No, YOU are the one who can't follow. And nice going trying to put words into my mouth I never said. That is dishonest.
Sentencing guidelines for a crime have absolutely nothing to do with compounding, since the sentence is given on the crime he is convicted of, and there is a minimum and maximum punishment he can receive for the crime he has been convicted of. There is no more time involved, other than the time Hastert will be given for money laundering. That can range from probation to the maximum sentence, depending on how the judge rules in THIS case. A judge can make a determination using those guidelines, based on the egregiousness of what he did, and give him the maximum sentence if he wants to, and there is absolutely no compounding involved, since it is related to the crime he is convicted of, not the one the statute of limitations ran out on. If the maximum sentence for a crime is, say, 10 years, a judge cannot sentence him to 11 years because of another crime. THAT would be compounding. However, the judge CAN give out 10 years, because that is what the maximum sentence IS for the crime he was convicted of. Try to keep up. Duh, and please stop your dishonesty!!!!