• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Roger Stone found guilty on all 7 counts!

T

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
Brickjectivity said:
I don't think Republican officials are willing to hold him responsible for anything.
Click to expand...

I read an interesting opinion, a few days ago: The Secret Reason Republicans Won’t Impeach Trump

"Is there some line that even Trump can’t cross, that will make Republicans say enough, and choose democracy over power? In theory, yes, but only if their backs are against the wall and the garrotes are held at their necks."

Brickjectivity said:
I think that its going to have to be decided what happens at election time.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
tytlyf

tytlyf

Not Religious
Riders said:
Trump supporters here are scratching their heads saying the impeachment hearings are a joke. Do you think the truth will get through the brain washing?
Click to expand...
They say it's a joke because that's what republican elitists tell them. They're not interested in the truth.
 
Brickjectivity

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Terry Sampson said:
I read an interesting opinion, a few days ago: The Secret Reason Republicans Won’t Impeach Trump

"Is there some line that even Trump can’t cross, that will make Republicans say enough, and choose democracy over power? In theory, yes, but only if their backs are against the wall and the garrotes are held at their necks."



Yep.
Click to expand...
Let me ask you a question: are Democrats not also responsible for this debacle? They won't give even a microt on any issue, none; and what to they do about corruption in their own fold? Nothing. Nobody believes them about Trump, because they've never stopped slandering Republican candidates starting from thirty years ago. This is their ****, too. Trump is their fault, too. He was, after all, a Democrat for many years, courted by Democrats. I'm no Republican, but I'm no Democrat either. Its very, very simple what is going on here. The two parties both ignore us, the 'Little' people. They rarely come through for us. See that country out there called the USA? Less than 50% of the people even think that our vote counts. Most of us don't vote, and the Democrats think that Trump is bad. He is, but they're just as bad. He is family for them. The two major parties work together to keep the independents from voting, and that is what has gotten all of us into this mess.

Even so. Yes, Trump ought to be impeached; but these turkeys would never impeach one of 'Their own'. Nevermind what's good for the country.
 
Riders

Riders

Well-Known Member
Brickjectivity said:
Let me ask you a question: are Democrats not also responsible for this debacle? They won't give even a microt on any issue, none; and what to they do about corruption in their own fold? Nothing. Nobody believes them about Trump, because they've never stopped slandering Republican candidates starting from thirty years ago. This is their ****, too. Trump is their fault, too. He was, after all, a Democrat for many years, courted by Democrats. I'm no Republican, but I'm no Democrat either. Its very, very simple what is going on here. The two parties both ignore us, the 'Little' people. They rarely come through for us. See that country out there called the USA? Less than 50% of the people even think that our vote counts. Most of us don't vote, and the Democrats think that Trump is bad. He is, but they're just as bad. He is family for them. The two major parties work together to keep the independents from voting, and that is what has gotten all of us into this mess.

Even so. Yes, Trump ought to be impeached; but these turkeys would never impeach one of 'Their own'. Nevermind what's good for the country.
Click to expand...

This may come as a shock but I agree with you. I do take the Democrats side because I am a liberal Libertarian, but this is both the fault of Dems and Republicans. TWeedle dee tweedle dum !!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
 
Mindmaster

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
metis said:
And you really believe this? So, if I rob a 7-11, it's no big deal? And then I can then blame it on a leftist lynch-mob that's out to get me?

So, I guess you believe that breaking the law is not really a big deal, so let's just move on and ignore what the jurors of Stone's peers decided their verdict on?
Click to expand...

I just look at it in this perspective....

Comey, Mueller, Clinton, Schiff, and a host of others have been found to lie on the stand to House Intelligence and whatever else they've charged Stone with. You know what the only difference is? They didn't bother to prosecute those people AND those people actually had some government position. We'll take it for a fact for the moment that sure Stone did everything they said, but even if that was the case it's certainly different for some private citizen to be involved in telling a lie versus someone who holds some sort of office.And, the argument of peers is retarded -- I see the people that troll on these forums... I think there should be some IQ test for jury duty, lol.

I think for me I pretty much don't care what Stone said versus what Stone has did. He's certainly been talking some ****, but he's also done nothing directly either. He's certainly said nothing worse than two neighbors that don't get along have and that's about the worst I've seen. Literally, the worst crime he has here is talking **** to someone in email, ffs. That's not worth all this trouble.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Mindmaster said:
Comey, Mueller, Clinton, Schiff, and a host of others have been found to lie on the stand to House Intelligence and whatever else they've charged Stone with.
Click to expand...
How could you possibly know that since those were closed depositions?

Also, even if true, do two wrongs make a right? I remember telling my mother as a child when my friend John and I got into trouble "Well, Johnny did it too!", only to be told "I'm not Johnny's mother!".

Mindmaster said:
I think for me I pretty much don't care what Stone said versus what Stone has did. He's certainly been talking some ****, but he's also done nothing directly either.
Click to expand...
So, seven convictions that includes felonies by a jury of one's peers is "nothing"?
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
tytlyf said:
It's nothing because Fox tells them it's nothing. That's all the reassurance they need...
Click to expand...
Ya, as I watched a bit of "Fox & Friends" this morning, and the "newscasters" (I'm being generous) complained that "we conservatives" ain't being treated well. Last time I heard, a serious news source doesn't say things like that.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
metis said:
Ya, as I watched a bit of "Fox & Friends" this morning, and the "newscasters" (I'm being generous) complained that "we conservatives" ain't being treated well. Last time I heard, a serious news source doesn't say things like that.
Click to expand...
technically FOX News is news and comment. F and F would fall under the comment category. The News part was a bit better,but I have not watched any news from them since Shepard Smith left.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Subduction Zone said:
technically FOX News is news and comment. F and F would fall under the comment category. The News part was a bit better,but I have not watched any news from them since Shepard Smith left.
Click to expand...
I thought that Fox & Friends is basically the "morning news", but either way it certainly isn't objective. Smith was top-shelf all the way, and we obviously know why he left since he made that abundantly clear that he was being pressured by the lunatic right at Fox.

Caputo seems to be quite fair, from the limited time I've seen his news slot, and he seemed to be quite shaken when Smith left.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
metis said:
I thought that Fox & Friends is basically the "morning news", but either way it certainly isn't objective. Smith was top-shelf all the way, and we obviously know why he left since he made that abundantly clear that he was being pressured by the lunatic right at Fox.

Caputo seems to be quite fair, from the limited time I've seen his news slot, and he seemed to be quite shaken when Smith left.
Click to expand...


I will have to give him a look see. I thought that Fox and Friends was more like Good Morning America. So perhaps more of a morning talk show than actual news. At any rate the amount of "news" on FOX has gone down. And the commentary has gone off the deep end.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Subduction Zone said:
I thought that Fox and Friends was more like Good Morning America. So perhaps more of a morning talk show than actual news.
Click to expand...
I watch the first hour of GMA twice a week, and that is largely objective news that they cover. The 2nd hour has a lot of fluff-fluff, so I don't watch that.

Subduction Zone said:
At any rate the amount of "news" on FOX has gone down. And the commentary has gone off the deep end.
Click to expand...
That's what I've heard, and the Politifact comparison of the American t.v. newscasts has Fox being the least accurate, then somewhat distantly followed by MSNBC. Their evaluation of the most accurate being CNN, closely followed by PBS NewsHour, with the latter being less opinionated.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
metis said:
I watch the first hour of GMA twice a week, and that is largely objective news that they cover. The 2nd hour has a lot of fluff-fluff, so I don't watch that.

That's what I've heard, and the Politifact comparison of the American t.v. newscasts has Fox being the least accurate, then somewhat distantly followed by MSNBC. Their evaluation of the most accurate being CNN, closely followed by PBS NewsHour, with the latter being less opinionated.
Click to expand...


One thing that I found about MSNBC is that they no longer have to go off into lala land to appeal to their base. A fairly accurate reporting on Trump is enough to get almost any person to shake their head in disbelief.
 
P

pearl

Well-Known Member
metis said:
Ya, as I watched a bit of "Fox & Friends" this morning, and the "newscasters" (I'm being generous) complained that "we conservatives" ain't being treated well. Last time I heard, a serious news source doesn't say things like that.
Click to expand...

The only person connected with Fox News to be credible is Chris Wallace.
 
Mindmaster

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
metis said:
How could you possibly know that since those were closed depositions?

Also, even if true, do two wrongs make a right? I remember telling my mother as a child when my friend John and I got into trouble "Well, Johnny did it too!", only to be told "I'm not Johnny's mother!".

So, seven convictions that includes felonies by a jury of one's peers is "nothing"?
Click to expand...

Does Roger Stone have a history of violence or other actions which make it seem like he'd carry out any act he mentioned? People say stupid **** like that all the time when they're mad, and if that was the criteria we'd all be in jail.

People get convicted of things they don't do all the time -- it's not whether or not you did it, but whether or not people think you did it. Anyway, I'm not defending Stone's actions at all -- he certainly was threatening people directly and that's not legal. The other stuff is just conspiracy nonsense on the level of the nutters debating the moon landing. Knowing about Wikileaks releases isn't a crime nor is Wikileaks releasing information that was released to them in confidence a crime. It doesn't matter if Stone knew if something was coming out ahead of time -- this is protected free speech in this country and he's under no obligation to report it to anyone as no crime is occurring.

There is a lot of silliness in regard to the impetus of the investigation as well. For one thing, while intelligence officials (that were beholden to Obama at the time) state that there was Russian involvement in the hacks of the email and other releases it's absurd to me that they'd even share this information if it were true. If you know exactly how someone is hacking you then you start adding sugar to the honeypot you don't disclose you know it was compromised. You can do a lot more damage to foreign actors by poisoning the information and using it to misplay. That's why I largely think it's complete bull in a nutshell. If this were what really what is going on then I'd have to accept that US intelligence is completely incompetent. Fortunately, I'm not stupid enough to believe that -- so, Occam's razor would say that it just didn't happen.

So, Stone lied about on-goings in his personal life on the stand. (He's not a government official, appointee, and doesn't have a duty to the public otherwise.) Did his lies cost anyone anything? Was anyone actually harmed? No...The e-mails would have been released with or without Stone's knowledge of them -- he wasn't the mechanism of their manifestation nor delivery. If the idea was to somehow "reflect" these wrong-doings on Trump, well you'd just have to be a complete moron to think it matters. Stone's personal troubles had nothing much to do with Trump, and still don't. He also didn't have any information to expose that would improve the Democratic position against Trump.

Anyway, it's all a big **** show and prime example of the classic standalone complex. If you spend your day reading liberal media Trump is the devil and Stone was some high ranking demon in the hierarchy, but if you look outside of that box you realize the connection between Stone and Trump is pretty damn tenuous and relatively insignificant.
 
Shadow Link

Shadow Link

Active Member
Mindmaster said:
Does Roger Stone have a history of violence or other actions which make it seem like he'd carry out any act he mentioned? People say stupid **** like that all the time when they're mad, and if that was the criteria we'd all be in jail.

People get convicted of things they don't do all the time -- it's not whether or not you did it, but whether or not people think you did it. Anyway, I'm not defending Stone's actions at all -- he certainly was threatening people directly and that's not legal. The other stuff is just conspiracy nonsense on the level of the nutters debating the moon landing. Knowing about Wikileaks releases isn't a crime nor is Wikileaks releasing information that was released to them in confidence a crime. It doesn't matter if Stone knew if something was coming out ahead of time -- this is protected free speech in this country and he's under no obligation to report it to anyone as no crime is occurring.

There is a lot of silliness in regard to the impetus of the investigation as well. For one thing, while intelligence officials (that were beholden to Obama at the time) state that there was Russian involvement in the hacks of the email and other releases it's absurd to me that they'd even share this information if it were true. If you know exactly how someone is hacking you then you start adding sugar to the honeypot you don't disclose you know it was compromised. You can do a lot more damage to foreign actors by poisoning the information and using it to misplay. That's why I largely think it's complete bull in a nutshell. If this were what really what is going on then I'd have to accept that US intelligence is completely incompetent. Fortunately, I'm not stupid enough to believe that -- so, Occam's razor would say that it just didn't happen.

So, Stone lied about on-goings in his personal life on the stand. (He's not a government official, appointee, and doesn't have a duty to the public otherwise.) Did his lies cost anyone anything? Was anyone actually harmed? No...The e-mails would have been released with or without Stone's knowledge of them -- he wasn't the mechanism of their manifestation nor delivery. If the idea was to somehow "reflect" these wrong-doings on Trump, well you'd just have to be a complete moron to think it matters. Stone's personal troubles had nothing much to do with Trump, and still don't. He also didn't have any information to expose that would improve the Democratic position against Trump.

Anyway, it's all a big **** show and prime example of the classic standalone complex. If you spend your day reading liberal media Trump is the devil and Stone was some high ranking demon in the hierarchy, but if you look outside of that box you realize the connection between Stone and Trump is pretty damn tenuous and relatively insignificant.
Click to expand...
The reality is this: The statute of limitations will run out for the democratic communists during Trumps second term. And there can be no indictment under seal (See sixth amendment).


...tick-tock!
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Wow.....the place the Trump presidency has forced people to go to in order to defend him and his cronies....

"Yeah, Stone made threats against someone's life and that's illegal, but he wasn't really going to do it, so what's the big deal?"

"Sure, Stone lied under oath multiple times. But it wasn't about anything I consider to be important, so....so what?"

And as has been for some time now....we should trust Russian propaganda over the unanimous conclusions of US intelligence agencies.

Defending criminality and promoting Russian propaganda...from Republicans! As someone who grew up in the cold war era, I never thought I'd see this day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top