..longtime dictator trump confidante roger stone facing 7-9

[thc6795]

1 minute ago, HSFBfan said:

This is a failure on the defense attorney not to have this person thrown off the jury. 

It does show bias of the jury and talking about the trial is usually against court rules and could easily taint the case

My understanding is they tried and were refused by the Judge...go figure.

[HSFBfan]

5 minutes ago, thc6795 said:

My understanding is they tried and were refused by the Judge...go figure.

Wtf

An attorney is allowed to dismiss a juror for absolutely no reason

This juror has a bias which is a question they ask you. Can u try the case with no bias. 

This is sounding more and more like the enron case. 

Enron flynn and stone. All sounds exactly alike 

[HSFBfan]

8 minutes ago, thc6795 said:

My understanding is they tried and were refused by the Judge...go figure.

Here ya go. The judge said exactly what I explained to you. The defense attorney fucked up

Stone had argued the juror was biased because the person is employed by an IRS division “that works hand-in-hand with the Department of Justice prosecuting criminal tax matters,” according to the ruling. The longtime Trump booster also said the juror had improperly read about the case.

Jackson, who’s due to sentence Stone on Feb. 20, disagreed. She said Stone’s defense lawyers had ample opportunity to challenge the juror “for cause” before the trial and failed to do so.

now she also said this which makes u shake ur head 

The court finds in its discretion that it was not necessary to strike the juror for alleged bias or for failure to follow the court’s instructions,” Jackson said in her previously sealed Feb. 5 decision.

[15yds4gibberish]

1 hour ago, zulu1128 said:

Speaking of “banana republic,” there’s some interesting info hitting the streets about the foreperson of Stone’s jury...a former democrat congressional candidate with a pretty entertaining Facebook feed lol. 
 

Stone might be looking at a re-trial when the dust settles. 

And here you told us just yesterday you weren't a drama queen.

Are you suggesting that a person can't serve on a jury if they don't like Donald Trump?  Can a person who dislikes Hillary serve on a Hillary jury?

Prosecutors don't have a duty to weed out jurors who might not like the defendant.  That's the defenses job.  If anything prosecutors will try to seat a jury that will convict.

Stone tried this nonsense with another juror already, the ruling about that juror was unsealed yesterday.   The bar for such a dismissal is always high.

Trump tweeting about it to get the fox and friends crowd riled up is cool interference though.  But hey, what do I know, you're the one with all the experience with banana republics.  Good luck!

 

[HSFBfan]

3 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

And here you told us just yesterday you weren't a drama queen.

Are you suggesting that a person can't serve on a jury if they don't like Donald Trump?  Can a person who dislikes Hillary serve on a Hillary jury?

Prosecutors don't have a duty to weed out jurors who might not like the defendant.  That's the defenses job.  If anything prosecutors will try to seat a jury that will convict.

Stone tried this nonsense with another juror already, the ruling about that juror was unsealed yesterday.   The bar for such a dismissal is always high.

Trump tweeting about it to get the fox and friends crowd riled up is cool interference though.  But hey, what do I know, you're the one with all the experience with banana republics.  Good luck!

 

Yes I already beat u to your defense attorney point 

[zulu1128]

40 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

And here you told us just yesterday you weren't a drama queen.

Are you suggesting that a person can't serve on a jury if they don't like Donald Trump?  Can a person who dislikes Hillary serve on a Hillary jury?

Prosecutors don't have a duty to weed out jurors who might not like the defendant.  That's the defenses job.  If anything prosecutors will try to seat a jury that will convict.

Stone tried this nonsense with another juror already, the ruling about that juror was unsealed yesterday.   The bar for such a dismissal is always high.

Trump tweeting about it to get the fox and friends crowd riled up is cool interference though.  But hey, what do I know, you're the one with all the experience with banana republics.  Good luck!

 

LOL...calm down, sport.  I simply said it was interesting info. 
 

She’s probably fine unless she didn’t disclose any of it on her juror questionnaire. 

[15yds4gibberish]

50 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Yes I already beat u to your defense attorney point 

You sure did!  Now if you just brush up on what sentencing guidelines are as distinct from how the sentencing guideline process works, you'll be golden! 

[HSFBfan]

12 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

You sure did!  Now if you just brush up on what sentencing guidelines are as distinct from how the sentencing guideline process works, you'll be golden! 

I'm gonna stick to the whole I beat u to the defense attorney point.

Defense attorney should have had this juror out of that box immediately. But the judge also says at the same time there was no bias is pure BS. There was obv bias on the part of the juror

And the bar to dismiss a juror is very low as an attorney can dismiss a juror for no reason 

[15yds4gibberish]

17 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

LOL...calm down, sport.  I simply said it was interesting info. 
 

She’s probably fine unless she didn’t disclose any of it on her juror questionnaire. 

As my banana republic consultant, does this hour's tweet from IMPOTUS suggest that federal aid to New York is conditioned on their lawsuits aimed at his business?

If so,  it would seem that this was one of the concerns specifically mentioned in the impeachment trial brief:

Is IMPOTUS's tweet banana republic, or just totally cool?

 

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

As my banana republic consultant, does this hour's tweet from IMPOTUS suggest that federal aid to New York is conditioned on their lawsuits aimed at his business?

If so,  it would seem that this was one of the concerns specifically mentioned in the impeachment trial brief:

Is IMPOTUS's tweet banana republic, or just totally cool?

 

Hes seeing cuomo over the ban of trusted travel. Idk the details but if Cuomo approves it you know it's bad 

[HSFBfan]

Just throwing this out there

Dems have a black problem

You know those people the Democrat party uses as pawns every 4 years

Black donors and business leaders have a problem with the Democratic presidential field: No one is doing enough to earn their support, they say — or to build a durable relationship with black voters for the primary and general elections.

Those concerns have spilled out in awkward exchanges in recent weeks as 2020 Democrats courted black donors in New York City. It’s a community that threw significant support to Kamala Harris and Cory Booker before they dropped out of the presidential race, and while a large number of them have ties to former President Barack Obama, many remain unconvinced by Joe Biden. But none of the alternatives, particularly Pete Buttigieg, have gained much traction either.

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/02/13/black-donors-democrats-114795

[zulu1128]

5 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

As my banana republic consultant, does this hour's tweet from IMPOTUS suggest that federal aid to New York is conditioned on their lawsuits aimed at his business?

If so,  it would seem that this was one of the concerns specifically mentioned in the impeachment trial brief:

Is IMPOTUS's tweet banana republic, or just totally cool?

 

The meeting is about the trusted traveler program, and the TSA denying new global entry applications to NY residents.

The rest of the tweet is just another Drumpf tangent...probably designed to get guys like you all worked up yet again. 
 

So no, it’s not “banana republic.” Keep up the good fight tho lol.

[15yds4gibberish]

59 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

The meeting is about the trusted traveler program, and the TSA denying new global entry applications to NY residents.

The rest of the tweet is just another Drumpf tangent...probably designed to get guys like you all worked up yet again. 
 

So no, it’s not “banana republic.” Keep up the good fight tho lol.

Whew!    Without you to answer my questions, I might have suggested that the tweet looks exactly like IMPOTUS holding the global entry status of New Yorkers hostage unless the state drops its pursuit of his tax returns and investigating his business.

Thanks for clarifying IMPOTUS was probably just trolling.  👍

 

[HSFBfan]

2 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

Whew!    Without you to answer my questions, I might have suggested that the tweet looks exactly like IMPOTUS holding the global entry status of New Yorkers hostage unless the state drops its pursuit of his tax returns and investigating his business.

Thanks for clarifying IMPOTUS was probably just trolling.  👍

 

As a NYer am I supposed to care about this global entry thing? 

I'm asking sincerely 

[maxchoboian]

1 hour ago, zulu1128 said:

...another Drumpf tangent...probably designed to get guys like you all worked up yet again. 

So, regardless of whether or not his tweets are accurate or correct, should everyone just dismiss our president's posts as "probably designed to get guys...all worked up?" He's our president, not some Archie Bunker sitcom character.

[concha]

11 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

Whew!    Without you to answer my questions, I might have suggested that the tweet looks exactly like IMPOTUS holding the global entry status of New Yorkers hostage unless the state drops its pursuit of his tax returns and investigating his business.

Thanks for clarifying IMPOTUS was probably just trolling.  👍

 

 

That would suggest that you always assume the worst of the president and not that he's just doing his frigging job.

Which would be silly.

Right?

 

[concha]

10 minutes ago, maxchoboian said:

So, regardless of whether or not his tweets are accurate or correct, should everyone just dismiss our president's posts as "probably designed to get guys...all worked up?" He's our president, not some Archie Bunker sitcom character.

 

Which sit-com characters do you associate with the congressional clowns who have pursued bullshit conspiracy theories and think there is nothing to see here as regards the son of a former VP making millions from a corrupt foreign country that said VP was assigned to deal with?

Might I suggest..

[RedZone]

12 minutes ago, concha said:

 

That would suggest that you always assume the worst of the president and not that he's just doing his frigging job.

Which would be silly.

Right?

 

A "dictator" doing his job?  That's so cute. 

 

[RedZone]

28 minutes ago, maxchoboian said:

So, regardless of whether or not his tweets are accurate or correct, should everyone just dismiss our president's posts as "probably designed to get guys...all worked up?" He's our president, not some Archie Bunker sitcom character.

...dictator trump going after John Kelly again.

trump tweets put us all right in the middle of the War Room,  if you know what I mean. 

 

[RedZone]

Do you STAND with dictator trump or John Kelly?

Another day.....another new WAR!

[Troll]

30 minutes ago, maxchoboian said:

So, regardless of whether or not his tweets are accurate or correct, should everyone just dismiss our president's posts as "probably designed to get guys...all worked up?" He's our president, not some Archie Bunker sitcom character.

Well you can understand it...

or

you can dismiss it ...

or

you can get all worked up about it...

 

Your choice....

 

PS: Only a meathead would crawl under the covers, ignore the tweet content, and only toss messenger insults

 

[zulu1128]

1 hour ago, maxchoboian said:

So, regardless of whether or not his tweets are accurate or correct, should everyone just dismiss our president's posts as "probably designed to get guys...all worked up?" He's our president, not some Archie Bunker sitcom character.

Well, he tweets something stupid pretty much every day, so I guess if someone chose to melt down over every tweet, that's his/her prerogative.

[zulu1128]

1 hour ago, 15yds4gibberish said:

Whew!    Without you to answer my questions, I might have suggested that the tweet looks exactly like IMPOTUS holding the global entry status of New Yorkers hostage unless the state drops its pursuit of his tax returns and investigating his business.

Thanks for clarifying IMPOTUS was probably just trolling.  👍

 

I never said he's a very good writer lol.

The administration has been pretty clear from the beginning that the trusted traveler freeze was solely driven by New York's issuance of drivers licenses to illegal immigrants (justifiably so)...hence the "national security" mention mostly likely.

If you want to interpret the rest of Drumpf's daily babble as something else, have at it lol.

[RedZone]

2 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

Well, he tweets something stupid pretty much every day, so I guess if someone chose to melt down over every tweet, that's his/her prerogative.

..if someone totally ignores the dictator trump madness that takes place 24/7 on twitter that's his/her prerogative......most would call that being a coward.

What is dictator trump? A President or Howard Stern of Twitter?

[I AM IRONMAN]

13 minutes ago, RedZone said:

..if someone totally ignores the dictator trump madness that takes place 24/7 on twitter that's his/her prerogative......most would call that being a coward.

What is dictator trump? A President or Howard Stern of Twitter?

😭👶