The Roger Stone Trial

#551
#551
evillawyer said:
Link?
Click to expand...

I would, but you liberal hacks control 90%+ of the media and I wouldn’t be able to find what I’m looking for.

You see nothing wrong with Trump enduring a constant barrage of politically-fueled attacks, but the moment he begins getting too close to the left’s ingrained corruption, it’s time for impeachment part deux? GTHOH!

November can’t get here soon enough.

1581564186766.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin, CagleMtnVol and hjeagle1vol
#555
#555
volinbham said:
J. Christian Adams resigned over Holder's de facto dismissal of the case against the Black Panthers. I posted this earlier.
Click to expand...

And the DOJ investigated and found the dismissal of the case was not politically based. And J. Christian Adams has gone on to have a distinguished tinfoil-hatter career as a voting fraud alarmist.

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/opr report_0.pdf

Voter Fraud Activist Will Apologize To Citizens He Accused Of Being Illegal Voters | HuffPost
 
#556
#556
evillawyer said:
And the DOJ investigated and found the dismissal of the case was not politically based. And J. Christian Adams has gone on to have a distinguished tinfoil-hatter career as a voting fraud alarmist.

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/opr report_0.pdf

Voter Fraud Activist Will Apologize To Citizens He Accused Of Being Illegal Voters | HuffPost
Click to expand...

1. One quit under Holder; one quit under Barr

2. There has been no finding that Barr's actions are politically based so it's even Steven.

You asked; I provided. Sorry it doesn't fit the narrative.

And

In his testimony before the Civil Rights Commission, Adams stated that his accusations could be corroborated by Christopher Coates,[11] the former head of the voting section of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division who had led the original investigation of the New Black Panther Party.[47] The Department refused to allow Coates to testify.[11] In September 2010, Coates was granted whistleblower protection and testified before the Civil Rights Commission in defiance of his supervisors' instructions.[48]
Coates' testimony included accusations similar to those made by Adams, stating, "I had people who told me point-blank that [they] didn't come to the voting rights section to sue African American people."[48] He compared the New Black Panther case to an earlier case from 2006, in which Department of Justice attorneys expressed anger at having to investigate Ike Brown, a black Democratic politician in Noxubee County, Mississippi accused of discriminating against white voters. Coates testified that the Justice Department's administration's decision to drop the Black Panther Case "was intended to send a direct message to people inside and outside the civil rights division. That message is that the filing of voting cases like the Ike Brown and the NBPP cases would not continue in the Obama administration."[49] Coates testified that one of his superiors appointed by the Obama Administration had prohibited him from asking job applicants if they would enforce the voting laws in a race-neutral manner.[50] Attorney General Holder denied these claims, stating "The notion that we are enforcing any Civil Rights laws, voting or other, on the basis of race, ethnicity, or gender is simply false."[49][51]
Some civil rights officials in the Obama Administration expressed the view that Voting Rights Act was specifically intended to correct historic injustices against minorities.[10] The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Washington Post pointed out that although the Department of Justice dismissed Adams' testimony as that of a partisan hired during the Bush Administration, Coates is of a different pedigree and cannot be ignored as easily. Coates worked for the American Civil Liberties Union for nearly 20 years, receiving the Thurgood Marshall Decade Award from the Georgia NAACP in 1991,[47] and was hired by the Justice Department during the Clinton Administration in 1996.[48]
 
Last edited:
#557
#557
1554938421.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC, DynaLo, 0nelilreb and 1 other person
#558
#558
hog88 said:
It’s the question of being honest about why they’re doing the job. Were they asking for the max sentence because of their political/personal views or actually seeking appropriate justice.
Click to expand...
Let's assume appropriate justice.
 
#562
#562
Mick said:
The only people ever guilty of anything is the government according to hog. Except for the Trump Administration of course.
Click to expand...
@luthervol

People seem to be overlooking the fact that the Probation Office independently recommended the exact same sentence.

Pretty wild that not only were the prosecutors and the probation office politically motivated, but they both came up with the exact same range of punishment.

Also wild that these Harvard educated, former Supreme Court clerk prosecutors (and the probation office) would be so dumb as to out their political bias, especially in light of our present political climate, by making a politically motivated recommendation that the Judge is perfectly able to completely disregard.

It would also be much more convincing if these weren’t the 1,793,465,352-356th individuals that we’ve been told were just politically hacks who were acting out of a bias against Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#563
#563
RockyTop85 said:
@luthervol

People seem to be overlooking the fact that the Probation Office independently recommended the exact same sentence.

Pretty wild that not only were the prosecutors and the probation office politically motivated, but they both came up with the exact same range of punishment.

Also wild that these Harvard educated, former Supreme Court clerk prosecutors (and the probation office) would be so dumb as to out their political bias, especially in light of our present political climate, by making a politically motivated recommendation that the Judge is perfectly able to completely disregard.

It would also be much more convincing if these weren’t the 1,793,465,352-356th individuals that we’ve been told were just politically hacks who were acting out of a bias against Trump.
Click to expand...
I'm starting to strain my neck muscles from shaking my head so damn much.
I need to find an alternative physical manifestation for my response to irrational lunacy. Maybe just blowing a raspberry, but then people would think I suffered from debilitating IBS.
 
#564
#564
Trey Gowdy: Dems' demands for Barr resignation 'about the dumbest damn thing I've ever heard'
Former House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy responded Thursday to the outrage by many Democrats over President Trump's defense of Republican political consultant Roger Stone and his agreement that the Justice Department should revise its sentencing recommendation against Stone.
...
Democratic lawmakers, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal, called on Barr to resign Wednesday, while the House Judiciary Committee announced it'll grill the attorney general during a March 31 hearing over his handling of the sentencing.
"I can tell you this: Bill Barr was aware of this recommendation before President Trump ever tweeted a single syllable, a single character. So the notion that Barr was somehow motivated to move because of this tweet is just factually wrong," said Gowdy, a Fox News contributor.
"The notion that Barr should resign is about the dumbest damn thing I've ever heard," Gowdy added.
"If a United States Senator really believes that the head of the Department of Justice cannot weigh in on what a proportional sentence is..." Gowdy trailed off, adding that "there are child pornographers, people who rob banks who do not get nine years."
...
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin, VolnJC and davethevol
#566
#566
When Barr testifies and says I thought the sentencing request was excessive 3 weeks ago or what have you, what will ya’ll bitch about then?
 
#567
#567
hog88 said:
When Barr testifies and says I thought the sentencing request was excessive 3 weeks ago or what have you, what will ya’ll bitch about then?
Click to expand...
There should be documentation. You don't want to see that though.
 
#570
#570
Mick said:
Don't get ahead of yourself. Hasn't history taught you anything? I''m sure you will end up saying it's their right to not release it.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn’t he release it? What sense does that make?
 
#572
#572
luthervol said:
I'm starting to strain my neck muscles from shaking my head so damn much.
I need to find an alternative physical manifestation for my response to irrational lunacy. Maybe just blowing a raspberry, but then people would think I suffered from debilitating IBS.
Click to expand...
I don’t know that I think it’s THAT big of a deal. Trump could pardon Stone anyways, this just adds a middleman. DOJ HQ doesn’t have any credibility at this point, so not much lost there. The general deterrent effect is obviously already gone on the lying to Congress and I don’t think it’s greatly diminished in the witness tampering aspect because who expects to get direct involvement from DOJ?

So, I would be fine with “9 years is unreasonable, Bill Barr, rewrite the guidelines” but Barr is out there trying to get harsher punishments and more jail time (more overcrowded private prisons) for everybody else.

Personally, it’s the fact that these political favors that do nothing to fix the system for the common man are being applauded by the faux populists and “libertarians” that reinforces the various stereotypes preconception of the gormless, unprincipled Trumpist.
 
#575
#575
volfanjustin said:
Jury was anti-Trump, judge is anti-Trump, prosecutors were anti-Trump but otherwise trial was very fair
Click to expand...
It's increasingly an anti-Trump vs. pro-Trump world in which we live. Just the way Trump wanted it.
"Increase the divide" has replaced "lock her up".
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top