As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

[Mueller Investigation] Manafort "Sentenced"

16465676970100

Posts

  • Options
    GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    It’s ok guys, Stone has a plan! According to this congress reporter for Politico, he’s gone so far as to file a personal apology. He signed it and everything!


    That makes it all better, right?

    That looks like way too much like a template; like stone just found a site with ready made documents that just require you to fill in the fields.

    Which I'm sure will go over well with a judge who was directly insulted and potentially threatened by this nimrod.

  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever run into a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    White privilege.

    I know it's fun to say that but I think it's off base. I, a white dude, would not get away with that shit in front of a federal judge either. It's not about being white, maybe not even about being white and wealthy. It's about being a part of this insane spin zone we've created where any escalation is just noise you make to fuel the grift, throwing out wild crazy shit in the media just... happens with no consequence, spewing conspiracies on the internet is the normal thing.

    They live in a different realm, and it's incompatible with standard reality.

  • Options
    Descendant XDescendant X Skyrim is my god now. Outpost 31Registered User regular
    Generally it's poor form to do anything that might even remotely require an apology to the judge afterward.

    Mind you, the dude we're currently discussing also has a tattoo of Nixon on his back, so I'm guessing that good judgement is severely lacking.

    Also, don't go looking at Stone's instagram account unless you're prepared to weep for mankind for a little bit afterward - it's chock full of morons wearing "Roger Stone Did Nothing Wrong" shirts.

    Garry: I know you gentlemen have been through a lot, but when you find the time I'd rather not spend the rest of the winter TIED TO THIS FUCKING COUCH!
  • Options
    Edith_Bagot-DixEdith_Bagot-Dix Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever run into a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    White privilege.

    I know it's fun to say that but I think it's off base. I, a white dude, would not get away with that shit in front of a federal judge either. It's not about being white, maybe not even about being white and wealthy. It's about being a part of this insane spin zone we've created where any escalation is just noise you make to fuel the grift, throwing out wild crazy shit in the media just... happens with no consequence, spewing conspiracies on the internet is the normal thing.

    They live in a different realm, and it's incompatible with standard reality.

    I agree this is about drinking deeply of the Flavor Aid. I think Stone and Manafort both live in this alternate reality not just because of being deep in the Republican spin-zone, but also through their work at Black, Manafort & Stone. They worked with all sorts of scumbags internationally in environments where threatening a judge would be completely normal. You combine them with a domestic administration that has no knowledge or respect for norms, and they revert to the instincts they honed working for third world despots.



    Also on Steam and PSN: twobadcats
  • Options
    SyphonBlueSyphonBlue The studying beaver That beaver sure loves studying!Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever run into a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    White privilege.

    Ain't nothin like rich white male privilege!

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • Options
    SleepSleep Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever run into a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    White privilege.

    I know it's fun to say that but I think it's off base. I, a white dude, would not get away with that shit in front of a federal judge either. It's not about being white, maybe not even about being white and wealthy. It's about being a part of this insane spin zone we've created where any escalation is just noise you make to fuel the grift, throwing out wild crazy shit in the media just... happens with no consequence, spewing conspiracies on the internet is the normal thing.

    They live in a different realm, and it's incompatible with standard reality.

    You're also smart spool. You realize why this doesn't work because you've availed yourself to stories of anything but rich white folks interacting with a legal system they are buddy buddy with.

    These folks literally don't have grasp on standard reality because extreme white privilege has insulated them from that reality. The reason they can not so subtly threaten a federal judge, and think a simple apology solves that problem for them is because in the past, when dealing with other legal issues... that's all its taken for a legal misstep to be forgotten. Offer an apology, maybe get a slap on the wrist, and then everything gets handled. They don't realize what part of the legal system they are dealing with, and that its very different from the legal systems they're used to interacting with.

    His court case started with a no knock raid with armor clad cops busting into his house unexpectedly in the early morning. Like a drug dealer. He's trying to act like it's one of those cases where they contacted his lawyers and told him to come on in to get deposed about some possible crimes that we're just going to give you a slap on the wrist for anyways.

    It isn't that white privilege is necessarily going to make it so a simple apology works. It's that white privilege is the reason they think a simple apology will work, and why we can't discount it as possibly working right out of hand.

  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever been in a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    He also just made up charges against Hillary and said that Judge dismissed them.

  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited February 2019
    Viskod wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever been in a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    He also just made up charges against Hillary and said that Judge dismissed them.

    She did dismiss a civil case against Hillary. Even odds Stone is just repeating the echoes from his chamber versus actively misconstruing it to seed the echo chamber himself.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever been in a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    he is a grifter

    lying is their whole deal

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Gaddez wrote: »
    It’s ok guys, Stone has a plan! According to this congress reporter for Politico, he’s gone so far as to file a personal apology. He signed it and everything!


    That makes it all better, right?

    That looks like way too much like a template; like stone just found a site with ready made documents that just require you to fill in the fields.

    Which I'm sure will go over well with a judge who was directly insulted and potentially threatened by this nimrod.

    It's almost certainly written by his attorneys. Who generally use various legal forms and standardized language in legal filings where anything that doesn't feel like a template is going to get edited until it does.

  • Options
    Drake ChambersDrake Chambers Lay out my formal shorts. Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Gaddez wrote: »
    It’s ok guys, Stone has a plan! According to this congress reporter for Politico, he’s gone so far as to file a personal apology. He signed it and everything!


    That makes it all better, right?

    That looks like way too much like a template; like stone just found a site with ready made documents that just require you to fill in the fields.

    Which I'm sure will go over well with a judge who was directly insulted and potentially threatened by this nimrod.

    It's almost certainly written by his attorneys. Who generally use various legal forms and standardized language in legal filings where anything that doesn't feel like a template is going to get edited until it does.

    Virtually everything used in an official filing is a template. If something has passed legal muster in the past, it makes no sense to re-invent the wheel every time.

    There are some jokes to that end -- no one has written a search warrant since the 70's -- but it's all on the level and is a reasonable way to conduct business with the court.

  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited February 2019
    I would assue most high falutin' law firms probably do not have to apologize for threats to judges enough to have a good form letter for that sort of thing.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Whitaker told the House Judiciary Committee that the President had never pressured him about intervening in investigations.

    We know that Trump already voiced his displeasure about SDNY to Whitaker, saying that they were getting "out of control". But now we know that Trump specifically wanted Whitaker to make Berman un-recuse himself and take charge of the Cohen related investigations.
    WASHINGTON — As federal prosecutors in Manhattan gathered evidence late last year about President Trump’s role in silencing women with hush payments during the 2016 campaign, Mr. Trump called Matthew G. Whitaker, his newly installed attorney general, with a question. He asked whether Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York and a Trump ally, could be put in charge of the widening investigation, according to several American officials with direct knowledge of the call.

    Mr. Whitaker, who had privately told associates that part of his role at the Justice Department was to “jump on a grenade” for the president, knew he could not put Mr. Berman in charge, since Mr. Berman had already recused himself from the investigation. The president soon soured on Mr. Whitaker, as he often does with his aides, and complained about his inability to pull levers at the Justice Department that could make the president’s many legal problems go away.

  • Options
    OneAngryPossumOneAngryPossum Registered User regular
    edited February 2019
    As to what Whitaker did following that conversation:
    [Trump] made the call to Mr. Whitaker to see if he could put Mr. Berman in charge of the New York investigation. The inquiry is run by Robert Khuzami, a career prosecutor who took over after Mr. Berman, whom Mr. Trump appointed, recused himself because of a routine conflict of interest.

    What exactly Mr. Whitaker did after the call is unclear, but there is no evidence that he took any direct steps to intervene in the Manhattan investigation. He did, however, tell some associates at the Justice Department that the prosecutors in New York required “adult supervision.”

    Talking to Congress might have been a bad idea for Whitaker.

    OneAngryPossum on
  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    As to what Whitaker did following that conversation:
    [Trump] made the call to Mr. Whitaker to see if he could put Mr. Berman in charge of the New York investigation. The inquiry is run by Robert Khuzami, a career prosecutor who took over after Mr. Berman, whom Mr. Trump appointed, recused himself because of a routine conflict of interest.

    What exactly Mr. Whitaker did after the call is unclear, but there is no evidence that he took any direct steps to intervene in the Manhattan investigation. He did, however, tell some associates at the Justice Department that the prosecutors in New York required “adult supervision.”

    Talking to Congress might have been a bad idea for Whitaker.

    I mean, the alternative was to get subpoenaed, so it's not like he had a choice.

  • Options
    OneAngryPossumOneAngryPossum Registered User regular
    As to what Whitaker did following that conversation:
    [Trump] made the call to Mr. Whitaker to see if he could put Mr. Berman in charge of the New York investigation. The inquiry is run by Robert Khuzami, a career prosecutor who took over after Mr. Berman, whom Mr. Trump appointed, recused himself because of a routine conflict of interest.

    What exactly Mr. Whitaker did after the call is unclear, but there is no evidence that he took any direct steps to intervene in the Manhattan investigation. He did, however, tell some associates at the Justice Department that the prosecutors in New York required “adult supervision.”

    Talking to Congress might have been a bad idea for Whitaker.

    I mean, the alternative was to get subpoenaed, so it's not like he had a choice.

    You’re not wrong. I’d rephrase it as ‘Working for Trump might have been a bad idea for [update name here daily].’

  • Options
    silence1186silence1186 Character shields down! As a wingmanRegistered User regular
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does Trump, after all this time, after it being explained over and over to him, still think getting his own people in the DoJ means the DoJ can't investigate him?

  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    the toddler admin saying anyone else needs adult supervision is fucking rich.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does Trump, after all this time, after it being explained over and over to him, still think getting his own people in the DoJ means the DoJ can't investigate him?

    Because Trump thinks being President is like being CEO, so anyone who works for the DOJ is basically his employee and therefore should have a vested interest in protecting his ass.

  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does Trump, after all this time, after it being explained over and over to him, still think getting his own people in the DoJ means the DoJ can't investigate him?

    Because he believes the DoJ works for the president. He's a stupid, stupid man.

  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does Trump, after all this time, after it being explained over and over to him, still think getting his own people in the DoJ means the DoJ can't investigate him?

    It's the only possible thing he can think of to get the investigations to go away. He thinks that the DoJ works for the President, and he's the President, so they should do what they tell him. He's desperate and not very smart.

  • Options
    silence1186silence1186 Character shields down! As a wingmanRegistered User regular
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does Trump, after all this time, after it being explained over and over to him, still think getting his own people in the DoJ means the DoJ can't investigate him?

    It's the only possible thing he can think of to get the investigations to go away. He thinks that the DoJ works for the President, and he's the President, so they should do what they tell him. He's desperate and not very smart.

    Initially yes, but how can still think that way after repeatedly, repeatedly, being told "Windmills do not work that way!" Where Windmills are the DoJ, in this instance.

  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    I think it's because the alternatives for him are either 1) Just sit back and wait for the investigations to dismantle his entire administration, or 2) Resign and wait to be arrested. Given those choices, banging his head against the wall at least might maybe eventually work in his favor.

  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    I think it's because the alternatives for him are either 1) Just sit back and wait for the investigations to dismantle his entire administration, or 2) Resign and wait to be arrested. Given those choices, banging his head against the wall at least might maybe eventually work in his favor.

    If he resigns I'd expect it to happen from Moscow.

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but how does Trump, after all this time, after it being explained over and over to him, still think getting his own people in the DoJ means the DoJ can't investigate him?

    Because Trump thinks being President is like being CEO, so anyone who works for the DOJ is basically his employee and therefore should have a vested interest in protecting his ass.

    This isn’t even how being CEO of a non-fake scam corporation works.

  • Options
    ButtersButters A glass of some milks Registered User regular
    He long accused Holder of playing offensive line for the Obama administration and now he wants the same imaginary thing.

    PSN: idontworkhere582 | CFN: idontworkhere | Steam: lordbutters | Amazon Wishlist
  • Options
    BrodyBrody The Watch The First ShoreRegistered User regular
    Butters wrote: »
    He long accused Holder of playing offensive line for the Obama administration and now he wants the same imaginary thing.

    Conservatives spent 8 years complaining about how Obama was wielding his AG to further the rise of socialism, and so he thinks he should be able to use his AG to sue people for libel and anything else that strikes his fancy. Which is even more ridiculous considering how much work Sessions did for "his" party, regardless of the recusal.

    "I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."

    The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson

    Steam: Korvalain
  • Options
    autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm not sure how in the world he can explain that post as not having the intention of disrespecting the court.

    I mean, a short list of ways it disrespected the court, in the pair of posts (pre- and post-edit):
    - suggested that the Federal Court is engaged in a "show trial", fundamentally impugning the integrity of the Judicial process.
    - suggested that the Judge is compromised and partisan because she was appointed by President Obama
    - suggested that the Judge violated the Due Process rights of another defendant by revoking his bail
    - suggested that he's being railroaded rather than getting a fair hearing and "the fix is in"
    - vaguely threatened the Judge via posting crosshairs near her head in an image

    How in the world do you say "I'm sorry, I meant no disrespect" with a straight face? This dude just seriously has not ever run into a situation where his day-to-day ran up against the plain, nonpartisan, no-spin character of real life. It's like a comedian getting blown up over a rape bit and going " ... but it was just a joke!" except with actual crimes.

    White privilege.

    rich white privilege

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • Options
    Martini_PhilosopherMartini_Philosopher Registered User regular
    Butters wrote: »
    He long accused Holder of playing offensive line for the Obama administration and now he wants the same imaginary thing.

    Imagination -- that's the key to this behavior. He and those like him refuse and continue to avoid learning how the government works. If any of them did learn how government works, it would be incredibly difficult to hold their stark, black & white opinions since that would be confronting their ignorance and possibly have to revise their stance.

    All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
  • Options
    MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    As to what Whitaker did following that conversation:
    [Trump] made the call to Mr. Whitaker to see if he could put Mr. Berman in charge of the New York investigation. The inquiry is run by Robert Khuzami, a career prosecutor who took over after Mr. Berman, whom Mr. Trump appointed, recused himself because of a routine conflict of interest.

    What exactly Mr. Whitaker did after the call is unclear, but there is no evidence that he took any direct steps to intervene in the Manhattan investigation. He did, however, tell some associates at the Justice Department that the prosecutors in New York required “adult supervision.”

    Talking to Congress might have been a bad idea for Whitaker.

    I mean, the alternative was to get subpoenaed, so it's not like he had a choice.

    He was asked to come clarify his testimony last week, right? So he should be in front of the House committee again soon.

  • Options
    MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Butters wrote: »
    He long accused Holder of playing offensive line for the Obama administration and now he wants the same imaginary thing.

    Imagination -- that's the key to this behavior. He and those like him refuse and continue to avoid learning how the government works. If any of them did learn how government works, it would be incredibly difficult to hold their stark, black & white opinions since that would be confronting their ignorance and possibly have to revise their stance.

    Basically, this.

    It's a Lisa Simpson science project. "Is my President smarter than a hamster?".

    And it's apparently not new to Trump. He'd rather bitch people out for not fixing an impossible problem, than not causing the problem to begin with.

  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo has some insight into why Stone’s apology was insufficient



    This guy is so used to his antics being overlooked that he can’t handle being under the magnifying glass

    The thing is, you don't even need a magnifying glass to see what these yahoos are doing.

    You just need, like, a regular glass.

    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo has some insight into why Stone’s apology was insufficient



    This guy is so used to his antics being overlooked that he can’t handle being under the magnifying glass

    The thing is, you don't even need a magnifying glass to see what these yahoos are doing.

    You just need, like, a regular glass.

    You need some kind of reverse magnifying glass or satellite picture from orbit to see what they are doing because there is so much of it you have to back really far up to see the forest for the trees.

  • Options
    TetraNitroCubaneTetraNitroCubane The Djinnerator At the bottom of a bottleRegistered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo has some insight into why Stone’s apology was insufficient



    This guy is so used to his antics being overlooked that he can’t handle being under the magnifying glass

    The thing is, you don't even need a magnifying glass to see what these yahoos are doing.

    You just need, like, a regular glass.

    At this point I'm pretty sure you could figure it out if you saw it through the wrong end of a pair of binoculars.

  • Options
    GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Josh Marshall from Talking Points Memo has some insight into why Stone’s apology was insufficient



    This guy is so used to his antics being overlooked that he can’t handle being under the magnifying glass

    The thing is, you don't even need a magnifying glass to see what these yahoos are doing.

    You just need, like, a regular glass.

    With beer in it ideally

    wbBv3fj.png
  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    I know people are in the mind of "I'll believe it when I hear it from Rosenstein's mouth" but the White House is definitely signaling they want him gone.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/19/politics/trump-dag-jeffrey-rosen/index.html

  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Oh, I'm sure they do. I'm just not sure he'll oblige them, since "the Boss" is - despite it being part of his "brand" - too chickenshit to actually fire anyone.

  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    Oh, I'm sure they do. I'm just not sure he'll oblige them, since "the Boss" is - despite it being part of his "brand" - too chickenshit to actually fire anyone.

    James Comey says hi.

    All he needs is for Rosenstein to be far enough away.

  • Options
    So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    Can anyone find a gif with "SHOW CAUSE" in giant letters on fucking fire?

    Because damn that efiling summary is HOT 100 levels of "judge be pissed"

  • Options
    So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    edited February 2019
    IF the court doesn't just revoke his release, I am excited to see what creative conditions the court comes up with, like no use of the internet or further gag orders (which Stone will definitely break I'm sure)

    So It Goes on
This discussion has been closed.