What is the implication of influencing legislation using a conspiracy?
Legislation that includes a penalty?
***********************************************************************************
Good question. At first, that whole piece of legislation was a giant question mark since the last known lynching was in 1981. Everyone was scratching their heads over the need to make it a federal crime almost 30 years after the last lynching was perpetrated ... that is, until you read the legislation.
Rand Paul came out against the Bill and explained it well when he said The bill as written would allow altercations resulting in a cut, abrasion, bruise, or any other injury no matter how temporary to be subject to a 10-year penalty.... The definition of lynching had been purposefully made overly broad, and the sponsors were hoping the publics instinctive and proper abhorrence to lynchings would sneak the bill through. To get it to slide through all three approvals very quickly and with little examination, the sponsors needed to inflame the publics emotions by staging the hoax.
Following passage of the Bill, who knows how many whites would have been subject to a 10 year prison term for inflicting a cut, abrasion or bruise on a black person for any number of reasons, some of them probably legitimate.
Given the climate the last 4 years, its highly likely it was yet another in a long line of Gotcha attempts against PDJT. Hed have been in the uncomfortable position of having to reject signing the Bill into law and the poor optics that would involve, or perform the final step in creating legislation with very harsh and unforeseen consequences for whites.
Ive been unable to find any penalty for the introduction of legislation based on fraudulent circumstances.
Slip of the finger. I meant to write almost 40 years.
:: Ive been unable to find any penalty for the introduction of legislation based on fraudulent circumstances. ::
So, the exact same penalty for issuing a [FISA] warrant based on fraudulent circumstances.
We are here.