What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Stone Case Prosecutors (2 Viewers)

>>Roger Stone’s sentencing will go forward as planned on Thursday, despite the longtime Donald Trump associate's Hail Mary attempt to get a new trial and ongoing presidential haranguing about a miscarriage of justice.

U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson decided during a brief teleconference Tuesday that there was no reason to continue delaying sentencing for the convicted GOP operative while she considers holding a hearing on a new-trial motion. Stone faces up to 50 years in prison after being convicted last November on seven felony charges, including lying to Congress and obstructing lawmakers in their investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

"I think that delaying the sentencing would not be a prudent thing to do under all the circumstances unless I'm required to do so,” Jackson said.

Jackson did assure Stone, though, that he would not be sent to prison immediately while she considers the defendant's latest demands. Stone’s defense team has pleaded for a brief delay on the sentencing, while newly assigned federal prosecutors said they favored proceeding with Thursday’s hearing.<<

>>Jackson, who already rejected one previous request from Stone for a new trial, said she’s considering holding a hearing on the latest ask. However, she did not commit to one, saying she was not sure it was necessary.<<

>>The new prosecution team consists of J.P. Cooney and John Crabb, who serve as the top two officials handling public corruption cases for the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, D.C. Cooney supervised the investigation into former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and the 2017 prosecution of New Jersey Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, which ended in a hung jury.<<

Politico

 
Can some lawyer types explain who Trump says “he would be suing” in this Stone case if he weren’t President? 
Do you mean the Mueller case?  Probably has to do with the FBI giving classified information to Steele that was eventually used to open an investigation into his campaign.  

 
Do you mean the Mueller case?  Probably has to do with the FBI giving classified information to Steele that was eventually used to open an investigation into his campaign.  
Honestly have no clue what he was talking about, it was a rambling series of tweets. 

 
Darren Samuelsohn @dsamuelsohn

Judge Jackson rules that she agrees with DOJ and will apply the stronger sentencing guidelines because of Stone's witness intimidation & pressure campaign on Randy Credico.

9:26 AM · Feb 20, 2020
- Politico

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Darren Samuelsohn @dsamuelsohn

DOJ prosecutor John Crabb says the stronger sentence should be applied to Stone on the witness tampering charge.

9:25 AM · Feb 20, 2020
- LOL crack Barr team says that oh yeah that seems fine, Judge. 

 
Wild that the Luchesi crime family lawyer, Ginsburg, is already in court arguing. He just joined the team. The argument being hey what’s the big deal, the judge is alive, Credico testified, we had a trial, c’mon yerhoner 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wild that the Luchesi crime family lawyer, Ginsburg, is already in court arguing. He just joined the team. The argument being hey what’s the big deal, the judge is alive, Credico testified, we had a trial, c’mon yerhoner 


Crabb says DOJ believes the the eight level increase should be applied. Jackson agrees, now up to 22.
Still arguing about one of the increases, but the court has already moved it up to 41-51 months.

 
"Extensive scope or planning" guideline rejected.  Still at 25.

Edit: I wish we could hear her tone of voice in stating that "I don't think we're looking at extensive scope or planning"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crabb arguing to largely follow the original sentencing memo is a twist I did not see coming. Cynically, I’d say that this suggests the pardon is already a fait accomplit  
Well let's face it, the man is appearing in court before a federal judge and he isn't going to vomit up his ethics and reputation all over the floor. Harder done than ordered.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crabb arguing to largely follow the original sentencing memo is a twist I did not see coming. Cynically, I’d say that this suggests the pardon is already a fait accomplit  
I guess, but there's a big difference between pardoning someone with a two year sentence and pardoning someone with a six year sentence.

 
Wow - 

ABJ: With respect to the second filing — you signed it. Did you write it?

Crabb: I’m not at liberty to discuss the internal deliberations in DOJ.

ABJ: Were you directed to write it by someone else?

Crabb: I can’t answer.

 
Wow - 

ABJ: With respect to the second filing — you signed it. Did you write it?

Crabb: I’m not at liberty to discuss the internal deliberations in DOJ.

ABJ: Were you directed to write it by someone else?

Crabb: I can’t answer.
Happy to see this.

Obviously staying he and and his fellows on the sig line wrote it would have been the simplest, best and easiest thing for almost every lawyer to say before a judge in every situation everywhere.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
>>DOJ prosecutor Crabb recommends incarceration for Stone, says “This prosecution was and this prosecution is righteous.”<<

 
Wild that the Luchesi crime family lawyer, Ginsburg, is already in court arguing. He just joined the team. The argument being hey what’s the big deal, the judge is alive, Credico testified, we had a trial, c’mon yerhoner 
Ed Scarry at Washington Examiner agrees with this

Nope, Stone was just a liar and made the unfortunate decision to work for Trump, who has been under hot pursuit by the authorities since he became the Republican nominee in 2016.
Imagine feeling moved to take a stand over the sentencing of Stone, a 67-year-old clownish figure who was convicted of being a harmless liar.


Link

What a joke. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
>>Crabb apologized and then she grilled him with a number of rapid-fire questions. Crabb explains the original trial team wrote the initial sentencing memo. He said he was part of the review and approval process. It went to the US attorney for DC, Timothy Shea, who approved of it.<<

- Politico/Samuelsohn.

- So that solves that. Barr’s crack suicide squad says in court that Shea approved the original filing. Enough of that bs about a rebellion.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Judge Jackson says Roger Stone's prosecution was not the result of enabling anyone to have a political advantage, or to vilify the defendant. “It arose because Roger Stone characteristically inserted himself smack in the middle of one of the most incendiary issues of the day."

 
On Stone testifying to the House Intel Comm that he had no record of communications with his intermediary, Judge Jackson says "again this was a flat out lie. There were at least 1,500 texts or emails with Randy Credico alone."

 
Judge Jackson says that Stone was guilty of tampering with witness Randy Credico and that the victim's letter asking her not to send him to prison says more about Credico than Stone. "It may be that even today he does not want to be the reason for a tough sentence.”

 
Glad to post the link but Credico has explained that he was concerned about threats to him and his family from Stone and Trump supporters when he submitted that letter. 

 
Now all the good things about Roger, for balance:

Judge Jackson says she has learned from Stone's friends and family's letters that he has rescued countless dogs, supported his in-law suffering from Alzheimer and fought for same sex marriage, NFL players with brain injuries and criminal justice reform.

 
>>“Certain themes emerge.” Quotes letters sent by Stone’s friends saying Stone was referred to as a provocateur and dirty trickster. Points out these were letters sent *on his behalf.*<<
 

- Lol, yasee yerhoner my friend is a scurrilous fiend so yaknow that’s just how he is.

 
>>“The government’s initial memorandum was thorough, well-researched and supported,” in concordance with the record and DOJ policy. “Any suggestion that the prosecutors in this case did anything untoward” is incorrect.<<

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top