Posted on 02/20/2020 9:36:37 AM PST by struggle
Berman-Jackson or whoever she is, is insane.
FOX said so just now
She's not going to declare a mistrial.
From the DOJ / Barr or the four scumbag prosecutors ?
No, do not pardon until Amy Berman Jackson (please notice that I did not address her as Judge because she isn’t) has to eat crow and been seen as the incompetent she is. She must be forced to go through the appeal based on a mistrial due to the biased jury forewoman that should have been culled in the jury selection process. This biased woman was such a public figure that she should have never made the cut. The judge is responsible for not asking the right questions when the attorneys don’t.
How many years does McCabe get?
So when are you going to bring Eric Holder, John Brennan, James Comey and James Clapper before “judge” Amy Berman-Jackson for trial and sentencing? All lied to Congress on issues far more substantive than the nonsensical crap Roger Stone testified to.
So I can misrepresent myself to a federal judge for the purpose of getting on a jury?
Cool, I’ll keep that in mind.
Trump can pardon Stone legally right NOW..in fact earlier today he retweeted a video of Tucker Carlson saying last night to pardon him
40 months = 3.3 years versus the 9-10 years originally recommended.
What was the final recommendation after the corrupt prosecutors left?
What was the defenses recommendation ?
From the analysis I saw, that is the original prosecutions recommendation with the one escalating factor removed - I think that was Stones alleged threat of force. The analyzer head 49 months by removing that factor.
Doesn’t matter what Stone did or didn’t do.
That jury was tainted.
The verdict should be tossed.
There is a legal term called “fruit of the poisonous tree.” If the evidence, or tree, is tainted, then anything gained from the evidence — the fruit — is tainted as well.
Fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal metaphor in the United States used to describe evidence that is obtained illegally.[1] The logic of the terminology is that if the source (the “tree”) of the evidence or evidence itself is tainted, then anything gained (the “fruit”) from it is tainted as well.
History:
The doctrine underlying the name was first described in Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920).[2][3][4] The term’s first use was by Justice Felix Frankfurter in Nardone v. United States (1939).[citation needed]
Such evidence is not generally admissible in court.[5] For example, if a police officer conducted an unconstitutional (Fourth Amendment) search of a home and obtained a key to a train station locker, and evidence of a crime came from the locker, that evidence would most likely be excluded under the fruit of the poisonous tree legal doctrine.
The testimony of a witness who is discovered through illegal means would not necessarily be excluded, however, due to the “attenuation doctrine”[6], which allows certain evidence or testimony to be admitted in court if the link between the illegal police conduct and the resulting evidence or testimony is sufficiently attenuated
For example, a witness who freely and voluntarily testifies is enough of an independent intervening factor to sufficiently “attenuate” the connection between the government’s illegal discovery of the witness and the witness’s voluntary testimony itself. (United States v. Ceccolini, 435 U.S. 268 (1978))
The “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine is an extension of the exclusionary rule, which, subject to some exceptions, prevents evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment from being admitted in a criminal trial.[1] Like the exclusionary rule, the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is intended to deter police from using illegal means to obtain evidence.[2]
The doctrine is subject to four main exceptions.[citation needed] The tainted evidence is admissible if:
It was discovered in part as a result of an independent, untainted source; or
It would inevitably have been discovered despite the tainted source; or
The chain of causation between the illegal action and the tainted evidence is too attenuated; or
the search warrant was not found to be valid based on probable cause, but was executed by government agents in good faith (called the good-faith exception).
This doctrine was also used by the European Court of Human Rights in Gäfgen v. Germany.[citation needed] In certain cases continental European countries have similar laws (e.g. in cases of torture), while the doctrine itself is generally not known.[citation needed] Illegally obtained evidence is used by the courts to ensure that the judgment is factually correct, however the person obtaining the illegal evidence typically faces independent consequences.
Mockery of our legal system isn’t new, it’s been ongoing for decades. the last place you want to settle any legalities is in court!
The Judge put a gag order on him didn't she?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Did you listen to mark levin radio last night? Dan Bongino was substitute. ....well he laid out the whole scoop about stone, flyn, popodopolus, and how brennen set up this coup attempt on Trump. .....really good stuff. ....there should be a podcast. ..if I find it, will send it. Bongino thinks Barr is about to drop the hammer. ...
you can only lie to the FBI, if you IN the FBI
....”Bongino thinks Barr is about to drop the hammer”.....
So do I....they’re going after Barr hot and heavy now and trying to disrupt his relationsip with Trump....which is exactly what Shifty Shift said they would do throughout the Administration....peel them off one by one.
this was a political prosecution from day 1....just like the scooter libby non sense was. Trump should pardon anyone caught up in this investigation....an investigation of a crime that never happened. Obama appointed judge just said today...that Stone lied to “cover up” for Trump, which is a total lie...cover up what??...they are still pissed that the dems got hacked in 2016, got exposed, and Trump won. Now they can attack Trump over “another conviction related to the Russia” case.....purely political. Problem for them....hrs President now and can pardon....hopefully Durham makes it even with Comey etc...
“Re-trial should be ordered, and Barr should choose not to re-try case, claiming DOJ attorneys failed to properly vet jury. He should claim they have other priorities and elect not to retry case. Stone will have already served xx months in prison.....”
Then, Stone should walk out as a free man, if I understand you.
Or could Stone then plead Nolo Contendere and go home free?
So who now still believes that Barr is our savior?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.