Pissed off about Roger Stone

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
And hope to get a new judge and different jury?

You certainly wont get the same, that's how an appeal works.

Indeed. So this is where you're at in the timeline of events, Augustus.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Indeed. So this is where you're at in the timeline of events, Augustus.

I don't know why you're worried, Trump will pardon the scumbucket anyway, it's how the swamp works.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Indeed. So this is where you're at in the timeline of events, Augustus.

I don't know why you're worried, Trump will pardon the scumbucket anyway, it's how the swamp works.

For a libertarian, you project quite a bit like a Democrat.

And I think Stone would deserve it.

Just like that video creator that was wrongfully blamed for inciting the Benghazi attack, and unjustly imprisoned for it. This is still America isn't it? Or do you change your mind on due process, fair trials, and the Bill of Rights when your personal feelings are involved.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
For a libertarian, you project quite a bit like a Democrat.

How is a Democrat thing to want people convicted by a jury to do their time?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
For a libertarian, you project quite a bit like a Democrat.

How is a Democrat thing to want people convicted by a jury to do their time?

You pulled me being "worried" out of your ass. So, I'm suggesting that it is you who is worried, especially because of your obviously personal hatred of Stone.

So worried in fact, that the first half of your sentence makes no grammatical sense.


Also, being convicted by a tainted jury is not justice. Even Stone is asking for a retrial. Do you object?

a reply to: Wardaddy454

I don't hate Stone, I just think he's a POS. But most political operatives are, it's kind of a job prerequisite.

And I'd add the 'it' into my sentence if I could if I thought it would help you answer my question.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Wardaddy454

I don't hate Stone, I just think he's a POS. But most political operatives are, it's kind of a job prerequisite.

And I'd add the 'it' into my sentence if I could if I thought it would help you answer my question.

Well I did answer your question in my first sentence.

I don't know how I can answer it any more plainly for you.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Probably by explaining why you'd think me wanting the rule of law is a Democrat thing.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Probably by explaining why you'd think me wanting the rule of law is a Democrat thing.

Stop playing dumb. You're better than that. You know exactly what I was referring to with that, as I laid out four posts above.

You got the rule of law. You also got evidence of a tainted Jury, and a biased judge. You think Stone should still serve time for convictions handed down by this tainted jury, and serve the time given by this biased judge? Or do you think he should get a new trial? Yeah he will probably get pardoned, oh well. Ignore that for now. No matter the outcome, should he get a new trial, yes or no?

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
You got the rule of law. You also got evidence of a tainted Jury, and a biased judge.

If this was the case that is what the appeals process is for, if the appellate court says he gets a new trial then he gets a new trial. Right now Scumface has been convicted. Should convicted ****bags serve their time? Yes or no?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
You got the rule of law. You also got evidence of a tainted Jury, and a biased judge.

If this was the case that is what the appeals process is for, if the appellate court says he gets a new trial then he gets a new trial. Right now Scumface has been convicted. Should convicted ****bags serve their time? Yes or no?

So angry haha.

Its hard to answer that since Federal and State constitutions guarantee to a defendant accused of a crime the right to a trial by unbiased, impartial jurors.

So again, are you against rights because you hate this man?

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
So again, are you against rights because you hate this man?

If he got an unbiased trial that's what the appeal process is for. Why you so mad about how the legal system works? It's okay, bro, he'll most likely get pardoned because he has a fellow POS friend in a high place.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
So again, are you against rights because you hate this man?

If he got an unbiased trial that's what the appeal process is for. Why you so mad about how the legal system works? It's okay, bro, he'll most likely get pardoned because he has a fellow POS friend in a high place.

Again, there's the projection. If you don't like pardons, write to congress. :p

He got a trial that was obviously biased against him, so I'd argue that the convictions are null and void, since he didn't get a trial with unbiased impartial jurors as is his right, and there should be a retrial. Even Stone is asking for a retrial.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Again, there's the projection. If you don't like pardons, write to congress. :p

No one who likes justice should like pardons.

He got a trial that was obviously biased against him, so I'd argue that the convictions are null and void...

You arguing that with your law degree? Maybe you should represent him in his appeal. You know, the thing you have to do first to get a new trial.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Again, there's the projection. If you don't like pardons, write to congress. :p

No one who likes justice should like pardons.

He got a trial that was obviously biased against him, so I'd argue that the convictions are null and void...

You arguing that with your law degree? Maybe you should represent him in his appeal. You know, the thing you have to do first to get a new trial.

And I would say that anyone who likes justice, should like pardons when used to free those whom have been wrongfully imprisoned. I'm not saying its a perfect system, but I'm glad its there because the system is imperfect.

And yes, he will have to appeal. I'm merely stating that it should be automatic, and a new jury and judge is found, instead of going through the appeal process.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
And I would say that anyone who likes justice, should like pardons when used to free those whom have been wrongfully imprisoned.

Call me when that actually happens.

As for not having to file an appeal, Stone already thinks the rules don't apply to him. He can follow the rules and file an appeal like everyone else who thinks they didn't get a fair trial.