America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 years ago by rfenst. 43 replies replies.
Roger Stone....
rfenst Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,112
Convicted for obstruction of justice, making false statements and witness tampering.
Sentenced to 40 months in prison.
Should his sentence have been commuted?
ZRX1200 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
He’s a douche bag, and he got the extra nice treatment for being associated with Trump.

That FBI raid of his home and the leak to CNN, that’s exactly what agencies should not be taking part in. Proves someone’s guilt the right way.
delta1 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
loyal douche bag who had his boss up against the wall, dropping hints about singing if he did any prison time...

the Friday night of the weekend before Stone was to report to prison...

boss Trump used his special powers to get Stone off the hook in order to keep him quiet about his own criminal behavior


coincidence?
Gene363 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,680
ZRX1200 wrote:
He’s a douche bag, and he got the extra nice treatment for being associated with Trump.

That FBI raid of his home and the leak to CNN, that’s exactly what agencies should not be taking part in. Proves someone’s guilt the right way.


True, even with out quotes around the, "extra nice" parts.

Regardless of Stone, if they will do it for you, they will do it to you.
Speyside Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
100% the Presidents right to do, so yes I agree. Stone's guilt or innocence is immaterial.
Whistlebritches Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,127
delta1 wrote:


boss Trump used his special powers to get Stone off the hook in order to keep him quiet about his own criminal behavior


coincidence?



So you're saying this special power has never been used by any other President.

I really don't know why I keep coming here,it's full of vile, hatred,closed minded socialist and some of the dumbest political statements on the planet and personally I am sick of it.


Later tators
tonygraz Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,175
Maybe it's a place that fits you well. In a while vile.
Brewha Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
It saddens me to see the state of our country. Stone is plainly a career criminal, but since the President is above the law so are his criminal friends.

The real kick in the pills is how Trump cult members will hail this as justice....
ZRX1200 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
Justice? No.

Within his rights as POTUS? Yeah.

Do I like it? Doesn’t make a difference.

You think maybe the silent majority is disappointed with the behavior of the FBI and don’t take the 5 counts of “lying to Congress” that serious when they’ve lied so much. And just maybe the fruit of the poison tree doesn’t seemed to have mattered much with a sham investigation.

But hey I don’t wanna be a cult member.
Abrignac Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
Every President is granted the ability to pardon. There have been some very controversial pardons from Presidents of both parties.
Brewha Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
ZRX1200 wrote:
Justice? No.

Within his rights as POTUS? Yeah.

Do I like it? Doesn’t make a difference.

You think maybe the silent majority is disappointed with the behavior of the FBI and don’t take the 5 counts of “lying to Congress” that serious when they’ve lied so much. And just maybe the fruit of the poison tree doesn’t seemed to have mattered much with a sham investigation.

But hey I don’t wanna be a cult member.

Yes, well I don’t like it.

And I think the FBI was doing their job. Those under investigation have accused them of willfully abusing their authority as federal agents. But we are Americans. And we believe anything.

I guess when the Right sold people on the idea that NASA and NOAA was faking climate data for political reasons I should have given up.



I’m not sure why Stone pizzes me off. Could be the Nixon tattoo. Could be him smiling for the camera had flashing peace signs cause he knows he if above the law.
Or maybe it’s cause he is a deek.

But prolly it’s cause he is a portrait of American criminals who get away with it time and time again and laugh about it.
Brewha Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Abrignac wrote:
Every President is granted the ability to pardon. There have been some very controversial pardons from Presidents of both parties.

Are you floating the idea that two wrongs make a right?
ZRX1200 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
I think he’s saying our collective energies are better spent arguing the power granted not the decisions made to use it.
Brewha Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
ZRX1200 wrote:
I think he’s saying our collective energies are better spent arguing the power granted not the decisions made to use it.

It’s a fair point.

But I would float the idea that his use of the power was an abuse of the power.
And that if others abused it in the past that has little bearing - other than to say “abuse happens all the time”. Which does not make it OK.
Abrignac Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
Brewha wrote:
Are you floating the idea that two wrongs make a right?


Absolutely not. Did I even suggest that? Just pointing out hypocrisy when I see it. Btw, the tug you feel in your jaw is the hook that held the bait.
ZRX1200 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
Brewha wrote:
It’s a fair point.

But I would float the idea that his use of the power was an abuse of the power.
And that if others abused it in the past that has little bearing - other than to say “abuse happens all the time”. Which does not make it OK.



And yet you called people who didn’t see your way as cult members.

When you play the same game of not calling out the use of that granted power on your team then you’re no different so I guess it just hit me wrong to see that card played.

*shrug*

Anthony did you use barbless or treble? Do we eat him or put him back?
Brewha Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Abrignac wrote:
Absolutely not. Did I even suggest that? Just pointing out hypocrisy when I see it. Btw, the tug you feel in your jaw is the hook that held the bait.

Right, you did not say that.

I’m saying when someone does something wrong, pointing out that other also have is...well...trying to minimize it.

His abuse of power may not be unique. But abuse it is never the less.
The man has little respect for the rule of law. And lies as easy as breathing.
Brewha Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
ZRX1200 wrote:
And yet you called people who didn’t see your way as cult members.

When you play the same game of not calling out the use of that granted power on your team then you’re no different so I guess it just hit me wrong to see that card played.

*shrug*

Anthony did you use barbless or treble? Do we eat him or put him back?

Many people don’t see it my way - does not make them cult members.

You know exactly what I meant. We have lots of cray cray folks that see no faults in the POTUS. Or at least all is forgivable because he is doing “such a great job, a 10!”.

But this one with Stone is egregious. Hell even Romney is sounding off. And it is a poor defense of him to say “look over there, someone else did bad too”.

So do you feel it was an abuse of power, or are you going with “but Hillary...”?
Abrignac Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
ZRX1200 wrote:
And yet you called people who didn’t see your way as cult members.

When you play the same game of not calling out the use of that granted power on your team then you’re no different so I guess it just hit me wrong to see that card played.

*shrug*

Anthony did you use barbless or treble? Do we eat him or put him back?


Put whatever of his you desire into your mouth. But, hurry so I can toss him back. He need not flop around on the deck anymore than absolutely necessary.
Abrignac Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
Brewha wrote:
Right, you did not say that.

I’m saying when someone does something wrong, pointing out that other also have is...well...trying to minimize it.

His abuse of power may not be unique. But abuse it is never the less.
The man has little respect for the rule of law. And lies as easy as breathing.


You’ll notice that I didn’t disagree with your assessment of him. But, it can also be said that by pointing out character flows in someone who’s politics you disagree with while being silent about the ones with whom you agree with is at best is hypocritical.
Brewha Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Abrignac wrote:
You’ll notice that I didn’t disagree with your assessment of him. But, it can also be said that by pointing out character flows in someone who’s politics you disagree with while being silent about the ones with whom you agree with is at best is hypocritical.

If by that you mean all politics is hypocritical....well...point made.

Now I never thought I would write this, but; I agree with Mitt:

“Unprecedented, historic corruption: an American president commutes the sentence of a person convicted by a jury of lying to shield that very president,”
Abrignac Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
Brewha wrote:
If by that you mean all politics is hypocritical....well...point made.

Now I never thought I would write this, but; I agree with Mitt:

“Unprecedented, historic corruption: an American president commutes the sentence of a person convicted by a jury of lying to shield that very president,”


That’s one way to see it. Others would argue that a pardon or even clemency is a correct action to take when someone is prosecuted for procedural crimes by politically motivated prosecutors.

On the other hand, I don’t know all the facts so I’m not qualified to argue either way.
Brewha Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Abrignac wrote:
That’s one way to see it. Others would argue that a pardon or even clemency is a correct action to take when someone is prosecuted for procedural crimes by politically motivated prosecutors.

On the other hand, I don’t know all the facts so I’m not qualified to argue either way.

Well one point we can discuss is the integrity of the FBI.

Do you feel they are politically motivated and not to be trusted?
Abrignac Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
Brewha wrote:
Well one point we can discuss is the integrity of the FBI.

Do you feel they are politically motivated and not to be trusted?


As a whole I don’t know. Were key players for the FBI’s prosecution politically motivated and not to be trusted? Absolutely!

Scott as we both know this is one of those issues that will always be debated.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ wrote:
(c) The prosecutor should know and abide by the standards of professional conduct as expressed in applicable law and ethical codes and opinions in the applicable jurisdiction. The prosecutor should avoid an appearance of impropriety in performing the prosecution function. A prosecutor should seek out, and the prosecutor’s office should provide, supervisory advice and ethical guidance when the proper course of prosecutorial conduct seems unclear. A prosecutor who disagrees with a governing ethical rule should seek its change if appropriate, and directly challenge it if necessary, but should comply with it unless relieved by court order.


It’s pretty evident that senior members of the prosecution team ignored this tenet of the ABA rules. If one actually reads entire set of rules from the source named above, it’s evident that most of the ethical requirements were ignored.

I’m addition, the elected members of the house impeachment investigation are attorneys. There is plenty in those same set of rules which apply them as well.

At the end of the day, it renders the entire debacle tainted (but tainted differently than TW’s taint). As such, it will ALWAYS be questionable by a significant portion of the populace.

Had this not been such a politically motivated fiasco, many, many more people would feel the same as you. Unfortunately, the Dems failed the country miserably.
Brewha Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Abrignac wrote:
As a whole I don’t know. Were key players for the FBI’s prosecution politically motivated and not to be trusted? Absolutely!

Scott as we both know this is one of those issues that will always be debated.



It’s pretty evident that senior members of the prosecution team ignored this tenet of the ABA rules. If one actually reads entire set of rules from the source named above, it’s evident that most of the ethical requirements were ignored.

I’m addition, the elected members of the house impeachment investigation are attorneys. There is plenty in those same set of rules which apply them as well.

At the end of the day, it renders the entire debacle tainted (but tainted differently than TW’s taint). As such, it will ALWAYS be questionable by a significant portion of the populace.

Had this not been such a politically motivated fiasco, many, many more people would feel the same as you. Unfortunately, the Dems failed the country miserably.

Dems failed miserably??





Ok, you win.
Abrignac Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
Brewha wrote:
Dems failed miserably??





Ok, you win.


I try to be pragmatic which is why I feel they failed miserably as prosecutors. However, they were successful in using the FBI to achieve political gain which created even more division. Yet, almost zero legal objectives were accomplished. It’s kinda like swimming across the English Channel to get a glass of water. Or did I slept through the Civics lesson which taught us that it’s ok to weaponize a governmental agency to persecute our political enemies?.
tonygraz Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,175
It's too bad that only 1 republican senator has balls.
delta1 Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
here's the difference, and it is a huge difference...

POTUS has the special power to pardon, and many have made some questionable decisions when exercising that power...

but there has not been many times when a POTUS exercised his power to free a friend who has incriminating info about him...this is a POTUS who is covering up his own criminal behavior by silencing an associate in crime by using that power.

There is documented intelligence evidence of a few phone calls between Stone and Trump on the day before Wikileaks published the first of Hillary's emails. Stone has been quoted as saying he was aware of the proposed leaks and spoke with Trump about it. Under oath, at trial, he denied it. Trump refused to be interviewed by Mueller, and in his written deposition, denied any knowledge of the phone call.
ZRX1200 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
And when Clinton was SELLING pardons?
delta1 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
politics has always had the stench of money, but concealing one's own crimes has a unique funk
Abrignac Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
ZRX1200 wrote:
And when Clinton was SELLING pardons?


He doesn’t count since he’s the Dem’s come back kid. On the other hand, there’s talk that Epstein and Maxwell created a video library. What’s worse selling pardons, lying or pedophilla?
frankj1 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
couple things.

sentence commuted, he was not pardoned.
so all the but Obama, but Clinton pardon complaints to justify wrong doing is totally unrelated, and some was from the last century!

what might be wrong doing, a thought I've heard floated about all this that may alarm clear thinkers from both sides (cuz it could work against you in the future if it works) is that Trump tampered with the under oath testimony of Stone by letting it be known that he already thought the trial was unfair before Stone testified...likely let it be leaked a pardon or commuting of sentence would/could happen so fear not Stone...lie your ass off.

Apologies to some, but I believe life long Republican Mueller when he says that he did not exonerate Trump and that Stone was rightfully convicted.
Abrignac Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
frankj1 wrote:
couple things.

sentence commuted, he was not pardoned.
so all the but Obama, but Clinton pardon complaints to justify wrong doing is totally unrelated, and some was from the last century!

what might be wrong doing, a thought I've heard floated about all this that may alarm clear thinkers from both sides (cuz it could work against you in the future if it works) is that Trump tampered with the under oath testimony of Stone by letting it be known that he already thought the trial was unfair before Stone testified...likely let it be leaked a pardon or commuting of sentence would/could happen so fear not Stone...lie your ass off.

Apologies to some, but I believe life long Republican Mueller when he says that he did not exonerate Trump and that Stone was rightfully convicted.


There was pre-trial prosecutorial malfeasance. Fruit from the forbidden tree.
frankj1 Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
Abrignac wrote:
There was pre-trial prosecutorial malfeasance. Fruit from the forbidden tree.

but could it be something for everyone to watch out for going forward?
sending signals to witnesses or defendants that they will be rewarded for loyalty over country?

and happy birthday you ugly bastid.
Abrignac Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
frankj1 wrote:
but could it be something for everyone to watch out for going forward?
sending signals to witnesses or defendants that they will be rewarded for loyalty over country?

and happy birthday you ugly bastid.


Thanks Frank
delta1 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
not all evidence against Stone could be called fruit of the poisonous tree...if it was it would have been challenged and ruled inadmissible...

his own public behavior and statements made in court, without any interference or pressure by any prosecutor, led to some of the charges on which he was found guilty
Abrignac Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
delta1 wrote:
not all evidence against Stone could be called fruit of the poisonous tree...if it was it would have been challenged and ruled inadmissible...

his own public behavior and statements made in court, without any interference or pressure by any prosecutor, led to some of the charges on which he was found guilty


I suspect the verdict will be appealed since the case didn’t get dismissed and he didn’t get a Presidential pardon. At which time those issues will come under the microscope.
Abrignac Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
delta1 wrote:
here's the difference, and it is a huge difference...

POTUS has the special power to pardon, and many have made some questionable decisions when exercising that power...

but there has not been many times when a POTUS exercised his power to free a friend who has incriminating info about him...this is a POTUS who is covering up his own criminal behavior by silencing an associate in crime by using that power.

There is documented intelligence evidence of a few phone calls between Stone and Trump on the day before Wikileaks published the first of Hillary's emails. Stone has been quoted as saying he was aware of the proposed leaks and spoke with Trump about it. Under oath, at trial, he denied it. Trump refused to be interviewed by Mueller, and in his written deposition, denied any knowledge of the phone call.


You do realize that his sentence was commuted. He was not pardoned. He’s still a convicted felon.
ZRX1200 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
Frank you’re projecting, that was racist one POTUS ago....
frankj1 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
ZRX1200 wrote:
Frank you’re projecting, that was racist one POTUS ago....

I don't follow...?

My post has nothing to do with history. Only present and future.
ZRX1200 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
#34 Frank.
frankj1 Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
going forward
rfenst Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,112
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/12/opinion/roger-stone-trump-commutation.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
Users browsing this topic
Guest