ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 4 of 33
< 1234 567814 > Last »
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Stone:7-9 years Fed Prosecuters ask
F150 06:03 PM 02-10-2020

BREAKING: Federal prosecutors ask judge to sentence Trump confidant Roger Stone to serve between 7 and 9 years in prison.
-@AP

— ALX 🇺🇸 (@alx) February 10, 2020



Get the feeling Trump needs to avoid getting anywhere near this.
[Reply]
banyon 02:14 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Indeed. Ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous, the evidence was fairly strong, as i explained to your gf in the other thread when she claimed he would be acquitted (before posting later that she'd called it all along that he would be convicted).

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=1113

Originally Posted by banyon:
I already posted the complaint here, but I will post the key snippet below.

He lied to House intel about communicating with wikileaks. He said he didn't at all and had no records to that effect.

****THEY HAVE THE RECORDS WHERE HE DID THIS*****

They will show the jury these records.


Then Stone told someone else who had been subpoenaed to House Intel to lie to the Intel Committee or take the 5th, "stone wall" (obstruct) it.

He used his own cell phone to text this message to the other person.


****THEY HAVE THE TEXT MESSAGES*************

They will show the jury these text messages.


That's it. It's a pretty simple case really. Not weak, actually very strong and straightforward.

I did review the thread for the alleged discussion of how weak this case was, but only found your conclusory statements and not actual discussion of the facts of the case.

[Reply]
banyon 02:15 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Did they lie under oath about that someplace?
[Reply]
GloryDayz 02:16 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
We weren't talking about voting. We were talking about pardoning people who have been convicted of lying under oath to Congress.
True. But I'd be very happy if President Donald John Trump pardons them as either one of his first acts of his second term, or on the way out the door after only one term.
[Reply]
Taco John 02:17 PM 02-11-2020
Stone was accused by Podesta of having prior knowledge of the publishing by WikiLeaks. So what?

Why is it that Stone gets all the scrutiny while none of the crimes shown in the Wikileaks or the Podesta/Clinton business ties to Russia have received any attention?

So stupid.
[Reply]
banyon 02:17 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by GloryDayz:
True. But I'd be very happy if President Donald John Trump pardons them as either one of his first acts of his second term, or on the way out the door after only one term.
I'd be very happy with the latter.
[Reply]
Taco John 02:18 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
Did they lie under oath about that someplace?
What did Stone lie about?
[Reply]
banyon 02:19 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Stone was accused by Podesta of having prior knowledge of the publishing by WikiLeaks. So what?

Why is it that Stone gets all the scrutiny while none of the crimes shown in the Wikileaks or the Podesta/Clinton business ties to Russia have received any attention?

So stupid.
It wasn't solely an accusation by Podesta, Stone chose to testify that way in front of Congress. Then he chose to make calls to intimidate witnesses. A Grand jury indicted him based on that. Then he was convicted by a petit jury. He is responsible for putting himself in this situation. No one else.
[Reply]
banyon 02:20 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
What did Stone lie about?
Having no communications with Wikileaks. (also he was convicted of other crimes besides the lie)
[Reply]
Taco John 02:22 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
Having no communications with Wikileaks. (also he was convicted of other crimes besides the lie)
lol

I didn't think you knew what you are talking about.

They were able to establish that Stone didn't actually have any communication with Wikileaks. He was just gossip mongering. He was prosecuted for gossip mongering against the wrong person: Hillary Clinton.

As always, you're a ****ing joke - especially as a "progressive."
[Reply]
GloryDayz 02:23 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
I'd be very happy with the latter.
Please God no. We need President Trump... We're on the road to recovery from those disgusting years under the Barry (the biggest racist ever!!), so it's important to keep the healing going.
[Reply]
Taco John 02:25 PM 02-11-2020
Actually, you fit "progressive" just fine (you fucking fascist).

You have no claim to the word "liberal" though, you lying dog-faced pony soldier.
[Reply]
banyon 02:26 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
lol

I didn't think you knew what you are talking about.

They were able to establish that Stone didn't actually have any communication with Wikileaks. He was just gossip mongering. He was prosecuted for gossip mongering against the wrong person: Hillary Clinton.
What are you talking about, that was the crime you asked about that he was indicted for.


It's there for anybody to read, you don't have to guess:

https://www.justice.gov/file/1124706/download
Attached: stone indictment.jpg (78.1 KB) 
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:26 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
It wasn't solely an accusation by Podesta, Stone chose to testify that way in front of Congress. Then he chose to make calls to intimidate witnesses. A Grand jury indicted him based on that. Then he was convicted by a petit jury. He is responsible for putting himself in this situation. No one else.
No he did not intimidate witnesses he was accused of witness tampering and even that was weak. He cracked a joke to a friend who was considered a witness.

You are so ill informed, you must be reading far-left propaganda daily.
[Reply]
banyon 02:28 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Actually, you fit "progressive" just fine (you ****ing fascist).

You have no claim to the word "liberal" though, you lying dog-faced pony soldier.
Who peed on your Cheerios?

It's "fascist" to reiterate the actual legal charges that were filed as opposed to agreeing with some slack jawed minimalizing "he wuz gossipin bout Hillary!" BS?
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:29 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Stone was accused by Podesta of having prior knowledge of the publishing by WikiLeaks. So what?

Why is it that Stone gets all the scrutiny while none of the crimes shown in the Wikileaks or the Podesta/Clinton business ties to Russia have received any attention?

So stupid.
He knew about a wikileaks dump coming but he was accused of being on contact with wikileaks directly. He not only knew that but publicized it. Only he wasn't in touch with wikileaks directly. He was involved with an intermediary to wikileaks. As if being in touch with a publisher or journalist directly is even a crime. This is Soviet Union type political crimes being alleged. This is what our plutocrats, like Hilldawg, are today.
[Reply]
Page 4 of 33
< 1234 567814 > Last »
Up