Image 01 Image 03

Judge Sentences Roger Stone to 40 Months in Prison

Judge Sentences Roger Stone to 40 Months in Prison

“Roger Stone will not be sentenced for who his friends are or who his enemies are.”

Judge Amy Berman Jackson sentenced Roger Stone to 40 months in prison, $20,000 fine, and two years of supervised release.

A jury convicted him “on seven charges of obstruction, lying to Congress and witness tampering” last year.

The Department of Justice recommended 7-9 years, but Attorney General Bill Barr withdrew that request. That caused four prosecutors to withdraw from the case:

A prosecutor representing the government apologized in court on Thursday “for the confusion” caused by the change of the sentencing recommendation, saying there had been a “miscommunication” between the career prosecutors and the leadership of the Justice Department over the sentencing recommendation. Jackson replied that the original sentencing recommendation was well within the guidelines.

Barr’s move to intervene in Stone’s sentencing led to all four members of the prosecution team quitting the case. Jonathan Kravis resigned as an assistant U.S. attorney in Washington and Aaron Zelinsky filed a notice that he would leave his post as a special prosecutor in Washington but would remain as an assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore. Prosecutors Adam Jed and Michael Marando also withdrew from the case.

The mass withdrawal caused Democrats to accuse Trump of interfering in the process, and the intervention at the DOJ level sparked an emergency meeting for the Federal Judges Association, an independent national association of federal judges, to tackle mounting concerns about Trump and Barr’s intervention in cases involving Stone and other Trump associates.

However, Jackson also found 7-9 years too hard, but would not consider probation.

Jackson also made it known that outsiders did not influence her decision.

[Featured image via YouTube]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Another Obama judge spews her foul nonsense. The Democratics love her poisonous behavior.

There are two standards of justice in this country. One for leftists, Washington insiders, and deep staters. The second for conservatives, friends of Trump, and other rubes.

How much longer are the latter going to put up with it?

    CKYoung in reply to Wisewerds. | February 20, 2020 at 1:53 pm

    It is almost as if these PDJT associates have entered the “justice” system on purpose, so we could all see how corrupt it all really is. I suppose that could make me a conspiracy theorist. General Flynn’s case is especially troubling. From the Judge rudy contreras/FISA aspect, strzok/pientka 302 timeline/changes, Covington/Burling fuquery, Brady issues… essentially the whole thing top to bottom has been a sham. In the old days before PDJT, the msm would cluck approvingly on the super serious proceedings and a largely dormant public would go about their day with no other thought on it. Those days are over. Many people are now awake and looking under the rocks the msm never bother to turn over, and sharing what they find over the internet. What many are finding is not pretty.

    There is an axis in this country, and it is between the left, islamists, and the swamp (corrupt elected officials, bureaucrats, the GOPe and the like).

    Then there is the rest of us.

    Kurt Schlichter’s recent Townhall column hits the heart of this. The double standard is right there in front of everyone, and they don’t even try to camouflage it. It is brazen, and in our face. Tar and feathers can’t be too far off.

    “A dual-track justice system is unsustainable in a free country. True, the Democrats behind these injustices don’t want a free country at all, but we do. If we tolerate these injustices, we won’t have one, and the bad guys are not going to like what happens next. This is how they got Trump. They have only gotten worse. Okay, well, more of this is how you get Caesar.” -Kurt Schlichter-

    Hopefully not too long after PDJT is elected in 2020 and adds a few hundred more judges each year.

Stone gets 3 years, 4 months

Just proves the martyrs who resigned were b*st*rds

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to | February 20, 2020 at 3:20 pm

      Fine, you may be as I am, just a person who loves history.

      I’ve never read a whole lot about the JFK admin, but what I have along with deductive reasoning as to the best explanation – given all the diametrically opposing theories thrown out there – led me to believe that it was a inside job involving collusion with the disgruntled “1960 JFK campaign” supporting Mafia.

      Have you seen the pictures of LBJ and Ladybird on Air Force 1 being sworn in? There is a famous one of that.

      However, last year in some book I caught sight of a different photo of the swearing in that must have been taken a second or two before the most used photo of the swearing it. In this picture LBJ and Ladybird where absolutely smiling with GLEE!!!!!

        Without knowing both sides of history (and having some understanding of psychology), people should listen more than talk.

        LBJ was the most corrupt politician this side of hillary clinton. He literally sold American soldiers’ lives and limbs for political payoffs. He had many people murdered.

        As heinous as he was, hillary and bill clinton were all those things, plus treason.

        Anyone who hasn’t read Stone’s book, should do so asap.

        Hillary clinton would have, without a doubt, been the worst thing that ever happened to America if she was elected to the presidency. Bless her incompetence, for she lost to Obama – who proved to be the single worst thing to ever happen to America. Clinton is second.

He won’t serve a single day. This case will be overturned on appeal because of jury misconduct.

    Question: While he’s free on appellate bond (as I understand it), is the gag order still in place? And can the judge yank him back into jail if he opens his mouth?

    (I’m suspecting ‘yes’ to both questions)

    Eddie Baby in reply to CountMontyC. | February 20, 2020 at 1:40 pm

    Judge Jackson almost guaranteed it with her behavior.

    Joe-dallas in reply to CountMontyC. | February 20, 2020 at 1:52 pm

    May be more difficult to overturn on appeal. The court of Appeals for the district of columbia has 4 obama appointees, 2 clinton appointees, 3 bush 43 appointees and 2 Trump appointees.

    dystopia in reply to CountMontyC. | February 20, 2020 at 2:00 pm

    This was a political show trial. The Appeal comes before Circuit Court stacked with Democrats. As for the Supreme Court, I am sure Chief Justice John Roberts would rather put the onus on Trump than on himself. Unlike Roberts, Trump has demonstrated he has the capacity to do the4 right thing.

    beagleEar in reply to CountMontyC. | February 20, 2020 at 2:13 pm

    Perhaps we should write letters to the effect. Guilty or not I dunno, i’m too far from the action. But the dishonest and prejudiced juror – the one appointed foreman – makes it an unfair trial. Proper remedy is either a new trial or dismissal.

    Maybe, but as Deep Staters like to quip: “The process is the punishment!”

This is about a good a case for reversal on appeal that you can get and everyone on both sides knows it.

This is just the Dems using more punishment by process.

JackinSilverSpring | February 20, 2020 at 1:27 pm

What about juror 1261 haing contaminated the jury pool? I hope that Mr. Stone’s appeal will lead to this verdict being vacated because the jury and the judge were not unbiased.

    The court agreed to delay sending him to prison until after it rules on his pending motion for a new trial for jury bias. There’s a 2/19 Order on the docket that says:

    MINUTE ORDER as to ROGER J. STONE, JR. On February 18, 2020, the Court held a telephonic scheduling conference that was open to the public. The Court did not rule on the defendant’s pending motion for new trial. Both the government and the defense agreed that there is no legal authority that would require the Court to rule on a motion for new trial — which may be filed up to three years after the judgment in certain circumstances — before the sentencing date. The Court decided that it would rule on the motion, along with any motions that may arise immediately after the sentencing, at one time, and, in order to allay the defendant’s concerns, it will defer execution of any sentence and extend the time for the filing of any notice of appeal until the motion for new trial has been resolved. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/19/20. (DMK)

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to JackinSilverSpring. | February 20, 2020 at 3:25 pm

    With her in it,
    it was a,

“Roger Stone will not be sentenced for who his friends are or who his enemies are.”

Nobody in the world really believes that…

How much of what he’s in for are process crimes, how much for doing things which are usually winked at and how much are for actual crimes which are normally prosecuted when found?

This guy seems to be a long time bend-the-rules operator, but he’s just one of many such people. There does seem to be a strong element of “we’re going to reward our friends and punish our enemies” ** partisanship here.

**Quote from Barack Hussein Obama, announcing his intentions in a public speech

“Judge agrees 7 to 9 years is too harsh, and says she doubts she would have thought differently even if not for “unprecedented actions of the Department of Justice in the past week.””

So, The Donald was right about the prosecution’s recommendation.

So was AG Barr.

Conta The Fleeing Four’s “recommendation.”

Seems like a lot of statement from the judgs, n even more chattering class ink to say that.

    healthguyfsu in reply to BierceAmbrose. | February 20, 2020 at 2:16 pm

    It will be overturned. This will a compromise sentencing to try and hide her partisanship with her blatantly disregarded and easily reversible errors on the jury pool.

      healthguyfsu in reply to healthguyfsu. | February 20, 2020 at 2:16 pm


      BierceAmbrose in reply to healthguyfsu. | February 20, 2020 at 3:09 pm

      “… a compromise sentencing to try and hide her partisanship…”

      What’s the most hackery you can’t prove I’m not unbiased? 4 years, and make a speech about “influence” ignroing all the filings about the trial itself? Got it.

      You can tell when they’re playing sleight-of-agenda when they stack up negatives, n qualifications.

A guest on Dana Perino’s show now surmised Stone would not get a retrial opportunity. Further, the guest suggested Stone start serving his sentence and wait for Trump’s re-election in November after which Trump could commute or pardon Stone. Made sense to me.

Stone should absolutely not start serving

Not one day

And yes Trump should overturn pardon kick some ass

This was a political assassination.

ScottTheEngineer | February 20, 2020 at 3:08 pm

If Trump hasn’t pardoned him by next Friday I’ll be disappointed. This is blatant political prosecution.

Randy credico stated that at no time did he ever feel any danger from stone. Stones threats were a joke. Any guy knows that. It’s how some men relate to each other. Who hasn’t threatened to slap the bitch out of their brother?

    I think it’s better if Trump holds on giving a pardon till after a decision on a new trial is made, and if there is to be one, it will wait till the results of said trial.

    Stone clearing his name through a second trial would be better for the narrative as well as for Stone. He won’t serve any time till the trial issue is settled.

    I have no doubt that President Trump would pardon him, but in cases like this, let them display their dishonesty, then see what needs to be done to correct it.

Stone clearly was guilty of perjury. Biased jury and selective prosecution notwithstanding. IMO 40 months on the sentence seems about right. Now if we could also get that result for high profile d leaning bureaucrats it would be much appreciated.

Most folks posting hers are critics of the swamp and it’s dual track system of enforcement. IMO we need to remain willing to ‘call strikes’ and police our own or we become as hypocritical as our opponents. We either support the rule of law including nullification and prosecutors discretion or we don’t.

That said the recent disclosures by the jury foreman clearly shows a level of bias against Stone which, IMO, demonstrates Stone didn’t have an impartial jury.

The real question then becomes is it possible to panel an unbiased jury in D.C. for politicized criminal cases given the composition of the potential jury pool? Maybe, in theory but in practice not so much at least recently.

So what to do? Move these high profile cases to a randomly chosen circuit? Adopt a rule changing venue automatically when involving political appointed figures? Adopt a rule requiring judges to utilize discretion to get the pool to an even split in political affiliation prior to counsel using strikes in highly political cases?

Clearly a DC or N Virginia jury is almost certainly going to be biased due to concentration of Federal Employees. Maybe the real solution is to reduce the concentration by relocation of agency’s to separate locations around the nation.

    Tell us the lie that Roger Stone told! Feel free to use quotation marks, not some CNN synopsis!

      CommoChief in reply to MarkS. | February 20, 2020 at 7:28 pm


      As I recall, Stone told the House Intelligence committee that he didn’t have email/text communications regarding wikileaks. At trial prosecution produced evidence to the contrary. That supports the particular charge. You are certainly entitled to draw your own conclusions.

      IMO the takeaway from Stone is don’t play games with the truth when under oath. Do not omit and do not fabricate, just tell the truth or remain silent. It is wrong when either/every side does it. Anyone who does so should, IMO, be held accountable. To restate our side must be willing to police our own or we become what we oppose.

        dmi60ex in reply to CommoChief. | February 21, 2020 at 1:56 am

        Stone said they confiscated his emails and would not allow him to review them and he could not remember them all.
        Also see KT McFarland ‘s video on how the Mueller team tried to set a perjury trap for her.

        gwsjr425 in reply to CommoChief. | February 21, 2020 at 7:45 am

        That’s not entirely accurate. Stone testified he never made contact with Assange. The only thing the prosecution produced was his emails trying to make contact.

          CommoChief in reply to gwsjr425. | February 21, 2020 at 9:16 am

          Guys and girls,

          I believe the man is guilty of perjury. You are free to disagree.

          I also believe he had zealous prosecutors, a biased jury, and a judge who seems to have let her personal bias influence trial decisions. Stone had been a shady r operator that played too loose with the truth and was a thorn to d for forty years. The d leaning bureaucrats saw an opportunity to take advantage of the situation and did so using Stone’s actions against him.

          Was he railroaded, maybe. Was this a process crime, sure. But still a crime that he committed. He got too cute and got caught.

    Olinser in reply to CommoChief. | February 20, 2020 at 8:10 pm

    And not to be rude, but the answer to that is now ‘fuck you’.

    We’re sick of ‘policing our own’ when the Democrats get a free pass to do whatever the hell they want.

    We are going to have ONE SET OF RULES.

    And right now the rule is, “Democrats get to commit perjury without fear”.

    Enjoy the new rules, Democrats.

    If the DOJ and GOPe are unwilling to enforce the law on Democrats, then we’re not going to enforce it on Republicans.

      CommoChief in reply to Olinser. | February 20, 2020 at 9:01 pm


      You seem a bit unhinged. What measures are you advocating in furthering your stated goal of ‘not enforcing the law against republicans’. Hopefully you are just blowing off steam and are not suggesting some sort of OK City style solution. If you are thinking about a violent solution of that sort then please get some help from mental health professionals at once.

I’d be in favor of Trump commuting his sentence, send it through just before Stone shows up to prison, but only after appeals have run their course

I think the takeaway for anyone who operates in the political realm and who is to the left of Chairman Mao is to never, ever, EVER cooperate in any investigation. Keep your freaking mouth shut. And to everyone, period: never, ever, EVER speak to the FBI. Ever.

    CDR D in reply to Anonamom. | February 20, 2020 at 5:40 pm

    This. Never ever cooperate with them. I don’t care if they are merely asking for directions. No one has any morale obligation to cooperate with this punch line of a “justice system”.

      MarkS in reply to CDR D. | February 20, 2020 at 6:01 pm

      James Duane, Esq has a couple of videos on YouTube about never, ever talking to the police with examples of the dire results of doing so

amatuerwrangler | February 20, 2020 at 6:23 pm

OK– what the hell is that bill board? The one in the photo at the top of the post. It is partially obscured by Roger.

She allowed highly biased people on the jury. It was a rigged trial

She allowed highly biased people on the jury. It was a rigged trial

AF_Chief_Master_Sgt | February 20, 2020 at 8:11 pm


“Why did they call her Lady Bird?”

“Because Lady Dog was considered too cruel!”

h/t Robin Williams, Good Morning, Vietnam

Like Russia, Russia, Russia and the Ukraine call, maybe this disproportionate sentence, judge political rant, etc., is Democrat/Resistance red meat for Trump to “obstruct” or “abuse his authority” by pardoning Stone or interfering in the process. Impeachment hearings called again, etc., etc.. That’s all the have. It seems too obvious to me. Trap for Barr and Trump to react.

how is one to expect a ” fair ” verdict form a tainted jury?–the judge knew the make-up of the jury and proceeded regardless–seems at least two flaws in the whole process–perhaps was allowed to proceed to publicly confirm judge’s complicity/partiality/dishonesty–perhaps to lay groundwork for her removal from the bench

regards stone’s book–have my own theories regarding JFK’s asassination