|
|
| Roger Stone thread (1699224) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1699224) | |
Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 12 22:36:14 2020 Why is no one talking about this? His Excellency put his finger on the scale. |
|
|
| (1699225) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Feb 12 22:40:02 2020, in response to Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 12 22:36:14 2020. What happened? |
|
|
| (1699236) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Feb 12 23:00:22 2020, in response to Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 12 22:36:14 2020. Not necessarily... the intervention was supposedly started independently by Barr before Trump's tweet.I'm trying to find where I read it, but my understanding is Barr was briefed on a lower sentencing recommendation, and the prosecutors changed things up and presented the 7-9 year number after it had been discussed. This might just be a rumor. In any case at this point we're probably not getting any new real information until Barr testifies before the House Judiciary Committee On March 31st. Which I wish was sooner, but whatever... |
|
|
| (1699274) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 06:15:14 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by BILLBKLYN on Wed Feb 12 22:40:02 2020. Trump had Barr intervene because the sentencing recommendation by the AUSA’s working the case was approximately 7-9 years and included things like when Stone tweeted a picture of the Judge with crosshairs or a target (I have seen it described both ways) on her head. All AUSA’s involved promptly resigned after being undercut by Trump (via tweet) and Barr. |
|
|
| (1699288) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Thu Feb 13 08:24:51 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 06:15:14 2020. Oh, yeah! I thought maybe something new happened that I didn't hear about. |
|
|
| (1699304) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 09:33:14 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 06:15:14 2020. Here we go again ...another impeachment try. |
|
|
| (1699325) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Feb 13 10:40:05 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 09:33:14 2020. Wouldn't be undeserved. Not in the least. |
|
|
| (1699328) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 13 10:43:13 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 06:15:14 2020. You didn't deliberately leave out the tainting of the jury pool now, didja? |
|
|
| (1699329) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 10:43:55 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 09:33:14 2020. It would be better to just have "investigations" nonstop between now and November |
|
|
| (1699333) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 10:49:08 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 13 10:43:13 2020. First, how did they taint the jury pool? Second, if that were the basis they would have been removed long before now. |
|
|
| (1699336) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Feb 13 10:55:31 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Feb 12 23:00:22 2020. And we're supposed to believe this trump-toad because??? |
|
|
| (1699357) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:22:56 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Feb 12 23:00:22 2020. Yes, what we have here is the question of whether Barr acted because Trump told him what to do, or because he already knew what Trump wanted him to do without having to be told. |
|
|
| (1699361) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:25:54 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 09:33:14 2020. Not likely to result in another impeachment. The Senate has made it clear that totally disgraceful conduct is to be ignored, except maybe if there's a dead body, multiple eyewitnesses, a video, and a confession. |
|
|
| (1699365) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 11:33:51 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 10:43:55 2020. The Dems would not be satisfied with that. They will try to get him out of office & the hell what the American voters want. |
|
|
| (1699366) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Thu Feb 13 11:34:45 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 11:33:51 2020. But 70% of americans wanted witnesses...what did republicans do? |
|
|
| (1699368) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:36:38 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 11:33:51 2020. What are you talking about? How can the Democrats remove Trump from office when there are way more than 33 Senators who literally wouldn't remove him for anything except a well-witnessed murder. |
|
|
| (1699370) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:39:12 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 06:15:14 2020. If Barr cuts the sentence recommendation way down, is the judge allowed to say, to hell with this, I don't care that he has friends in high places, and still sentence him to 7 years? |
|
|
| (1699372) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 11:42:28 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by ClearAspect on Thu Feb 13 11:34:45 2020. When Clinton was impeached, Schummer said out loud & more than once that witnesses were not necessary. Talk about two faced hypocrisy.As far as that 70% poll, that meant nothing to the republicans (if the poll # were accurate in the first place). Witnesses or not, in this case it was a slam dunk that he would not be convicted. Bottom line, its all political BS. |
|
|
| (1699374) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:48:02 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 11:42:28 2020. When Clinton was impeached, the Senate and the President accepted the facts presented by the House as true.When Trump was impeached, that wasn't the case. Trump is still claiming Sondman lied about his actions and a lot of senators are still supporting that position. But they wouldn't accept a witness who could have corroborated Sondman. |
|
|
| (1699378) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 11:53:38 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:22:56 2020. It’s not even that. The issue is whether Barr’s intervention is because the prosecution’s sentencing guidelines were actually overly harsh compared to past cases involving similar facts and convictions, or whether it was only to be lenient to one of His Excellency’s loyal subjects? |
|
|
| (1699383) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 12:01:14 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 11:53:38 2020. OK. Given the situation, I was assuming the latter, though I understand it is not yet established.If you threaten a judge, you can expect the prosecutors to go high. And there are also very few cases involving similar facts and circumstances. |
|
|
| (1699386) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 12:17:47 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:39:12 2020. Yes. The sentence recommendations are not binding on the judge. |
|
|
| (1699433) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Feb 13 14:41:28 2020, in response to Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 12 22:36:14 2020. Last I heard, the president did not forfeit his first amendment right to free speech. He expressed his opinion about the case. Are you forbidding him to do so? |
|
|
| (1699436) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 14:52:45 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Train Dude on Thu Feb 13 14:41:28 2020. That's just not how it works at all. Free Speech has nothing to do with it. |
|
|
| (1699493) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 17:04:37 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:36:38 2020. You just made a case for not trying to Impeach him again. The Dems knew that gong in last time & it would be beyond stupid to try it again with the deck stacked against them the same way.It would be another case of soaked in desperation Trump hating Democrats trying to give Trump the boot, all well knowing that any of the knuckleheads that the Dems put up don't have a snowballs chance in hell of beating him. Let the voters decide if he should stay in office & not the blinded by Trump hate, sore losing Democrats. Thats the American way. |
|
|
| (1699508) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 18:01:32 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 17:04:37 2020. Democrats did not impeach Trump in order to remove him from office. They knew that wasn't going to happen.They did it to register the disapproval of outrageous criminal conduct. |
|
|
| (1699509) | |
Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 18:02:25 2020, in response to Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Feb 12 22:36:14 2020. See your favorite news source.I am favorably astounded. |
|
|
| (1699522) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by BILLBKLYN on Thu Feb 13 18:34:28 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 18:01:32 2020. And, at the end of the day, no one cares. |
|
|
| (1699525) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 18:39:39 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by BILLBKLYN on Thu Feb 13 18:34:28 2020. Which is just pathetic. |
|
|
| (1699555) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Feb 13 19:56:46 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 11:33:51 2020. American voters want him out of office. He is and always was a minority president. |
|
|
| (1699559) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 20:03:40 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by bingbong on Thu Feb 13 19:56:46 2020. No we don’t if the option is Comrade Bernie or Liawatha. |
|
|
| (1699560) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Feb 13 20:05:51 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 20:03:40 2020. Why are you picking on Elizabeth Warren? You have an unhealthy fixation on her. |
|
|
| (1699561) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 20:07:13 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Feb 13 20:03:40 2020. I fervently hope we don't get to find out, but I wouldn't be surprised if Bernie could get a plurality of the popular vote. Just not in WI, MI, PA, or FL. |
|
|
| (1699562) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Feb 13 20:08:28 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by bingbong on Thu Feb 13 19:56:46 2020. If you really believe that the American public want him out of office, then why are you so afraid to let the public have their say? |
|
|
| (1699582) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Thu Feb 13 21:40:47 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 11:53:38 2020. The issue is whether Barr’s intervention is because the prosecution’s sentencing guidelines were actually overly harsh compared to past cases involving similar facts and convictions, or whether it was only to be lenient to one of His Excellency’s loyal subjects?Good point! That would be a rather easy way to put this to rest one way or the other. Because media (on both sides) perfer clicks over resolving a wedge issue, no journalist would dare dig that up, except maybe the odd motivated Trump-obsessed individual feverishly poring over old documents... and even then they'd need a credible media source to verify their claim to give it legitimacy. |
|
|
| (1699796) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Feb 14 17:57:59 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 11:25:54 2020. Well yes, disgraceful conduct isn't supposed to be removable. An actual significant law has to be broken, aka a high crime or "misdemeanor" (18th-century speak for Felony). The same reason Bill Clinton wasn't removed applies here. |
|
|
| (1699804) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Feb 14 18:23:56 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Feb 14 17:57:59 2020. The same reason Bill Clinton wasn't removed applies here.Perjury about sex isn't a high crime. Bribery is. |
|
|
| (1699815) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Feb 14 18:47:17 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 18:39:39 2020. IAWTP. This is why the US is going to fail. |
|
|
| (1699816) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Fri Feb 14 18:51:04 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Feb 13 17:04:37 2020. I though the American way was also to mete out justice when a crime was committed. |
|
|
| (1699818) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Fri Feb 14 18:54:00 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Fri Feb 14 18:23:56 2020. Bribery was removed from the articles of impeachment, because even the House realized that they hadn't proven it. |
|
|
| (1699848) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 14 21:42:24 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by 3-9 on Fri Feb 14 18:51:04 2020. Correct, but first you have to be found guilty. |
|
|
| (1699849) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Feb 14 21:44:59 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Fri Feb 14 21:42:24 2020. And first you have to have a fair trial, and not one with the jury refusing to hear the evidence. |
|
|
| (1699879) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by jimmymc25 on Fri Feb 14 23:09:49 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by 3-9 on Fri Feb 14 18:47:17 2020. Very sad, but that's what it looks like. |
|
|
| (1699903) | |
Re: Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Sat Feb 15 07:42:36 2020, in response to Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 18:02:25 2020. I'm getting a different feeling, and it's not surprise, favorable or otherwise. |
|
|
| (1699904) | |
Re: Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Feb 15 07:43:32 2020, in response to Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 18:02:25 2020. No sale. Subterfuge is the way of the Sith. |
|
|
| (1699912) | |
Re: Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Feb 15 10:10:34 2020, in response to Re: Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by JayZeeBMT on Sat Feb 15 07:43:32 2020. IAWTP |
|
|
| (1699963) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Feb 15 15:51:06 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 12:17:47 2020. Especially the judge with the defendant, Roger Stone's pic of her with a rifle crosshair sightlines on her head! |
|
|
| (1699971) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 15 16:55:27 2020, in response to Barr shows backbone Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by AlM on Thu Feb 13 18:02:25 2020. Backtalk to one's boss is not "backbone". Also, there is no attorney general anywhere in Article II of the Constitution, but reading the Beobachter Slimes would not be conducive to you learning such facts.I'm still waiting for him to show backbone towards the deep state. |
|
|
| (1700140) | |
Re: Roger Stone thread |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Feb 16 14:03:59 2020, in response to Re: Roger Stone thread, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 15 16:55:27 2020. LOL! |
|
|