ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 5 of 33
< 12345 678915 > 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 02:30 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
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.
I'm reading the charges he was convicted of. That's count 1:

Originally Posted by :
and STONE attempted to have Person 2
testify falsely before HPSCI or prevent him from testifying.
Intimidation of a witness is the same as tampering in the legal contexts I am used to. In KS anyway you didn't reach Aggravated witness intimidation unless you had a threat of violence.
[Reply]
banyon 02:31 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
He knew about a wikileaks dump coming but he was accused of being on contact with wikileaks directly because he knew that and said it openly. Only he wasn't. He was involved with an intermediary to wikileaks. As if being in touch with a publisher or journalist is a crime. This is Soviet Union type political crimes.
It is if you lie to Congress about it and then attempt to persuade others to lie as well.
[Reply]
BigBeauford 02:31 PM 02-11-2020

Should note this footnote only references his position as special assistant US attorney for DC, and NOT his position in the US attorney's office in Baltimore

Per @saramurray, a spokeswoman for the Baltimore US attorney's office says he has not resigned from his position there

— Jeremy Herb (@jeremyherb) February 11, 2020

[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:32 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
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?
Criminalizing political behavior or hauling people in to be questioned over it with the threat of a perjury charge if you don't recall every detail from 2 years ago....is pretty fascist if you ask me. So yes, you are being a fascist.
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:34 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
It is if you lie to Congress about it and then attempt to persuade others to lie as well.
Lying to be real lying has to be intentional. Not remembering insignificant petty matters is not lying. He did not persuade anyone to lie. You have bought into the lies...does that make you a knowing liar now too?

Like I said, he should have pleaded the 5th or said he did not recall as Comey did too often when questioned.

I followed Stone on his site and in YouTube videos where he lays out what happened compared to what was claimed. I have no reason to disbelieve him. Okay, so he's a political operative and the Democrats claim he's a dirty trickster but they have their own. Stone took down NY gov Eliot Spitzer so it was pay back and for helping Trump win.
[Reply]
banyon 02:34 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
Criminalizing political behavior or hauling people in to be questioned over it with the threat of a perjury charge if you don't recall every detail from 2 years ago....is pretty fascist if you ask me. So yes, you are being a fascist.
It wasn't "every detail" that was the Defense his attorneys attempted and the jury did not buy it.

He communicated with them for months over very specific requests and then denied ever communicating with them. It wasn't just "oh I thought the guy's name was Johnson and it was Jones".

Very audacious to blast me as ill informed, when YOU were the one trumpeting that there was no evidence to support the charges and it would all be dismissed. That was you, "ill informed".
[Reply]
banyon 02:37 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
Lying to be real lying has to be intentional. Not remembering insignificant petty matters is not lying. He did not persuade anyone to lie. You have bought into the lies...does that make you a knowing liar now too?

Like I said, he should have pleaded the 5th or said he did not recall as Comey did too often when questioned.
Yeah it was intentional:

Originally Posted by :
Prosecutors have said Mr. Stone hid dozens of text messages and emails that were pertinent to the House committee’s inquiry; deliberately misidentified the person he dispatched to get in touch with the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in late summer 2016; covered up the fact that he tried to obtain stolen Democratic emails from WikiLeaks; and denied that he talked to Trump campaign officials about WikiLeaks’ plans.

Two former senior campaign officials, Rick Gates and Stephen K. Bannon, testified that they and other aides talked to Mr. Stone because he appeared to have inside information from WikiLeaks. Mr. Gates also recounted a July 2016 phone call between Mr. Trump and Mr. Stone, days after WikiLeaks released a trove of documents. As soon as they hung up, Mr. Trump said to Mr. Gates that more information would be coming out.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/13/u...arguments.html
[Reply]
BigBeauford 02:38 PM 02-11-2020

Schiff: "Doing so would send an unmistakable message that President Trump will protect those who lie to Congress to cover up his own misconduct, and that the Attorney General will join him in that effort." https://t.co/clvWNpsJbH

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) February 11, 2020

[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:39 PM 02-11-2020
I am not going to re-litigate this a la Donger aka ad nauseum for page after page, when it's already been done in this forum earlier, while you steal from taxpayers instead of working. You can use the search.

Seriously, the NYTs? That's your entire problem right there--trusting the lying scum MSM. People who read that rag when it comes to anything related to Trump are a waste of time arguing with. Bottom line, is you believe the lies. You probably believed the Bundy lies who were exonerated due to a WB saying their trial was being rigged essentially. A Stone juror admitted he was a hard-core leftist, like yourself. The judge would not disallow a juror connected to the Obama administration. Rigged. Like the DNC primary procees.
[Reply]
Donger 02:42 PM 02-11-2020
Stone's been an admitted liar since 1960.

:-)

He's not even shy about it.
[Reply]
vailpass 02:44 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
Two 17-I's plus a couple of other offenses, sounds about right.
thanks. It look like the 17-I's (not acting like I know anything about this) will get you 33 month max. Any idea what the other charges are?
[Reply]
banyon 02:44 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
I am not going to re-litigate this a la Donger aka ad nauseum for page after page, when it's already been done in this forum earlier, while you steal from taxpayers instead of working. You can use the search.

Seriously, the NYTs? That's your entire problem right there--trusting the lying scum MSM. People who read that rag when it comes to anything related to Trump are a waste of time arguing with. Bottom line, is you believe the lies. You probably believed the Bundy lies who were exonerated due to a WB saying their trial was being rigged essentially.
The NYT reference was just for convenience to summarize what the closing arguments were. Do you take a factual issue with the summary of the closing arguments?

The rest were citations to the actual DOJ files. What did you cite to? Nothing as usual, but "trust us you know what you're talking about".

And I already told you once that I no longer work for a taxing entity. But thanks for the irrelevant ad hominem per usual that you still have no way to legitimately argue this nonsense.
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:45 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by BigBeauford:

The Stalinist Show Trial of Roger Stone

https://21stcenturywire.com/2019/11/...f-roger-stone/

Banyon's kind of justice.
[Reply]
banyon 02:46 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by vailpass:
thanks. It look like the 17-I's (not acting like I know anything about this) will get you 33 month max. Any idea what the other charges are?
30 per, so they're asking for them to run consecutively, which would get you to 5 years, not counting the other 6 charges, which would be more than enough to get you to the 7 figure.
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 02:47 PM 02-11-2020
Originally Posted by banyon:
The NYT reference was just for convenience to summarize what the closing arguments were. Do you take a factual issue with the summary of the closing arguments?

The rest were citations to the actual DOJ files. What did you cite to? Nothing as usual, but "trust us you know what you're talking about".

And I already told you once that I no longer work for a taxing entity. But thanks for the irrelevant ad hominem per usual that you still have no way to legitimately argue this nonsense.
You're not a prosecutor anymore? So your just ripping off a different employer now?

I'll ad hom dishonest attackers of a man who really didn't much wrong, when I already laid out this case before and gave my opinion Stone should be pardoned while you passive aggressively attack with fake academic attempts. That's being a waste of time to me. I've heard all the same arguments before ad nauseum. Oh and as I said many times before, I don't do questions especially rhetorical. You just want to keep arguing it endlessly.

IMO Stone should be pardoned for the reasons I gave. Don't agree. Touch shit.
[Reply]
Page 5 of 33
< 12345 678915 > Last »
Up