Durham gets the first Russiagate conviction – Ex-Justice Department lawyer Kevin Clinesmith

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
You don't want to accept that the judge officially accepted Clinesmith's guilty plea, and had moved on to sentencing.

You STILL can't or WON'T answer how a defendant can be sentenced WITHOUT a conviction.
Many cases go days, weeks or months after conviction before final sentencing occurs.

The bet was on conviction ONLY. Not sentencing, which only is scheduled AFTER conviction, which was Aug. 19, and a totally different procedure.

If there's a date in the near future showing conviction after Aug. 19 when the judge officially accepted his guilty plea (same as conviction) prior to the sentencing date Dec. 10., then you will win the bet.

I can wait until Dec. 10 sentencing, if you can. It seems none of this is recorded as final until sentencing in this federal case.
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
a conviction requires that a judgement of conviction be entered by the judge

it's procedural

"a conviction" is a well-defined case disposition which is why I used this very
clear and commonly-understood term

once again, if you didn't know what a conviction entailed and instead want to
use the entry of a plea as the basis of the bet why didn't you state that to begin
with? you agreed to a bet with very simple terms, but you don't seem to have a
functional grasp of what they mean.

did you attempt to corroborate anything I've stated with actual.fkn.attorneys yet?!
I've referenced numerous law, lawyer and attorney sites stating what a guilty plea, conviction and sentencing is, the differences, and the order they are processed.

You CAN'T have a sentencing hearing WITHOUT a conviction. That took place Aug. 19.

Simple as that.

I WILL ASK AGAIN.

How can one get a sentencing hearing WITHOUT a firm, official and finalized conviction?

Get your attorney buddies to answer that one for all of us. I've already posted my sources multiple times.
 

Random Guy

Duke status
Jan 16, 2002
32,005
6,132
113
What was the agreed upon deadline for the conviction?
I gotta figure this bet had a “convicted by” clause

I’m thinking a jury of peers may need to make a decision
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
What was the agreed upon deadline for the conviction?
I gotta figure this bet had a “convicted by” clause

I’m thinking a jury of peers may need to make a decision
Deadline was Sept 30 for a conviction.

Judge accepted the guilty plea on Aug 19 and set the sentence hearing for Dec 10 that same day.
 

Random Guy

Duke status
Jan 16, 2002
32,005
6,132
113
So he will be convicted on or before December 10
If you can show proof that his conviction date, the date he became a convicted felon, was before September 30, then I would rule in your favor

As of now you’ve provided supporting evidence that is not decisive
 

sirfun

Duke status
Apr 26, 2008
17,542
6,874
113
U.S.A.
watch out Surfdog !! )

Durham's coming !! ) :)




















it''s kind of like an AUDIT !! )

these things take time !! )




:)
 
Last edited:

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
So he will be convicted on or before December 10
If you can show proof that his conviction date, the date he became a convicted felon, was before September 30, then I would rule in your favor

As of now you’ve provided supporting evidence that is not decisive
I guess you missed my response post yesterday to your similar conviction question.

A conviction is NOT the same as a sentence.

He plead guilty on Aug. 19, and the judge ACCEPTED his plea of guilt THAT DAY. That was the Conviction date.

His sentencing hearing was set on Aug. 19 for Dec. 10.

https://thetrcompany.com/en/difference-between-conviction-and-sentence/

"Difference between conviction and sentence is something to which we rarely pay attention to. This is because we have a tendency, a habit almost, to use terms interchangeably or synonymously without actually paying close attention to their meaning. The terms Conviction and Sentence are a classic example of this. Indeed, identifying the difference between the two is simple. It only requires a clear and proper understanding of their definitions. The key to distinguishing the terms is to think of Conviction as something that precedes a Sentence."
---------------------------------------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE A SENTENCING HEARING WITHOUT A CONVICTION FIRST.
DOES NOT HAPPEN, EVER

How many times do I have to post this?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Conviction
A guilty plea results in conviction.
By pleading guilty, the defendant admits to all elements of the crimes to which he is pleading. Likewise, the defendant admits that all material facts alleged in the charges are true. Therefore, a guilty plea serves as an adjudication on the merits of a case.

What is the difference between Conviction and Sentence?

> A Conviction refers to the outcome of a criminal trial. It is the act of proving or declaring a person guilty of a crime.
> A Sentence, on the other hand, is the formal declaration by a court imposing a punishment on the person convicted of a crime.
> A Conviction is a result of the verdict of a judge and/or jury. In contrast, a Sentence is typically ordered by a judge.
> The court cannot order a Sentence unless the person has been found guilty or convicted. Therefore, a Conviction must precede a Sentence.
--------------------------------------------------------------
How much more clearer can it be explained ? :foreheadslap:

(and this is not my interpretation, this is law in it's most basic definition)
 
Last edited:

Lance Mannion

Duke status
Mar 7, 2009
26,334
2,282
113
In Gods Country
---------------------------------------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE A SENTENCING HEARING WITHOUT A CONVICTION FIRST.
DOES NOT HAPPEN, EVER
---------------------------------------------------------------
Unless of course the defendant lacks the Wokeness required by the "progressive" Church flock.
 

Random Guy

Duke status
Jan 16, 2002
32,005
6,132
113
I guess you missed my response post yesterday to your similar conviction question.

A conviction is NOT the same as a sentence.

He plead guilty on Aug. 19, and the judge ACCEPTED his plea of guilt THAT DAY. That was the Conviction date.

His sentencing hearing was set on Aug. 19 for Dec. 10.

https://thetrcompany.com/en/difference-between-conviction-and-sentence/

"Difference between conviction and sentence is something to which we rarely pay attention to. This is because we have a tendency, a habit almost, to use terms interchangeably or synonymously without actually paying close attention to their meaning. The terms Conviction and Sentence are a classic example of this. Indeed, identifying the difference between the two is simple. It only requires a clear and proper understanding of their definitions. The key to distinguishing the terms is to think of Conviction as something that precedes a Sentence."
---------------------------------------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE A SENTENCING HEARING WITHOUT A CONVICTION FIRST.
DOES NOT HAPPEN, EVER

How many times do I have to post this?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Conviction
A guilty plea results in conviction.
By pleading guilty, the defendant admits to all elements of the crimes to which he is pleading. Likewise, the defendant admits that all material facts alleged in the charges are true. Therefore, a guilty plea serves as an adjudication on the merits of a case.

What is the difference between Conviction and Sentence?

> A Conviction refers to the outcome of a criminal trial. It is the act of proving or declaring a person guilty of a crime.
> A Sentence, on the other hand, is the formal declaration by a court imposing a punishment on the person convicted of a crime.
> A Conviction is a result of the verdict of a judge and/or jury. In contrast, a Sentence is typically ordered by a judge.
> The court cannot order a Sentence unless the person has been found guilty or convicted. Therefore, a Conviction must precede a Sentence.
--------------------------------------------------------------
How much more clearer can it be explained ? :foreheadslap:

(and this is not my interpretation, this is law in it's most basic definition)
I get that you can’t have a sentencing without a conviction
So, assuming the sentencing happens as scheduled, he’ll be convicted by dec 10
What is not clear from anything you’ve posted is what the actual conviction date is
A guilty plea resulting in a conviction doesn’t mean that it’s immediate
What is the official conviction date?
I think I’ve been pretty clear in my questions, but, I’m happy to clarify, or take into account other evidence.
 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,204
22,752
113
I get that you can’t have a sentencing without a conviction
So, assuming the sentencing happens as scheduled, he’ll be convicted by dec 10
What is not clear from anything you’ve posted is what the actual conviction date is
A guilty plea resulting in a conviction doesn’t mean that it’s immediate
What is the official conviction date?
I think I’ve been pretty clear in my questions, but, I’m happy to clarify, or take into account other evidence.
surfdog is attempting to do two things here:

1. poor appeals to authority
2. portray the conviction as a foregone conclusion

it's bad logic

he has not proven a conviction

a conviction occurs when a judgement of conviction is entered

as it stands only a plea has been entered

you can see what he's doing by linking the conviction leads to sentencing article above

what he does not state, and that I have pointed out previously, that the judgement of
conviction can be entered on the day of sentencing and, up to now, there is not one
entered for Clinesmith

because conviction precedes sentencing AND the sentencing hearing in December
DOES NOT LOGICALLY mean that the conviction happened back in August. the actual
procedural conviction can be entered at sentencing or in the interim.

so, again, Surfdog DOES NOT provide proof of conviction

Surfdog ONCE AGAIN is attempting to make very specious and indirect arguments that
infer that a conviction has been entered instead of directly proving conviction

Surfdog continues to make these arguments after agreeing to a bet where "a conviction"
was the crux of the wager while demonstrably being unclear on what that actually entails

I'm sitting with one of my attorney friends, general counsel for a large three letter film
studio here in town, and we're all like this....

1603671169892.png
 

sirfun

Duke status
Apr 26, 2008
17,542
6,874
113
U.S.A.
How much more clearer can it be explained ? :foreheadslap:
do you have a link to the public record of conviction with a date ?? ) :)


Are you happier than the doofus potus with the investigation ?? )

 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,204
22,752
113
do you have a link to the public record of conviction with a date ?? ) :)


Are you happier than the doofus potus with the investigation ?? )

ding ding ding

like I said...that's what settles this bet
 

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
The Clinesmith case isn't even showing up on the judges history yet in DC court records. It's like what happened on Aug 19, never took place, at this stage.

But judge already accepted the guilty plea and sent the case to sentencing. This is all technicality at this point.

So, we'll have to see when the guilty plea (conviction) becomes official on the final records, which will probably be after sentencing is finished.

That will settle the bet.

I don't even care about the money no matter who wins. I just want confirmation that he was convicted on Aug 19, or not.

Lots of documentation in the guilty plea, and then sentencing hearing here......

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17445533/united-states-v-clinesmith/

Looks like all is done other than sentencing his punishment.
 
Last edited:

Surfdog

Duke status
Apr 22, 2001
21,768
1,988
113
South coast OR
surfdog is attempting to do two things here:

1. poor appeals to authority
2. portray the conviction as a foregone conclusion

it's bad logic

he has not proven a conviction

a conviction occurs when a judgement of conviction is entered

as it stands only a plea has been entered

you can see what he's doing by linking the conviction leads to sentencing article above

what he does not state, and that I have pointed out previously, that the judgement of
conviction can be entered on the day of sentencing and, up to now, there is not one
entered for Clinesmith

because conviction precedes sentencing AND the sentencing hearing in December
DOES NOT LOGICALLY mean that the conviction happened back in August. the actual
procedural conviction can be entered at sentencing or in the interim.

so, again, Surfdog DOES NOT provide proof of conviction

Surfdog ONCE AGAIN is attempting to make very specious and indirect arguments that
infer that a conviction has been entered instead of directly proving conviction

Surfdog continues to make these arguments after agreeing to a bet where "a conviction"
was the crux of the wager while demonstrably being unclear on what that actually entails

I'm sitting with one of my attorney friends, general counsel for a large three letter film
studio here in town, and we're all like this....

View attachment 99786
Your meme should've said ".....entering a GUILTY plea...." and then it might be funny.

Kind of like the difference between "legal" and "illegal" immigrant.

I knew you were Hollywood, but now it make sense as to your constant defense of that slimy, sleazeball, soul-selling industry.:monkey:

AND, you haven't proven he HASN'T been convicted yet, either.

We're going on your defense lawyer buddies word, and nothing online ANYWHERE to back it up.
 
Last edited:

sirfun

Duke status
Apr 26, 2008
17,542
6,874
113
U.S.A.

I feel bad that the Surf dog has to go through this.
if only reality dint mug right wing talking points ?? ) :)


 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,204
22,752
113
I like the walking it back and the smirky joke like it's all good in the hood....

integrity deficit