Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (7663)	10/2/1998 11:53:00 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 13994

Maybe we should let Clinton plea bargain just like lesser criminals are allowed to do. Of course, public figures are normally held to a higher standard than the general public. (This is a common feature of elected governments. In dictatorships and monarchies, one generally expects to excuse slight failings among our betters.) Having been involved in plea bargaining before, I can intelligently suggest some options for the senate... (1) It is important that the criminal understand and regret his crime. Thus it is not usually possible for a criminal to get a plea bargain, in a case where the prosecutor has the evidence to convict him, unless and until the criminal admits his crime. This is not the same as pleading guilty to the original charge. Instead, typically, some lessor, included crime is pleaded guilty to. For instance, a murder might be plea bargained down to a manslaughter. But the criminal has to admit to the crime. (2) The criminal must agree to not perform the crime (or any other crime) again for a certain length of time. This is known as being on "probation". If the criminal violates the terms of his probation, then the court can punish him to the full extent of his original sentence. During probation, the criminal must report monthly to a parole officer, and must not leave the state without obtaining permission. (3) For the President's crime in particular, he would have to undergo counseling on sexual harassment and sex addiction. This is because his crime, while it was not a sex crime, was caused by these problems he had. The more typical addiction that gets people into court is liquor, and even their crime is, for instance, breaking and entering, if they are found to have a liquor problem, they will be required to undergo alcohol counseling. Clearly a censor vote is of no meaning. Instead, in return for not impeaching him on the subject of his Lewinsky affair crimes, he should be required to comply with the requests of the independent counsel's investigation into his other scandals. He should be required to cease slowing down the investigation. He should be required to name names, etc. -- Carl