• 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!

Trump commutes sentence of longtime adviser Roger Stone

danielpalos said:
...he should have been successfully impeached the first time.
Click to expand...

That was literally impossible since Republicans would never have voted against him and he stonewalled all witnesses from testifying against him just like Mafia Dons try to do. It was fixed.
 
jakiejakester said:
That was literally impossible since Republicans would never have voted against him and he stonewalled all witnesses from testifying against him just like Mafia Dons try to do. It was fixed.
Click to expand...

It should have been possible. Each and every denial and disparagement of the authority of the House could have been a separate Article sent to the Senate. Eventually the People would have gotten tired of right wing bananaRepublicanism.
 
Atomic Kid said:
I wouldn't be talking about 'low information people' if I were you since your inability to read and comprehend certainly would render yourself as being one of them. The law says exactly what I said does. The act of obstruction, the specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a pending judicial proceeding, for whatever reason, is a crime in of itself. There doesn't need to be any other previous criminal act directly associated with the person prior to his or her commission of the obstruction for it to be a crime.
Click to expand...


This was one of the right wing talk radio tropes right after the Mueller report was published.

It wasn’t valid then, and it isn’t now.
 
humbolt said:
Since the SC investigation essentially cleared Trump, I'm not all that interested in the rather wild speculations of the political left in that regard.
Click to expand...

With respect to obstruction, the SC investigation did not in any way clear Trump, and in fact, the evidence revealed in Vol 2, indicated at least 4 instances of potential obstruction.

You're grasping at any straw, however far fetched, to keep a false narrative alive.
Click to expand...

Stone himself implied he should receive a pardon/commutation because he lied and/or kept quiet on Trump's behalf.

Is it because Biden's mind is all boogered up? Is it because the left doesn't want to discuss the riots?
Click to expand...

It's because it's wrong for public officials to engage in acts of public corruption.

Over 10,000 convicted felons have been released out of compassion because of COVID 19. But Roger Stone shouldn't receive any compassionate treatment.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. And there are a number of things that can be done, if Covid-19 is something you're concerned about with respect to Stone that does not involve commuting his sentence.

I don't really care
Click to expand...

It is apparent you do not care about the Rule of Law.

It is apparent you do not think much about discouraging acts of public corruption.

And people who do not care about public corruption are people I do not hold in high esteem.

but I'm amazed that you guys do. I believe you want to avoid discussion of more serious and relevant problems.
Click to expand...

Our entire legal and political system basically relies on people executing the duties of their office in good faith.

Public corruption is a big deal. And I get that a huge swath of Trump supporters could not care less about public corruption, but they are all wrong. We don't have to look further than Russia or Venezuela to see what it's like to live in a society rife with public corruption.
 
trump giving stone the hookup for keeping his mouth shut...bottom line, end of story
 
W_Heisenberg said:
With respect to obstruction, the SC investigation did not in any way clear Trump, and in fact, the evidence revealed in Vol 2, indicated at least 4 instances of potential obstruction.



Stone himself implied he should receive a pardon/commutation because he lied and/or kept quiet on Trump's behalf.



It's because it's wrong for public officials to engage in acts of public corruption.



I don't think so. And there are a number of things that can be done, if Covid-19 is something you're concerned about with respect to Stone that does not involve commuting his sentence.



It is apparent you do not care about the Rule of Law.

It is apparent you do not think much about discouraging acts of public corruption.

And people who do not care about public corruption are people I do not hold in high esteem.



Our entire legal and political system basically relies on people executing the duties of their office in good faith.

Public corruption is a big deal. And I get that a huge swath of Trump supporters could not care less about public corruption, but they are all wrong. We don't have to look further than Russia or Venezuela to see what it's like to live in a society rife with public corruption.
Click to expand...

So ypu're still stuck on collusion and obstruction. The SC didn't have prosecutorial powers, but it could recommend prosecution. It did not. That was the end of it in spite of Schiff's charade.

If you can point to clear evidence of corruption, you should do so. Whining about someone you don't like because you despise their politics doesn't count for anything beyond your personal beliefs, which carry no weight beyond the end of your nose.

Historically, Roger Stone has always wanted to be a player - a heavy hitter. He never was. He lacked the seriousness required, and as a result, he never reached a position that would've given him some semblance of authority. He tried at the fringes, and never actually did anything of substance, as has been documented. His mistake was to lie about it. For that, he deserved the trouble he's had.

I think you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill, but if you think this is serious, go for ut. I'll watch. I will tell you right up front here, you won't gain a single vote in November from this. But it's your party...
 
TomFitz said:
What?

Are you ever serious!!!!
Click to expand...

Yes. Here would have been the time for you to offer an example of what he tried to hide in order to protect Trump. Cant help but notice you passed it up.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
With respect to obstruction, the SC investigation did not in any way clear Trump, and in fact, the evidence revealed in Vol 2, indicated at least 4 instances of potential obstruction.



Stone himself implied he should receive a pardon/commutation because he lied and/or kept quiet on Trump's behalf.



It's because it's wrong for public officials to engage in acts of public corruption.



I don't think so. And there are a number of things that can be done, if Covid-19 is something you're concerned about with respect to Stone that does not involve commuting his sentence.



It is apparent you do not care about the Rule of Law.

It is apparent you do not think much about discouraging acts of public corruption.

And people who do not care about public corruption are people I do not hold in high esteem.



Our entire legal and political system basically relies on people executing the duties of their office in good faith.

Public corruption is a big deal. And I get that a huge swath of Trump supporters could not care less about public corruption, but they are all wrong. We don't have to look further than Russia or Venezuela to see what it's like to live in a society rife with public corruption.
Click to expand...

You don't care about the rule of law because you fail to even acknowledge the gigantic ethics and legal lapses employed by the Mueller team to keep the investigation moving.
 
OpportunityCost said:
If you consider drug dealers friends, then yes.
Click to expand...

They weren't "drug dealers" in the way you're implying. They were convicted felons who received mandatory sentencing for relatively small amounts of drugs that do not equal the length of their sentence so Obama freed those felons by reducing their prison time. It's not as simple as you're making it out to be and the big difference with President Obama and Trump is that Obama did it after thoroughly reviewing each prisoner. Trump did it to PROTECT HIMSELF by paying Stone back for not lying on Trump's beghalf.
 
OpportunityCost said:
You don't care about the rule of law because you fail to even acknowledge the gigantic ethics and legal lapses employed by the Mueller team to keep the investigation moving.
Click to expand...

Please share with us what ethics and legal lapses Mueller and his team committed? I haven't heard about any of what you wrote. Please provide a link (and not from a conspiracy theory website). Thanks.
 
MTAtech said:
From Time Mag:
Myth: Mueller found “no collusion.”

Response: Mueller spent almost 200 pages describing “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign.” He found that “a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” He also found that “a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations” against the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.

While Mueller was unable to establish a conspiracy between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians involved in this activity, he made it clear that “[a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.” In fact, Mueller also wrote that the “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

To find conspiracy, a prosecutor must establish beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the crime: an agreement between at least two people, to commit a criminal offense and an overt act in furtherance of that agreement. One of the underlying criminal offenses that Mueller reviewed for conspiracy was campaign-finance violations. Mueller found that Trump campaign members Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner met with Russian nationals in Trump Tower in New York June 2016 for the purpose of receiving disparaging information about Clinton as part of “Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email message arranging the meeting. This meeting did not amount to a criminal offense, in part, because Mueller was unable to establish “willfulness,” that is, that the participants knew that their conduct was illegal. Mueller was also unable to conclude that the information was a “thing of value” that exceeded $25,000, the requirement for campaign finance to be a felony, as opposed to a civil violation of law. But the fact that the conduct did not technically amount to conspiracy does not mean that it was acceptable. Trump campaign members welcomed foreign influence into our election and then compromised themselves with the Russian government by covering it up.


Barr DID NOT accurately describe what Mueller reported. Mueller specifically stated Mueller stated, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” Mueller declined to make a “traditional prosecution decision” about obstruction of justice. Because he was bound by the Department of Justice policy that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime, he did not even attempt to reach a legal conclusion about the facts. Instead, he undertook to “preserve the evidence when memories were fresh and documentary materials were available,” because a president can be charged after he leaves office. In fact, out of an abundance of fairness, Mueller thought that it would be improper to even accuse Trump of committing a crime so as not to “preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct,” meaning impeachment.


We understand why Trump is so inclined to steal the 2020 election, he can be charged with obstruction of justice when he loses.
Click to expand...

:beatdeadhorse:beatdeadhorse:beatdeadhorse:liar2


Mueller Report, Volume I, page 66, second paragraph:
[In particular,] the investigation examined whether these contacts involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the
Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination.
 
jakiejakester said:
They weren't "drug dealers" in the way you're implying. They were convicted felons who received mandatory sentencing for relatively small amounts of drugs that do not equal the length of their sentence so Obama freed those felons by reducing their prison time. It's not as simple as you're making it out to be and the big difference with President Obama and Trump is that Obama did it after thoroughly reviewing each prisoner. Trump did it to PROTECT HIMSELF by paying Stone back for not lying on Trump's beghalf.
Click to expand...

They were carrying dealer weight. So, they were drug dealers by legal definition.

That last sentence of yours is telling, you can't even word the accusation correctly.
 
jakiejakester said:
Please share with us what ethics and legal lapses Mueller and his team committed? I haven't heard about any of what you wrote. Please provide a link (and not from a conspiracy theory website). Thanks.
Click to expand...

Lying about the CIA status with Gates.
Lying about almost every aspect of the Flynn investigation.
Lying on the content of FISA applications (Boente was just fired possibly because of this.)
Lying about when they knew about Steele's employer and how the information from the dossier was coming into the agency--through Ohr.
 
OpportunityCost said:
You don't care about the rule of law because you fail to even acknowledge the gigantic ethics and legal lapses employed by the Mueller team to keep the investigation moving.
Click to expand...

It's not necessary to believe that the FBI/DOJ is infallible in order to believe in the Rule of Law.

It is necessary to not believe in the Rule of Law in order to support Trump.
 
jakiejakester said:
Please share with us what ethics and legal lapses Mueller and his team committed? I haven't heard about any of what you wrote. Please provide a link (and not from a conspiracy theory website). Thanks.
Click to expand...
The entire $32 million farce was based on lies and should never have begun. The 'Russian Collusion' was with the Clinton's and the DNC. That should be known by everyone by now yet still hasn't reached some liberal precincts. Just incredible!
 
W_Heisenberg said:
It's not necessary to believe that the FBI/DOJ is infallible in order to believe in the Rule of Law.

It is necessary to not believe in the Rule of Law in order to support Trump.
Click to expand...

"infallible", what an understatement.
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
The entire $32 million farce was based on lies and should never have begun. The 'Russian Collusion' was with the Clinton's and the DNC. That should be known by everyone by now yet still hasn't reached some liberal precincts. Just incredible!
Click to expand...

BS! You have nothing official to verify what you wrote. You hear rumors, you visit conspiracy sites yet there's nothing that has been proven to backup what you wrote. You're listening to Trump's lies and believing them - that's your fatal mistake - believing anything that Trump says. He's now over 20K lies! Prove what you wrote...
 
Roger Stone, a former adviser to Trump, who was released from prison, announced his intention to write a book. In it, he wants to "once and for all dispel the myth of collusion with Russia."
Has he not learned his lesson from the Democrats? No one cares about the truth.
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
The entire $32 million farce was based on lies and should never have begun. The 'Russian Collusion' was with the Clinton's and the DNC. That should be known by everyone by now yet still hasn't reached some liberal precincts. Just incredible!
Click to expand...

That's an interesting way of saying "The whole world is wrong and I'm right."
 
jakiejakester said:
They weren't "drug dealers" in the way you're implying. They were convicted felons who received mandatory sentencing for relatively small amounts of drugs that do not equal the length of their sentence so Obama freed those felons by reducing their prison time. It's not as simple as you're making it out to be and the big difference with President Obama and Trump is that Obama did it after thoroughly reviewing each prisoner. Trump did it to PROTECT HIMSELF by paying Stone back for not lying on Trump's beghalf.
Click to expand...

Stone was convicted for lying.
So the question is now what did Mueller say Stone lied about?
And when we see what that is, we also see that there was no conspiracy by the campaign with Russia.
 
jakiejakester said:
You're totally missing the point! Trump has the unfettered right to pardon or commute anyone he chooses. The point which either you're purposely ignoring or you don't get is that Trump commuted Stone's sentence as a payback for his not testifying against Trump. Get it now? PAYBACK for not testifying. That is what's wrong. What Trump did is legal but unethical and something that Mafia bosses do not Presidents
Click to expand...

What is it that you suppose Stone would testify against Trump about?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom