture of himself as a loyal, overworked, under-experienced senior adviser to his father-in-law during a novice campaign that was never staffed up to win.
“I am not a person who has sought the spotlight,” Kushner says in his opening statement, according to a copy provided to POLITICO. But he explains that after Trump clinched the Republican nomination, his father-in-law asked Kushner to be the point of contact for foreign governments, and he was in touch with emissaries from 15 different countries, including Russia. To put his hectic life and schedule into context — and explain away his presence at a meeting where a Russian lawyer was hawking opposition research about Hillary Clinton — he also writes that he typically received about 200 emails a day during the campaign, and often didn’t read through every exchange.
In his opening testimony, he walks through each of his four meetings with the Russians, downplaying all of them to brief, pro forma interactions that lead to no follow-ups.
200 emails a day really is not amazing.
Nope. Plus he had staff to help with it. Plus the goddamn subject line was: "Russia - Clinton - private and confidential"
President Trump is so unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he has raised the possibility of bringing back Rudolph Giuliani to head the Justice Department, according to West Wing confidants.
Instead, Kushner paints a picture of himself as a loyal, overworked, under-experienced senior adviser to his father-in-law during a novice campaign that was never staffed up to win.
“I am not a person who has sought the spotlight,” Kushner says in his opening statement, according to a copy provided to POLITICO. But he explains that after Trump clinched the Republican nomination, his father-in-law asked Kushner to be the point of contact for foreign governments, and he was in touch with emissaries from 15 different countries, including Russia. To put his hectic life and schedule into context — and explain away his presence at a meeting where a Russian lawyer was hawking opposition research about Hillary Clinton — he also writes that he typically received about 200 emails a day during the campaign, and often didn’t read through every exchange.
In his opening testimony, he walks through each of his four meetings with the Russians, downplaying all of them to brief, pro forma interactions that lead to no follow-ups.
200 emails a day really is not amazing.
Nope. Plus he had staff. Plus the goddamn subject line was: Russia - Clinton - private and confidential
President Trump is so unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he has raised the possibility of bringing back Rudolph Giuliani to head the Justice Department, according to West Wing confidants.
Won't he be too busy doing the cyber for the whitehouse?
Also: I gotta love how trump is still trying to play pin the tale on the donkey with hillary.
0
Options
Johnny ChopsockyScootaloo! We have to cook!Grillin' HaysenburgersRegistered Userregular
Trump's tweets are what is known as "Whataboutism", which, coincidentally, is a favored technique from the USSR.
Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery in British English) is a variant of tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda. When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, the Soviet response would be "What about..." followed by an event in the Western world
I'm adding "whataboutery" to my lexicon, and I'm going to try using it in conversation as often as possible.
President Trump is so unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he has raised the possibility of bringing back Rudolph Giuliani to head the Justice Department, according to West Wing confidants.
Won't he be too busy doing the cyber for the whitehouse?
Also: I gotta love how trump is still trying to play pin the tale on the donkey with hillary.
Can't Trump just ask Sessions to begin an investigation if he feels so strongly about it?
President Trump is so unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he has raised the possibility of bringing back Rudolph Giuliani to head the Justice Department, according to West Wing confidants.
Won't he be too busy doing the cyber for the whitehouse?
Also: I gotta love how trump is still trying to play pin the tale on the donkey with hillary.
Can't Trump just ask Sessions to begin an investigation if he feels so strongly about it?
Instead, Kushner paints a picture of himself as a loyal, overworked, under-experienced senior adviser to his father-in-law during a novice campaign that was never staffed up to win.
“I am not a person who has sought the spotlight,” Kushner says in his opening statement, according to a copy provided to POLITICO. But he explains that after Trump clinched the Republican nomination, his father-in-law asked Kushner to be the point of contact for foreign governments, and he was in touch with emissaries from 15 different countries, including Russia. To put his hectic life and schedule into context — and explain away his presence at a meeting where a Russian lawyer was hawking opposition research about Hillary Clinton — he also writes that he typically received about 200 emails a day during the campaign, and often didn’t read through every exchange.
In his opening testimony, he walks through each of his four meetings with the Russians, downplaying all of them to brief, pro forma interactions that lead to no follow-ups.
Somebody said to me yesterday — I won't tell you who — that if the Russians actually hacked this situation and spilled out those e-mails, you would have never seen it. ... You would have never had any evidence of them, meaning that they're super confident in their deception skills and hacking. My point is, all of the information isn't on the table yet.
Then he admitted the source was the President
I wonder where that idea came from ...
But when Mr. Trump met Mr. Putin in Hamburg, Germany, two weeks ago, he did not utter similar suspicions, at least in public. In fact, he emerged to tell his aides that the Russian president had offered a compelling rejoinder: Moscow’s cyberoperators are so good at covert computer-network operations that if they had dipped into the Democratic National Committee’s systems, they would not have been caught.
In a werewolf game I once tried to convince everyone I couldnt be the werewolf because if I were, they would never suspect me. Almost noone bought it, and everyone else thought it was funny. Now we have real people reassured that a world power said this, second hand?
I get well over 200 emails a day and I'm a software engineer, not a real estate tycoon slash campaign advisor slash money laundry. I'm kind of astounded he gets so few unless he has staff who specifically filter his emails for him.
Who exactly, in Trump's mind, is beleaguering Sessions? The media? Because I feel like in recent history Sessions' biggest beleaguerer is Trump himself.
Also I desperately wish there were someone who could go lean into the Oval after Trump drops one of these piles of shit on twitter and yell the answer at him. "Because you made most of them up in your fat head and they're a little bit busy with INVESTIGATING THE SITTING PRESIDENT FOR ESPIONAGE, YOU ORANGE FUCK."
President Trump is so unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he has raised the possibility of bringing back Rudolph Giuliani to head the Justice Department, according to West Wing confidants.
Won't he be too busy doing the cyber for the whitehouse?
Also: I gotta love how trump is still trying to play pin the tale on the donkey with hillary.
Can't Trump just ask Sessions to begin an investigation if he feels so strongly about it?
The DoJ is supposed to be independent, and not the attack dog of the President. Allowing the President to order investigations into political enemies would be very dangerous.
President Trump is so unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions that he has raised the possibility of bringing back Rudolph Giuliani to head the Justice Department, according to West Wing confidants.
Eventually Trump is gonna run out of people that shoveled shit for him during the campaign.
Posts
If you lie under oath, you're violating two laws, with a possibility of 10 years in prison. Not under oath is just 5, max.
Oh, so the debuffs stack. Gotcha.
And if you're under oath you can't claim ignorance. It means one less excuse for the witness if they decide to try and be a goose.
Then he admitted the source was the President
I wonder where that idea came from ...
This is fine. Right, congressional pubs? This is cool, right?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Trump is like a middle schooler whose favorite movie changes based on the last thing the he overheard the cool kids saying.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/07/24/kushner-to-detail-four-meetings-with-russian-officials-in-congressional-testimony/?utm_term=.115dab9485c0
It's not hard to see why he picked his side.
I guess it stops being new after a while
Also, Russia likes it when people know they did it
Edit:
This is the saddest thing
Keep it up Trump. He's more likely to make a deal just to spite you than fall on a sword for you.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Ah, yes, ‘Russians’. The nation that allegedly interfered in US elections. We have dismissed this claim.
He also stated firmly that there were no other meetings. Which basically means we'll find out about another secret meeting any time now.
CNN reporter
Fox News was playing clips of Schiff 15 minutes before this tweet.
Nope. Plus he had staff to help with it. Plus the goddamn subject line was: "Russia - Clinton - private and confidential"
Fucking
of course
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Their dog has eaten WAY too much homework to be healthy.
Exclusive: Trump ponders Rudy Giuliani for attorney general
Nope. Plus he had staff. Plus the goddamn subject line was: Russia - Clinton - private and confidential
Won't he be too busy doing the cyber for the whitehouse?
Also: I gotta love how trump is still trying to play pin the tale on the donkey with hillary.
I'm adding "whataboutery" to my lexicon, and I'm going to try using it in conversation as often as possible.
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
Like father, like son
Can't Trump just ask Sessions to begin an investigation if he feels so strongly about it?
Sessions is Mueller's now.
Ah the i'm too stupid to commit a crime defense.
In a werewolf game I once tried to convince everyone I couldnt be the werewolf because if I were, they would never suspect me. Almost noone bought it, and everyone else thought it was funny. Now we have real people reassured that a world power said this, second hand?
Who exactly, in Trump's mind, is beleaguering Sessions? The media? Because I feel like in recent history Sessions' biggest beleaguerer is Trump himself.
Also I desperately wish there were someone who could go lean into the Oval after Trump drops one of these piles of shit on twitter and yell the answer at him. "Because you made most of them up in your fat head and they're a little bit busy with INVESTIGATING THE SITTING PRESIDENT FOR ESPIONAGE, YOU ORANGE FUCK."
The DoJ is supposed to be independent, and not the attack dog of the President. Allowing the President to order investigations into political enemies would be very dangerous.