Jump to content

Barr tells Trump to stop tweeting about Stone case; juror calls it 'appalling'


Recommended Posts

Posted

Trump appears to be attempting to "Putinize" the justice system. At least he is trying. Might be a bit harder for him, as the US at least appears to have higher safeguards, and Trump lacks the sophistication or intelligence of Putin. But, no doubt there is some funny business going on. Good on Barr for finally showing us he possesses a tiny bit of manhood. Although one does suspect how sincere he was, and whether or not it was a coordinate effort. 

  • Sad 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, candide said:

Her statements in voir dire are in the article linked.

 

Stone’s lawyers knew that she was generally familiar with Stone, they knew she ran for Congress, they specifically asked about political bias, and then refused to seek her removal.

https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/is-there-a-stone-jury-scandal-not

 

According to the author, there could possibly be an issue only if she hid facts that would have provided a valid basis to challenge her presence on the jury.

 

Very interesting. Looks like Stone got a fair trial.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
On 2/14/2020 at 5:04 AM, webfact said:

Trump posted a Fox News story on Twitter that accused some of the jurors in Stone's case of political bias.

as always anything and everything to stir attention away from his wrong doing.... always somebody else's fault

  • Sad 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Plain and simple the leftist idea of justice is whatever suits them.

Really. I guess that's a repeat of a tweet from the clown.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, BobBKK said:

Yes he should stop Tweeting it's ridiculous but not as ridiculous as the proposed sentence of 9 years for a minor felony, Clinton lied, Comey lied, Strock lied and Schiff lied but nothing happens? 9 years is more than many serious assaults, robberies and rapes.

Your assertions about who lied are questionable. But it wasn't just about Stone lying, was it? He also threatened another witness. That's a far more serious crime.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
3 hours ago, candide said:

Her statements in voir dire are in the article linked.

 

Stone’s lawyers knew that she was generally familiar with Stone, they knew she ran for Congress, they specifically asked about political bias, and then refused to seek her removal.

https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/is-there-a-stone-jury-scandal-not

 

According to the author, there could possibly be an issue only if she hid facts that would have provided a valid basis to challenge her presence on the jury.

 

A plausible explanation is the defense team withheld objecting to this particular jury member with the intention to make post trial objections in the expectation that the verdict was going to be a conviction.

 

The evidence against Stone was solid, his legal team would surely understand that a conviction was a near certainty, setting up grounds for a post trial objection is a logical insurance strategy.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Berkshire said:

Daily Caller?  Lordy, a totally unreliable source.

 

But I'm curious to your rationale.  To be fair, are you suggesting that Trump supporters also cannot serve on the jury?

Ah yes, liberals get to decide what is a credible source based on what they want to hear 

  • Confused 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A plausible explanation is the defense team withheld objecting to this particular jury member with the intention to make post trial objections in the expectation that the verdict was going to be a conviction.

 

The evidence against Stone was solid, his legal team would surely understand that a conviction was a near certainty, setting up grounds for a post trial objection is a logical insurance strategy.

 

 

I think someone posted alink to the transcript of the voir dire. I believe it showed that his lawyers did quedtion her quite closely.

  • Like 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, winslowsjardine said:

I think someone posted alink to the transcript of the voir dire. I believe it showed that his lawyers did quedtion her quite closely.

They did. Here is the link again:

https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/is-there-a-stone-jury-scandal-not

And if you want to see the whole voir dire transcript here's a link:

https://www.scribd.com/document/446913716/Roger-Stone-jury-selection-transcript-Nov-5-2019

Her interview starts on page 34.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

Ok, you tell me what is a credible source.

A reporter who is actually going to tell the whole story, not a narrative dictated by editors purposely omitting facts that are contrary to the preferred narrative of the biased political ideology present in the majority of news agencies. 

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Tug said:

Back to the safe spot calling others leftie lol just so you know I’m more about the assault on our democracy by this administration it goes deeper than my revulsion of trump as an individual it’s more about his attempt to destroy our democracy his inability to work within our constitution and norms his ignorant hamfisted handeling of foreign policy the constant undignified lies and trolling the welcoming of foreign interference or the soliciting of such interference in our elections now the interference in our justice system I could go on and on but let’s just leave it at this if it makes you feel all righteous and safe to call ma a lefty go ahead I know what I am an American who is truly alarmed by this president and administration 

Get over the moral preening and virtue signaling. 

 

The only threat to the democracy is the ideological left deeply rooted in the bloated beauracracy that would purposely leak and lie to pedal an agenda. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
6 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

A reporter who is actually going to tell the whole story, not a narrative dictated by editors purposely omitting facts that are contrary to the preferred narrative of the biased political ideology present in the majority of news agencies. 

So you agree that Fox news pundits are not credible sources.  Good for you.

 

Why don't you name specific reporters and news organizations they work for that you consider credible.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

Get over the moral preening and virtue signaling. 

 

The only threat to the democracy is the ideological left deeply rooted in the bloated beauracracy that would purposely leak and lie to pedal an agenda. 

factual examples? Not trump conspiracy claims

  • Confused 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Tug said:

Rite back to the old safe spot lol now it’s now it’s preening and virtue signaling lol I guess so I do care and love my country but you go ahead and defend the guy interfering in the justice system you know the guy who had to pay up for the scam university and let’s not forget the 2 million dollar fine for ripping off the scam chairty lol virtue my rear end lol just to funney

 

Even more virtue signaling. 

  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 hours ago, simple1 said:

factual examples? Not trump conspiracy claims

You mean factual examples of the overwhelming percentage of leftists who run the media? 

  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Chiphigh said:

The justice system interfered in an election on known false pretense and bias and you think that the President is the problem. That is truly ironic 

Have any evidence of that? Considering the ig and horowitz report stated otherwise.

  • Like 1
Posted

Barr tells Trump to stop tweeting about Stone case

 

Because Barr is busy fixing and hiding things this criminal enterprise working out of the White House is doing.  Every time Trump tweets. what is hidden is now open and has to be explained

 

Democracy may die in darkness, but criminals love it  

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Posted

Basically Barr got wind of over a thousand prosecutors, both dems and repubs about to give him a huge vote of no confidence.

 

The whitehouse was told before the interview what he was going to say, hence this is the first instance of trump not going crazy when someone says anything against him.

 

So all barr is doing is telling trump that he needs to get the rank and file subdued.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...