• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

News DOJ asks for 7 to 9 for Roger Stone

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

If integrity is lying to the court the same way that happened in the FISA case.................
You are already a proven liar. Quote some rag saying something "may" have happened.

If my grandmother had wheels she "may" have been a wagon
 
There's nothing to subvert here. Their sentencing recommendation has been overruled by their superiors. Barr already assigned another prosecutor to the case. They can't stop that from happening but they can refuse to be a part of it, which they have.

I seriously doubt that judge Amy Berman Jackson is buying any of it.
Certainly, I just meant in a broad sense.
 
Reported.

So persecuted. Your linked hit piece contains demonstrable lies, this among them-

A full investigative report released by Mueller last year revealed that the Mueller investigation found zero evidence for any of the claims of collusion between Trump and the Russians. According to a separate report on serial abuses committed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) during its investigation of Trump, the DOJ inspector general found that the government knew long before Mueller was even appointed that there was no evidence of any collusion.

The Mueller investigation found insufficient evidence for prosecution, not zero evidence. Stone's obstruction was part of that.

I strongly suspect the assertion that the prosecutors misinformed higher ups as to their sentencing recommendation, particularly when attributed to anonymous sources via Fox News. And the bit about Credico not feeling threatened has no bearing on the threats being made in the first place. It's cute, though, as is Barr interceding on his behalf because of his relationship to the President. You know that's corrupt, right?
 
Reported.


If Americans are concerned that President Donald Trump and Republicans are moving the US toward becoming a one-party, authoritarian state, they are running out of time to stop them, experts warned.

That is what you stand for. Just saying shit comes around and all that. Wait for it.
 
Reported.
Reported? Grow a pair.
51xAHtPM0aL._SX342_.jpg

Edit. Don't think that because I disagree with you about EVERYTHING That I wouldn't die to protect yours or anyone's free speech.
 
Last edited:
So persecuted. Your linked hit piece contains demonstrable lies, this among them-



The Mueller investigation found insufficient evidence for prosecution, not zero evidence. Stone's obstruction was part of that.

I strongly suspect the assertion that the prosecutors misinformed higher ups as to their sentencing recommendation, particularly when attributed to anonymous sources via Fox News. And the bit about Credico not feeling threatened has no bearing on the threats being made in the first place. It's cute, though, as is Barr interceding on his behalf because of his relationship to the President. You know that's corrupt, right?
So somehow an article i linked that you disagree with turns me into a liar? If it's actually factually wrong, it would turn the person or persons writing it into a liar. Not that I agree with your assessment.
 
Reported? Grow a pair.
51xAHtPM0aL._SX342_.jpg

Edit. Don't think that because I disagree with you about EVERYTHING That I wouldn't die to protect yours or anyone's free speech.
Sorry, but it's pretty plainly stated in the

I abide by these rules, there is absolutely nothing i can do about the people that don't have the integrity to follow them.
 
The bit in Taj's linked Federalist hit piece about how Shea, a political appointee, was bullied by his subordinates is a really nice touch, I'll admit. How do you bully your boss, anyway? In Trumplandia, all things seem possible, huh?
They must have threatened to use harsh language against him!
 
Sorry, but it's pretty plainly stated in the

I abide by these rules, there is absolutely nothing i can do about the people that don't have the integrity to follow them.
Reported
 
Sorry, but it's pretty plainly stated in the

I abide by these rules, there is absolutely nothing i can do about the people that don't have the integrity to follow them.

When you lie and someone calls you a liar because of your lying, that is not a personal attack.
 
When you lie and someone calls you a liar because of your lying, that is not a personal attack.

Um, actually, it really is. You are attacking them personally instead of the argument they are making. Them being a liar is not a argument against what they said, but who said it.
Calling what they said a lie would be a counter to their argument, but saying that they are a liar does tell us if the specific thing they said in this instance is a lie or not.
 
Back
Top