Loading...

Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement. - Hallo friend WELCOME TO AMERICA, In the article you read this time with the title Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement., we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article AMERICA, Article CULTURAL, Article ECONOMIC, Article POLITICAL, Article SECURITY, Article SOCCER, Article SOCIAL, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement.
link : Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement.

Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement.

Lawprof Stephen Gillers explains in "When Is a 'Literally True”' Statement False and a Crime?"

I'll just excerpt the part about Bill Clinton:

Just as in daily life, judges say that a literally true answer can nevertheless be false if the witness knows what the questioner is getting at and intends to mislead by exploiting an imprecise question....

Bill Clinton famously argued that he did not lie at his deposition when he denied ever having had sex or being alone in a room with Monica Lewinsky. Clinton proposed definitions of “sex” and “alone” that, he argued, would make his answers true. In imposing sanctions against him, Judge Susan Weber Wright wrote:

Simply put, the President’s deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false, notwithstanding tortured definitions and interpretations of the term “sexual relations.”

Lawprof Stephen Gillers explains in "When Is a 'Literally True”' Statement False and a Crime?"

I'll just excerpt the part about Bill Clinton:

Just as in daily life, judges say that a literally true answer can nevertheless be false if the witness knows what the questioner is getting at and intends to mislead by exploiting an imprecise question....

Bill Clinton famously argued that he did not lie at his deposition when he denied ever having had sex or being alone in a room with Monica Lewinsky. Clinton proposed definitions of “sex” and “alone” that, he argued, would make

Loading...

his answers true. In imposing sanctions against him, Judge Susan Weber Wright wrote:

Simply put, the President’s deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false, notwithstanding tortured definitions and interpretations of the term “sexual relations.”

Thus articles Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement.

that is all articles Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement. This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article Bill Barr said something that was literally true but could still be considered a criminal false statement. with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2019/05/bill-barr-said-something-that-was.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: