It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should Politicians face criminal charges for lies?

page: 2
32
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
Who gets to decide what is a lie or just a stupid politician that has no clue what they are talking about?


A jury.

Or the one charged can opt for a trial by a judge

Just like a normal criminal trial.

Pretty simple.


Do you have any idea how much time and money that would cost? A jury could decide guilt but somebody has to decide if the so called crime is even able to be proven.
Like your example of Obama's keep your insurance.
Did he lie or did he actually have no idea what was in the aca bill? My gut tells me he was clueless.
He also promised to close gitmo, it's still open. Is that a lie or just a complete lack of understanding what it would take to close the base?
Good luck getting a jury to agree to prosecute.



So a jury is ok to decide the fate of you and me up to capital cases ?

But for politician? O NO!!!! Not fit for purpose?

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

Do you have any idea how much time and money that would cost?



Do you have any idea how much money lies have cost or the amount of lives lost?


Id say a few dozen cases going through courts is a bargain if it avoids another wrong war or economic blunder.




posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
somebody has to decide if the so called crime is even able to be proven.
Like your example of Obama's keep your insurance.
Did he lie or did he actually have no idea what was in the aca bill? My gut tells me he was clueless.
He also promised to close gitmo, it's still open. Is that a lie or just a complete lack of understanding what it would take to close the base?


Well that is up to your Prosecution services.

If he can PROVE he was ignorant on the cost of closing GITMO or the ACA then his defense could argue that cant they?


But at the end of the day one should not make promises they cant be sure of keeping.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zarniwoop

Just don't re-elect the liars.


Cause that logic is working so far........







posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Maybe we should just give them a buck for every whole truth they say in public. I know, they would be broke. But if this was their only source of political campaign money, it might work. But what is truth and what constitutes a lie. Both are based on perception based on consensus of the time. Since we know most politicians do not say the truth much, this means that their misconceptions and half truths are acceptable and legal. After all, the government controls the creation of the laws and let the buyer beware is always told to us in school. People do not realize this applies to everything, people do not realize that all politicians have to make deals with other politicians to get what they want for the people who elected them.

So what do we do? We can't stick every politician in jail, we already have put them in the big house on capital hill. In jail they are supposed to reform people, yet when people get out of jail they are worse a lot of times. Same with those who get put into congress, if they are honest at first, the deceit in politics changes them and they learn to make deals with the devil.

No problem, if everyone just understands that you can trust some street people more than most politicians we are just fine.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


Did you even read what I said?
A jury has nothing to do with a criminal case until the case goes to trial. Then at that time yes, a jury is the only way to go.
I want to know who gets to determine what constitutes a lie. Who is going to say he lied and we need to go to trial? Who do you trust enough to make those decisions?
And even then, what punishment are you recommending?



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

If...

- It causes unnecessary conflicts or wars

- It causes American citizens or American soldiers to lose their life

- It's a major piece of legislation that was passed when all the facts were not made public


You Betcha! The only problem is, when government is policing themselves, you have no unbiased oversight. Unless you have an oversight committee made up of citizens who have no party affiliation, will you ever get justice. 9/11 is a perfect example.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

I want to know who gets to determine what constitutes a lie.

Well a lie is pretty easy to define.

A willful deceit, slander or outright falsehood.

What I would use is the same standards that are in a court room.


If what constitutes a lie needs to spelled out for you then you have no hope


originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
Who is going to say he lied and we need to go to trial? Who do you trust enough to make those decisions?

The exact same people who get to decide if you have committed perjury in a court of law.

In the UK that is the CPS. So what ever is relevant in your country.


originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
And even then, what punishment are you recommending?

For most matters the same as perjury in a court of law. IE a large fine and/or a short prison sentence.

For a lie that gets people killed and damages the country is a large way? Treason



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Absolutely!! Now I know that an argument for being able to lie to the public is essential to doing their job but more often than not it isn't. Politicians lie to the public to forward nefarious agendas or for personal enrichment. We already have the tools, pathological lying is a diagnosable mental illness which renders them unfit to hold office.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
No. An apple will never be a peach...
People who keep voting these windbags into office need to be re-educated. Start applying algebra to social issues for starters. ISIS didn't hate us until we took their poppy fields...?

Do you think if the lights go out these creeps are going to sacrifice their own comfort and cry in the streets for the lights to come back on?
No. They will be clamoring and scheming each other and anyone who has anything in the way of chocolate bars...



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
It is nice to dream of what could be.

But sadly, the DOJ, house, senate and potus are all bought and paid for by people who would never let this happen.

Maybe after the inevitable reset happens, but I fear when the dust settles the whole world will be under control of the very same ones running the show now.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: smurfy

Perfect result then..imprison the lying, self serving gits and reduce their numbers at the same time.

Win win.

Ah yes, but they all lie. My Ol' grandpappy was right although I didn't believe him at the time I was little, he used to say, " Never trust anyone who talks for a living."



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Not for a lie in of itself, no. There's too much uncertainty and plausible deniability. For example, in terms of Bush and weapons of mass destruction, it would be so very easy to say that he was misinformed by his staff. Next thing you know the politicians are arresting scapegoats... More often.

There should be an accountability system in place for campaign promises. I don't know what exactly, but if a politician gets elected on the premise of a lie, then he should face consequences.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
No. Unless they do it under oath. Then yes. That's why the goal of so many investigations is to get the elected official on the stand under oath.

Perhaps have Presidential debates done under oath before a court.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
Who gets to decide what is a lie or just a stupid politician that has no clue what they are talking about?


A jury.

Or the one charged can opt for a trial by a judge

Just like a normal criminal trial.

Pretty simple.

If its good enough for us plebs its good enough for them.


Just the problem, Crazy. If the judge is in the bag as well, we
get this.. everybody in the system letting everybody off.
I really do like that concept of an equal lack of protection clause
though. Five years hard for a lie that affects national policy or
public opinion, like "We had no idea they were going to fly...".



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Intresting responses so far.


I fail to see why a poliician ever needs to lie.

Maybe withhold certain information at times but never lie.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 05:55 PM
link   
You know there is a a passage in the bible where Jesus talks about not taking oaths.

I always wondered about that one, as I see people all about do just that daily.

Well enter Emmett Fox on the subject. He explained it thus, that because circumstances, people and even oneself are constantly changing it's difficult predict, with any degree of certainity, what will be the correct/wise thing to do in the future.

So I think, intent is important and there is no realable way any of us can truely know the intent behind anothers words. There is also a law - a spiritual rule, Karma, that makes sure the guilty pay in some form or another.

Which brings me to another, even older, biblical paraphase, "Vengence is mine, sayth the Lord".

I'd love to see truth in advertising laws on the books (as advertising almost by definition is deceitful). Perhaps politicians are as well - but I'm sure they have, every single one, convinced themselves that they believe what they say is true in "that particular moment". "I don't recall", "I misspoke", etc.

I think the only crime that requires a definite 'motive' or 'intention' is murder, everything else is based purely on factual behavoir. I'd apply the same standard to politicians and salepeople.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Yes they should its fraud to operate like lying kings when they're just pimply faced mascots and minions of the people and need to cut themselves and eat some humble pie.

Also, we need to have the power to fire them as we deem fit, them, all other elected minions, civil servants and judges.
Its treason that we don't.

In addition, when they break the law, the constitution, abuse their positions and power, why is it, that there is very complex procedure that only the corrupt minions can perform? The police need to have the power to arrest and charge, the president and all politicians and judges, at the discretion of the majority population.

I don't vote as this entire system is criminal, illegal and null and void. Those things are the bare minimum of a host of other things, that it would take to try and right the system and to have it even bare a semblance of legality.


edit on 29-1-2015 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
I give you a lot of credit crazyewok, for asking what IMO is one of THE most important questions.

To be honest, I truly thought that this thread would have more replies, and quite frankly agreement that honesty IS the best policy. I recall asking as a child, why politicians lie to get elected...and the reply I received back then was that the people allow them to - which of course to a logical thinking child only begat more "why's".


You wouldn't accept a spouse who lies; and you would teach a child not to do that as well. But a politician, someone who decides the very procedures, taxes and laws that you MUST live by; and also rules as a collective - their positions of power should have them being held to a much higher standard. I mean, their salaries alone ought to make them SOME degree of accountable, wouldn't you say?

Perhaps if their salaries were downsized, to that of the countries average income, there would be more honest folk seeking office, than career liars.

However maybe it's a bigger commentary on society as a whole and what is acceptable...but in my thinking, so much MORE could be accomplished if you didn't have to spend so much time sorting the wheat from the chaff.

------

I was just thinking that society seems to demand more accountability from a minimum wage employee, than they do a politician!! What a crazy world indeed.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: MoonBlossom

Exactly.

When I worked in Pharmaceutical R&D you could not lie. Lie on a form or your results and you would end up fired, huge fine, FDA blacklisted and possible whacked in jail.

In the UK you can not lie in court. To do so is perjury and again huge fines and prison can result.


so why is it ok for a politician to lie? Surely running a country is one of the most important jobs? So standards should be insanely high?


As for people arguing cost to the public? Thousands of people pass through the courts everyday a lot for BS reasons, so sending a few corrupt politicans through the system is not going to overload it.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Should they be prosecuted??? Yes. All in Govt that lie should.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join