Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
News Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
Author Message
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 31,519
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1463
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #61
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rick Wilson spectacularly filets trump's boy toy Stone. 03-lol

Quote:The Trump media has been bleating for two days now that the original sentence recommended by the career Justice Department officials that Stone serve his twilight years breaking rocks, stamping out license plates, and working in a prison call center was a massive miscarriage of justice, a horror beyond words and reason, and a grim penalty for a wee, decrepit old dandy barely able to totter to the stand in his own defense.

Horseshit. The sentence Stone faced was appropriate because his actions weren’t simply a criminal — and criminally stupid — defense of the president. They were just one part of a wider assault from the transparently corrupt Trump-Barr kleptocracy on the entire administration of justice in the United States. William Barr, who has taken on the role of Trump’s family attorney, put his greasy thumb on the scale this week, demanding the U.S. attorneys in the case reduce Stone’s recommended sentence.

It led to the withdrawal of all four of the prosecutors, and the resignation of one. Barr’s bull-in-a-china-shop efforts on Stone’s behalf were comically absurd, driven by a Trump tweet, and will no doubt land him in front of congressional committees for a full political rectal exam in the immediate future.

Quote:In the late 1990s, I once asked the famous (or infamous, depending on your perspective) New York political operator Ray Harding about Stone. Harding was a man who knew where all the bodies — literal and metaphorical — were buried. He looked across his desk from behind a cloud of unfiltered-Camel smoke and said to me, “Roger parlayed one line of bull**** into a career. The only person who buys his bull**** is that moron Trump.”

At least some justice has come for Fort Lauderdale’s most prominent Penguin cosplayer and sleaze-ball boulevardier already. Trump left his former confidant hanging for two years, reducing Stone to penury in a one-bedroom apartment. Even if Trump pardons him, Stone will never work in politics again at any serious level — not that he did anyway.

He’ll never get out from under his legal bills. His speaking circuit appearances at local Republican clubs in Florida often bring in tens of dollars, and it’s gonna take longer than Stone has on this Earth to catch up. His days as a provocateur are over. He may get a hit or two on Infowars or OANN, but he’ll never be in the big green rooms again. His days without having the mark of “felon” — pardoned or not — branding him are over.
Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison

It's just a damned good thing that trump didn't meet Barr in a plane on a tarmac!

lol...wont read Solomon and then you serve up this sloppy hit piece dripping with bias and hate? Spare me. Most people cant even explain what Stone did wrong. His big threat was he was supposedly going to do something to a guys dog. The average rapist gets 4.2 years. Seven to 9 for a process crime committed by a 67 year old guy is a joke and everyone knows it. This is why Democrats cant get any traction. They keep tyring to convince the public that big nothing burgers are a bid deal. If some substantial wrong doing were ever to actually be committed by the Trump administration---nobody is going to believe a word this lying Democrat cabal has to say. They squandered all their credibility on nothing burgers.
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2020 07:04 PM by Attackcoog.)
02-13-2020 06:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,315
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1315
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #62
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 06:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rick Wilson spectacularly filets trump's boy toy Stone. 03-lol

Quote:The Trump media has been bleating for two days now that the original sentence recommended by the career Justice Department officials that Stone serve his twilight years breaking rocks, stamping out license plates, and working in a prison call center was a massive miscarriage of justice, a horror beyond words and reason, and a grim penalty for a wee, decrepit old dandy barely able to totter to the stand in his own defense.

Horseshit. The sentence Stone faced was appropriate because his actions weren’t simply a criminal — and criminally stupid — defense of the president. They were just one part of a wider assault from the transparently corrupt Trump-Barr kleptocracy on the entire administration of justice in the United States. William Barr, who has taken on the role of Trump’s family attorney, put his greasy thumb on the scale this week, demanding the U.S. attorneys in the case reduce Stone’s recommended sentence.

It led to the withdrawal of all four of the prosecutors, and the resignation of one. Barr’s bull-in-a-china-shop efforts on Stone’s behalf were comically absurd, driven by a Trump tweet, and will no doubt land him in front of congressional committees for a full political rectal exam in the immediate future.

Quote:In the late 1990s, I once asked the famous (or infamous, depending on your perspective) New York political operator Ray Harding about Stone. Harding was a man who knew where all the bodies — literal and metaphorical — were buried. He looked across his desk from behind a cloud of unfiltered-Camel smoke and said to me, “Roger parlayed one line of bull**** into a career. The only person who buys his bull**** is that moron Trump.”

At least some justice has come for Fort Lauderdale’s most prominent Penguin cosplayer and sleaze-ball boulevardier already. Trump left his former confidant hanging for two years, reducing Stone to penury in a one-bedroom apartment. Even if Trump pardons him, Stone will never work in politics again at any serious level — not that he did anyway.

He’ll never get out from under his legal bills. His speaking circuit appearances at local Republican clubs in Florida often bring in tens of dollars, and it’s gonna take longer than Stone has on this Earth to catch up. His days as a provocateur are over. He may get a hit or two on Infowars or OANN, but he’ll never be in the big green rooms again. His days without having the mark of “felon” — pardoned or not — branding him are over.
Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison

It's just a damned good thing that trump didn't meet Barr in a plane on a tarmac!

lol...wont read Solomon and then you serve up this sloppy hit piece dripping with bias and hate? Spare me. Most people cant even explain what Stone did wrong. His big threat was he was supposedly going to do something to a guys dog. The average rapist gets 4.2 years. Seven to 9 for a process crime committed by a 67 year old guy is a joke and everyone knows it. This is why Democrats cant get any traction. They keep tyring to convince the public that big nothing burgers are a bid deal. If some substantial wrong doing were ever to actually be committed by the Trump administration---nobody is going to believe a word this lying Democrat cabal has to say. They squandered all their credibility on nothing burgers.
That piece can be summed up: "Doesn't matter what Stone did. I hate him!"

Why would RWT even post something so ridiculous?
02-13-2020 07:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Online
Legend
*

Posts: 26,456
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 2032
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #63
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rick Wilson spectacularly filets trump's boy toy Stone. 03-lol

Quote:The Trump media has been bleating for two days now that the original sentence recommended by the career Justice Department officials that Stone serve his twilight years breaking rocks, stamping out license plates, and working in a prison call center was a massive miscarriage of justice, a horror beyond words and reason, and a grim penalty for a wee, decrepit old dandy barely able to totter to the stand in his own defense.

Horseshit. The sentence Stone faced was appropriate because his actions weren’t simply a criminal — and criminally stupid — defense of the president. They were just one part of a wider assault from the transparently corrupt Trump-Barr kleptocracy on the entire administration of justice in the United States. William Barr, who has taken on the role of Trump’s family attorney, put his greasy thumb on the scale this week, demanding the U.S. attorneys in the case reduce Stone’s recommended sentence.

It led to the withdrawal of all four of the prosecutors, and the resignation of one. Barr’s bull-in-a-china-shop efforts on Stone’s behalf were comically absurd, driven by a Trump tweet, and will no doubt land him in front of congressional committees for a full political rectal exam in the immediate future.

Quote:In the late 1990s, I once asked the famous (or infamous, depending on your perspective) New York political operator Ray Harding about Stone. Harding was a man who knew where all the bodies — literal and metaphorical — were buried. He looked across his desk from behind a cloud of unfiltered-Camel smoke and said to me, “Roger parlayed one line of bull**** into a career. The only person who buys his bull**** is that moron Trump.”

At least some justice has come for Fort Lauderdale’s most prominent Penguin cosplayer and sleaze-ball boulevardier already. Trump left his former confidant hanging for two years, reducing Stone to penury in a one-bedroom apartment. Even if Trump pardons him, Stone will never work in politics again at any serious level — not that he did anyway.

He’ll never get out from under his legal bills. His speaking circuit appearances at local Republican clubs in Florida often bring in tens of dollars, and it’s gonna take longer than Stone has on this Earth to catch up. His days as a provocateur are over. He may get a hit or two on Infowars or OANN, but he’ll never be in the big green rooms again. His days without having the mark of “felon” — pardoned or not — branding him are over.
Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison

It's just a damned good thing that trump didn't meet Barr in a plane on a tarmac!

lol...wont read Solomon and then you serve up this sloppy hit piece dripping with bias and hate? Spare me. Most people cant even explain what Stone did wrong. His big threat was he was supposedly going to do something to a guys dog. The average rapist gets 4.2 years. Seven to 9 for a process crime committed by a 67 year old guy is a joke and everyone knows it. This is why Democrats cant get any traction. They keep tyring to convince the public that big nothing burgers are a bid deal. If some substantial wrong doing were ever to actually be committed by the Trump administration---nobody is going to believe a word this lying Democrat cabal has to say. They squandered all their credibility on nothing burgers.
That piece can be summed up: "Doesn't matter what Stone did. I hate him!"

Why would RWT even post something so ridiculous?

I'm just surprised RedWingTom wasnt on the Stone jury.
02-13-2020 07:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 64,852
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1676
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #64
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rick Wilson spectacularly filets trump's boy toy Stone. 03-lol
Quote:The Trump media has been bleating for two days now that the original sentence recommended by the career Justice Department officials that Stone serve his twilight years breaking rocks, stamping out license plates, and working in a prison call center was a massive miscarriage of justice, a horror beyond words and reason, and a grim penalty for a wee, decrepit old dandy barely able to totter to the stand in his own defense.
Horseshit. The sentence Stone faced was appropriate because his actions weren’t simply a criminal — and criminally stupid — defense of the president. They were just one part of a wider assault from the transparently corrupt Trump-Barr kleptocracy on the entire administration of justice in the United States. William Barr, who has taken on the role of Trump’s family attorney, put his greasy thumb on the scale this week, demanding the U.S. attorneys in the case reduce Stone’s recommended sentence.
It led to the withdrawal of all four of the prosecutors, and the resignation of one. Barr’s bull-in-a-china-shop efforts on Stone’s behalf were comically absurd, driven by a Trump tweet, and will no doubt land him in front of congressional committees for a full political rectal exam in the immediate future.
Quote:In the late 1990s, I once asked the famous (or infamous, depending on your perspective) New York political operator Ray Harding about Stone. Harding was a man who knew where all the bodies — literal and metaphorical — were buried. He looked across his desk from behind a cloud of unfiltered-Camel smoke and said to me, “Roger parlayed one line of bull**** into a career. The only person who buys his bull**** is that moron Trump.”
At least some justice has come for Fort Lauderdale’s most prominent Penguin cosplayer and sleaze-ball boulevardier already. Trump left his former confidant hanging for two years, reducing Stone to penury in a one-bedroom apartment. Even if Trump pardons him, Stone will never work in politics again at any serious level — not that he did anyway.
He’ll never get out from under his legal bills. His speaking circuit appearances at local Republican clubs in Florida often bring in tens of dollars, and it’s gonna take longer than Stone has on this Earth to catch up. His days as a provocateur are over. He may get a hit or two on Infowars or OANN, but he’ll never be in the big green rooms again. His days without having the mark of “felon” — pardoned or not — branding him are over.
Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison

So what, pray tell, does Rick Wilson have to say about what appears to be possible jury malfeasance and judicial misconduct in a big way in the Stone trial? Or have your left-wing news sources not told you about it?
02-13-2020 07:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoMs Eagle Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,829
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 573
I Root For: Mighty Mustard
Location:
Post: #65
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 07:39 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rick Wilson spectacularly filets trump's boy toy Stone. 03-lol

Quote:The Trump media has been bleating for two days now that the original sentence recommended by the career Justice Department officials that Stone serve his twilight years breaking rocks, stamping out license plates, and working in a prison call center was a massive miscarriage of justice, a horror beyond words and reason, and a grim penalty for a wee, decrepit old dandy barely able to totter to the stand in his own defense.

Horseshit. The sentence Stone faced was appropriate because his actions weren’t simply a criminal — and criminally stupid — defense of the president. They were just one part of a wider assault from the transparently corrupt Trump-Barr kleptocracy on the entire administration of justice in the United States. William Barr, who has taken on the role of Trump’s family attorney, put his greasy thumb on the scale this week, demanding the U.S. attorneys in the case reduce Stone’s recommended sentence.

It led to the withdrawal of all four of the prosecutors, and the resignation of one. Barr’s bull-in-a-china-shop efforts on Stone’s behalf were comically absurd, driven by a Trump tweet, and will no doubt land him in front of congressional committees for a full political rectal exam in the immediate future.

Quote:In the late 1990s, I once asked the famous (or infamous, depending on your perspective) New York political operator Ray Harding about Stone. Harding was a man who knew where all the bodies — literal and metaphorical — were buried. He looked across his desk from behind a cloud of unfiltered-Camel smoke and said to me, “Roger parlayed one line of bull**** into a career. The only person who buys his bull**** is that moron Trump.”

At least some justice has come for Fort Lauderdale’s most prominent Penguin cosplayer and sleaze-ball boulevardier already. Trump left his former confidant hanging for two years, reducing Stone to penury in a one-bedroom apartment. Even if Trump pardons him, Stone will never work in politics again at any serious level — not that he did anyway.

He’ll never get out from under his legal bills. His speaking circuit appearances at local Republican clubs in Florida often bring in tens of dollars, and it’s gonna take longer than Stone has on this Earth to catch up. His days as a provocateur are over. He may get a hit or two on Infowars or OANN, but he’ll never be in the big green rooms again. His days without having the mark of “felon” — pardoned or not — branding him are over.
Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison

It's just a damned good thing that trump didn't meet Barr in a plane on a tarmac!

lol...wont read Solomon and then you serve up this sloppy hit piece dripping with bias and hate? Spare me. Most people cant even explain what Stone did wrong. His big threat was he was supposedly going to do something to a guys dog. The average rapist gets 4.2 years. Seven to 9 for a process crime committed by a 67 year old guy is a joke and everyone knows it. This is why Democrats cant get any traction. They keep tyring to convince the public that big nothing burgers are a bid deal. If some substantial wrong doing were ever to actually be committed by the Trump administration---nobody is going to believe a word this lying Democrat cabal has to say. They squandered all their credibility on nothing burgers.
That piece can be summed up: "Doesn't matter what Stone did. I hate him!"

Why would RWT even post something so ridiculous?

I'm just surprised RedWingTom wasnt on the Stone jury.

How do you know he wasn’t?
02-13-2020 09:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive trash
*

Posts: 36,214
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 623
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #66
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Techno Fog has the questions the jurors had to fill out.
I believe we know that she admitted to running for congress as a democrat. This is why Stones attornies tried to have her removed from the jury pool, but the judge would not allow it. The question now is, on the publication of social media onabout Stone, she had to have answered No. And we know this was a lie. (And is probably why she was deleting her FB posts like mad last night. )


She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2020 09:47 AM by Redwingtom.)
02-14-2020 09:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive trash
*

Posts: 36,214
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 623
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #67
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-13-2020 09:31 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 07:39 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rick Wilson spectacularly filets trump's boy toy Stone. 03-lol


Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison

It's just a damned good thing that trump didn't meet Barr in a plane on a tarmac!

lol...wont read Solomon and then you serve up this sloppy hit piece dripping with bias and hate? Spare me. Most people cant even explain what Stone did wrong. His big threat was he was supposedly going to do something to a guys dog. The average rapist gets 4.2 years. Seven to 9 for a process crime committed by a 67 year old guy is a joke and everyone knows it. This is why Democrats cant get any traction. They keep tyring to convince the public that big nothing burgers are a bid deal. If some substantial wrong doing were ever to actually be committed by the Trump administration---nobody is going to believe a word this lying Democrat cabal has to say. They squandered all their credibility on nothing burgers.
That piece can be summed up: "Doesn't matter what Stone did. I hate him!"

Why would RWT even post something so ridiculous?

I'm just surprised RedWingTom wasnt on the Stone jury.

How do you know he wasn’t?

I was. I'm everywhere thanks to Mr. Soros. I'm also the whistleblower.
02-14-2020 09:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Online
Legend
*

Posts: 26,456
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 2032
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Techno Fog has the questions the jurors had to fill out.
I believe we know that she admitted to running for congress as a democrat. This is why Stones attornies tried to have her removed from the jury pool, but the judge would not allow it. The question now is, on the publication of social media onabout Stone, she had to have answered No. And we know this was a lie. (And is probably why she was deleting her FB posts like mad last night. )


She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...


Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.
02-14-2020 10:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,315
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1315
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #69
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 10:56 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Techno Fog has the questions the jurors had to fill out.
I believe we know that she admitted to running for congress as a democrat. This is why Stones attornies tried to have her removed from the jury pool, but the judge would not allow it. The question now is, on the publication of social media onabout Stone, she had to have answered No. And we know this was a lie. (And is probably why she was deleting her FB posts like mad last night. )


She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...


Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.

You answer if you are able to look at the facts objectively. She was posting negative things about Stone before the trial. So she lied about that. It clearly should be a mistrial.
02-14-2020 11:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive trash
*

Posts: 36,214
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 623
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #70
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 11:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:56 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Techno Fog has the questions the jurors had to fill out.
I believe we know that she admitted to running for congress as a democrat. This is why Stones attornies tried to have her removed from the jury pool, but the judge would not allow it. The question now is, on the publication of social media onabout Stone, she had to have answered No. And we know this was a lie. (And is probably why she was deleting her FB posts like mad last night. )


She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...


Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.

You answer if you are able to look at the facts objectively. She was posting negative things about Stone before the trial. So she lied about that. It clearly should be a mistrial.

Can you source her jury questionnaire where she said she never posted anything negative online?

Thanks.

Bottom line, you can re-try Stone all day long, he's still going to get convicted because he's a criminal.
02-14-2020 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,315
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1315
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 11:45 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:56 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...


Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.

You answer if you are able to look at the facts objectively. She was posting negative things about Stone before the trial. So she lied about that. It clearly should be a mistrial.

Can you source her jury questionnaire where she said she never posted anything negative online?

Thanks.

Bottom line, you can re-try Stone all day long, he's still going to get convicted because he's a criminal.

Learn to read. Reading is fundamental.
Next step is simple logic. If you post negative things before the trial, you can't look at the facts objectively. So when she promises to, she lied.

Logic isn't your strong suit. Fair trials don't matter because we all know beforehand that they are criminals.
02-14-2020 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,315
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1315
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #72
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed,"

From the 6th amendment.
02-14-2020 01:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 31,519
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1463
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #73
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Techno Fog has the questions the jurors had to fill out.
I believe we know that she admitted to running for congress as a democrat. This is why Stones attornies tried to have her removed from the jury pool, but the judge would not allow it. The question now is, on the publication of social media onabout Stone, she had to have answered No. And we know this was a lie. (And is probably why she was deleting her FB posts like mad last night. )


She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...

Why would that matter. If she did its a mistrial. If she didnt, then the judge has given Stone a clear judicial error to appeal. She had no business on the jury and if the judge knew those details and refused to strike her--then thats fairly clear proof she was not doing her job correctly. Its undeniable that the women had no business being on the jury---the answers on the questionaire will only tells us who to blame for her being there.
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2020 04:27 PM by Attackcoog.)
02-14-2020 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GrayBeard Offline
Whiny Troll
*

Posts: 30,991
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 727
I Root For: My Kids & ECU
Location: 402 Miles From ECU

Crappies
Post: #74
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 01:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 04:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 09:47 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Techno Fog has the questions the jurors had to fill out.
I believe we know that she admitted to running for congress as a democrat. This is why Stones attornies tried to have her removed from the jury pool, but the judge would not allow it. The question now is, on the publication of social media onabout Stone, she had to have answered No. And we know this was a lie. (And is probably why she was deleting her FB posts like mad last night. )


She needs to be indicted for perjury ASAP.

On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.

Quote:Although Hart was not named by the trial court, the juror’s identity was always known to both Stone’s defense and prosecutors throughout pretrial proceedings, and she disclosed her background, including a Democratic bid for Congress, in public pretrial jury selection proceedings.

Quote:According to a court ruling released Wednesday, Stone’s defense did move, unsuccessfully, to seek a new trial alleging bias by another juror, but not Hart.
Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

Quote:Multiple attorneys who have practiced federal criminal law for years in various parts of the justice system emphasized to TPM that the jury selection process for a federal trial is explicitly designed to eliminate the complaint at the heart of President Trump’s accusation: bias that would prevent a juror from fairly weighing the facts and law of a case.

Defense attorneys and prosecutors submit questions to the judge, who creates a questionnaire for jurors designed to suss out aspects of their background, information diet, and views related to the case at hand.

“The whole process is designed to flag potential bias,” Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. Attorney who is now general counsel for the University of Virginia, told TPM.

This occurred in the Stone case. Defense attorneys were also granted peremptory strikes, which allows jurors to be stricken for any permissible reason.
All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...

Why would that matter. If she did its a mistrial. If she didnt, then the just has given Stone a clear judicial error to appeal. She had no business on the jury and if the judge knew those details and refused to strike her--then thats fairly clear proof she was not doing her job correctly.

I hate to say it, but he's not going to understand what you are saying.
02-14-2020 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive trash
*

Posts: 36,214
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 623
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #75
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 01:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:45 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:56 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  On what grounds? A tweet from some anonymous person?

According to the WaPo, she disclosed her running for office. Unless evidence appears that she lied about the social media stuff, there's nothing there. Stone's team had plenty of opportunity to question and object to her being on the jury, of which she was only one vote. They tried to dismiss one juror on the case, and it was not her.


Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’

And

All The Ways Trump Is Dead Wrong About Juror Bias In Roger Stone Case

Show me proof she lied on her questionnaire and then we'll talk. Until then...


Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.

You answer if you are able to look at the facts objectively. She was posting negative things about Stone before the trial. So she lied about that. It clearly should be a mistrial.

Can you source her jury questionnaire where she said she never posted anything negative online?

Thanks.

Bottom line, you can re-try Stone all day long, he's still going to get convicted because he's a criminal.

Learn to read. Reading is fundamental.
Next step is simple logic. If you post negative things before the trial, you can't look at the facts objectively. So when she promises to, she lied.

Logic isn't your strong suit. Fair trials don't matter because we all know beforehand that they are criminals.

So I guess you take issue with the Senate acquittal of trump then, right? 04-cheers
02-14-2020 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive trash
*

Posts: 36,214
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 623
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Post: #76
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 01:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed,"

From the 6th amendment.

Newsflash, there's likely never been a trial in our history where the jury did not come in with total impartiality. We're human...and flawed. It's not a perfect system, but it's pretty darn effective in the grand scheme. That's why we have a jury of 12.

Unless you show the jurist lied in her questioning by council, the judge, or in her submitted questionnaire, there's likely nothing you can do. If that's the case, Stone's council blew it by not getting her canned.
02-14-2020 01:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GrayBeard Offline
Whiny Troll
*

Posts: 30,991
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 727
I Root For: My Kids & ECU
Location: 402 Miles From ECU

Crappies
Post: #77
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 01:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 01:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:45 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:56 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.

You answer if you are able to look at the facts objectively. She was posting negative things about Stone before the trial. So she lied about that. It clearly should be a mistrial.

Can you source her jury questionnaire where she said she never posted anything negative online?

Thanks.

Bottom line, you can re-try Stone all day long, he's still going to get convicted because he's a criminal.

Learn to read. Reading is fundamental.
Next step is simple logic. If you post negative things before the trial, you can't look at the facts objectively. So when she promises to, she lied.

Logic isn't your strong suit. Fair trials don't matter because we all know beforehand that they are criminals.

So I guess you take issue with the Senate acquittal of trump then, right? 04-cheers

No, I take issue with the House impeachment of Trump on trumped up charges.
02-14-2020 01:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,315
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1315
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #78
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 01:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 01:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:45 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 11:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:56 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Thats a "simple mind" way of thinking. There actually isnt a winner for you here.

1. She lied

2. She didnt lie, and the judge allowed her on anyway

Both are losers. We just need to know which loser option was taken.

You answer if you are able to look at the facts objectively. She was posting negative things about Stone before the trial. So she lied about that. It clearly should be a mistrial.

Can you source her jury questionnaire where she said she never posted anything negative online?

Thanks.

Bottom line, you can re-try Stone all day long, he's still going to get convicted because he's a criminal.

Learn to read. Reading is fundamental.
Next step is simple logic. If you post negative things before the trial, you can't look at the facts objectively. So when she promises to, she lied.

Logic isn't your strong suit. Fair trials don't matter because we all know beforehand that they are criminals.

So I guess you take issue with the Senate acquittal of trump then, right? 04-cheers

Well I think the 48 who voted to remove should have excused themselves.
02-14-2020 01:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eldonabe Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,955
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 226
I Root For: All but Uconn
Location: Van by the River
Post: #79
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)
(02-14-2020 01:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So I guess you take issue with the Senate acquittal of trump then, right? 04-cheers

I take issue with HOW they acquitted him - yes. However, I also take issue with HOW congress impeached him.

I think the blame should be shared equally.


It's yet another example of the Swamp doin' Swamp things....
02-14-2020 02:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrimsonPhantom Offline
Warden Of The WAC
*

Posts: 10,343
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 851
I Root For: NM State
Location:
Post: #80
RE: Stone Case - DOJ Stepping in (Draining of the swamp underway)

02-14-2020 06:08 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.