Roger Stone's Jury Has Been Rigged

a reply to: Sookiechacha

ep, Schiff's opening arguments included a dramatic parody of the mafia boss like coercion that the summary of the call revealed. But, I don't see how anybody would think that he's reading Trump's words from a verbatim transcript, when he's clearly summarizing everything else.

Get over yourself.

You're hilarious. Schiff isn't generalizing when he claims Trump said, "I'm going to put you in touch with Rudy Giuliani. You're going to love him, trust me!" That is verbatim what Trump would say. That's not a summary, foolish one.

Get over yourself.

a reply to: Deetermined
Adam Schiff used artistic license to portray the spirit of the conversation, while Devin Nunes out right lied. Like I said, if you have a problem with Adam's Schiff's truthiness, you should be outraged with Devin Nunes' opening statement. But, you won't be, because it's okay as long as it's "your side" doing the hyperbolic representation and lying.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

LOL! Artistic license? That's funny!

What exactly did you object to regarding Devin Nunes' opening statement?

a reply to: Deetermined

He also put on a fake voice and everybody knew he was ad libbing and not reading it.
everybody but djt who apparently didnt get it. Or he is pretending to not get it for drama.

Why did William Barr decline to announce that the presidents phone call was not illegal?
After the president asked him to.

a reply to: Deetermined

Schiff isn't generalizing when he claims Trump said, "I'm going to put you in touch with Rudy Giuliani. You're going to love him, trust me!"

You need to stop putting words into my mouth. I didn't say that. I said Schiff was summarizing, and in summarizing inserted a quote or two.

What exactly did you object to regarding Devin Nunes' opening statement?

Among other things, you can start with him telling the congressional body, that knows better, that the Russian investigation was a HOAX. I assure you, it was not. The Mueller Report is real, not a HOAX.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Deetermined

He also put on a fake voice and everybody knew he was ad libbing and not reading it.
everybody but djt who apparently didnt get it. Or he is pretending to not get it for drama.

He tried to get his "parody" entered into the official record by reading it on the floor. So he could then turn around and claim it as official record. Trump is 100% correct saying that was treasonous...

Back on topic.
When 20 FBI agents accompanied by the media kick this senior citizens door in at 2:00 AM I knew then he wasn't ever gonna get a fair trial. A child could see this was a political hit job from the get go.

Who is the Judge.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Save the hyperbole. You do not live in a Banana Republic nor do you truly understand the scope of that terminology.

a reply to: JAY1980

He tried to get his "parody" entered into the official record by reading it on the floor. So he could then turn around and claim it as official record. Trump is 100% correct saying that was treasonous...

If that's the case, then Devin Nunes is guilty of perjury to Congress.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Maybe you can correct me, but don’t lawyers from both sides need to agree on the jurors?

Not exactly. They don't affimatively agree but each side can challenge a juror for cause, like bias, or prior relationship with a party or witness, etc. And if you simply don't like a juror, you can get rid of him using what is called a peremptory challenge, Each side gets a certain number of these peremptorilies. Sometimes you keep a juror because they show you something during voir dire that ouweighs what might look like a disqualifying factor. I f a jury looks "rigged", it usually means that the defendant's lawyer wants it that way. Or Stone could have picked a total fool for a lawyer.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: RexKramerPRT

Two words. Alex Jones!!!

Because he has been censored by TPTB. Because the DNC etc say we shouldn't listen to him. Only gives him that much more credibility. He's a little crazy but he mostly gets his facts straight and doesn't lie. Unlike the mainstream media.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Deetermined

How is that disqualifying? How does her previous position in Health and Human Services hinder her ability to hear the case and make a decision based on evidence and law?

Can't they find anyone in America that isn't a deep state Obama operative? Are you all right in the head? This is why they are attacking Trump and Stone.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Can't they find anyone in America that isn't a deep state Obama operative?

This trial isn't about Obama, or his employees. It's about the crimes that Rodger Stone is accused of.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Deetermined

How is that disqualifying? How does her previous position in Health and Human Services hinder her ability to hear the case and make a decision based on evidence and law?

Can't they find anyone in America that isn't a deep state Obama operative? Are you all right in the head? This is why they are attacking Trump and Stone.

www.youtube.com...

Enough with the Deep State excuses. Stone will get a fair trial from 12 of his peers. If he doesn’t, he can appeal.

That’s how the rule-of-law works.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Deetermined

How is that disqualifying? How does her previous position in Health and Human Services hinder her ability to hear the case and make a decision based on evidence and law?

Can't they find anyone in America that isn't a deep state Obama operative? Are you all right in the head? This is why they are attacking Trump and Stone.


www.youtube.com...

Enough with the Deep State excuses. Stone will get a fair trial from 12 of his peers. If he doesn’t, he can appeal.

That’s how the rule-of-law works.

When I see some of these Deep State Criminals that stole billions of USA tax dollars go to prison I'll stop complaining. Only innocent citizens like Roger Stone have been prosecuted so far. Then they get caught stealing in the Ukraine by Trump and accuse Trump of BS to cover up they're crime. They blow their dog whistle and you come to defend them. Sickening.

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Deetermined

How is that disqualifying? How does her previous position in Health and Human Services hinder her ability to hear the case and make a decision based on evidence and law?

Can't they find anyone in America that isn't a deep state Obama operative? Are you all right in the head? This is why they are attacking Trump and Stone.


www.youtube.com...

Enough with the Deep State excuses. Stone will get a fair trial from 12 of his peers. If he doesn’t, he can appeal.

That’s how the rule-of-law works.

When I see some of these Deep State Criminals that stole billions of USA tax dollars go to prison I'll stop complaining. Only innocent citizens like Roger Stone have been prosecuted so far. Then they get caught stealing in the Ukraine by Trump and accuse Trump of BS to cover up they're crime. They blow their dog whistle and you come to defend them. Sickening.

www.youtube.com...

If “Deep State” were defined in any reasonable way aside from “bad for Trump” I would probably agree with you.

As it is ... we should respect what is left of the rule of law and support a jury trial without partisanship. IMO

a reply to: Gryphon66

They (far left) don't like Trumps policies. That's fine. When they try and find a crime for Trump or Stone. When no crime actually exist. And they control the media. That's when everyone should get worried. whether you are left or right.

a reply to: Gryphon66

A biased jury isn't a good thing.

Whatever the bias.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Gryphon66

A biased jury isn't a good thing.

Whatever the bias.

It’s not that’s true. That’s why the attys participate in jury selection. We cannot assume bias because of politics.

For example, were I charged with some crime, I’d take 12 folks with your kind of rational thinking AND your politics over 12 liberals/Dems/etc.