The Roger Stone Trial

Trump will pardon Stone, for sure. But not because he genuinely thinks Stone deserves it -- its to send a message to others that if you defend Trump, even if you do so by seriously breaking the law, then Trump will protect you.
The Teflon Don has to watch out for family when they don't rat him out..
 
Trump will pardon Stone, for sure. But not because he genuinely thinks Stone deserves it -- its to send a message to others that if you defend Trump, even if you do so by seriously breaking the law, then Trump will protect you.
And i'm 100% for President Trump pardoning people targeted by highly biased deep state defending FBI agents,CIA Operatives, Prosecutors and Judges.
 
No prior criminal conduct. Always a major factor in sentencing.

Big picture, he has shown no remorse or regret. It is problematic that Trump defends him. The guy was convicted of 7 counts of perjury and threatening a witness.

The President should not be undermining the legal system as he has.

Yes - no prior criminal conduct is a big factor. It's a known factor. No way reasonable way to get sentencing guidelines to 7 - 9 yet prosecutors went there - hmmmm wonder why.

I agree the President is undermining the legal system but so did Crossfire Hurricane and the aftermath. Seeking 7 - 9 for this also undermines it. The entire process has been politicized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1
Yes - no prior criminal conduct is a big factor. It's a known factor. No way reasonable way to get sentencing guidelines to 7 - 9 yet prosecutors went there - hmmmm wonder why.

I agree the President is undermining the legal system but so did Crossfire Hurricane and the aftermath. Seeking 7 - 9 for this also undermines it. The entire process has been politicized.


Trumpsters keep saying the recommendation was too severe, but it was within the sentencing guidelines. And in fact today the prosecutors re-endorsed that recommendation. So I believe you are simply mistaken to say it was out of proportion to the offenses.
 
Trumpsters keep saying the recommendation was too severe, but it was within the sentencing guidelines. And in fact today the prosecutors re-endorsed that recommendation. So I believe you are simply mistaken to say it was out of proportion to the offenses.

What do you think about that biased jury foreman? You think that was fair?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennesseefan2019
Trumpsters keep saying the recommendation was too severe, but it was within the sentencing guidelines. And in fact today the prosecutors re-endorsed that recommendation. So I believe you are simply mistaken to say it was out of proportion to the offenses.

It wasn't within the sentencing guidelines so far as I can tell. They had to argue it up in severity way beyond analogous cases. Clearly the judge didn't think 7-9 was in the sentencing guidelines since she went for less than half that.

7 - 9 puts it at severity of 29; judge sentenced at a level of 20. That's a lot of stacking to get to 29. Judge clearly wasn't buying it.
 
Seems like a fair sentence for a verbal threat with no steps taken to follow through. Low sentence probably makes a pardon unlikely before the election.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinbham
Seems like a fair sentence for a verbal threat with no steps taken to follow through. Low sentence probably makes a pardon unlikely before the election.

Probably no need for a pardon this year. Surely he will appeal and wouldn’t he be a candidate to remain free during appeals?
 

VN Store



Back
Top