Crime Roger Stone guilty on all counts

[K1levelgrappler]

What makes you think that I believe he is a "stand up guy"? And what makes you think this is about something as childish as "owning the libs"? It's possible for Roger Stone to be a rat fucking shitbag, and for his prosecution to be a politically motivated miscarriage of justice at the same time.

I've been very clear that I don't like Trump, and I don't like many of the people that surround him. But his enemies in the deep state are far worse. Stone was convicted for standing in the way of their war against Trump and normal Americans.

Stone was convicted for lying, obstructing justice, and witness tampering. In other words misremembering and defending himself against a fraudulent investigation cooked up by Clintonworld and dead enders in the intelligence and law enforcement communities from the Bush and Obama administration.

Despite what you may think, far left shit bags not having total power is not a crime.

Right so he didn't do anything wrong other other than some process crimes i.e, good crimes but even if he did who cares? He's fighting against people you don't like so he should get away with it.

 

[JSnake]

Right so he didn't do anything wrong other other than some process crimes i.e, good crimes but even if he did who cares? He's fighting against people you don't like so he should get away with it.

The problem is there's a double standard being applied, where people are getting away with crimes on the other side--the law is being selectively enforced.

The Podestas were caught doing the same thing as Manafort, yet only the latter is jailed; nothing happens to the former. Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and even Mueller himself had lied/perjured themselves to Congress... and nothing happens to them; yet Stone gets prosecuted and held to a standard that even the interrogators could not hold up to.

So the corruption has gotten to a point where people who have held power in government agencies for so long are just giving themselves immunity from the rule of law, and weaponizing it against their political opposition.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Alex Jones is source. https://www.mediamatters.org/roger-...roger-stone-trial-juror-help-stones-assistant

On a side note for people who dont understand. During jury selection, the prosecution and the defense are both able to eliminate any person from the jury pool. Jones falsely claimed on his show Tuesday that a former Obama administration official had been chosen for the jury.

The only people who listen to that guy are fools.

 

[Letssnuggle]

It’s not a big deal. After Barr releases his report and what everyone already knows is confirmed, Manafort, Stone, Flynn will all be pardoned. As they should be.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

It’s not a big deal. After Barr releases his report and what everyone already knows is confirmed, Manafort, Stone, Flynn will all be pardoned. As they should be.

Didn't they all lie and lie and lie and lie and lie?
Why on earth do they deserve a pardon?
Wouldn't that just be the president using his power to let criminals commit crimes with consequences?

 

[7437]

The problem is there's a double standard being applied, where people are getting away with crimes on the other side--the law is being selectively enforced.

The Podestas were caught doing the same thing as Manafort, yet only the latter is jailed; nothing happens to the former. Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and even Mueller himself had lied/perjured themselves to Congress... and nothing happens to them; yet Stone gets prosecuted and held to a standard that even the interrogators could not hold up to.

So the corruption has gotten to a point where people who have held power in government agencies for so long are just giving themselves immunity from the rule of law, and weaponizing it against their political opposition.

The republicans are selectively enforcing the law against republicans, but unwilling to go after democrats?

Sounds pretty unlikely.

 

[Letssnuggle]

Didn't they all lie and lie and lie and lie and lie?
Why on earth do they deserve a pardon?
Wouldn't that just be the president using his power to let criminals commit crimes with consequences?

I wouldn’t have any problem with this if it was enforced equally. That is the entire point, people are selectively being convicted for lying, which is a joke.

 

[Letssnuggle]

The problem is there's a double standard being applied, where people are getting away with crimes on the other side--the law is being selectively enforced.

The Podestas were caught doing the same thing as Manafort, yet only the latter is jailed; nothing happens to the former. Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and even Mueller himself had lied/perjured themselves to Congress... and nothing happens to them; yet Stone gets prosecuted and held to a standard that even the interrogators could not hold up to.

So the corruption has gotten to a point where people who have held power in government agencies for so long are just giving themselves immunity from the rule of law, and weaponizing it against their political opposition.

Missed your post or I wouldn’t have even replied in this thread. Spot on, great post!

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

I wouldn’t have any problem with this if it was enforced equally. That is the entire point, people are selectively being convicted for lying, which is a joke.

These three men. Be specific.
What about these three men makes them deserving of a pardon?
Seems to me, they're being "selectively" punished for the crimes they committed.

 

[Andy Capp]

'Prepare to die c**ks****r.' Stone wrote in one profanity-laced text to Credico. 'You are a rat.'

'I don't know why you had to lie and say you had a backchannel,' Credico later told Stone in texts sent in early December 2017. 'You could have just told them the truth ... You want me to cover you for perjury now.'
'I guarantee you, you are the one who gets indicted for perjury if you are stupid enough to testify,' Stone replied.

Stone in various texts urged Credico to plead the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination or not talk to investigators. He made references to 'Frank Pentangeli' - a character in the film 'The Godfather Part II' who recants his testimony to Congress about a mobster amid witness intimidation.

In the movie, Pentangeli is a midlevel Mafia boss who plans to testify against the criminal godfather, Michael Corleone. At the last minute, under pressure that is never fully explained, Pentangeli reverses his testimony and sabotages the government's case. He claims before Congress that the FBI pressured him to make up stories and ensnare Corleone.

One thing's for sure, if anything is overturned on appeal, it won't be the witness tampering charge.

 

[Andy Capp]

@kpt018 I couldn't pin down a date for that incident we were arguing over before but combined with what came out in Stone's trial I agree that you can reasonably say "Russia, if you're listening" and the DNC announcement before that about the hack mean that Trump knew Russians were the source of the info Stone was passing to the campaign. And yeah, that's bad, I agree. Even if that's not strong enough to convict in a criminal trial, it ought to be strong enough to convict in the court of public opinion, if not for the obfuscations of the Republicans, Faux news, and their ilk. I hope it makes it through all the noise. It's treasonous, IMO.

 

[kpt018]

@kpt018 I couldn't pin down a date for that incident we were arguing over before but combined with what came out in Stone's trial I agree that you can reasonably say "Russia, if you're listening" and the DNC announcement before that about the hack mean that Trump knew Russians were the source of the info Stone was passing to the campaign. And yeah, that's bad, I agree. Even if that's not strong enough to convict in a criminal trial, it ought to be strong enough to convict in the court of public opinion, if not for the obfuscations of the Republicans, Faux news, and their ilk. I hope it makes it through all the noise. It's treasonous, IMO.

Agreed and imo it’s impeachable regardless of the timing as to when he knew it was Russia (he’s still denying it btw, but the evidence is apparently clear). He knew or should have known the emails were illegally obtained. So whether it’s Russia or “some loser in his underwear in his mom’s basement” he coordinated the use of illegally obtained emails for political purposes. The Russian angle would make it worse if we didn’t already know he engages with foreign governments to cheat during elections.


And that was really the point I poorly articulated during our last exchange. But I’m with you here.

We know he’ll cheat to win elections including using illegally obtained information as well as strong arming desperate foreign leaders. All impeachable (and not a close call imo). Whether he’s coordinating with Putin or not is irrelevant to the question of impeachment at this point. He proved his nay sayers right.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Agreed and imo it’s impeachable regardless of the timing as to when he knew it was Russia (he’s still denying it btw, but the evidence is apparently clear). He knew or should have known the emails were illegally obtained. So whether it’s Russia or “some loser in his underwear in his mom’s basement” he coordinated the use of illegally obtained emails for political purposes. The Russian angle would make it worse if we didn’t already know he engages with foreign governments to cheat during elections.


And that was really the point I poorly articulated during our last exchange. But I’m with you here.

We know he’ll cheat to win elections including using illegally obtained information as well as strong arming desperate foreign leaders. All impeachable (and not a close call imo). Whether he’s coordinating with Putin or not is irrelevant to the question of impeachment at this point. He proved his nay sayers right.

I'll never vote Republican again unless they can swing the party back towards sanity and away from elevated criminals.

 

[Andy Capp]

Agreed and imo it’s impeachable regardless of the timing as to when he knew it was Russia (he’s still denying it btw, but the evidence is apparently clear). He knew or should have known the emails were illegally obtained. So whether it’s Russia or “some loser in his underwear in his mom’s basement” he coordinated the use of illegally obtained emails for political purposes. The Russian angle would make it worse if we didn’t already know he engages with foreign governments to cheat during elections.


And that was really the point I poorly articulated during our last exchange. But I’m with you here.

We know he’ll cheat to win elections including using illegally obtained information as well as strong arming desperate foreign leaders. All impeachable (and not a close call imo). Whether he’s coordinating with Putin or not is irrelevant to the question of impeachment at this point. He proved his nay sayers right.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like you're still not quite with me on precisely what I was getting at before. And I admit it's a rather fine point that I may not have made clear. You and I agree that "Russia, if you're listening" and cooperating with wikileaks regardless of the source of the illegally obtained material; and his subsequent statement that he would do it again because why not; and probably a dozen other factually verifiable incidents merit impeachment, but that hasn't happened. So, I concluded that despite the revelation you posted, nothing less than a provable connection to Russia will lose the support of his followers.

Though it's circuitous, I'd say the Stone trial uncovered such a link but I'd need to go over it more carefully to be sure and that alone would never satisfy the hardcores.

I may have been too cynical, however. It appears he has lost a lot of support based upon one week of public testimony in the impeachment inquiry alone. Here's hoping.

 

[MikeMcMann]

@kpt018 I couldn't pin down a date for that incident we were arguing over before but combined with what came out in Stone's trial I agree that you can reasonably say "Russia, if you're listening" and the DNC announcement before that about the hack mean that Trump knew Russians were the source of the info Stone was passing to the campaign. And yeah, that's bad, I agree. Even if that's not strong enough to convict in a criminal trial, it ought to be strong enough to convict in the court of public opinion, if not for the obfuscations of the Republicans, Faux news, and their ilk. I hope it makes it through all the noise. It's treasonous, IMO.

Agreed and imo it’s impeachable regardless of the timing as to when he knew it was Russia (he’s still denying it btw, but the evidence is apparently clear). He knew or should have known the emails were illegally obtained. So whether it’s Russia or “some loser in his underwear in his mom’s basement” he coordinated the use of illegally obtained emails for political purposes. The Russian angle would make it worse if we didn’t already know he engages with foreign governments to cheat during elections.


And that was really the point I poorly articulated during our last exchange. But I’m with you here.

We know he’ll cheat to win elections including using illegally obtained information as well as strong arming desperate foreign leaders. All impeachable (and not a close call imo). Whether he’s coordinating with Putin or not is irrelevant to the question of impeachment at this point. He proved his nay sayers right.

And why did Russia pretty much instantly respond to "Russia are you listening?'

Was it because they hated Hilary and wanted her to lose? Sure in part.

But more importantly they knew it would give them massive kompromat on Trump if won and that is why Russia put on the full court press to help him win.


You have a POTUS who says 'Russia can you help?' and the Russians quickly help knowing that Trump is breaking the law in that request and they (the Russians) can prove it at any time.

The Russians would have preferred it not all be outed in the Mueller Investigation so it could be their little secret.

 

[Andy Capp]

Right so he didn't do anything wrong other other than some process crimes i.e, good crimes but even if he did who cares? He's fighting against people you don't like so he should get away with it.

Get ready to die is a process crime. Hm.

 

[kpt018]

I'll never vote Republican again unless they can swing the party back towards sanity and away from elevated criminals.

I totally agree. Even if you lean right it should be down the ballet D until they get their shit together. The country will be better off too.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like you're still not quite with me on precisely what I was getting at before. And I admit it's a rather fine point that I may not have made clear. You and I agree that "Russia, if you're listening" and cooperating with wikileaks regardless of the source of the illegally obtained material; and his subsequent statement that he would do it again because why not; and probably a dozen other factually verifiable incidents merit impeachment, but that hasn't happened. So, I concluded that despite the revelation you posted, nothing less than a provable connection to Russia will lose the support of his followers.

It's circuitous, but I'd say the Stone trial uncovered such a link but I'd need to go over it more carefully to be sure and that would never satisfy the hardcores.

.

I may have been too cynical, however. It appears he has lost a lot of support based upon one week of public testimony in the impeachment inquiry alone. Here's hoping.

I totally agree and on your one point would take it further. If we found out indisputable evidence of Trump knowing and working with Putin there’s some portion that still would support him. There are people that would side with Russia over Dems!

And thanks for being a really good poster and getting past the fuckups (mostly if not entirely on my part). It’s refreshing to talk to adults on here about this stuff

And why did Russia pretty much instantly respond to "Russia are you listening?'

Was it because they hated Hilary and wanted her to lose? Sure in part.

But more importantly they knew it would give them massive kompromat on Trump if won and that is why Russia put on the full court press to help him win.


You have a POTUS who says 'Russia can you help?' and the Russians quickly help knowing that Trump is breaking the law in that request and they (the Russians) can prove it at any time.

The Russians would have preferred it not all be outed in the Mueller Investigation so it could be their little secret.

Absolutely. Again, speaking in strictly evidence based claims we don’t know for sure. But there’s more than enough evidence to remove him from office imo.

 

[Quipling]

The problem is there's a double standard being applied, where people are getting away with crimes on the other side--the law is being selectively enforced.

Nope. That is your argument, but other people in this thread are clearly arguing that Stone didn't do anything wrong. Good on you for not trying that garbage, but I think your examples don't hold up well either.

The Podestas were caught doing the same thing as Manafort, yet only the latter is jailed; nothing happens to the former.

I assume you are talking about failing to register as a foreign agent. This is a pretty bad false equivalency. First, that only applies to one Podesta (through his firm, which did work for manafort), not both.
Second, Manafort was convicted and sentenced on a variety of charges, including witness tampering, tax fraud, and bank fraud. He did not serve and will not serve any time on the foreign agent charge.

Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and even Mueller himself had lied/perjured themselves to Congress... and nothing happens to them; yet Stone gets prosecuted and held to a standard that even the interrogators could not hold up to.

It's not clear what statements you think Mueller, Comey, Clapper and Brennan made that would qualify. I checked Brennan out of curiosity-he has made fewer statements under oath than the others in recent years so this was possible to check. I assume you are talking about his statements under oath that there had been contacts between representatives of the Trump campaign and representatives of the Russian government, although he did not know if they were colluding. This has since been confirmed as correct, so it's not clear why this would be perjurious, which would require it to be false and knowingly false. Contrast with Stone's statements, which were not only false, but his own text messages showed he knew then to be false around the time that he made them.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

 

[Anung Un Rama]

'Prepare to die c**ks****r.' Stone wrote in one profanity-laced text to Credico. 'You are a rat.'

'I don't know why you had to lie and say you had a backchannel,' Credico later told Stone in texts sent in early December 2017. 'You could have just told them the truth ... You want me to cover you for perjury now.'
'I guarantee you, you are the one who gets indicted for perjury if you are stupid enough to testify,' Stone replied.

Stone in various texts urged Credico to plead the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination or not talk to investigators. He made references to 'Frank Pentangeli' - a character in the film 'The Godfather Part II' who recants his testimony to Congress about a mobster amid witness intimidation.

In the movie, Pentangeli is a midlevel Mafia boss who plans to testify against the criminal godfather, Michael Corleone. At the last minute, under pressure that is never fully explained, Pentangeli reverses his testimony and sabotages the government's case. He claims before Congress that the FBI pressured him to make up stories and ensnare Corleone.

One thing's for sure, if anything is overturned on appeal, it won't be the witness tampering charge.

Frank turned because Michael threatened his family. He brought his brother in from Sicily and had him sit with him during Pentangeli’s hearing. Frank saw this and changed his testimony to save his brother’s and his children’s lives.