• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prosecutor withdraws from Roger Stone case

OpportunityCost said:
I did not answer because its not corroborated yet.
Click to expand...
It is not "corroborated yet" if Barr knew what his own prosecutors were going to submit for recommendations? That is a queer statement.
If you could quit trying to jump down my throat and read you would already have my answer.
Click to expand...
It is nonsense.

A timeline of the extraordinary turn of events in the Roger Stone case - ABC News

The question is did the prosecutors turn over something different to the DoJ than what they presented to the judge. If that remains uncorroborated, its not true.
Click to expand...
Again, this is such a queer idea....that DoJ prosecutors would be communicating something different to the judge....from their own bosses. It is funny to think that this team somehow went "rogue". Nonsense. Any more than the team prosecuting Flynn went rogue.....which is why his sentencing was suddenly reversed. Both teams were out of control.....according to the cult.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
It is not "corroborated yet" if Barr knew what his own prosecutors were going to submit for recommendations? That is a queer statement. It is nonsense.

Again, this is such a queer idea....that DoJ prosecutors would be communicating something different to the judge....from their own bosses. It is funny to think that this team somehow went "rogue". Nonsense. Any more than the team prosecuting Flynn went rogue.....which is why his sentencing was suddenly reversed. Both teams were out of control.....according to the cult.
Click to expand...

**** that cult bull****. ALL I am doing is providing information and you seem to think I am spinning it somehow.

1. I don't care about Stone. I really don't, he's a scumbag.
2. The information isn't corroborated and the only way it will be is if the DoJ releases the information relayed to the DoJ and it proves different from that offered to the judge. I doubt they will do that unless forced by legal or political pressure.
3. Due process is what really matters to me.

Read this again:
Tuesday evening A senior DOJ official tells reporters that they find the withdrawals of the prosecutors "surprising," but said the filing yesterday was "inconsistent with what we were told' the government would be recommending for Stone. The official said "it does" appear the withdrawals of the prosecutors, including at least one who resigned from DOJ, was done in protest of the department's reversal -- but the official declined to speak to the specifics of their circumstances.
Click to expand...
 
OpportunityCost said:
The information isn't corroborated and the only way it will be is if the DoJ releases the information relayed to the DoJ and it proves different from that offered to the judge.
Click to expand...
Uh, according to the source you keep posting all over the place, the spox has already thrown the prosecutors under the bus: "inconsistent with what we were told"....ie, they went rogue.....which is an insane argument..."we didn't know the prosecutors were going to do that, just like with Flynn"

In cult land, deep state is real!
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Uh, according to the source you keep posting all over the place, the spox has already thrown the prosecutors under the bus: "inconsistent with what we were told"....ie, they went rogue.....which is an insane argument..."we didn't know the prosecutors were going to do that, just like with Flynn"

In cult land, deep state is real!
Click to expand...

In bull**** land bureaucrats have never acted to undermine our current President...ever.

The truth is somewhere in-between and both know it.
 
OpportunityCost said:
In bull**** land bureaucrats have never acted to undermine our current President...ever.

The truth is somewhere in-between and both know it.
Click to expand...
Ah, is that who we are talking about.....federal prosecutors who work for the DoJ....are just "bureaucrats"......and these hoorible peeple were concetrated within the Stone, Flynn and Cohen prosecution teams! Deep state! What cultish nonsense.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Exactly what is the usual court oath administered? Go ahead and say it. She didn't tell the whole truth.
Click to expand...

Prospective jurors don't take that oath. Haven't you served on a jury before?
 
OpportunityCost said:
Exactly what is the usual court oath administered? Go ahead and say it. She didn't tell the whole truth.

If you visit MSNBC, you are lying to yourself about your mental hygiene.
Click to expand...
"Do you and each of you solemnly swear that you will well and truly try and a true deliverance make between the United States and Roger Stone, the defendant at the bar, and a true verdict render according to the evidence, so help you God?"
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Uh, according to the source you keep posting all over the place, the spox has already thrown the prosecutors under the bus: "inconsistent with what we were told"....ie, they went rogue.....which is an insane argument..."we didn't know the prosecutors were going to do that, just like with Flynn"

In cult land, deep state is real!
Click to expand...
If there was such a thing as a 'Deep State' what form do you think it might take?
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
If there was such a thing as a 'Deep State' what form do you think it might take?
Click to expand...

Smurfs. Riding unicorns. While mermaids spin hay into gold bars. The "deep state" is a psychotic and paranoid delusion designed to invalidate every criticism of Trump.
 
Every day, millions of federal workers go to work, doing their jobs to the best of their abilities in accordance with the laws of the United States, and the regulations and policies that govern their particular tasks. That, I'm afraid, is what the "deep state" now is, according to Donald Trump and his cohorts: government workers, doing their jobs, following the rules; Lawyers following the law in the administration of justice; scientists gathering data and reporting the results; economists trying to suss out economic trends and counteract negative effects; educators teaching.

When Dwight Eisenhower left office, he coined the phrase "Military-Industrial Complex" to describe what he saw as an unhealthy alliance between the arms industry and expansionist elements within the military acquisition leadership. This morphed over time into the far more amorphous "deep state" of paranoid minds and fiction writers (think, Manchurian Candidate). In the conspiratorial mind, any action which doesn't follow their precept of what "should" happen becomes evidence of the conspiracy, no, matter the mundane and easily identified root of the "deviation". Because Donald Trump has deviated so far from the norms and traditions (not to say rules and laws as well), there are innumerable activities that don't conform to his (fantasy) expectations.

Thence we get to our current condition, fostered by the unfortunate accession of the party (and Congress), that normal people, doing normal things, for routine reasons become part of the grand "deep state" conspiracy.
 
NWRatCon said:
Every day, millions of federal workers go to work, doing their jobs to the best of their abilities in accordance with the laws of the United States, and the regulations and policies that govern their particular tasks. That, I'm afraid, is what the "deep state" now is, according to Donald Trump and his cohorts: government workers, doing their jobs, following the rules; Lawyers following the law in the administration of justice; scientists gathering data and reporting the results; economists trying to suss out economic trends and counteract negative effects; educators teaching.

When Dwight Eisenhower left office, he coined the phrase "Military-Industrial Complex" to describe what he saw as an unhealthy alliance between the arms industry and expansionist elements within the military acquisition leadership. This morphed over time into the far more amorphous "deep state" of paranoid minds and fiction writers (think, Manchurian Candidate). In the conspiratorial mind, any action which doesn't follow their precept of what "should" happen becomes evidence of the conspiracy, no, matter the mundane and easily identified root of the "deviation". Because Donald Trump has deviated so far from the norms and traditions (not to say rules and laws as well), there are innumerable activities that don't conform to his (fantasy) expectations.

Thence we get to our current condition, fostered by the unfortunate accession of the party (and Congress), that normal people, doing normal things, for routine reasons become part of the grand "deep state" conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Comments like this are fair enough. The problem here is that it only seems to work one way. So when a political operative decides to act politically, its seen as a sign of a conspiracy with Russia. Or when inexperienced campaign guys are duped by a Russian intelligence operation, its also immediately seen as part of a conspiracy.
Or when government workers are now trying to determine why members of the previous administration were also so easily duped by the Russian intelligence operation, those workers are vilified.
 
Diesel said:
Smurfs. Riding unicorns. While mermaids spin hay into gold bars. The "deep state" is a psychotic and paranoid delusion designed to invalidate every criticism of Trump.
Click to expand...
About what was expected.
 
NWRatCon said:
Every day, millions of federal workers go to work, doing their jobs to the best of their abilities in accordance with the laws of the United States, and the regulations and policies that govern their particular tasks. That, I'm afraid, is what the "deep state" now is, according to Donald Trump and his cohorts: government workers, doing their jobs, following the rules; Lawyers following the law in the administration of justice; scientists gathering data and reporting the results; economists trying to suss out economic trends and counteract negative effects; educators teaching.

When Dwight Eisenhower left office, he coined the phrase "Military-Industrial Complex" to describe what he saw as an unhealthy alliance between the arms industry and expansionist elements within the military acquisition leadership. This morphed over time into the far more amorphous "deep state" of paranoid minds and fiction writers (think, Manchurian Candidate). In the conspiratorial mind, any action which doesn't follow their precept of what "should" happen becomes evidence of the conspiracy, no, matter the mundane and easily identified root of the "deviation". Because Donald Trump has deviated so far from the norms and traditions (not to say rules and laws as well), there are innumerable activities that don't conform to his (fantasy) expectations.

Thence we get to our current condition, fostered by the unfortunate accession of the party (and Congress), that normal people, doing normal things, for routine reasons become part of the grand "deep state" conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Is it your understanding that what the IRS, FBI, and CIA did was normal? Or do you feel they may have crossed a line by deliberately targeting Republicans?
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
Is it your understanding that what the IRS, FBI, and CIA did was normal? Or do you feel they may have crossed a line by deliberately targeting Republicans?
Click to expand...
That has always been a Bull**** argument. There is no evidence, NONE, that Republicans were targeted. If you want to make the claim, provide the evidence.

Out.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Devil's advocate will only carry you so far when there are multiple social media posts that she knew exactly who Stone was.
Click to expand...

Knowing who the person IS does not constitute evidence of impermissible bias, and she never claimed not to know who he is. So there are multiple social media posts indicating something she didn't deny and can be assumed since she did admit to closely following political news on social media... Where's the issue?
 
JasperL said:
Knowing who the person IS does not constitute evidence of impermissible bias, and she never claimed not to know who he is. So there are multiple social media posts indicating something she didn't deny and can be assumed since she did admit to closely following political news on social media... Where's the issue?
Click to expand...

Splitting hairs. Lying by omission by not claiming to recall will still give basis for appeal. The issue remains claiming not to know details while posting details on social media.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Splitting hairs. Lying by omission by not claiming to recall will still give basis for appeal. The issue remains claiming not to know details while posting details on social media.
Click to expand...

But you're just asserting lies without quoting what she represented to the court in voir dire, and her questionnaire, versus what her social media shows. There's LITTLE in it about Stone, which is why your "GOTCHA!!" so far is she tweeted a story that included Stone's indictment, and about 10 others indicted, charged, convicted, etc. And she didn't claim she was unaware Stone was indicted until she showed up for jury duty.

People have pored over her accounts and AFAIK there are two Tweets. One about the arrest and use of force which isn't a commentary about Stone's case, and that story. No amount of stretching indicates those two Tweets show a bias against STONE.
 
JasperL said:
But you're just asserting lies without quoting what she represented to the court in voir dire, and her questionnaire, versus what her social media shows. There's LITTLE in it about Stone, which is why your "GOTCHA!!" so far is she tweeted a story that included Stone's indictment, and about 10 others indicted, charged, convicted, etc. And she didn't claim she was unaware Stone was indicted until she showed up for jury duty.

People have pored over her accounts and AFAIK there are two Tweets. One about the arrest and use of force which isn't a commentary about Stone's case, and that story. No amount of stretching indicates those two Tweets show a bias against STONE.
Click to expand...

Anything and I mean anything unethical will give basis for appeal. Appeals have been filed on thinner basis.
 
JasperL said:
OK, that's just word salad that has nothing to do with my comment.
Click to expand...

There was nothing wordy about that. It will be easy to argue the juror was unethical in her statement that she knew little about the case prior to the voir dire. Any weakness at all in the case will form the basis for appeal. That is a weakness.
 
OpportunityCost said:
There was nothing wordy about that. It will be easy to argue the juror was unethical in her statement that she knew little about the case prior to the voir dire. Any weakness at all in the case will form the basis for appeal. That is a weakness.
Click to expand...

The problem is you can't show she knew much about the case. Her entire tweet repertoire on Stone, the case, was AFAIK two tweets, neither of them indicating anything more than a superficial knowledge. Yes, he was arrested and indicted - the end.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Uh, according to the source you keep posting all over the place, the spox has already thrown the prosecutors under the bus: "inconsistent with what we were told"....ie, they went rogue.....which is an insane argument..."we didn't know the prosecutors were going to do that, just like with Flynn"

In cult land, deep state is real!
Click to expand...

What's especially odd is the U.S. Attorney who filed both sentencing recommendations was Barr's hand picked person for the DC circuit, and he'd just been appointed. It would be....strange he'd keep Barr in the dark about what they were going to file with regard to Stone.
 
OpportunityCost said:
In bull**** land bureaucrats have never acted to undermine our current President...ever.

The truth is somewhere in-between and both know it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the guy in this case was appointed as acting U.S. Attorney by Barr to the D.C. circuit. So he's not some deep state holdover from the Obama years, but a recent BARR pick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom