BREAKING: Mueller’s Prosecutor Abruptly Resigns From Roger Stone Case After DOJ Backs Down From Exce

Being president doesn't removes one freedom of speech. deal!

 

The House appropriated the revenue to the Executive. Trump is the Executive and spent it. The House does not have to give Trump a penny.

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 7, clause 1

“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 9, clause 7

THE POWER OF THE PURSE
https://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Power-of-the-Purse/

 

More silly evasion. Several sources have been posted on this thread.
Read them.

 

He has a responsibility to the office that outweighs his unfounded opinions.

 

There has been no proof that Russia hacked into anything.
The DNC computer fiasco was micromanaged by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
and she did her best to conceal how her DNC computer had funny connections.
She wasn't about to resign as Head of the DNC until Obama forced
her out.Because it was found out how she was using the DNC servers
to help Hillary as a candidate while sabotaging Sanders.
WikiLeaks was instrumental in whistleblowing her little plot.
Plus she Refused to hand over the DNC servers and Computers.
Calling out a Washington Chief of Police in the process.
It was Not the Russians who Hacked the DNC.Seth Rich died because he
knew what Wasserman-Schultz was up to.It had to do with how Wasserman-Schultz
used the Awan Brothers { paying them around $ 4 Million }
One of the Awan brothers got caught trying to flee the country.
Little Debbie wasted no time in lawyering-up and going into hiding,once
Seth Rich { the WikiLeaks connection } ended up dead.Because
she knew all about the workings of her crooked DNC management.
Plus her threatening behavior towards the Capitol Police Chief.

That is why all This Russian Hacked into crap.It was an easy narrative
to manipulate and use as teaser.Chuck Todd and Senator Mark Warner
to this day,keep up the bogus tale.

 

That's an interesting opinion......but I for one am glad we live in a society where a President can give their opinions on issues and events. I really didn't like Obama's opinion on many things, specifically some of his March Madness picks....but I didn't say he couldn't have them

 

I've read them. She was questioned as a prospective juror and stated her former candidacy for public office as a Democrat. If the defense had any doubts, they could have challenged her at the time of jury selection. They did not. If I am not mistaken, these were criminal charges requiring a unanimous consent of the jury for conviction. She was one of twelve and a second juror has come out in her defense. Stone and Trump are now attacking the jury system and the court itself.

 

Yes...and you believe the entire U.S. government and the Mueller investigation team was in on the plot. And, I believe you are wrong. Crowdstrike is a debunked conspiracy theory, initiated by Russian intelligence (per the testimony of Hill, the former NSC Russian expert and the findings of our intelligence agencies). Wasserman-Schultz continues to serve in the House of Representatives.

 

More baloney. Trump is not attacking the jury system - I am.

Trump merely pointed out that the trail was a sham. Stone was railroaded, and the juror was a militant anti-Trump activist who should never have been allowed go sit on the jury. She has now revealed that she sees herself as part of the prosecution team.

"Trump’s tweet came a day after reports that Tomeka Hart, a former president of the Memphis City Schools Board of Commissioners, had identified herself as the forewoman of the jury in a Facebook post, saying she “can’t keep quiet any longer” in the wake of the Justice Department’s efforts to seek a more lenient sentence for Stone than the seven to nine years recommended by front-line prosecutors."


“It pains me to see the DOJ now interfere with the hard work of the prosecutors,” Hart said in the post, the authenticity of which CNN reported was verified by Hart. “They acted with the utmost intelligence, integrity, and respect for our system of justice.”
THE WASHINGTON POST, Trump suggests Roger Stone’s jury forewoman had ‘significant bias’, By John Wagner, Spencer S. Hsu and Matt Zapotosky, Feb. 13, 2020.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...e102ee-4e68-11ea-b721-9f4cdc90bc1c_story.html

 

His "March Madness" picks were't attacks on the other branches of government. Trump tosses around unfounded charges, as his "free speech right," while ignoring his responsibilities as President to be careful with both his words and charges. Attacking the Judicial system, will only bring additional impeachment charges and the next time Chief Justice Roberts may not be so neutral.

 

I see...you didn't like the verdict, so you want a do-over? Hart's remarks came AFTER Stone's conviction and in response to the resignations of the prosecution, with whom the jury agreed 12-0. But...the ball isn't really in Trump's court...it's in Jackson's, isn't it?

 

Mueller cleared Trump of Russia collusion. The DNC has been exposed for colluding with Russian intelligence to rig the 2016 election for The Clintons.

“The “cyber-security” firm that everyone is depending on to make the case for Russia’s alleged “hacking” of the 2016 presidential election, CrowdStrike, has just retracted a key component of its analysis – but the “mainstream” media continues to chug along, ignoring any facts that contradict their preferred narrative.

As Voice of America – hardly an instrument of Russian propaganda! – reports:
“U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year’s American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented data published by an influential British think tank.” antiwar.com, A Cyber-Gulf of Tonkin, There was no “Russian hacking” of the 2016 election, by Justin Raimondo, 3/21/17.
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2017/03/30/a-cyber-gulf-of-tonkin/

 

Well Stone is a defendant in a criminal case, he is free to challenge the trial against him, and has every right to defend himself. To suggest otherwise is Facist

Trump merely expressed an opinion about one particular case, in which it appears that the foreperson had a lot of bias, and questioned if that bias had an impact on her decision making. Was her anti-Trump bias known at trial? I don't know...it doesn't appear so....either way that is a great thing for the appeal.

 

It was obviously a rigged trial. The juror just exposed herself as part of the prosecution team.

"“I want to stand up for Aaron Zelinsky, Adam Jed, Michael Marando, and Jonathan Kravis — the prosecutors on the Roger Stone trial,” Hart wrote in a social media post that was shared with CNN. “It pains me to see the DOJ now interfere with the hard work of the prosecutors. They acted with the utmost intelligence, integrity, and respect for our system of justice.”
LAW AND CRIME, Lawyers: Roger Stone’s Attorneys Should Have Done a Better Job Vetting Anti-Trump Jury Foreperson, By Jerry Lambe | 1:00 pm, February 13th, 2020.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...ve-done-a-better-job-vetting-jury-foreperson/

 

When they're all running toward a political train wreck just about any budget whatever is going to be signed into law. It's a game of here and now with little regard for the future, hoping to make it to coal and water down the tracks somewhere. So far, so good, but risk is higher and higher.

 

Think I'll wait for confirmation from our FBI. It doesn't say whether or not the analysis proves the Crowstrike Conspiracy theory is correct or not. Also, the FBI had corroberating evidence of the hacking (aside from the Steele Dossier material). The "preferred narrative" sands, until proven false.

 

Read the COTUS, and tell me where it says the President is supposed to avoid criticizing the other branches of the government.
In fact, it is a critical part of a president's job to oppose the other branches whenever he feels it is necessary.

Google: checks and balances.

 

Good points. At the time Hart was found acceptable it was only known she was and democrat who had run for office. That does not necessarily make a person less than an impartial juror. But what has been revealed since jury selection does indicate that she was less than impartial.

 

I never claimed otherwise. In fact, I believe I was the one in this discussion that brought up his right of appeal. And, Trump's opinion isn't just a random one regarding a random case...Stone was a long term friend and adviser, who was involved in his 2016 campaign and publicly claimed to have talked with Assange about the Russian e-mails.

 

In fact, Steele admits that he colluded with Russian intelligence and the DNC to rig the 2016 election. The failure of the DOJ/FBI to indict Steele and extradite him exposes the level of corruption to which our failed criminal justice system has now sunk. Instead they indicted Russians while they were beyond the reach of our extradition process. What a sham.

 

Would there exist some law against talking to Assange, on any subject whatever? Did Stone or Assange make a money agreement to transfer the emails to Stone?

 

And she was the forewoman! Talk about a witch hunt. ...

 

Trump hasn’t “attacked” any other branch of govt or anyone. What charges and how is his opinion on this case unfounded? The juror’s bias is proven now, and saying a proceeding is unfair is a subjective matter, moreover his opinion on the sentencing guidelines might be “unfounded” to you, but many of us believe that criminal justice reform is needed...many dems even clapped when he mentioned it at the State of the Union.

how is he attacking the judicial system? He gave an opinion on one judge’s running he thought was unfair.


You all know you can’t beat him, so now you are coming up with Silly ways to try and impeach him...sad...and now hoping the Judge isn’t neutral?! Hahaha you can’t make this stuff up!

 

Stop using facts ?

 

Why would anyone believe that Assange would have to hack an emial server that was wide open to the whole world?