ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 6 of 38
« First < 23456 7891016 > Last »
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Impeachment 2.0: The Roger Stone Chronicles
petegz28 10:16 AM 02-13-2020
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem...ger-stone-case


:-)
[Reply]
Donger 12:04 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY:
What are you talking about? The whole thing was weaponized under the Obama administration. DOJ and the FBI.

I can't take you seriously anymore.
Yes, it was to a certain extent. Did you oppose that?
[Reply]
Ninerfan11 12:07 PM 02-13-2020
HAHA DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:-)
[Reply]
Shields68 12:07 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
Why do you say that what Trump allegedly did is inappropriate?
I do not think there is any showing that he contacted the AG. So not sure it is even alleged based on any actual facts. I assumed your made up facts are true.

But the made up facts implied that Trump put pressure on the AG to interfere with a criminal case. (which Trump and the DOJ deny) Now Trump is allowed to do that and it is not illegal. I would say it would be inappropriate for him to apply direct pressure to get favorable treatment for a friend.

Now that being said, it seems like there was a lot of bias against Trump involving Mueller his team and the whole Russian investigation (after all someone doctored an email and mislead the FISA court numerous ways to get a illegal warrant) and it might be wholly appropriate to hold a discussion with the AG on whether the attorneys involved are clearly independent and not political actors themselves. Which is not putting pressure on the AG to have favorable treatment but rather to have fair treatment.
[Reply]
Donger 12:10 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Shields68:
I do not think there is any showing that he contacted the AG. So not sure it is even alleged based on any actual facts. I assumed your made up facts are true.

But the made up facts implied that Trump put pressure on the AG to interfere with a criminal case. (which Trump and the DOJ deny) Now Trump is allowed to do that and it is not illegal. I would say it would be inappropriate for him to apply direct pressure to get favorable treatment for a friend.

Now that being said, it seems like there was a lot of bias against Trump involving Mueller his team and the whole Russian investigation (after all someone doctored an email and mislead the FISA court numerous ways to get a illegal warrant) and it might be wholly appropriate to hold a discussion with the AG on whether the attorneys involved are clearly independent and not political actors themselves. Which is not putting pressure on the AG to have favorable treatment but rather to have fair treatment.
I haven't claimed that it's a fact that Trump ordered Barr the Ballwasher to do this, or anyone else. Quite the opposite.

Thanks for your answer.
[Reply]
stevieray 12:11 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by BIG_DADDY:
What are you talking about? The whole thing was weaponized under the Obama administration. DOJ and the FBI.

I can't take you seriously anymore.
good call.

his bias is deafening.
[Reply]
Shields68 12:18 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
So, let's say that it's proven that Trump called up Barr the Ballwasher (or someone else) and told him to have the sentencing decision reduced.

What say the Trumpers?
Originally Posted by :
I haven't claimed that it's a fact that Trump ordered Barr the Ballwasher to do this, or anyone else. Quite the opposite.

Thanks for your answer.
Your first question above is what my inappropriate comment was answering. Then you asked:

Originally Posted by :
Why do you say that what Trump allegedly did is inappropriate?

I thought it necessary to make sure we were talking about your original hypothetical above. Because to me the word allegedly implies someone claims it to be true. I am not aware anyone claims that the original question that Trump called Barr about this is actually true.


Alleged to me is an allegation made by someone based on facts.
[Reply]
Donger 12:22 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Shields68:
Your first question above is what my inappropriate comment was answering. Then you asked:




I thought it necessary to make sure we were talking about your original hypothetical above. Because to me the word allegedly implies someone claims it to be true. I am not aware anyone claims that the original question that Trump called Barr about this is actually true.


Alleged to me is an allegation made by someone based on facts.
Some people are alleging that Trump did this, yes. Based on his previous behavior, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he did. But that isn't fact at this point.
[Reply]
Shields68 12:38 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
Some people are alleging that Trump did this, yes. Based on his previous behavior, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he did. But that isn't fact at this point.
Well if he asked for favorable treatment and not fair treatment I say inappropriate. But given that the original recommendation seems excessive and may have been based on personal bias I think it was appropriate for the AG and DOJ to step in.
[Reply]
Donger 12:41 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Shields68:
Well if he asked for favorable treatment and not fair treatment I say inappropriate. But given that the original recommendation seems excessive and may have been based on personal bias I think it was appropriate for the AG and DOJ to step in.
Again, what if Trump told the AG and DOJ to step in? Not them doing it of their own volition.
[Reply]
Shields68 12:43 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
Again, what if Trump told the AG and DOJ to step in? Not them doing it of their own volition.
The why is important. But I have answered.
[Reply]
Donger 12:47 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Shields68:
The why is important. But I have answered.
You really want POTUS deciding that a personal friend who happens to be a convicted felon got a sentence that is excessive?
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 12:57 PM 02-13-2020
4 partisan scumbags. The 4 persecutors:

Aaron Zelinsky
Adam Jed
Jonathan Kravis
Michael Marando

"Jonathan Kravis did the same thing to my client Kesari that he did to Roger Stone. Remember how they raided the 68-year-old's home to arrest him? They did the same thing to Kesari. Feds busted into his house at 6 in the morning and dragged his 15-year-old daughter out on the side of a busy road, in her underwear. For context, this case was about a failure to report a campaign expenditure on an FEC form."

This type of raid, for noncompliance with a federal form, is an absolutely absurd abuse of government power.

What is your take on Jonathan Kravis' intentions?

"Kravis is very calculating. He is a former Obama White House lawyer and I think he came to the DOJ with a political agenda. In fact, I think he’s an angry Democrat who can’t stop abusing his power as a prosecutor. It’s good that he has left government".

Did Kravis achieve his agenda?

"I think Kravis is upset that the President of the United States and the Attorney General are putting limits on his political prosecutions."
--Federal trial attorney Jesse Binnall.

Currently, Binnall is defending Michael Flynn alongside Sidney Powell.

https://townhall.com/columnists/mari...awyer-n2561231


The Mueller Investigative Team:

Rush Atkinson, an attorney on detail from the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section at the Department of Justice
— Donated $200 to Clinton in 2016

Peter Carr – DOJ spokesman under Barack Obama.

Andrew Goldstein, a public corruption prosecutor on detail from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York

— Worked under Trump-basher Preet Bharara in the liberal New York southern district.

Adam Jed, an appellate attorney on detail from DOJ’s Civil Division. — Defended Obamacare at the DOJ.

Elizabeth Prelogar, an appellate attorney on detail from the Office of the Solicitor General. -Fluent in Russian; former law clerk to Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan.

James Quarles, a former partner at WilmerHale and a former assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. –Former assistant special prosecutor on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.

Jeannie Rhee, a former partner at WilmerHale who has served in the Office of Legal Counsel at DOJ and as an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. — Rhee is a Clinton Foundation Lawyer and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel under Barack Obama.

Brandon Van Grack, an attorney on detail from the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

— Led a grand jury inquiry in Northern Virginia scrutinizing former Trump associate Michael Flynn’s foreign lobbying.

Aaron Zebley, a former partner at WilmerHale who has previously served with Mueller at the FBI and has served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. — Worked with Robert Mueller at the WilmerHale firm.

Sunday, July 28, 2019

The Boston Herald has an interesting tidbit on Robert Mueller's long time chief of staff, Aaron Zebley. It appears in a longer article--Mueller collapse raises more questions: John Durham may tie up loose ends. It appears that Zebley both ran the day to day operations of Team Mueller and also had represented a key defendant in the Hillary email case:

... reports are surfacing that reveal that Mueller was a no-show and others may have run the investigation and authored the report. According to the New York Times, Mueller, “Kept noticeably shorter hours than he had as FBI Director,” and he “Seemed to cede substantial responsibility to his top deputies, including Aaron Zebley, who managed day-to-day operations.”

Zebley was in private practice in 2015 and 2016, and he represented a man named Justin Cooper. Cooper was an adviser to the Clinton Foundation and an IT expert who set up and maintained Hillary Clinton’s private email server. According to the FBI, “Cooper did recall two instances where he destroyed Clinton’s old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer.”

Unbelievable.

It is becoming clear that the Mueller report is a partisan document, carefully crafted to cut around nefarious activity perpetuated by Clinton et al., and focus on the most salacious moments of the Trump presidency.

I'm not familiar with DoJ internal guidelines, but I find it hard to impossible to believe that the way Team Mueller was staffed did not violate ethical rules/guidelines.

https://meaninginhistory.blogspot.co...ler-aaron.html
[Reply]
petegz28 01:02 PM 02-13-2020
This is yet another temper tantrum from the non-Trumpers. Nothing more.
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 01:06 PM 02-13-2020
February 13, 2020
It appears that the jury in the Roger Stone trial was tainted
By Andrea Widburg

From beginning to end, Robert Mueller and his squad used Roger Stone as an object lesson to frighten anyone who had high-level contact with the Trump campaign in the lead-up to and immediately after the election. Stone is not a savory character, but the treatment meted out to Stone, now 67, had a revolting aura of police state hanging about it from the start. Now it turns out that this un-American police state set up a kangaroo trial to shuttle Stone into prison.

The Mueller mob started its press against Stone in January 2019, when Stone, who ought to have been a generic white-collar criminal:

... was instead subjected to a humiliating midnight predawn raid with cars full of riot gear–clad FBI agents, all staged before the cameras of CNN, which was exclusively granted access to the scene worthy of an action movie. [Update: It is not clear who leaked news of the raid to CNN, having the effect of staging it for the most anti-Trump of networks.] This is similar to the treatment of Paul Manafort, but with the added indignity of CNN cameras.

Stone, a first-timer, was eventually convicted of lying to Congress, interfering in the House's Russian Collusion Hoax investigation, and tampering with a witness. All of these charges sound serious, but the first two are garden-variety politics and a routine occurrence in D.C. As for the third, the witness at the receiving end of the fulminating threats Stone issued recognized them for the language of an angry, impotent man and found them laughable.

Despite all this, Mueller's cadre asked the judge to impose a seven- to nine-year prison term for Stone. While this is technically within the reach of the laws Stone violated, it's a grotesque demand for an elderly, first-time, non-violent offender. To give context to how truly evil this request was, John Nolte reminds us of James A. Wolfe:

Wolfe is the scumbag who completely betrayed his trust as the head of security for the Senate intelligence committee by leaking to the media (including a New York Times reporter he was allegedly banging) — all in an effort to damage Trump. While under investigation for leaking government secrets, he lied on three occasions to the FBI (a crime), eventually pleaded guilty to one count, and was sentenced to just two months.

Two months!

Eight weeks!

Fine.

I'm fine with that. Like Stone, he certainly deserves to spend some time in prison, and anything up to a year seems reasonable. Nevertheless, there is just no question what Wolfe did is much worse than what Stone's been found guilty of.

Meanwhile, Obama-ites have walked away free despite acts such as violating national security and deleting 33,000 emails, wiretapping an opponent's presidential campaign, lying to Congress, forging FISA warrants, etc. What the Mueller gang was demanding the judge do to Stone was political thuggery of the worst sort, and Barr's DOJ was right to step in. (The only question was why the DOJ waited as long as it did.)

Naturally, the left went insane with rage that Trump and the DOJ would try to correct a manifest case of prosecutorial overreach. Indeed, they went so mad with rage that Tomeka Hart wrote a Facebook post challenging Trump and the DOJ.

Who is Tomeka Hart? She is one of the jurors who helped convict Roger Stone. Hart explained that Trump's interference was so egregious that she could no longer keep quiet:

"I have kept my silence for months. Initially, it was for my safety. Then, I decided to remain silent out of fear of politicizing the matter," Hart wrote on Facebook, adding: "But I can't keep quiet any longer."

Hart would have done her cause better to keep quiet. By identifying herself, she revealed just how corrupt the Mueller posse really was, for Hart was the last person who should have been on a politically charged jury.

First, Hart was a former Democrat congressional candidate, although party affiliation alone should not be enough to boot a potential juror from a trial. Second, and significantly, Hart hated Trump, his politics, and his associates:

Here are some of her Tweets about Trump and those close to Trump:



But how did she get on a jury involving Trump's longtime close friend?

How did a federal court judge ever allow a far left wing activist to sit on a case where a close Trump associate faced trial?

Roger Stone was tried in a kangaroo court, one in which the prosecutors, and possibly the judge, colluded to ensure a guilty judgment against him. This is a disgrace and antithetical to everything America stands for.

It's becoming clear that the entire Mueller investigation was corrupt. Mueller knew by the second day that the Trump campaign had not colluded with Russia and that everything in the Steele dossier was bull fecal matter. Instead of announcing that truth, Mueller's team embarked upon a two-year odyssey of destroying people close to Trump by catching them on process crimes. The message was clear: work with Trump, and not only will you retire from Washington in disgrace, but you will also lose everything: career, money, and even your liberty.

It's well past time to call all of these people — including Mueller himself — to account, not with police action and kangaroo trials, but with justice properly administered and impartially carried out.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...s_tainted.html
[Reply]
patteeu 01:19 PM 02-13-2020
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
Why plant your flag on the "he's innocent" hill again? Since you (collectively) would defend him even if he did do it, you may as well start there.
There is no shortage of people jumping to the conclusion that Trump ordered Barr to act as if that's the only possible reality. It's worth pointing out that that has been denied and remains unproven. It's also worth pointing out that it's not an abuse of power anyway.
[Reply]
Page 6 of 38
« First < 23456 7891016 > Last »
Up