Trump Ally Roger Stone Gets 40 Months for Lying, Witness-Tampering

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

again, she said in court that Stone was convicted for covering for the president. no such thing was in the charges. you’d think that maybe the judge presiding over the trial, might have a casual familiarity with the charges of the case she’s presiding over.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yea Jim, perhaps you could give her a ring and explain the finer details of the case
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Yea Jim, perhaps you could give her a ring and explain the finer details of the case
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i know he didn’t get convicted for covering up for trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

He was sentenced for lying to Congress, witness tampering/threatening and obstructing the investigation into election interference by Russia.
He did all that to "cover" up for Donald Trump. I think the Judge is smart enough to recognize that "covering up" is not a crime. Saying he covered up for Donald Trump is not a lie.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

He was sentenced for lying to Congress, witness tampering/threatening and obstructing the investigation into election interference by Russia.
He did all that to "cover" up for Donald Trump. I think the Judge is smart enough to recognize that "covering up" is not a crime. Saying he covered up for Donald Trump is not a lie.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

she said he was convicted for covering up for trump. that’s a lie. it’s that simple.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

she said he was convicted for covering up for trump. that’s a lie. it’s that simple.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It is not a lie. If you can't understand the statement, no one can help you.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

It is not a lie. If you can't understand the statement, no one can help you.

show me then, where in the charges it states he was covering for the president. that’s what she said he was convicted of.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

so you think "covering" for someone is a crime? Or do you think the judge thinks "covering" is a crime and didn't know what the charges were?

Use your critical thinking like you do every day at work.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

so you think "covering" for someone is a crime? Or do you think the judge thinks "covering" is a crime and didn't know what the charges were?

Use your critical thinking like you do every day at work.

no, the judge somehow thinks it’s a crime. SHE said Stone was convicted of covering for the president. Sounds like you are agreeing with me, that he was not convicted of any such thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

no, the judge somehow thinks it’s a crime. SHE said Stone was convicted of covering for the president. Sounds like you are agreeing with me, that he was not convicted of any such thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No she said he was prosecuted for covering up for the president, that’s exactly why he was charged with lying, witness tampering and obstruction. You’re making stuff up again Jim, it’s getting old.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

no, the judge somehow thinks it’s a crime. SHE said Stone was convicted of covering for the president. Sounds like you are agreeing with me, that he was not convicted of any such thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

correct - he was not, but I'm smart enough to understand that she meant Stone was convicted for trying to cover up for the Pres. by lying, tampering/threatening and obstructing the investigation .

[scottw]

Jim...they can't even agree...let them argue amongst themselves

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

Jim...they can't even agree...let them argue amongst themselves

they’re denying what she said was true, but can’t bring themselves to admit she was wrong, because she’s an obama appointee. TDS in all its glory.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Paul, judge Jackson said stone “was prosecuted for covering up for the president.”

The judge said that, not me. So when you attack that statement for being absurd ( which it is), you’re not attacking me as you thought you were. you were attacking the judge.

So now that you know judge Jackson said it, do you still feel it’s a stupid statement? Or is it brilliant, now that a democrat said it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

The chick had it coming
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Perhaps you think the FBI should take more chances with their lives?
Here is the view of a guy who has been in that situation.

Was the FBI’s show of force too heavy-handed, as has been alleged? Absolutely not.

Lest you believe Mueller's office or the Justice Department decides how many agents are deployed for an arrest, and what type of hardware they’re armed with, you’re mistaken. The FBI makes that call. Prosecutors draft indictments and litigate in court on behalf of The People. They leave the sweet science of apprehension tactics and techniques to other professionals.

Having been involved in the planning and execution of hundreds of early morning arrests like this one, nothing appeared to be “irregular.” This was a “knock and announce” warrant service, not to be confused with a “no knock” (exigent circumstances) arrest warrant. FBI special agents were prepared to employ mechanical breaching tools to enter Stone's home if the occupant delayed their passage.

Stone was not afforded an opportunity for a self-surrender, negotiated through his attorney, because there were concerns he may have been a flight risk (Stone insists he doesn’t own a passport) or that he may have destroyed evidence had there been warning of the coming indictment. Therefore, the FBI would have been directed to take Stone into custody. The means and methods are then left to the FBI.

Some have speculated it was overkill treatment of an elderly man, eradicating the proverbial gnat with a hammer. But some of the most dangerous encounters I experienced in my 25-year FBI career didn’t necessarily come when apprehending career street criminals or violent gang members. It was often the unassuming, benign in appearance, white-collar fraudster, corrupt politician, or senior church member infected by pedophilia. These lawbreakers and miscreants weren’t adorned with tattoos or menacing glowers. But they had a lot to lose, and in their moment of reckoning, sufficiently panicked, they often acted irrationally — choosing to hurt themselves or attack the (blessedly) armed instruments of the state sent to apprehend them.

To those pearl-clutchers raising alarms about “armed FBI agents,” you must be made aware that FBI agents were granted arrest powers and authority to carry firearms back when Congress passed a series of anti-crime legislation back in the summer of 1934, precipitated by an agent’s murder during the Kansas City Massacre of 1933.

That’s why “armed FBI agent” is such a foolish redundancy. As far as Stone’s inaccurate, hyperbolic characterization of agents armed with “grenades,” it deserves no response.

So spare me the “they didn’t need that many people for one arrest” proselytizing. You don’t know that of which you speak. In the FBI, we tend to defuse situations by removing the fight-or-flight inclination, via our overwhelming presence. To arrest one, we bring 10. For 10, we’ll bring 100. And yet, we still have a wall loaded with photos of our service martyrs. None of them expected to lose their life on that particular day.

[Sea Dangles]

Thank you for sharing his words Bitchslappedboy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Thank you for sharing his words Bitchslappedboy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What a vile person you are.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by PaulS

What a vile person you are.

I can’t wait to take you fishing with my other kids.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

I just ignore Dingleberry because he's the prime example of the old adage that, The emptier the head, the louder the mouth.

[Sea Dangles]

Thank You for sharing bsb

[Pete F.]

Boat still running?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Time to put Roger Stone in the grand jury to find out what he knows about Trump but would not tell. Commutation can’t stop that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Time to put Roger Stone in the grand jury to find out what he knows about Trump but would not tell. Commutation can’t stop that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I bet it's a "bombshell"

[nightfighter]

Totally disgusted.... Officially on the vote him out bandwagon. Don't even care who is running against. Though I would prefer to have a good decent alternative.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by nightfighter

Totally disgusted.... Officially on the vote him out bandwagon. Don't even care who is running against. Though I would prefer to have a good decent alternative.

We might have Kanye 😂😂😂😂
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

I bet it's a "bombshell"

That Trump knew about the leaks, lied to the FBI about it and Stone lied to help cover it up then threatened to dish if he went to prison? That little tidbit?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

That Trump knew about the leaks, lied to the FBI about it and Stone lied to help cover it up then threatened to dish if he went to prison? That little tidbit?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

google..."bombshell allegations trump"...it's pretty funny

[Pete F.]

The commutation happened because Stone clearly could have implicated Trump & didn’t & has made very clear that he wasn’t doing so in order to get this benefit.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

The nation is the winner here.

[wdmso]

Remember he is the law and order President..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device