Trump Ally Roger Stone Gets 40 Months for Lying, Witness-Tampering
 

Judge sums up case thusly: "He was not prosecuted for standing up for the president; he was prosecuted for covering up for the president."

On Stone's defense of “So what?" judge echoes prosecutors: "Of all the circumstances in this case, that may be the most pernicious. The truth still exists, the truth still matters. Roger Stone's insistence that it doesn’t ... are a threat to our most fundamental institutions"

Breakdown of Roger Stone's sentence:

COUNT 1 - 40 MONTHS
COUNT 2 to 6 -- 12 MONTHS
COUNTS 7 -- 18 MONTHS

all to run concurrently

Stone was found guilty of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional investigation to protect Agolf. Yet another cog in Twittler's inner circle of criminals.

Reminder: Barr said in his confirmation hearings that it would be a crime for a president to pardon somebody in exchange for them lying to protect him.
Will he still believe it if Trump pardons Roger Stone?

The judge lied and should be impeached. She is clearly biased. Just another example of political corruption.

to funny from another one convinced of the deep state..

But absent of criticism of Stones Behavior :btu:

About WHAT?

She said on the record, that Stone was covering for the president. As far as I know, the charges didn't mention that.

The jury forewoman calls herself "a lieutenant with the Resistance", I believe?

The judge also barred Stone from speaking about it. So all the people at CNN can say whatever they want about him, and he's not allowed to speak his mind or defend himself?

Spence, we know the DOJ tipped off CNN, and we all saw the way the DOJ went in to get this senior citizen, armed like Seal Team 6.

Stone broke the law, and absolutely deserves to be punished. But it appears there was a significant political element to some of this.

Worst case, Trump pardons him after the election. My bet, the conviction gets tossed. That jury forewoman had no business being anywhere near that trial, she posted on social media that Trump was in the Klan and that all of his supporters were racist.

so what was the lie?

CNN tipped off By DOJ Conspiracy theory

The Jury forewomen was vetted by Stone Lawyers and she wasn't the only Juror to convict


The judge also barred Stone from speaking about it,,, its a gag order and not uncommon and apply to both parties

DOJ went in to get this senior citizen, armed like Seal Team 6.

Policy on Raids are not defined by the Targets Age but based on the safety of the officers involved .. funny again no issue with seal team 6 wannabes protesting in VA But actual law enforcement doing their Job OMG


and Trump can say what he wants interfering in the Trial and the Right called it Free speech This forewomen spoke after the trial and never during the trial about the trial and she's the one the right goes after Typical

I think it was from a meme.

Wow, did all the flakes turn into Bitchslappedboy while I was away?
This all seems like a big deal about nothing.
🍔
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i’m told that in federal court, the judge selects the jury, not the lawyers. either way, she should have been booted.

i’ve seen democrat lawyers who were stunned at the gag order. it’s not only sean hannity saying that was excessive.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A gag order doesn't change whats told in court by either side not sure of why this is problematic to you


The judge and the attorneys then ask the potential jurors questions to determine their suitability to serve on the jury, a process called voir dire. The purpose of voir dire is to exclude from the jury people who may not be able to decide the case fairly.

this is in All us courts Not sure how many they get to dismiss when I was selected the defendant was with his attorneys when then asked if i could be impartial even as a correctional officer , And didn't get bounced until the last round

Stone's buddy can't pardon him because that makes the Fifth Amendment moot.
So will he commute his sentence is the question.

If you want to whine about the judge and think she did something awful in sentencing Roger Stone, you ought to at least read the transcript of the sentencing before you do so. It is an official transcript, not a memorandum or unofficial reporting and is the court record. If you are only concerned about her sentencing statement it starts on page 57. And there are no redaction's.:bl:
So read or carry on with your usual Trumplican whining.

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...ranscript.html

it’s problematic to me because it violates his first amendment right. again, i’ve seen harvard law professors who identify as democrats, say she has no reason to prevent him from speaking, especially after its over. i haven’t heard one single person say it’s common. i guess you know more, but little old me, i have to rely on experts. unlike you, i can accept and process that which goes against my beliefs, i don’t need to deny all such things.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Who has said this?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He's been convicted and sentenced, so it's over. And the judge has him under a gag order. So he's not allowed to talk about the proceedings, he's not allowed to speak in his defense when he's excoriated on CNN. Which from what every lawyer (even democrats) I've heard say, is very unusual for a case like this.

The guy was convicted of a crime, I have no problem with him being punished. However, I think it's very strange that he, of all people, is worthy of a special forces team storming his house at dawn, rather than simply calling his lawyer to have him turn himself in. And everyone says a gag order in this kind of a case is unusual. And the jury forewoman (while obviously only one juror) had absolutely zero business being on that jury. So there are multiple red flags. It smells of politics. Why an assault team with those kinds of weapons? Is that a typical response for an old man accused of interfering with witness and of lying about emails? Maybe all seniors accused of these kinds of crimes get that kind of a response, and if so, that's fair. But I'd bet that's not the case.

If his conviction isn't overturned, he'll probably get pardoned.

Everyone everyone everyone everyone
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn't follow the case that closely so I could be wrong but the reason I believe the judge gave a gag order was because she is looking into the juror or she is expecting stone to appeal. And I don't believe it's unusual for the feds to use overwhelming force .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

during the trial, the judge was very clear that the gag order was to prevent crowds from getting fired up by public statements and coming to the courthouse. If you believe that, it makes you wonder why the gag order hasn’t been lifted now that it’s over.

in all seriousness, i’d like to see how often the feds respond with that level of force in these kind of cases. i hope they do so all the time, otherwise it leads to speculation about politics.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yes...it's hard to comprehend that level of stupid...but then there's always the democrat debates

Bernie attacking Bloomberg for his wealth, but then adamantly defending his right to own three homes. i mean my goodness.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I cant find a gag order at the end of the trial ? While hes out on bond
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Because it’s not over. Stone is not in jail. The judge has other issues to finish.

As for his capture, I’ve read it was nothing unusual.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

hmmm, where did you read that, in the obama groupie newsletter?

as i said, i hope it’s the usual practice. if it is, they can change that practice. sometimes, all it takes is a call to the lawyer to say “ have your client turn himself in tomorrow morning.”. but i remember the photos during the clinton presidency of immigration agents with big rifles and riot gear, showing up to pull some little kid away from his family in a very high profile case. not every federal action requires a Rambo response.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this is beyond stupid..

...or a Trump rally.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Beyond Stupid
“He is on his third chief of staff, his fourth national security adviser, his fourth defense secretary, his fifth secretary of homeland security, his sixth deputy national security adviser and his seventh communications director.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“Namaste Trump!”

Judge Amy Berman Jackson dismissed the Stone defense team's claims, arguing that the motion to have her recuse herself lacked "any factual or legal support."

Then Trump tweets shocking

Without offering evidence, Trump told reporters outside the White House on Sunday, "You have a juror that's obviously tainted. She was an activist against Trump, said bad things about Trump and said bad things about Stone. She somehow weaseled her way onto the jury and if that's not a tainted jury then there is no such thing as a tainted jury."


Again the rights and Trumps defense is based on no factual evidence :rotflmao:

wayne,,, you might want a do-over on that one too