RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN 2016 US ELECTION & SPIN-OFF INVESTIGATIONS

[Duchess]

I care a lot about that. I just want equal justice, Brennan Clapper, Comey all did the same thing they got nothing.

What felonies did Brennan, Clapper & Director Comey commit? Your party controlled everything for years, if those people you referenced were guilty of something why wasn't something done when they had the opportunity? Those are serious questions and I ask them sincerely.

I'm not going to ask you any more to please pay attention to what is actually going on. I see that you are firm in your belief that trump is the best thing since sliced cheese and you truly feel as if everything he does is in the best interest of America & Americans. You believe that with all your heart regardless of all the evidence to the contrary and you're entitled to that belief.

[Maggot]

I care a lot about that. I just want equal justice, Brennan Clapper, Comey all did the same thing they got nothing.

What felonies did Brennan, Clapper & Director Comey commit? Your party controlled everything for years, if those people you referenced were guilty of something why wasn't something done when they had the opportunity? Those are serious questions and I ask them sincerely.

They all lied under oath.

[Duchess]

Why weren't they charged? 

I don't recall hearing about this so I'm going to go see what I can find. No one should be lying under oath and those that do should be charged.

[Maggot]

Why weren't they charged? 

I don't recall hearing about this so I'm going to go see what I can find. No one should be lying under oath and those that do should be charged.

I don't know why either.

[Duchess]

So I did a quick search. 

It was difficult to find much about Brennan that didn't come from FOX, The Washington Examiner or The Federalist. I don't consider any of them a credible news source.

I found where Clapper said he made an erroneous response but I didn't have time to really delve into exactly what he was referring to.

All I could find about Comey were a bunch of unproven allegations. Keep in mind, this was a quick search and there's a ton I didn't see. I'm only responding because I told you I would look for some info.

[Rootilda]

Brennan shady info is basically him trying to deny that the CIA illegally hacked Feinstein's computers that were being used to investigate "enhanced interrogation" which Brennan supported:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos...n-brennan/

Clapper shady info from wikipedia:  Following the June 2013 leak of documents detailing the NSA practice of collecting telephone metadata on millions of Americans' telephone calls, Clapper was accused of perjury for telling a congressional committee hearing that the NSA does not collect any type of data on millions of Americans earlier that year.

Comey is a sniveling coward and I have no wish to look any further than that.

[Rootilda]

By the way, "The Report" was really interesting.  I'm sure some here will say it's partisan bullshit, but take a look anyway.

[HairOfTheDog]

A fourth prosecutor has now withdrawn.

It's somewhat unnerving to read some of what is being said across the internet by smart & knowledgeable people.

The President and Attorney General interfering and attempting to disrupt the criminal justice system for their own gain, yet again, is disturbing.....if that's what happened (and it sure looks that way).

Roger Stone was convicted by a jury of his peers and the sentence recommended by the prosecutors was not even the max.  

It would be nice if Barr or the responsible higher-up at the DOJ would provide a briefing explaining the legal rationale for the public/press (but, they probably won't).

[Duchess]

 the sentence recommended by the prosecutors was not even the max.  

The DoJ sets the guidelines, right? If I understand that correctly, it would mean the prosecutors were going by the guidelines set by the same people who then wanted to rescind the sentence. Bah. I find the law confusing sometimes.

[Duchess]

By the way, "The Report" was really interesting.  I'm sure some here will say it's partisan bullshit, but take a look anyway.

Wow! I watched. I don't think I've heard of this before now. 

I just googled it and discovered it's on Prime! Yay!

[Duchess]

 the sentence recommended by the prosecutors was not even the max.  

The DoJ sets the guidelines, right? If I understand that correctly, it would mean the prosecutors were going by the guidelines set by the same people who then wanted to rescind the sentence. Bah. I find the law confusing sometimes.

I should have said a lot of the time not sometimes.

Yeah, I quoted myself.  

[HairOfTheDog]

You're correct Duchess.  Prosecutors used the standard DOJ sentencing guidelines in making their recommendations for Stone.

[Duchess]

The DoJ appears to have turned into just another arm of trump's banana republic. trump wants to go after his political enemies and jail them and release from jail those who have been convicted by a jury of their peers. He feels like he can do anything now with no repercussions. Much of the GOP is running around wearing trump merch for fuckssake and to think some people had a shit fit when President Clinton chatted with the AG on a tarmac. That seems so quaint now. 

[HairOfTheDog]

The DoJ appears to have turned into just another arm of trump's banana republic. trump wants to go after his political enemies and jail them and release from jail those who have been convicted by a jury of their peers. He feels like he can do anything now with no repercussions. Much of the GOP is running around wearing trump merch for fuckssake and to think some people had a shit fit when President Clinton chatted with the AG on a tarmac. That seems so quaint now. 

It's so fucked up -- a big middle finger by President Trump and his administration (and many of the Republican congresspersons) when it comes to the separation of powers, the rule of law, and law and order.   

I remember bitching about Obama saying that Trayvon Martin could be his son because I feared that it could affect the jury pool, even though he refused to comment on the case itself.  Republicans totally scorched Obama for that one comment -- now they either defend or stay silent when the President interferes and obstructs justice openly for personal gain.

I also remember Donovan posting that this exact abuse of power scenario would happen if Trump was elected.  I was more optimistic and argued that if at least one branch of Congress was not under the same party's control, our system of checks and balances would prevent it.  I was wrong.

Anyway.........there was so much evidence against Roger Stone, he was convicted by a jury of his peers very quickly, and the prosecutors used the DOJ sentencing guidelines to make their recommendations to the judge.  That's the way the system works and there obviously shouldn't be exceptions made for the President and his associates.  But, here we are.

If the judge decides that the sentence recommended by the prosecutors is too harsh, she has the power to sentence him to less time and explain why.  If she decides to do so of her own accord (not under threat or pressure) that wouldn't be a problem for me -- that's also how the system works.   

I see that Attorney General Barr has agreed to answer questions about the Stone intervention in front of Congress....................on March 31^st.  That's a long six weeks from now (and I won't be surprised if he balks again anyway).  In the meantime, President Trump continues to lie publicly about Stone's actions and the details of the case/conviction.

[BigMark]

Quickly quickly, now that is fast!

[HairOfTheDog]

Quickly quickly, now that is fast!

Not so fast eagle eye!  Fixed.

[Duchess]

   

If the judge decides that the sentence recommended by the prosecutors is too harsh, she has the power to sentence him to less time and explain why.  If she decides to do so of her own accord (not under threat or pressure) that wouldn't be a problem for me -- that's also how the system works.   

I see that Attorney General Barr has agreed to answer questions about the Stone intervention in front of Congress....................on March 31^st.  That's a long six weeks from now (and I won't be surprised if he balks again anyway).  In the meantime, President Trump continues to lie publicly about Stone's actions and the details of the case/conviction.

Judge ABJ has the ability to bring in the 4 prosecutors who resigned the case and ask them why they did so. I sure hope she does. She's also the person who Roger posted a picture of with an image of cross hairs covering her head/face.

I wish Democrats would get their act together. Issue subpoenas and if they are not honored start jailing those fuckers.

[Duchess]

Today trump jr. went on a radio show and said -

“The reality is Roger Stone wasn’t involved in our campaign at all ... Roger Stone was one of those guys who was trying desperately to be relevant, so he was in a dark room throwing darts & he actually hit something”

[Rootilda]

I see a twitter battle in the making.

[Maggot]

I don't think that Stone is a nice person or without blame but if the jury foreman was bias and failed to tell the judge that they were it would seem the trial would be polluted. Now the defense should have caught it and with the prosecutors not seeing it then it should be investigated. To me it seems the outcome was a bit strict compared to other recommendations and it should be addressed. The judge in the case should admit that and wait for the results to be forthcoming from the AG. Time will tell on this one. And Stone should not get off scott free. Although 9 years is a hefty sentence,  I feel Smollet did a bigger disservice legally speaking. And rightfully so.