this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
692 points (99.3% liked)

politics

19047 readers
4405 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • Former Mesa County, Colorado, clerk Tina Peters was sentenced to nine years in prison for crimes related to a breach of her county's voting system.
  • Peters espoused the false conspiracy theory that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election to President Joe Biden due to ballot fraud.
  • She was accused of allowing access to the voting system to an expert affiliated with My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell, a leading proponent of the Trump election conspiracy theory.

🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 115 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

It was actually pretty interesting to listen to the sentencing. It's about 20 minutes. The judge goes through all of the options at his disposal and discusses his the rationale that he used to arrive at a prison sentence.

He had the option of sentencing her to parole, community service, or incarceration. He then described her as unrepentant, the most defiant defendant the court has ever seen, and a continuing danger to society. He also discussed that he considers how a sentence will act as deterrent for the defendant directly (not at all in this case) and for others who might seek to commit similar crimes as well as punishment. He determined that Mrs Peters would immediately go commit the same crimes again given the opportunity, that community deterrence is important, and that punishment was warranted.

He also went through her mitigating circumstances. He compared her circumstances to the typical defendant that his court sees and characterized her as extremely privileged with few mitigating circumstances and many aggravating ones. He said that she simply sought power, prestige, and wealth without a care for who she harmed. He characterized her as an unrepentant liar and a fraud who lied every chance she got including about why she kicked a police officer while on video.

Based on his rationale, he decided that removing Tina Peter's from the community was in the best interests of the community.

TL/DR The judge didn't like Mrs Peters very much.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

And this is why you STFU as soon as you're indicted, then act contrite after you're convicted, until after your sentencing. What a dumbass, in addition to being a horrible person. I hope she enjoys the FO part of FAFO

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 week ago

She followed the fascists’ lead of doubling down, never admitting to a lie. Not punishing it is how they stay in power, I’m glad the judge in this case recognized that.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Good. May she be but the first of these traitors who get thrown in prison.

The country needs a reality check and that likely involves sending a lot of people to prison.

Hopefully trump will be one of them.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)