In an effort to set the record straight regarding Вen Li's article, I would like to point out a number of factual errors in the article.
First, the cover of the Gauntlet states: "Impeachment attempt failed: Preston told truth on report but must apologize for comments made to slc." This is, in fact, completely incorrect. slc did not find that he told the truth in his report.
Second, Вen Li incorrectly states that Preston was "Cleared of charges of over-reporting the number of hours he worked in June." Preston was not cleared of any charges by slc. A similarly misleading statement was made in the photo caption.
Third, Вen Li writes that Rosie Nagra had "claimed that her evidence showed Preston had not in fact worked 20 hours on the pipe-smoking resolution as he claimed in his June report." This is misleading. Based on Preston's own admission to slc that he lied in his report, Nagra felt she had an obligation to pursue the matter.
Fourth, Preston claims that the decision "validates the fact that I didn't steal students' money." slcdecided no such thing. While slc may have decided not to pursue disqualification from slc and saa, he was certainly not exonerated of the charge of stealing money. While we don't object to Вen Li reporting Mr. Preston's claims about exoneration, we do take issue with his parroting those claims when unsupported by the facts.
Fifth, in Вen Li's tribute to Preston in the concluding paragraph of his article, he incorrectly states that Preston successfully carried constitutional amendments through slc. As constitutional amendments must go to referendum, Вen Li's facts are once again incorrect.
Finally, in Вen Li's article, nowhere is it mentioned the principles that were at stake and on which Nagra based her arguments. These principles include an oath that Preston took to work in the spirit of fairness and cooperation, to place the benefit of students above his own, and to avoid conflicts of interest. Consequently, Вen Li trivialized the point of these proceedings.