Well, I’ll be surprised if Judge Jackson rules for Stone in this matter.
Why in the heck would this grandstanding worm get to see the unredacted report that not even Congress has seen?
No, please no, just make the bad man go away!
I bet his friend in the WH has already told him about the details.
Is he just trolling/delaying, or does he think there’s information that will be useful to pass on to someone who hasn’t already seen it?
imo, both.
His lawyers probably already have the information via discovery. This is just theater.
I disagree. Once the government puts someone down on paper in this fashion, it should be provided to a defendant – even one as odious as Roger Stone, especially since it will eventually become public.
(If its grand jury material, Stone is entitled to it. And all the “opinion” stuff is part of the “prosecution/non-prosecution” stuff that Mueller was required to report on – and that will become public once the Stone matter is settled)
bullseye, center hit.
This is one of those situations where I might side with even a scumbag like Stone in wanting to see what’s redacted, to help build a case for the defense.
Putting myself in that situation; wouldn’t I want to know what the government is withholding? Unless it’s something involving intelligence sources and methods, I would think a fair trial would require that. If nothing else, it gives Stone less ammunition for an appeal when he’s convicted.
Maybe, once the Stone matter is settled.
But how is that an argument for revealing it to Stone now?
its probably not much of a legal argument, but if I was Stone’s lawyers, I’d tell the judge that Stone contends the government committed wrongdoing, and that by withholding evidence of their motives, they are suppressing evidence that is potentially relevant to Stone’s defense.
What? Kravis has the entire Mueller report, has read it and can give the judge some redacted portions? Why not give the enitre report to her, not just the Stone part.
Gotta wonder how soon a whistleblower will psot the whole thing on line for us to see.
Well, they’ll stone you when you’re trying to be so good
They’ll stone you just like they said they would
They’ll stone you when you’re trying to go home
And they’ll stone you when you’re there all alone
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned
Well, they’ll stone you when you’re walking on the street
They’ll stone you when you’re tryin’ to keep your seat
They’ll stone you when you’re walkin’ on the floor
They’ll stone you when you’re walkin’ to the door
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned
They’ll stone you when you’re at the breakfast table
They’ll stone you when you are young and able
They’ll stone you when you’re tryin’ to make a buck
Then they’ll stone you and then they’ll say “good luck”
Tell ya what, I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned
Well, they’ll stone you and say that it’s the end
Then they’ll stone you and then they’ll come back again
They’ll stone you when you’re riding in your car
They’ll stone you when you’re playing your guitar
Yes, but I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned alright
Well, they’ll stone you when you walk all alone
They’ll stone you when you are walking home
They’ll stone you and then say you are brave
They’ll stone you when you are set down in your grave
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned
— Bob Dylan
“demand”
Tee-hee.
What logic allows a defendant to go on a fishing expedition on the theory that the prosecution might have some unproven disqualifying motivation?
The prosecution’s motivations don’t typically matter. Only their actions.
Judge Jackson just happens to be a loyal Trump supporter. Just as the author of the DOJ memo that says sitting US Presidents can not be subpoenaed or indicted just happens to be a very conserivative Republican!
The US Democracy is in rapid decline and decay and the Republicans and their billionaire masters own everything…including the Supreme Court.
It will take a people’s rvolution to take back our Democracy…Pelosi, Schumer, Biden, Obama and Hillary have made it crystal clear they don’t fight the battles…they pass the buck to the grass roots.
Chicken leadership is the only wayto describe the Obama-Clinton Democratic Party.
If Barr’s characterization is good enough for the American people, then Kravis’ is good enough for Stone.
What the hell does the democratic leadership have to do with anything in this story?
What your evidence for supposing judge Jackson is a loyal Trump supporter?
What makes you say she is a “loyal Trump supporter”?