News DOJ asks for 7 to 9 for Roger Stone

[K1052]

I think a lil more would have been appropriate but still 40 months in prison in your late 60s is not a pleasure cruise.

 

[BlueWeasel]

Even if he was not guilty, he deserves at least 4 years in prison for the Nixon back tattoo and those stupid-looking glasses. What an attention seeking clown.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Garbage. We have two justice systems, one for rich white guys and one for everyone else.

Per the radio, average sentence for his crime is 10-15 months. 40 months is in the top few percent.
Stone is still a turd

 

[UNCjigga]

Judge Jackson knows what she is doing. She is daring Trump to pardon him when he already got a lighter sentence. She’s eliminated any possible excuse for a “just” pardon.

 

[ivwshane]

Apparently 40 months is still above the average sentence. I just think with all his antics he deserved more.

 

[Sunburn74]

Garbage. We have two justice systems, one for rich white guys and one for everyone else.

Three justice systems.
Rich white guys
Cops
Everyone else

 

[MomentsofSanity]

K so who has what time frame for the pardon to be issued? Before dinner? After he's denied a retrial?

 

[thilanliyan]

K so who has what time frame for the pardon to be issued? Before dinner? After he's denied a retrial?

Just after Nov 2020?

 

[VRAMdemon]

I'm sure the pardon paperwork is printing as we speak.

 

[fleshconsumed]

I'm sure the pardon paperwork is printing as we speak.

What paperwork when all you need is 140 characters?

 

[allisolm]

Just heard on the radio, new Federal Prosecutors never revoked the previous Prosecutors sentencing recommendations.

And one of the new, replacement attorneys said today that the Justice Department stands by the original sentencing memo and argued that "the court should impose a substantial period of incarceration" on Stone.

So much for Barr's influence.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

K so who has what time frame for the pardon to be issued? Before dinner? After he's denied a retrial?

It will have to wait for the Judge's ruling on the foreperson of the juries comments on Stone before and during the trial that should have made her ineligible to sit on the jury.

 

[zinfamous]

It will have to wait for the Judge's ruling on the foreperson of the juries comments on Stone before and during the trial that should have made her ineligible to sit on the jury.

wow. right on cue. ....and what the hell are you even talking about?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

It will have to wait for the Judge's ruling on the foreperson of the juries comments on Stone before and during the trial that should have made her ineligible to sit on the jury.

Oh. So you've seen the jury questionnaire for her? Lucky you. Can you share it with the rest of us because that's the only thing that would even begin to suggest there's an issue. If you can share her answers specifically to questions 23, 30, 34 and 35 that would help the rest of us know what you seem to know.

 

[dainthomas]

hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha


Just heard on the radio, new Federal Prosecutors never revoked the previous Prosecutors sentencing recommendations.
Pure incompetence
Mini revolution
Or as always “Best minds, best people”

Which is it?

Hold on, Dump's tweeter tantrums don't count as official court documents? I thought he was the country's top law enforcement officer?

 

[Vic]

It will have to wait for the Judge's ruling on the foreperson of the juries comments on Stone before and during the trial that should have made her ineligible to sit on the jury.

Is this something that you ever cared about with any criminal trial before? Of course not. So why do you care about it now?

 

[Jhhnn]

Wow. He only got 40 months... WTF?

I figure that's about right. It's the lengthy sentences given to people who don't deserve them that are at the heart of our absurd incarceration rate.

 

[Jhhnn]

Is this something that you ever cared about with any criminal trial before? Of course not. So why do you care about it now?

Because Stone is Trump's guy. There is no sin when on a mission from God or Trump. It's a bullshit angle, anyway. The verdict was unanimous. It's like the other 11 jurors didn't matter.

Putting a ringer on the jury really only benefits the defense, anyway, as a means to a mistrial.

 

[dainthomas]

Posts a picture of his judge online with a target on her head (not even counting his other crimes), and he only gets 40 months? What a joke.

 

[sportage]

And so... they want a NEW TRIAL?
Just because someone over at Fox claims someone on the jury hates Trump?
SO they think that qualifies as justification for a new trial?
HEY... we're in a new era now, the Donald Trump era where anything goes and nothing matters. You can't hold a juror accountable while the big fat orange guy is not held accountable.
I mean seriously, if it's good enough for the president it surely is good enough for the rest of those out there.
I don't care if the entire jury wore NEVER TRUMP sweatshirts in the courtroom every day, it's a new day and a new dawn. The dawn of anything goes and no one is accountable.
In other words, NO NEW TRIAL.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Oh. So you've seen the jury questionnaire for her? Lucky you. Can you share it with the rest of us because that's the only thing that would even begin to suggest there's an issue. If you can share her answers specifically to questions 23, 30, 34 and 35 that would help the rest of us know what you seem to know.

No sorry, i can't.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Is this something that you ever cared about with any criminal trial before? Of course not. So why do you care about it now?

Actually it is something i care about and after sitting on different juries something i've had to deal with in the past. Try serving jury duty sometime.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Actually it is something i care about and after sitting on different juries something I've had to deal with in the past. Try serving jury duty sometime.

So if you've sat on juries then you are aware that unless you've seen the jury questionnaire and what she disclosed you have no idea if your comment about her being ineligible is valid. She certainly didn't hide it since it's public comments.

 

[Vic]

Actually it is something i care about and after sitting on different juries something i've had to deal with in the past. Try serving jury duty sometime.

I have served juty duty a few times. Sat on a weeklong felony DV trial just a couple years ago. Why would you assume that I hadn't? And how exactly is it even relevant?

 

[outriding]

I have served juty duty a few times. Sat on a weeklong felony DV trial just a couple years ago. Why would you assume that I hadn't? And how exactly is it even relevant?

I thought most trials had an alternate juror.

Just kick that juror out and put the alternate on in.