Posted on 02/25/2020 4:27:17 PM PST by yesthatjallen
This judge will not budge an inch!!!
Well, I mean, if she can’t remember it.. /s
Of course, she didn’t only tweet about Trump, she celebrated Stone’s arrest. So... that seems to me like bias. And if she denied it at the time (and seems to still deny it) is there a case for perjury? Disbarment, since she is an attorney?
I’ve got murder in my heart for the judge
I’ve got murder in my heart for the judge
Well, that bad old judge wouldn’t budge
I’ve got murder in my heart for the judge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xEbbyKJ0mk
You’ve learned well Grasshopper.
Lib judges don’t judge. They already “know”. Should this ignorant s**t be doxed, I most certainly will not judge the doxers. After all, libs do it all the time.
Oh yeah, this is real helpful. Cause liars quickly become honest when confronted by soft shell questioning by a fellow believer.
I’m not hopeful for Stone. But I will give the judge a friendly suggestion. “You got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em, know when to walk away, and know when to run.” In the present case, gracefully fold and walk away.
The Hillary Clinton Defense. : “ I do not recall “ ( used 21/ 25 times during email server testimony)
Been a LONG time since I’ve heard that one.
What f’n joke.
Did you unfairly influence? Well no. Okay we’re good.
I don’t care what she says.
What does the evidence say?
Yes, just like Hillary would couldn’t remember so many times. The Judge and the Jury foreperson are aligned in their hostility to Trump and anyone associated with him. It may not have started out as a conspiracy, but it is starting to smell like one.
AMY BERMAN JACKASS IS A DIRTY DEMOCRAT!!!
Exactly.
“She concealed evidence regarding her political views which would have been important for the court and the parties for understanding her bias,” Ginsberg said in Tuesday’s hearing. “Based on the social media posts, it appears to me that [her answers] are misleading — intentionally,” he added.
==============================================
<><> After Hart’s role as the Stone jury foreperson became publicly known, several of her social media posts criticizing Trump were uncovered.
<><> Judge Jackson, an Obama appointee, also brought in two other jurors, both of whom said that Hart did not try to prejudice the panel and did not appear biased. Neither one was identified during the questioning. “I never had any feeling that she was attempting anything like that,” one of the jurors told the judge. Another juror said that the foreperson even slowed down deliberations so that the jury could more carefully consider one of the charges.
<><> Judge Jackson said the testimony showed that there was little evidence that Hart had acted improperly on the jury and added that Hart’s political beliefs would not be grounds for a new trial. “Posts about the president do not constitute bias against the defendant,” Jackson said. “Having an opinion about the president on some or all of his policies does not mean she can not fairly judge evidence against Roger Stone.”
Sadly, I went to the comments after the article. There is real hatred for anyone who might support Trump, by the readers of The Hill. The comments are overall disgusting.
“Another juror said that the foreperson even slowed down deliberations so that the jury could more carefully consider one of the charges.
Jackson said the testimony showed that there was little evidence that Hart had acted improperly on the jury and added that Hart’s political beliefs would not be grounds for a new trial.”
Based on these two paragraphs I am really worried that the Judge will not rule for Stone. Sad. Really sad.
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.