(07-08-2014 02:09 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 02:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 01:28 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Dude...impeach is just bringing to trial. He was convicted of nothing.

You said "...he was found guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors against the US." He was not. You are wrong.

Quote:The United States Senate acquitted William Jefferson Clinton yesterday on charges that he committed perjury and obstruction of justice to hide sexual indiscretions with a onetime White House intern, permitting the 42nd president to complete the remaining 708 days of his term.

After a tumultuous year of scandal that tested the Constitution and tried the nation's patience, neither of the two articles of impeachment brought by the House garnered a simple majority, much less the two-thirds necessary to convict Clinton of high crimes and misdemeanors. Article I alleging perjury was defeated on a 45 to 55 vote at 12:21 p.m. Just 18 minutes later, Article II charging obstruction failed on a 50 to 50 tie. Five Republicans joined all 45 Democrats in supporting full acquittal.

"It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that the said William Jefferson Clinton be, and he hereby is, acquitted of the charges in the said articles," declared Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the presiding officer, marking the conclusion of the first impeachment trial of a president in 131 years.

The Senate Acquits President Clinton

Did someone say to do some research?

so he was disbarred because he was acquitted?

Disbarment is not equivalent in any way shape or form to "high crimes and misdemeanors".

You can be disbarred for all sorts of things not related to a crime.

But usually crime

How do you know?

One state's example:

Quote:It should come as no surprise that various forms of financial misconduct top the list of ways to lose your license. Twenty-three of the 55 decisions involve—exclusively or in combination with other misconduct—misappropriation of funds, commingling of personal funds in a fiduciary account (especially if intended to hide assets from personal creditors), and failure to maintain trust account records. Quite likely, such a finding would be consistent with the results from any period of lawyer disciplinary decisions chosen or from any other jurisdiction; our highest ethical obligation as lawyers is the proper handling of other people’s money; any deviation from absolute fidelity should result in serious discipline.


Other serious acts of dishonesty form the next major category of misconduct that can lead to the loss of a license. Twenty decisions involve such forms of dishonesty as lying to courts, to clients or disciplinary authorities; fabricated, back-dated or falsely notarized documents or other evidence; and acts of fraud. Three of the matters from these major categories resulted in felony convictions.

http://www.mnbar.org/benchandbar/2009/au...ponse.html

(07-08-2014 02:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 02:09 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 02:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 01:28 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 12:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Dude...impeach is just bringing to trial. He was convicted of nothing.

You said "...he was found guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors against the US." He was not. You are wrong.

The Senate Acquits President Clinton

Did someone say to do some research?

so he was disbarred because he was acquitted?

Disbarment is not equivalent in any way shape or form to "high crimes and misdemeanors".

You can be disbarred for all sorts of things not related to a crime.

But usually crime

How do you know?

One state's example:

Quote:It should come as no surprise that various forms of financial misconduct top the list of ways to lose your license. Twenty-three of the 55 decisions involve—exclusively or in combination with other misconduct—misappropriation of funds, commingling of personal funds in a fiduciary account (especially if intended to hide assets from personal creditors), and failure to maintain trust account records. Quite likely, such a finding would be consistent with the results from any period of lawyer disciplinary decisions chosen or from any other jurisdiction; our highest ethical obligation as lawyers is the proper handling of other people’s money; any deviation from absolute fidelity should result in serious discipline.


Other serious acts of dishonesty form the next major category of misconduct that can lead to the loss of a license. Twenty decisions involve such forms of dishonesty as lying to courts, to clients or disciplinary authorities; fabricated, back-dated or falsely notarized documents or other evidence; and acts of fraud. Three of the matters from these major categories resulted in felony convictions.

http://www.mnbar.org/benchandbar/2009/au...ponse.html

We have a term for that and it's a crime.

Yes, it is possible that in that case a crime was committed. It's also possible that it was just an accounting error. The point I'm making is that probably over a thousand attorney's are disbarred every year. I don't see any evidence that it's usually for a crime.

And besides, that doesn't change the fact that it has nothing to do with the impeachment and his subsequent acquittal.

Billy Boy was disbarred for providing false testimony Paula Jones' civil suit.

That's a crime.

I'm guessing you don't get disbarred for a legitimate mistake

(07-08-2014 02:39 PM)ncbeta Wrote:  I'm guessing you don't get disbarred for a legitimate mistake

Yup, unless it was just that bad, which I can't think of an example of at the moment, or you do it continually.

The Clintons have always been pretty damn sleazy.

(07-08-2014 03:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  The Clintons have always been pretty damn sleazy.

Just amazing how well they are thought of though in general with that being the case. And it is the case.

(07-08-2014 02:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 02:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 02:09 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 02:08 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 01:28 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  so he was disbarred because he was acquitted?

Disbarment is not equivalent in any way shape or form to "high crimes and misdemeanors".

You can be disbarred for all sorts of things not related to a crime.

But usually crime

How do you know?

One state's example:

Quote:It should come as no surprise that various forms of financial misconduct top the list of ways to lose your license. Twenty-three of the 55 decisions involve—exclusively or in combination with other misconduct—misappropriation of funds, commingling of personal funds in a fiduciary account (especially if intended to hide assets from personal creditors), and failure to maintain trust account records. Quite likely, such a finding would be consistent with the results from any period of lawyer disciplinary decisions chosen or from any other jurisdiction; our highest ethical obligation as lawyers is the proper handling of other people’s money; any deviation from absolute fidelity should result in serious discipline.


Other serious acts of dishonesty form the next major category of misconduct that can lead to the loss of a license. Twenty decisions involve such forms of dishonesty as lying to courts, to clients or disciplinary authorities; fabricated, back-dated or falsely notarized documents or other evidence; and acts of fraud. Three of the matters from these major categories resulted in felony convictions.

http://www.mnbar.org/benchandbar/2009/au...ponse.html

We have a term for that and it's a crime.

So true.

(07-08-2014 03:19 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-08-2014 03:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  The Clintons have always been pretty damn sleazy.

Just amazing how well they are thought of though in general with that being the case. And it is the case.

Just think of them as your real-life Frank and Claire Underwood.

Clinton Cuts Deal


Commietom - CSNBBS Secretary Of 'Splaining Stuff