• 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!

Judge Berman Jackson Gives Stone 40 months prison time

humbolt said:
Your point appeared to be that Stone knows and supports Trump, and deserves life in prison for his misdeeds, and your post above seems to support that view.

Stone has nothing to do with government, but we do have some folks running actual government institutions who've lied to congress, and they're free as a bird, getting book deals and puffy positions in tbe media. They're the ones threatening government institutions - not Stone.

That doesn't mean I disagree with his sentence. Lying to congress and disregarding court orders should have consequences similar to those Stone has received. But again, if such low level junk is meant as a signal for the virtue of the Mueller investigation, it's a waste of time. No serious and rational person buys into that. Berman was way out in left field with such remarks.
Click to expand...
Save your “you’re a Trump hater so ..” crap. I don’t like anyone who makes a living being a “dirty trickster” as Stone describes himself.

And you can save your weak ass whataboutisms too. We’re not talking about other people or other investigations.

Stone broke the law and got what he had coming.
 
Mach said:
Say it isn't so. Trump, pardoning crooks who helped him get elected? We never imagined it would come to that.
Click to expand...

How did Blago get Trump elected?

Stone should be pardoned because that is what the power of the pardon is for, a check and balance for when the criminal justice system drops the ball. No matter what your political feeling are about Roger Stone, he is entitled to the same due process as anyone else. So when the presiding judge failed to intervene or to correct a situation where a juror was there in stealth denying Stone of a fair trail, then at this point a pardon is the last remedy.

The system should have demanded a re-trial, but it failed. Now it up to "Caesar" to decide what will happen next.

The jury foreperson should be brought up on charges of lying during her voir dire. She was clearly biased, she clearly should have recused herself from the process. EVERYONE is entitled to a fair trail, and pre determined bias has no place in a jury room---otherwise we would be going back to kangaroo courts and Jim Crow justice.
 
Da Mole said:
If you were on trial and looking at significant jail time would you be ok with the jury forewomen being prejudiced against people whose name ended in (sky)? I bet you would scream bloody murder and demand a new trial if convicted. Why is Stone's situation any different?
Click to expand...

The juror in question was questioned by the Judge during Jury Selection as to the exact issues that appear to e the crux of Stone's attorney's effort to secure a new trial. Those same jurors could have had the Juror stricken from the Jury during Jury Selection and they didn't.

It does not matter what any of us would think is fair if we were convicted under similar circumstances. If you think convicted felons just go off to jail quietly, think again. They all scream bloody murder on the way out the door to the pen. You would whether you were guilty and knew it or not and so would I.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Save your “you’re a Trump hater so ..” crap. I don’t like anyone who makes a living being a “dirty trickster” as Stone describes himself.

And you can save your weak ass whataboutisms too. We’re not talking about other people or other investigations.

Stone broke the law and got what he had coming.
Click to expand...

You'll need to put a lot more air in your self-rightousness baloon to make the above believeable. You haven't posted a thing about those who've done worse in high level positions and been rewarded for it, so spare me that BS.
 
digitusmedius said:
Here are the details:


During her summation she told the counsels that she herself had thought the 7-9 recommendation was too high.* So Barr didn't even need to stomp in on this case and, of course, Dirtbag will most certainly pardon Stone before he has to do any time.

*This is what a courtroom reporter wrote:
Click to expand...

So the correct and proper way to look at it was that Mr. Barr (and-- brace yourself) Mr. Trump were correct and those line prosecutors and 2000 or how many ex-prosecutors were incorrect.
 
Chomsky said:
And the son-of-a-beach walked out of the courthouse smiling, knowing he's getting-off scott free with a pardon. Disgusting. Everything criminally wrong with our current administration was on display here.
Click to expand...

It would seem that the Mr. Barr made a recommendation that was more in the interest of justice than that was proposed by the prosecutors.
 
jnug said:
There was an "original recommendation" which was within guidelines. That is all the Prosecution was required to do. There was no original sentence. There was only today's sentence.
Click to expand...

The prosecution did make a recommendation. Their supervisors disagreed.
And in turns out, the judge agreed with Barr that the line prosecutors were being unjust.

Almost worse than flipping on the initial recommendation was seeing the new head of the prosecution flip on his flip, clearly because the political blowback from what Trump/Barr did was more than they were willing to stand. THAT is actually even more of an issue.
Click to expand...

The issue is that the Attorney general determined that the line prosecutors had lost perspective and made an unjust recommendation.
Mr. Barr corrected this.
Its his job.
The line prosecutors demonstrated their loss of prospective.
Or they demonstrated their own political bias. That would seem to be a problem.

But of course Trumpettes are drooling over Trump's Imperial Presidency. So they revel in this nonsense as opposed to criticizing it.
Click to expand...

The nonsense came from those who spent the last week screaming about an "imperial presidency" and signing op-eds that Barr needs to resign.
Click to expand...
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Just admit it: you hate the rule of law and worship twump as a literal god. He can do no wrong in your eyes and you venerate him.
Click to expand...

The rule of law was vindicated. Mr. Stone was charged, tried and convicted.
The DOJ had what amounts to an internal disagreement as to the proper punishment. The children in the room said one thing and when the adult said "no" the kids stormed off, with a bunch of people cheering them on.
And the adult was proven correct.
 
digitusmedius said:
Here are the details:


During her summation she told the counsels that she herself had thought the 7-9 recommendation was too high.* So Barr didn't even need to stomp in on this case and, of course, Dirtbag will most certainly pardon Stone before he has to do any time.

*This is what a courtroom reporter wrote:
Click to expand...

Barr had every right and good reason to step in and overrule the Obama holdover prosecutors who recommended an overly excessive sentence to an Obama appointed judge. Without Barr stepping it in, my bet is that she would have leaned closer to the prosecutors recommendation s then Barr's. As for a possible pardon by Trump, did you get as worked up over Obama commuting the sentence of Chelsea Manning allowing him to walk out after serving 7 years of a 35 year sentence for a crime endangered the lives up US soldiers and CIA agents for years? Obama did that to placate the LBGTQ lobby. How about Bill Clinton pardoning Marc Rich....and 16 FALN terrorists just to assist wifey the hildabeast in her New York Senate campaign?
 
Too low. Blagojevich got 14 years (even with the charges for selling Obama's Senate seat overturned on appeal); Stone gets a fraction of that for several felony convictions including lying to authorities investigating foreign election interference to protect a president and threatening a witness in his trial?
 
Mach said:
Trump interfering in the justice system, with someone who was lying to protect Trump, and the idea that he'd pardon him (and has been hinting at such), is not boring.
It's serious, and interesting. Mind blown, right?
Click to expand...

Trump didn't interfere with the justice system.
Mr. Stone was charged, tried and convicted.
The line prosecutors made a recommendation that the supervisors disagreed with.
The judge was under no obligation to accept such a recommendation.
And the judge agreed with what the supervisors said.

The real issue, to the extent that one exists, is why did the line prosecutors get it so wrong.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The rule of law was vindicated. Mr. Stone was charged, tried and convicted.
The DOJ had what amounts to an internal disagreement as to the proper punishment. The children in the room said one thing and when the adult said "no" the kids stormed off, with a bunch of people cheering them on.
And the adult was proven correct.
Click to expand...

No, what happened was that the AG acted in an utterly unprecedented and politcal manner, acting on behalf of a lifetime twup crony and associate and not the American people.

You've had your asinine claim dismantled yet again.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Napolitano on Roger Stone case: 'Only a pardon can fairly undo this mess'

Napolitano on Roger Stone case: '''Only a pardon can fairly undo this mess''' | Fox News

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday, the day former Trump adviser Roger Stone was set to be sentenced after the federal judge overseeing the case refused demands to delay the trial, that “only a pardon can fairly undo this mess.”

“This is not about politics and it's not about friendship, it's about the Constitution and human decency,” Napolitano added.

When asked what should happen on Thursday, Napolitano said, “The judge should interrogate this foreperson about her biases against the president.”


Former Memphis City Schools Board President Tomeka Hart said last week that she was the foreperson on the jury that convicted Stone, and revealed a history of Democratic activism after a string of her anti-Trump social media posts came to light.

Hart even posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Click to expand...

You must keep in mind that these libruls wake up every morning and go to bed every night obsessed with hatred not only of Trump, but anyone with any connections whatsoever to Trump. That same mindset leads them to attack Trump supporters in some cases physically over something as simple as wearing a MAGA hat or a pro-Trump bumper sticker on their vehicles. Established sentencing guidlines mean nothing to them. In their minds, anyone connected to Trump must be destroyed.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No, what happened was that the AG acted in an utterly unprecedented and politcal manner, acting on behalf of a lifetime twup crony and associate and not the American people.

You've had your asinine claim dismantled yet again.
Click to expand...

Judge Jackson thought the original recommendation by the line prosecutors were incorrect.
She evidently agreed with the correction by the attorney-general.
Will we be slamming Judge Jackson next?
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Napolitano on Roger Stone case: 'Only a pardon can fairly undo this mess'

Napolitano on Roger Stone case: '''Only a pardon can fairly undo this mess''' | Fox News

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday, the day former Trump adviser Roger Stone was set to be sentenced after the federal judge overseeing the case refused demands to delay the trial, that “only a pardon can fairly undo this mess.”

“This is not about politics and it's not about friendship, it's about the Constitution and human decency,” Napolitano added.

When asked what should happen on Thursday, Napolitano said, “The judge should interrogate this foreperson about her biases against the president.”


Former Memphis City Schools Board President Tomeka Hart said last week that she was the foreperson on the jury that convicted Stone, and revealed a history of Democratic activism after a string of her anti-Trump social media posts came to light.

Hart even posted specifically about the Stone case before she was selected to sit on the jury, as she retweeted an argument mocking those who considered Stone's dramatic arrest in a predawn raid by a federal tactical team to be excessive force. She also suggested President Trump and his supporters are racist and praised the investigation conducted by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which ultimately led to Stone's prosecution.
Click to expand...

Yet defense counsel accepted her. Kind of hard to complain about her now.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Judge Jackson thought the original recommendation by the line prosecutors were incorrect.
She evidently agreed with the correction by the attorney-general.
Will we be slamming Judge Jackson next?
Click to expand...

Her decision was made independently from pressure from the president.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The real issue, to the extent that one exists, is why did the line prosecutors get it so wrong.
Click to expand...

You think the Judge got it right? Then why would hint of a pardon for him, and tweet non-stop about how Stone was so wronged, etc.
You're argument is a mess, as always.

I agree, the Judge got it right, and Trump, and Barr, shouldn't have put their fingers on the scale and tainted the process.
And similarly, I think it's deplorable to imagine that Trump would pardon Stone, after he was found guilty..same for Manafort, etc. since they worked for him, and protected him in violating the law or their agreements to cooperate.

All these criminals Trump's surrounds himself with, and you think the problem might be that prosecutors recommendation differed from the Judges...
 
ObamacareFail said:
You must keep in mind that these libruls wake up every morning and go to bed every night obsessed with hatred not only of Trump, but anyone with any connections whatsoever to Trump. That same mindset leads them to attack Trump supporters in some cases physically over something as simple as wearing a MAGA hat or a pro-Trump bumper sticker on their vehicles. Established sentencing guidlines mean nothing to them. In their minds, anyone connected to Trump must be destroyed.
Click to expand...

You confuse holding Trump accountable for hating him.
 
Craig234 said:
Her. Didn't bother with the rest of your post seeing that.
Click to expand...

They did not get it wrong. All prosecutors go for the max time knowing the judge will likely lower it. Stone did not cooperate, if anything he obstructed. He got what he deserved and we'll see what happens next.

If Trump pardons him, that will be the slow death of the rule of law.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Barr had every right and good reason to step in and overrule the Obama holdover prosecutors who recommended an overly excessive sentence to an Obama appointed judge. Without Barr stepping it in, my bet is that she would have leaned closer to the prosecutors recommendation s then Barr's. As for a possible pardon by Trump, did you get as worked up over Obama commuting the sentence of Chelsea Manning allowing him to walk out after serving 7 years of a 35 year sentence for a crime endangered the lives up US soldiers and CIA agents for years? Obama did that to placate the LBGTQ lobby. How about Bill Clinton pardoning Marc Rich....and 16 FALN terrorists just to assist wifey the hildabeast in her New York Senate campaign?
Click to expand...

This makes no sense. They coukd be Bush holdovers. If they are biased, Barr never should have given them the job in the first place. The sentence recommendation was based on federal guidelines. Your "bet" is worthless, as it based on nothing, and Obama didn't pardon Manning to keep her from revealing his corruption..

So wrong. Awfully wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom