Roger Stone trial set to begin Tuesday, Nov. 5 (Update: Stone found guilty on all 7 counts) (1 Viewer)

< Previous | Next >

superchuck500

does good at rockets
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
670
Reaction score
1,328
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Jury selection will begin Tuesday morning. Note that Steve Bannon intends to testify for the prosecution.

Roger Stone will go on trial starting Nov. 5 in Washington, the federal judge presiding over the high-profile case said Thursday.

U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson set out a calendar for a two-week trial that will pit the longtime Trump associate against special counsel Robert Mueller on charges Stone lied to Congress and obstructed lawmakers’ Russia investigations.

Stone entered the D.C. courthouse for Thursday’s status hearing uncertain whether he’d face any penalties — including jail — for violating the terms of a gag order restricting his ability to talk about any aspect of the case.

But Stone was spared any punishment after Jackson opened the proceedings saying she didn’t “intend to dwell” on the dispute, which centers on discrepancies over whether Stone mislead the court about plans to rerelease a recent book with a new introduction bashing Mueller’s investigation.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/14/roger-stone-trial-1221289


https://www.law.com/nationallawjour...n-roger-stones-trial/?slreturn=20190931143946
 

TaylorB

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
197
Reaction score
811
Age
34
Location
Louisiana
Offline
I'm glad I learned what I did in light of the fact that Russia appears to be planning to interfere again in 2020. I don't know if Trump will conspire with Russia to help them do it in a way that can be charged criminally, but I feel pretty confident he will do nothing to stop them, and will ensure there are as few people as possible standing in the way of it.
Trump on being told of intel assessment that Russia is planning to try to help him in 2020: "It's disinformation."
 

FullMonte

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
322
Reaction score
552
Age
52
Location
Bossier City
Offline
What happened to fake news?

The term is disinformation now?
Yeah, that's an official sounding term that Trump heard.

Much like his sudden decision to tell Sondland, unprompted and out of the blue, "I want no quid pro quo," a phrase that he still struggles with even when he's got it written in a huge magic marker on paper in front of him.
 

Dadsdream

Ugly kids have ugly parents.
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,245
Reaction score
892
Age
63
Location
Hancock
Offline
You know, when my daughter was in college, she used to post large, canned narratives and talking points on websites and bulletin boards for various groups of one type or another, never mentioning that it was because she belonged to a group.
She'd occasionally get kicked off of sites when the owners got wise and started asking her to pay advertising rates for her posts.
Then, she'd change her screen name and start over.
Are you affiliated with a group that follows such practices?
I'm not.
Drum roll, please:

Michael R. Bloomberg’s presidential campaign has been experimenting with novel tactics to cultivate an online following, or at least the appearance of one.

But one of the strategies — deploying a large number of Twitter accounts to push out identical messages — has backfired. On Friday, Twitter began suspending 70 accounts posting pro-Bloomberg content in a pattern that violates company rules.

“We have taken enforcement action on a group of accounts for violating our rules against platform manipulation and spam,” a Twitter spokesman said. Some of the suspensions will be permanent, while in other cases account owners will have to verify they have control of their accounts.



Only $2,500 per month? What a cheapskate.
 
Last edited:

The moose

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
798
Reaction score
499
Age
51
Location
New Orleans
Offline
Drum roll, please:

Michael R. Bloomberg’s presidential campaign has been experimenting with novel tactics to cultivate an online following, or at least the appearance of one.

But one of the strategies — deploying a large number of Twitter accounts to push out identical messages — has backfired. On Friday, Twitter began suspending 70 accounts posting pro-Bloomberg content in a pattern that violates company rules.

“We have taken enforcement action on a group of accounts for violating our rules against platform manipulation and spam,” a Twitter spokesman said. Some of the suspensions will be permanent, while in other cases account owners will have to verify they have control of their accounts.



Only $2,500 per month? What a cheapskate.
I would love a part time gig I could do from anywhere for an extra 600 a week.

Heck if they actually put in fifteen hours a week that would be a ton tweeting crap and decent pay after he 1099's you.

Now I am sure he is 1099ing people cuz that is how the rich work.
 

wardorican

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
995
Age
39
Location
Ft. Lauderdale
Offline
So, Trump really blasted a juror on social media? Wut?!? Who does this? He is going after a private person. Not a public official.


Is that marching orders to the true believers?
 

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
1,248
Reaction score
1,556
Location
Midwest
Offline
It’s ridiculous and outrageous. Barr should speak out. The Chief Justice should speak out as well.

but nobody says anything anymore.
 

The moose

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
798
Reaction score
499
Age
51
Location
New Orleans
Offline
Wow, no one has an issue with this?
I have plenty of problems with it.

The sad thing is it was kinda expected.

In all honesty he has wore most people down. The outrage just is not in me anymore.

I don't think I will be all outraged when this virus is Democrats plan and all either. It is to be expected.
 

TaylorB

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
197
Reaction score
811
Age
34
Location
Louisiana
Offline
The crux of the North case I linked to was that dishonesty on a questionnaire was not per se evidence of actual bias. The DC circuit specifically declined to adopt a test in which actual bias would be inferred by a dishonest response, but rather, there would still have to be a demonstration of actual bias in addition to the dishonest response. Actual bias in this framework is way more than anti-Trump sentiment; it’s usually case-specific and very hard to show if they don’t literally admit to personal bias with respect to the particular case.

As far as I know, we don’t know whether she was dishonest on the written questionnaire anyway. The limited piece of the voir dire transcript seemed to suggest she was less than forthcoming regarding how closely she follows politics, but we dont know whether the written transcript or remaining voir dire questions would help or hurt her credibility. And even if they hurt her credibility on the issue of how closely she follows politics, the DC circuit case law suggests that this alone would not demonstrate bias of the sort that would necessitate a new trial. There were several other cases showing much more clear evidence of dishonesty and much more clear instances of potential bias, and none of those guilty verdicts were disturbed.

Again I’m not saying that’s what the law should be. I’m just saying I skimmed all the post-McDonough cases in the DC circuit and didn’t see any jurisprudential reason to think Jackson or DC appeals will overturn this. Also, the case against Stone with respect to the crimes he was charged with is overwhelming, and is heavily backed up by documentation in the event the live witnesses are less than cooperative, so I still think his best case scenario to avoid significant prison time is a pardon. Is it a fact that his sentence would be suspended during the appeal to DC Circuit?
Stone’s Motion For New Trial denied:


I stand by the assertion that the DC circuit would have a hard time overturning this based on its own jurisprudence. Stone’s most likely shot at freedom is up for re-election in 200 days. He deserves to go to prison, just like the rest of us would if we had flouted the justice system.

It’s been a minute since I’ve posted, hope everyone has been safe and healthy.
 

Humperdoo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
446
Reaction score
205
Age
43
Location
Tennessee
Offline
I have plenty of problems with it.

The sad thing is it was kinda expected.

In all honesty he has wore most people down. The outrage just is not in me anymore.

I don't think I will be all outraged when this virus is Democrats plan and all either. It is to be expected.
Oh it’s still in you Moose. 😁
 

Humperdoo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
446
Reaction score
205
Age
43
Location
Tennessee
Offline
Yeah, that's an official sounding term that Trump heard.

Much like his sudden decision to tell Sondland, unprompted and out of the blue, "I want no quid pro quo," a phrase that he still struggles with even when he's got it written in a huge magic marker on paper in front of him.
Lol he is indeed a terrible speaker.
 

Humperdoo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
446
Reaction score
205
Age
43
Location
Tennessee
Offline
Why is he a terrible speaker? He used to be quite well spoken. What do you think has happened from that point in time until now?
Trump? I don’t recall him ever being articulate or eloquent. If he was and I misremember, then the stresses of the job have taken a toll I’m sure.
I would not want that job and could not do it.
 

cuddlemonkey

Well-known monkey
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
709
Reaction score
702
Offline
Trump? I don’t recall him ever being articulate or eloquent. If he was and I misremember, then the stresses of the job have taken a toll I’m sure.
I would not want that job and could not do it.

Clips of him speaking articulately from years gone by compared to clips of him speaking in the manner we see today (at least one of which is from two months after announcing his candidacy).

So no, you can't blame job stress because it was happening long before he had the job.
 

Humperdoo

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
446
Reaction score
205
Age
43
Location
Tennessee
Offline

Clips of him speaking articulately from years gone by compared to clips of him speaking in the manner we see today (at least one of which is from two months after announcing his candidacy).

So no, you can't blame job stress because it was happening long before he had the job.
Haven’t watched that yet but I will. Can tell it’s before my time.
And I’m not defending or trying to blame. He’s a terrible speaker, from what I see daily. Thankfully I prefer actions to silver tongued.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Fact Checkers News Feed

Top Bottom