Trump commutes sentence of longtime adviser Roger Stone

[Mustachio]

Watch the Mark Dice interview on Youtube,

I'm busy reading an interview with Putin about how Russia doesn't interfere with American elections

 

[jakiejakester]

Let it stand as a testimony to the fact that democrats can unjustly railroad their enemies into jail but Trump still has the power to release them from prison.

Your deduction is 100% wrong my friend. In today's WAPO there's a scathing OP-ED from Robert Mueller reminding all of us of the crimes that Stone committed. Read this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/11/mueller-stone-oped/?arc404=true

From the piece:

"I feel compelled to respond both to broad claims that our investigation was illegitimate and our motives were improper, and to specific claims that Roger Stone was a victim of our office. The Russia investigation was of paramount importance. Stone was prosecuted and convicted because he committed federal crimes. He remains a convicted felon, and rightly so."

And:
"Stone became a central figure in our investigation for two key reasons: He communicated in 2016 with individuals known to us to be Russian intelligence officers, and he claimed advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’ release of emails stolen by those Russian intelligence officers."

The truth is still the truth no matter what lies from Trump you believe.

 

[uptower]

Did Clinton pardon someone that did anything similar to Stone? If you have the proof, show it.

Indeed. It needs to be shown that Obama pardoned or commuted business or political associates who had earlier helped him get his job. This is what Trump does.

 

[jakiejakester]

Why do you keep insisting on sinless perfection when you must know so many democrat candidates who are crooks, thieves, liars and untrustworthy?

You're 100% right politicians of all stripes have lied, cheated, broke the law, have done horrible things but add all of the previous sins of all politicians and you won't get to 25% of Trump's evilness and sins. Trump is just a national nightmare who history will destroy.

 

[Vadinho]

Indeed. It needs to be shown that Obama pardoned or commuted business or political associates who had earlier helped him get his job. This is what Trump does.

Name them and prove it.

 

[jakiejakester]

he has the power to pardon or commute sentences. once again leftists prove how low information they are.

Dude, just connect the dots! Trump promised Stone he would get him out of jail if he didn't cooperate with the FBI. Think about it...The FBI. No conspiracy theories about the FBI please. Trump frees him as a thank you. If you do not see that as incredibly wrong and illegal then...

 

[Paradoxical]

I'm busy reading an interview with Putin about how Russia doesn't interfere with American elections

Yes. Those teenagers on FB created havoc, didn't they?

 

[Paradoxical]

Dude, just connect the dots! Trump promised Stone he would get him out of jail if he didn't cooperate with the FBI. Think about it...The FBI. No conspiracy theories about the FBI please. Trump frees him as a thank you. If you do not see that as incredibly wrong and illegal then...

He barely knew Roger Stone. Where do you get this garbage from?

 

[jakiejakester]

Trumped up charges, no pun intended.

Really? How so? I'd love it if you actually explain why the charges were "Trumped" up? Did You read Bob Mueller's OP-ED in today's WAPO?

 

[joko104]

I talking about Stone, why was he not pardoned?

A pardon admits guilt and would end Stone's appeal. Commuting sentence allows his appeal to go on. Stone doesn't want a pardon, he wants a new trial to be found innocent at a new trial.

That is exactly the reason. Stone said he had the choice between a pardon totally ending it or commuting the sentence. However, he also said to be successful he has to be alive and they likely would have Epstein-ed him or deliberately infected him with covid-19.

 

[joko104]

Stone's appeal is based upon the juror who lied saying she never heard of Roger Stone - but it was later learned she is a highly active Democrat who had been ranting online about Roger Stone and how he should be sent to prison. So not only did the juror have decided Stone was guilty before the trial started, had investigated the case before becoming a juror - but also then completely lied about it in jury selection questioning.

To show JUST how corrupt the judge and prosecutor is, NOTHING has been done to the juror who outright committed jury in jury panel questioning. It is just a fact that at the federal level Democrats can commit any crime - and everyone can know it - and there will never be any prosecution or will any grand jury even be allowed to consider it.

There is NO equal treatment under the law in the USA anymore. It is all political now.

 

[Athanasius68]

He coordinated with two hostile foreign entities launching an attack upon our democratic institutions. So he's probably not all that far from that.

If he did, better tell Mr. Mueller. Stone was never charged with conspiring with Russia.

 

[Athanasius68]

Right! That's why Flynn pleaded guilty twice! The Trump Crime Family is as dirty as it gets. Trump is a blight on the US and we can't vote him out of office soon enough!

And as the evidence shows with Mr. Flynn, he ought not have pled guilty.
There was no crime.

With Mr. Stone, Mr. Mueller never charged him with conspiring with Russia.

 

[Athanasius68]

The only thing that Roger Stone did is get convicted on 7 out of 7 charges including witness tampering. Trump signaled to him throughout that if he didn't tell the truth he'd be freed. That is pure corruption staring you in the face and you're so blindly in love with Trump that you live in denial and please spare us the Whataboutism!

Tell the truth about what? Even Mr. Mueller never charged Stone with conspiring with Eussia.
What is it that Stone is supposed to have known?

 

[Athanasius68]

Stone was the liaison/contact for Wikileaks.

Better tell that to Mr. Mueller. Stone was never charged with conspiring with Wikileaks. Heck, Stone didn't even have contacts with wikileaks.
You are hanging on to false stories.

 

[Athanasius68]

It’s impossible to have a serious conversation with you since you are impervious to facts. It’s been established by the Mueller report that there was joint actions between Russian operatives and the Trump campaign but it didn’t meet the standard of illegal conspiracy, according to Mueller. That doesn’t mean Trump was pure as unpadded snow.

We already know that partisan ideologues, like yourself, reject the Mueller report, not because it wasn’t conducted properly, but because it doesn’t say what you want.

Mueller never said there was "joint action." What he said was that Russia reached out to the campaign and sometimes the campaign responded.
That is why nobody was charged with conspiracy.

 

[Athanasius68]

The Russia investigation conclude that Russia did indeed intervene on Trump’s behalf.

And what does that have to do with Trump complicity with said interference? Nothing, of course.

It also concluded that high level members of Trump’s campaign met with Russian operatives and shared information.

You are talking about Manafort. And he was fired.
And he was never charged with conspiring with Russia.

If so, explain why the Republican controlled Senate came to the same conclusions?

The Senate wasn't doing their own investigation. They were reviewing the investigation of the IC and agreed with the conclusion that Russia sought to interfere in the election on behalf of Trump.
They were clear that they were not opining as to whether the Trump campaign participated in that interference by Russia.

 

[Athanasius68]

The operative words are “Barr said.” Barr wrote a summary Of the Mueller report that conflicted with what the Mueller report actually said. Barr is a partisan operative not interested in facts. Quoting him undermines your argument.

Mueller said that he couldn’t charge Trump with obstruction because DoJ rules prevented it, which kinda means you are making up your own facts. What Mueller did say was that had Trump not been president, he would have been charged with obstruction.

Barr said that Mueller said that there was insufficient evidence to say that Trump conspired.
Mueller said there was insufficient evidence to say that Trump conspired.

Barr said that Mueller said he could exonerate Trump for obstruction.
Mueller said that he could not exonerate Trump for obstruction.

Barr accurately described what Mueller reported.

 

[countryboy]

Then it should have been easy to convince one juror out of 12. He couldn't.

Guilty people are always blaming someone else. Where is that well-known conservative personal responsibilty?

Whatever, libs support the police state.

 

[Athanasius68]

Only because McGhan did not want to seen as being complicit with the commission of a possible crime. It wasn't a fit of pique. Trump directly and specifically instructed him to get it done and to call him once it was done.

And nothing happened.
Its like saying you robbed the bank this morning even though you didn't get out of bed and the bank wasn't robbed.

 

[countryboy]

Really? How so? I'd love it if you actually explain why the charges were "Trumped" up? Did You read Bob Mueller's OP-ED in today's WAPO?

Why would I do that?

 

[Athanasius68]

Barr lied, and also there doesn't need to be any underlying crime for someone to be charged with obstruction. Just the act of obstruction itself is a crime.

The problem here though is that as there was no crime, then we have to assume Trump exercised his lawful authority.
In other words, Trump can't commit a crime while doing that which he is lawfully permitted to do.
Thus, no obstruction.

 

[Athanasius68]

This is the thing most Trump supporters simply cannot fathom.

They don't understand that official acts done with a corrupt intent are not allowed in our system.

They think, "Well, he's the President! HE can do WHATEVER he wants, so just shut up and listen to him." Fundamentally, Trump supporters are authoritarians.

And what the Trump detractors do not understand is that as there was no crime, there was no corrupt intent. As such, he was simply exercising his lawful authority.

 

[Athanasius68]

Witness tampering is a process crime?

Stone was investigated for his role in cyberespionage conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.
He was not charged for this (no American actually was) -- he was charged for actions during the investigation.

 

[Athanasius68]

He does have inside knowledge that could damage the President. He admitted as much in an interview with NBC analyst Howard Fineman just after he had been granted clemency.

'“He knows I was under enormous pressure to turn on him. It would have eased my situation considerably. But I didn't."

If Mueller believed that Stone had inside knowledge that could damage the president, then all Mueller had to do was give Stone immunity in exchange for testimony.
He could have done the same with Flynn.
It didn't happen because even Mueller knew that neither of these two had any information that would support the allegation that Trump had conspired with Russia.