Quote

ABJ walks through several Stone’s claims to the House Intel Committee.

“It was all false. And afterwards, he endeavored mightily to make sure” Credico didn’t mess up his story. Says that’s why Stone was indicted, not for his political activities.
--
“I really did appreciate the sensitivity and the concern that went into Randy Credico’s letter” (arguing against a tough sentence) ABJ says. “It’s nice that Mr. Credico has forgiven Mr. Stone.”

But all of that “reflects more on Mr. Credico than Mr. Stone.”
--
ABJ points out that Stone's obstruction wasn't directed at "an anti-Trump cabal," but rather at the House Intelligence Committee, which was at the time controlled by Republicans and chaired by Devin Nunes.
--
The judge moves on to look at the history and characteristics of the defendant.

“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.*
--
ABJ: ”Nothing about this case was a joke. It wasn’t funny. It wasn’t a prank.”
--
“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.

BUT: ABJ says, she is concerned that 7-9 years is greater than necessary. And would have thought so regardless of the sentencing memo chaos.
--
Judge Jackson: “He was not prosecuted, as some have claimed, for standing up for the president. He was prosecuted for covering up for the president.”

ABJ calls Trump’s comments on the case “entirely inappropriate,” she will not be influenced by them. But she will not hold them against Stone either.

Also says she will not be influenced by pressure from the left from those who want a stiffer sentence.
--
ABJ: “The truth still exists. The truth still matters. Roger Stone’s insistence that it doesn’t” poses “a threat to our most fundamental institutions, to the very foundation of our democracy.”

“The dismay and disgust at the defendant’s belligerence should transcend party.”

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 21 2020 06:52pm)

The lawyer youtube channels that I follow are virtually always reserved when talking about something they aren't sure about, ya know, that lawyer mentality. "This isn't legal advice, I am not a constitutional lawyer so I don't know the norms, etc. etc."

They're all saying basically the same thing about Trump's interference with Roger Stone's case. It's a power grab and level of corruption that would make Nixon blush.

Quote (IceMage @ Feb 21 2020 07:05pm)

Trump's behavior on DOJ cases has been pretty consistent... he's been trashing the rule of law on Twitter for quite a while. What's changed is the Attorney General. Barr is a true believer in all of the deranged fantasies you hear on Hannity and talk radio... he doesn't need a direct order from Trump to do his bidding.

Anyway, prepare for a Goom essay on how Trump's blatantly corrupt behavior is actually justified because something something deep state.

--

I like Ken White from All The President's Lawyers podcast. I follow a bunch of lawyer type pundits on Twitter and Ken doesn't fall into the groupthink that so many others do. Andy McCarthy has the occasional nugget of useful information if you read past the propaganda.

Quote (tagged4nothing @ Feb 21 2020 07:45pm)

how was Clinton/Comey/McCabe justified again? i'll just copy/pasta whatever essay you write up for those 3.

Quote (tagged4nothing @ Feb 21 2020 06:45pm)

how was Clinton/Comey/McCabe justified again? i'll just copy/pasta whatever essay you write up for those 3.

Quote (IceMage @ Feb 21 2020 07:48pm)

You've pointed out the asymmetry. I don't pretend everything they've done was justified.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 21 2020 07:49pm)

Thanks for another perfect example of whataboutism from the cult.

Quote (tagged4nothing @ Feb 21 2020 07:51pm)

huh, that's news to me. nice sig btw

have you bothered calling any of those 3 out?