Roger Stone Indicted

YouTube

Months ago, I wrote about how Special Counsel Robert Mueller was clearly gunning for Stone with an increasing intensity (here and here and here). Stone was arrested early Friday morning in another signature raid on his home by the FBI. Once again, as with the treatment of Paul Manafort, it is unclear why prosecutors wanted to have a night raid on his home (captured by awaiting media) for non-violent crimes. It was entirely unnecessary in my view. The criminal counts themselves are additional counts of false statements and witness tampering. These type of process crimes are the majority of charged conduct against non-Russians in the investigation other than the unrelated crimes against figures like Manafort.

Mr. Stone was charged with seven counts.

The indictment contained the vintage language of Stone with other witnesses, attacking those deemed weak while encouraging others to stonewall.

On or about November 19, 2017, in a text message to STONE, Person 2 said that his lawyer wanted to see him (Person 2). STONE responded, “‘Stonewall it. Plead the fifth. Anything to save the plan’ . . . Richard Nixon.”

It is a weird comment even for a guy with a tattoo of Richard Nixon since Nixon was destroyed by precisely such conduct.

Notably, there are no charges in the indictment that accuse Stone of colluding with the Russians or the hacking of the email systems. Stone suggested to others that he was the conduit of hacked information from Wikileaks but he later insisted that he was not actually speaking to Julian Assange and that he had no direct knowledge that Russians were responsible for the Democratic hackings.

The indictment is largely on false statements but those statements seem to overlap and confirm the occurrence of communications. :

STONE testified falsely that he did not have
emails with third parties about the head of
Organization 1, and that he did not have any
documents, emails, or text messages that refer
to the head of Organization 1.

STONE testified falsely that his August 2016
references to being in contact with the head of
Organization 1 were references to
communications with a single “go-between,”
“mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” who
STONE identified as Person 2.

STONE testified falsely that he did not ask the
person he referred to as his “go-between,”
“mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” to
communicate anything to the head of
Organization 1 and did not ask the
intermediary to do anything on STONE’s
behalf.

STONE testified falsely that he and the person
he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual
friend,” and “intermediary” did not
communicate via text message or email about
Organization 1.

STONE testified falsely that he had never
discussed his conversations with the person he
referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual
friend,” and “intermediary” with anyone
involved in the Trump Campaign.

The Special Counsel likely knows about those communications and does not allege anything criminal in the communications themselves.

The indictment does reference a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone about possible Wikileaks information. The indictment clearly states that Stone told multiple campaign officials that he had such information and the question is who “directed” campaign officials to reach out to Stone. Obviously, many will want to know if that person was President Trump or his close aides. On the other hand, it also references people like Steve Bannon as not even returning his calls.

Nothing in this indictment contradicts that latter account. This conduct involves false statements, obstruction, and witness tampering. Unlike Cohen who was allowed to correct false statements, Mueller charged every possible alleged crime. This will make for an interesting defense as Stone cites his public reputation for spinning and conning the media.

Some of the language is so over-the-top that it may appear less than credible to a jury as an actual threat as opposed to Stone’s signature vernacular. In one communication, the indictment recounts the following:

On or about April 9, 2018, STONE wrote in an email to Person 2, “You are a rat. A stoolie. You backstab your friends-run your mouth my lawyers are dying Rip you to shreds.” STONE also said he would “take that dog away from you,” referring to Person 2’s dog. On or about the same day, STONE wrote to Person 2, “I am so ready. Let’s get it on. Prepare to die [expletive].”

The defense can call Person 2 and ask how that statement was taken or understood while also pointing to similarly outlandish statements in public. Like much else in Stone’s world, this will make for a fascinating trial.

Here is the indictment: Stone Indictment


348 thoughts on “Roger Stone Indicted”

    1. Olly, responding to the slanderous lunacy of mentally competent people has nothing to do with whether they merit it or not. It has to do with their slander. How do you erase slander?

      1. How do you erase slander?

        Why do you feel compelled to erase the slander? Erase the slanderer instead. These folks are more like functional alcoholics and this blog is like an intervention being held at a kegger. You’ve worked tirelessly to expose their fallacious arguments and all the facts, all the logic and reason hasn’t nudged them any closer to admitting they were wrong.

        I consider what my footprint on this blog is. Think archives. What do you want your legacy to be? People follow this blog but don’t participate in the discussions. The information you share, the facts you bring, your reasoning, your logic has legs beyond what is evident here. This is like a reality show and people watch the goings on. I know this because I’ve invited people to the blog and they only watch. They will tell me what they think of character X or Y.

        1. “Why do you feel compelled to erase the slander?”

          Obviously that is not my goal which is somewhat different. I don’t care if these idiots change their minds or not. This is a study of sorts and if the information benefits anyone it will be those that are on the side lines and not responding. However, that is not my goal either.

          Why do you bother to remain on the list?

          “What do you want your legacy to be?”

          My legacy doesn’t stem from this blog and I hope yours doesn’t either.

  1. Too bad Trump didn’t try to sell the Russians 20 percent of our uranium production. Then that would have been Ok. Right.

    1. Haha. Excellent. Please post more materials addressing “Uranium One” or whatever your clique of conspiracy wackjobs call it. Thanks for playing, and please post more conspiracy warnings for the ‘Merican peoples.

      this is to “also, hannity said Obama didn’t put his hand on his heart during the Anthem” bobbie

      1. “So if you meet me
        Have some courtesy
        Have some sympathy, and some taste
        Use all your well-learned politesse
        Or I’ll lay your soul to waste, mm yeah”

        – Mick Jagger
        ___________

        Deompensating Marky Mark’s NPD Diagnosis

        Narcissistic personality disorder — one of several types of personality disorders — is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that’s vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

        A narcissistic personality disorder causes problems in many areas of life, such as relationships, work, school or financial affairs. People with narcissistic personality disorder may be generally unhappy and disappointed when they’re not given the special favors or admiration they believe they deserve. They may find their relationships unfulfilling, and others may not enjoy being around them.

        Treatment for narcissistic personality disorder centers around talk therapy (psychotherapy).

        Symptoms

        Signs and symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder and the severity of symptoms vary. People with the disorder can:

        Have an exaggerated sense of self-importance
        Have a sense of entitlement and require constant, excessive admiration
        Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
        Exaggerate achievements and talents
        Be preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
        Believe they are superior and can only associate with equally special people
        Monopolize conversations and belittle or look down on people they perceive as inferior
        Expect special favors and unquestioning compliance with their expectations
        Take advantage of others to get what they want
        Have an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
        Be envious of others and believe others envy them
        Behave in an arrogant or haughty manner, coming across as conceited, boastful and pretentious
        Insist on having the best of everything — for instance, the best car or office

        At the same time, people with narcissistic personality disorder have trouble handling anything they perceive as criticism, and they can:

        Become impatient or angry when they don’t receive special treatment
        Have significant interpersonal problems and easily feel slighted
        React with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make themselves appear superior
        Have difficulty regulating emotions and behavior
        Experience major problems dealing with stress and adapting to change
        Feel depressed and moody because they fall short of perfection
        Have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation

        ***When to see a doctor***

        People with narcissistic personality disorder may not want to think that anything could be wrong, so they may be unlikely to seek treatment. If they do seek treatment, it’s more likely to be for symptoms of depression, drug or alcohol use, or another mental health problem. But perceived insults to self-esteem may make it difficult to accept and follow through with treatment.

        If you recognize aspects of your personality that are common to narcissistic personality disorder or you’re feeling overwhelmed by sadness, consider reaching out to a trusted doctor or mental health provider. Getting the right treatment can help make your life more rewarding and enjoyable.

        *** Emphasis

  2. Remember when the Left villified the women in Clinton’s circles and how they seethed at Ken Starr?

    ###

    “Kenneth Starr: Treatment of women involved in Lewinsky scandal ‘American tragedy’ of the 1990s”

    Looking back on the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, Kenneth Starr, who served as the special independent counsel, said he doesn’t think today, in the #MeToo era, Americans would have allowed the women who came forward back then to be vilified as they were in 1998.

    “We live in a very different era, especially in terms of the way we treat human beings,” Starr said. “The treatment that was afforded by the Clinton White House — and by the president himself — to women who had come into his orbit, into some kind of relationship with him … to demean and to challenge and to attack them in these very mean-spirited ways was a part of, I think, the American tragedy that we experienced in the 1990s.”

    In December 1998, the House impeached Clinton for obstruction of justice and perjury after Starr and his team brought forth documents showing, among other allegations, that the commander in chief had lied under oath about a relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

    Lewinsky’s name, however, was dragged through the mud. She was referred to as a “slut” and “vixen” in the media, as Clinton and his camp tried to discredit her story.

    Starr said Sydney Blumenthal, Clinton’s aide and friend, had even testified to a grand jury investigating the relationship between Lewinsky and the president that Lewinsky was a stalker and that the president was trying to “respond to a stalker-type situation.”

    “These were all total fabrication. Total lies,” Starr said.”

    https://www.yahoo.com/gma/kenneth-starr-treatment-women-involved-lewinsky-scandal-american-115212517–abc-news-topstories.html

    1. Yeah, Tabby, we should have show trials in which every member of Deep State is brought to justice. The problem is that shutdown damaged Trump significantly. It’s hard to say what political juice he has at this point. So I think those show trials will have to wait until Trump gets his mo-jo back.

      1. ” It’s hard to say what political juice he has at this point.”

        Peter, Trump probably has the same amount of juice he had when he won the Republican nomination and when he won the Presidency.

        1. Allan,
          – Trump might learn not to paint himself into a corner like he did; also, he may figure out that it’s a bad idea to openly take credit for a “government shutdown” before it even happens.
          I think he did come out of this with egg on his face and politically weakened, at least in the short term.
          Policy-wise, the Democrats are now capitalizing on their momentum and have proposed installing a 2,000 mile-long, eco-friendly welcome mat for illegal immigrants.
          I don’t know how this will all play out longer term, but for the time being, I think it strengthens the hand of the Democratic “rising stars” like Rep. Hyphen-Cortez and others.
          They must be encouraged by recent events, in that their dreams of abolishing ICE and getting funding for that border welcome mat seem closer to becoming official U.S. policy.

          1. “– Trump might learn not to paint himself into a corner like he did; also, he may figure out that it’s a bad idea to openly take credit for a “government shutdown” before it even happens.”

            Tom, I don’t think this means squat. Yes, it will be used as talking points but I don’t think they will hold traction with the voters that count. Time is a big factor so the future is indefinite.

            The further left the Democratic candidates move in the primaries the more Democrats that will feel abandoned. The pundits can make all sorts of predictions and the polls can show all sorts of things but the only thing that counts is the electoral college. Right now I think the Russians and Chinese are putting military pressure on the US. They obviously want the Democrats in charge of our government in 2020.

            1. Allan,…
              A segment of voters that really does count is the c.40% group of hard-core Trump loyalists.
              And the perception that Trump caved on the border wall issue has prompted criticism of Trump from some in that very key group.
              That’s one of the major reasons I think that Trump has been
              politically damaged.
              Among other reasons are the political optics of furloughed/ unpaid federal workers and the strong media focus on that issue, and the entenched position that Trump adopted at the beginning of the “shutdown” and maintained for over a month, and Trump’s statement that he’d take credit/ blame for the shutdown.
              From someone who boasts of negotiating prowess and expertise in the “Art of the Deal”, these elements are especially damaging.
              Because at the end of the day, the question “what did Trump get out of this standoff?” and negotiating “strategy” will linger.
              These aren’t necessarily permanent or fatal political setbacks for Trump, but at least in the short/ intermediate term I think he got clobbered.

              1. I don’t know if he should have done what he did or not, but I don’t look at it as a killer mistake. He can take advantage of the drug corridor law which would permit him easier access to building a wall since that is specifically written into law. We are going to revisit the problem and it isn’t over. I don’t believe as many Trump supporters will leave because of the wall in 2020. They will leave because of the economy. Trump is facing tremendous forces from both parties so one can’t just think about the numbers at this time.

            2. Your codefenant below imagines that the gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make which compose the hard-core 37% who still like the day glo bozo are the “voters that count.” I commend you, and your ilk, for being “in for a penny, in for a pound.” Perhaps the forthcoming scalding will allow the few rational persons still in the Republican Party to rebuild something viable from the ashes. So sorry for your loss, and condition.

              this is to “these damn deckchairs are all messed up” allan / allen

              1. Sounds like Mark’s employers have found out how Mark enjoys himself at work and decided to let him go. That would be an explanation for the extra time Mark has to play on the net.

    2. Obergruppenfuhrer Mueller and the Feminazi Schutzstaffel found no crime which was committed before the appointment of a special counsel. Herr Mueller is attempting to compel his targets to not only “sing” but to “compose.” The false, contrived “process crimes” induced by Herr Mueller constitute criminal “malicious prosecution” a la Mike Nifong of Duke Lacrosse notoriety. NC AG Nifong was convicted and sent to jail.

  3. The eminently ineligible, non-“natural born citizen” and possibly criminal Kamala Harris declared her candidacy for president. She may have a big problem.
    ________________

    EXCLUSIVE: Whistleblower Evidence Shows Kamala Harris Covered Up Illegal Wiretaps

    “Democratic California senator Kamala Harris covered up a wide-ranging surveillance scheme in which a single Riverside County judge ordered hundreds of wiretaps snaring millions of phone calls and thousands of unsuspecting people across the country, according to whistleblower case evidence obtained by Big League Politics.

    New evidence shows how then-California attorney general Kamala Harris’ office defied precedent to conceal and obscure the details of this illegal operation, including by “locking” a mandatory annual report on intercepted communications from public disclosure and allegedly changing the numbering system on the official report to make it impossible to identify each wiretap coming out of Riverside County. Many of these wiretaps were never explained and never resulted in action, and targets are still unnamed.

    Kamala Harris served as California attorney general from 2011 to 2017, when she took her Senate seat.

    Riverside County Superior Court judge Helios Hernandez, appointed by Democrat governor Gray Davis, ordered 624 wiretaps in 2014, almost five times more than any other American judge, and 44,000 people and over 2 million conversations were tapped. Hernandez even got 17 wiretap applications in one day. Some of Hernandez’s wiretaps have been found to be illegal by prosecutors, leading to the dropping of some cases and the surrender of assets seized by the feds. A federal judge said legal standards “could not have been met” with regard to the Riverside County wiretaps. Approximately 18 percent of the more than 4 million conversations wiretapped in the state of California in 2016 were incriminating.

    The wiretapping scheme coincided with a period of massive revenue gains for the state of California from civil asset forfeitures overseen by Kamala Harris’ office. In 2014, Riverside County collected more than $3 million in civil asset forfeitures.

    Stephanie J. Lacambra, criminal defense staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, is representing a retired California Highway Patrol officer who was targeted with a wiretap, and who still has no idea why.

    “It looked like the FBI and DEA were shopping because they could get this one judge in Riverside County” to sign off on wiretap orders, Lacambra told Big League Politics, referring to Riverside County judge Helios Hernandez.

    Lacambra that the “specter of impropriety” led to numerous of these cases being dropped nationwide. “It looked like there was not justification for the sheer number of wiretaps coming out of this county.”

    Lacambra said that her client’s wiretap “occurred during the time in which this spike in wiretaps was happening in 2015.”

    “The problem lies in that the district attorney’s office that had the responsibility of issuing notice to individuals who were targets failed to notify those targets,” Lacambra told Big League Politics, noting that people were completely unaware that they were being wiretapped.

    “What we’re doing right now is trying to convince the court to exercise its discretion to release the information” about her client’s wiretap, before going to the next step of a lawsuit.

    “In California there is a state law that says the target of a wiretap can ask the court to release the documents…we’re trying to get that information first,” Lacambra said.

    Cover Up

    In 2015, Kamala Harris’ attorney general’s office made the unprecedented decision to release California’s Electronic Interceptions Report as a “locked” PDF not available to members of the public, according to documents obtained by Big League Politics.

    An April 23, 2015 letter on Kamala Harris’ official attorney general stationery denied Lacambra’s firm’s request to see the report.

    A deputy attorney general wrote on Harris’ behalf:

    “Since that time, our Office has changed its security protocol regarding reports and other documents that are made available electronically to members of the public on our public web site. Now, all such reports and documents appearing on our public website are only made available to members of the public in a locked PDF format. We have made this change in orderto better protect the security and integrity of the data in our public records.

    Unfortunately, given our new procedure, we are unable to provide you with an electric copy of the 2014 Electronic Interception report in a Microsoft Word format. We apologize for any inconvenience that this new change may cause for you.”

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s persistence eventually led to the publication of the 2015 report, but problems persisted.

    The report was incomprehensible in the sense that Riverside County wiretap reports did not correspond to the wiretap order numbers, and were not in correct sequential order like other counties, according to a source.

    The Riverside County wiretaps had identifying numbers in the report starting at over 1,000, even though there were not more than 1,000 wiretaps from that county in 2014 or 2015, making it impossible to trace or identify some of the wiretaps, including in the case of Lacambra’s client, the retired California Highway Patrol officer. That officer’s issued wiretap number does not correspond with any of the numbers indexed in the report.”

  4. GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN..

    CAUSED DEEP CRACKS IN REPUBLICAN BASE

    INDEPENDENTS SWING STRONGLY AGAINST TRUMP

    Public disapproval of President Trump has swelled five points to 58 percent over three months as a majority of Americans continue to hold him and congressional Republicans most responsible for the partial federal government shutdown that ended Friday, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

    In addition, more than 1 in 5 Americans say they were personally inconvenienced by the ­record-long shutdown, which ended after lawmakers and the White House reached agreement on a three-week continuing resolution to reopen government agencies that had been shuttered for 35 days.

    For Trump, the poll illustrates the political damage he sustained as he sought to please his conservative base by building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, his top campaign promise.

    The Post-ABC poll finds that Trump’s overall popularity has weakened, with 37 percent of the public approving of his job performance and 58 percent disapproving. In the previous Post-ABC poll just before November’s midterm elections in which Democrats won control of the House of Representatives, the approval-disapproval margin was narrower, at 40 percent to 53 percent.

    Though the new survey finds that a 54 percent majority of Americans disapprove of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s performance during the shutdown, negative ratings for Trump on this question are higher, at 60 percent. And when asked who is most responsible, 53 percent blame Trump and congressional Republicans, while 34 percent blame Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Democrats.

    The 19 percentage-point margin of blame is slightly smaller than the 24-point margin in a Post-ABC poll roughly two weeks ago.

    Among political independents, disapproval of Trump has grown from 53 percent at the start of November to 63 percent. Independents have also had a lopsided reaction to the shutdown, with 54 percent saying Trump and Republicans are more responsible for it, while 29 percent blame Pelosi and Democrats, a 25-point margin, slightly wider than the public as a whole.

    White House aides have expressed concerns in private about Trump’s strategy, fearful that the deepening public impact of the shutdown could prove a long-term drag on his political fortunes as the president begins to focus on his 2020 reelection campaign.

    Edited from: “Post-ABC Poll: “Trump Disapproval Swells As President, Republicans Face Lopsided Blame For Shutdown”.

    Today’s WASHINGTON POST

    1. RE. ABOVE:

      Every poll released this week illustrated that the shutdown has severely damaged Trump. But Republicans may have sustained longterm damage with regards to basic ideology. Their elderly message that ‘government must be shrunk’ was severely contradicted. The public has seen how important government is. That lesson won’t be forgotten any time soon.

      1. Peter Shill, the jackhammer in our forums, this has your genetic makeup all over it.

        “Donald-hating media devolve into self-mutilation
        When you are a jackhammer, everything looks like a broken sidewalk. This is why the Trump-hating media are demolishing themselves.

        The Left’s journalists and artists are so deeply consumed by vile, vicious, venomous rage towards President Donald J. Trump and his supporters that they have become incapable of clear thought.”

        “Just about daily, they soil themselves and stain beyond recognition the notion of a free press as a bulwark of American liberty. Instead, they humiliate themselves while aiming to “get Trump” and reverse the results of the 2016 election, which they remain too juvenile to accept, even halfway through Trump’s first term.“

        https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/trump-critics-media-embarrass-themselves/

        1. WC if you have to trot out that old ‘left wing media bias’ tripe to explain Trump’s defeat in the shutdown crisis, you are grasping for straws.

          Obviously Trump and Mitch McConnell were following polls. They have their ‘own’ pollsters you know. Every poll showed the public wanted the shutdown over! That is why Trump finally called it off. He and McConnell knew the GOP was getting slammed on this. At least 6 Republican senators were ready to defect.

          What’s more, comments made by Trump’s Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross and Economic Advisor, Larry Kudlow, indicated a certain deafness to the public’s frustration. Their comments were so badly received that it’s no coincidence the shutdown ended one day later.

          1. “Every poll showed the public wanted…”

            Peter, your entire view of politics is the “polls”. Nothing else counts to you whether it be the Constitution or the working families that keep America alive. Trump is correct and has been proven correct by Pelosi’s and Schumer’s own statements. That Pelosi and Schumer are playing politics is not a good thing. It demonstrates their disdain for the nation and yours as well.

            You are also stupid for if there is a poll taken in years past whether the sun goes around the earth or the earth goes around the sun you think the former if the polls demonstrate the wind blowing in that direction. You don’t bother concerning yourself with the science. That is a summation of your intellect.

            1. Allen, America was established as a restricted-vote republic. The Founders never intended for the “poor” to vote and they never intended for a one man, one vote democrazy. Ben Franklin told you that he gave you “…a republic if you can keep it.” You couldn’t. Franklin’s republic required and understood that voters would be Male, European, 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres. Never were the masses intended to vote. Ironically, China does not allow the masses to vote and China is a republic like the Founders’ America in which power resides in a group of people ENTITLED to vote. China’s difference from America is the CONSTITUTION.

              1. Actually what you said George is untrue. In one state woman were permitted to vote from the beginning. That state later in the early 1800’s changed the law and conformed with the other states on that matter. Read the Constitution.

                1. Allen,

                  “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”

                  – Alexander Hamilton
                  _________________

                  The Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795 and 1802

                  thrice required citizens who vote to be “…free white person(s)…” as original intent passed by the Founders within the year of the adoption of the Constitution, 1789.
                  ________________________________________________________________________________________

                  Fun Fact: The people in China are not allowed to vote for the president in China. The People’s Congress is “entitled” to vote.
                  ________________________________________________________________

                  Thank you. I agree. America has no need for and should immediately expunge the 19th dumbendment by emergency executive order, a la “Crazy Abe’s” wholly unconstitutional “proclamation” or Obongo’s absurdly unconstitutional DACA (immigration is set by the legislative branch).

                  Apparently, the Founders, by omission, allowed the several states to establish qualifications to vote. Some women did vote. I think you would agree that there were so few that a small contingent of corrupt legislators corruptly and improperly ratified the 19th dumbmendment (1920) which is unconstitutional by its very “injurious” nature.

                  To wit,

                  “…amendments desired,…as will not injure the constitution…”

                  ” And if there are amendments desired, of such a nature as will not injure the constitution, and they can be ingrafted so as to give satisfaction to the doubting part of our fellow citizens; the friends of the federal government will evince that spirit of deference and concession for which they have hitherto been distinguished.”

                  – James Madison, Proposed Amendments to the Constitution, June 8, 1789
                  ___________________________________________________________

                  Ben Franklin said we gave you “…a republic, if you can keep it.” Ben Franklin’s republic was distinctly not a one man, one vote democrazy. A republic is rational governance by citizens entitled to vote:

                  republic –

                  b(1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law
                  ______________________________________________________________________

                  The Founders did not allow the “poor” to vote because they would “sell” their votes which is the very basis for the current state of confused and unintelligible electoral affairs wherein the vote has been infected and contaminated causing it to be mortal for America and its Constitution.

                  “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”

                  “If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

                  – Alexander Hamilton – The Farmer Refuted, 1775

                  1. Again George, I will say you are wrong. Read the Constitution which is what the founders intended after compromising to meet the needs of enough states. Yet in one state women had the right to vote until early in the 19th century.

                    How do you justify what you have said here and elsewhere based on my comment above about women and voting?

                    1. Allen, read. The 19th dumbmendment came to the fore because women were not entitled to vote. Hello! Read. The “poor” were never intended to vote. Read. Capable and accomplished European men were entitled to vote by the Founders – this was a demonstration of original intent. The Founders did not conduct a one man, one vote democrazy. They simply didn’t. Read.

                    2. “Allen, read. The 19th dumbmendment came to the fore because women were not entitled to vote. Hello! Read.”

                      George, before trying sarcasm learn your subject matter. In this case it is the Constitution. I am toying with you because your bravado doesn’t match the content of what you write.

                      Look at Article 4 that references the states and then look at Amendment 10 “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

                      The 19th Amendment took the assignment of what sex could vote from the States and put it in the hands of the Federal Government. That is why the 19th Amendment was passed and that is why you make a mockery of yourself in your recent posts.

                      Think about this for awhile, George, recognizing that one State permitted women to vote before the 19th Amendment. How could that be? Start to talk rationally and I will stop playing with you and explain what it is you are confused about without pulling your tail. The rest of your statement that I didn’t adress is also basic BS at least where the founders were concerned when they signed the Constitution.

                      Let me add that in at least some of the Colonies women were not totally excluded from the vote. Take note of the wording. I like playing with you and pulling your tail.

                    3. Please cite the Constitution on entitling any citizens to vote. Entitlement to vote is a state function.

                    4. “Please cite the Constitution on entitling any citizens to vote. Entitlement to vote is a state function.”

                      Of course I replied to your other comment before reading this.

                      George, it appears the Socratic method is helping you reach the truth. Knowing this part of the Constitution makes us question why you made your ridiculous statements here and on other threads?

                      You have to ask yourself whose words are you paraphrasing when these statements of yours are made? The Constitution or what you wish to believe? Those are two different things.

                  2. Allan, your citations of Article 4 and the 10th amendment prove my assertion that the states determine the criteria to entitle particular groups of citizens to vote. The 19th dumbmendment is proof that women were not allowed to vote, for obvious and good reasons, understanding that there are always “exceptions” to the rule and some exceptions existed in 1789. My point is that the Founders established a restricted-vote republic and never intended for a one man, one vote democrazy as they understood that the “poor,” for example, would “sell” their votes. They did. You are correct. I would never attempt to change the Ten Commandments and would never attempt to amend, or “injure” as Hamilton put it, the Constitution with amendments written by the Founders. America must have restrictions on the vote or it is not America. Understanding that the entire American welfare state is irrefutably unconstitutional, as it imposes the anti-American principles of communism, it is not inconceivable that many Americans disagree with post adoption, 1789, amendments to the Constitution. The “Reconstruction amendments” were improperly ratified and corruptly counted under the duress of post-unconstitutional-war military occupation. The 19th amendment was “injurious” to the Constitution, improperly ratified and has resulted in hysterical and incoherent, communistic governance constituting the inverse of the severely limited government of the Founders which existed solely to facilitate freedom, free enterprise and self-reliance. I wonder if you also think there was any value or, otherwise, legitimacy to the 10-year, 58,000-dead Vietnam War. Did you agree with the election of JFK as the mob fixed the vote in Chicago and elsewhere? We all know right from wrong and constitutional from unconstitutional, don’t we?

                    1. “Allan, your citations of Article 4 and the 10th amendment prove my assertion that the states determine the criteria”

                      No, it proves your former responses were wrong. That you finally recongized that the Constitution left that determination to the States is refreshing but came a bit too late for you to untangle yourself from your earlier comments. We had this discussion months back and at that time you seemed to be having the same problem you had on this occasion.

                      Maybe it will stick in your head for the future and that is why I repeat that one State permitted woman to vote in the 18th century and into the early 19th century based on the 10th Amendment. Let’s not have this argument again and don’t try to weasle out of your mistake after you were insulting to me. That is what it seems you are doing in your most recent response.

                      “My point is that the Founders… ”

                      Your point should be that the Founders compromised and signed on the dotted line of the Constutition which represents the basis of our Federalist system and the division of power in the federal government. You wish to insert your voice into the mouths of those that have been dead for around 200 years. Your voice was wrong earlier in these responses and has been wrong all over the blog. I will leave the voices to the Constitution or quote the statements of those who are now dead.

                      “America must have restrictions on the vote or it is not America.”

                      America must live by its Constitution with the thoughts ingrained in the Declaration of Independence or it is not America. Your personal restrictions are your world and do not represent America.

                      I decline to respond to the rest of your questions here and elsewhere because they are rants and not questions. Your statements of facts are too often statements of inaccuracies.

                    2. Allen, your madness and defense mechanisms aside, the Founders established a restricted-vote republic; leaving it to the states to qualify voters. The Founders told you that they bequeathed America “…to ourselves and our Posterity,…” while they thrice required citizens to be “…free white person(s)…” The states may or may not “entitle” groups of citizens to vote as it is entirely constitutional – the judicial branch has no authority to legislate or amend the Constitution. Entitlement to vote should be severely limited for obvious reasons. The Founders never intended for the “poor” to vote as the Founders understood that they would “sell” their votes.

                      To wit,

                      “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”

                      “If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

                      – Alexander Hamilton – The Farmer Refuted, 1775

                      You have acknowledged that the Supreme Court supported and upheld the irrefutably unconstitutional Obamacare. The Supreme Court also erroneously upheld the “injurious” 19th dumbmendment, with possibly its most egregious ramification being that of encouraging abortion and a fertility rate that is in a nationally mortal “death spiral” (the population is imported) not to mention the clear and present danger of national hysteria and incoherence. The Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians and Cubans laugh at America. Is there such a thing countenanced as Nancy Pelosi in those realms? Can you imagine every citizen in those countries voting? Does Xi Jinping have favorables/unfavorables? The Founders did not design a one man, one vote democrazy. Throughout history “democracies” have imposed criteria to the vote.

                      To wit,

                      “…amendments desired,…as will not injure the constitution…”

                      ” And if there are amendments desired, of such a nature as will not injure the constitution, and they can be ingrafted so as to give satisfaction to the doubting part of our fellow citizens; the friends of the federal government will evince that spirit of deference and concession for which they have hitherto been distinguished.”

                      – James Madison, Proposed Amendments to the Constitution, June 8, 1789

                      I am compelled to apologize for engaging in contest with an unarmed opponent.

                    3. “Allen, your madness and defense mechanisms aside”

                      George, you are projecting. You can’t stand to be wrong especially regarding the most basic facts and women. I made it clear by example that you were wrong when I told you that in one state till the early 19th century women had the right to vote. All your insults and arguments were duly noted but you couldn’t get past the fact that your bravado could not keep up with your errors.

                      Here is one of your statements: “The 19th dumbmendment is proof that women were not allowed to vote, for obvious and good reasons,” It was proof of the fact that right of determination was left to the states and all but one of the state’s constitutions (early times) didn’t permit women the right to vote.

                      We had this same discussion months back and you were wrong then as well, but it is nice to see that suddenly in the midst of our conversation and your blathering that you suddenly recognized “Entitlement to vote is a state function”, a bit too belatedly though.

                      I have little interest in the rest that you say on your soap box. You provide partial quotes to bolster your argument without referencing who made those quotes or where those quotes were made along with off topic referenced quotes. Those quotes are thereby meaningless and a waste of time filling up space to surround and thereby hide the ignorant and off topic statements that preceded all this junk.

        2. Please remind me how the right treated Obama with love and respect. Count how many indictments pleas deals, and guilty verdicts were under Obama, then if you can keep count, Trump.

        3. I think it’s easy to understand that all patriotic Americans hold nothing but vile. vicious, venomous rage towards criminogenic, small-minded, narcissistic, malevolent, traitorous, dictator wannabees. Thus, assuming for argument’s sake that whatever you imagine the Free Press to believe about the day glo bozo is true, so?

          this is to “but aren’t Russians white just like me?” wc

        4. Peter Shill is “flyover country.”

          He incessantly advertises his interminable, bedrock refrain:

          “I want more free stuff, more free stuff, more free stuff from other people’s money because I simply cannot take care of myself.”

          Just keep on scrolling.

      2. “Every poll released this week illustrated that the shutdown has severely damaged Trump”

        Almost every poll predicted that Trump would not win the Republican nomination.
        Almost every poll predicted that Trump would not win the election.
        Democratic pundits predicted the economy would collapse.
        Democratic pundits predicted that Trump would leave the Presidency in short order
        Democratic pundits predicted that Trump would be found guilty of Russian collusion.

        Trump is President and so far none of the indictments implicate Trump. Peter, you are an idiot.

            1. It’s always nice to hear form YNOT. He provides such an abundant lack of information. One cannot expect more from YNOT.

              Tell us what is not true. You can’t YNOT and that is how we can judge your mental capacity.

              Almost every poll predicted that Trump would not win the Republican nomination.
              Almost every poll predicted that Trump would not win the election.
              Democratic pundits predicted the economy would collapse.
              Democratic pundits predicted that Trump would leave the Presidency in short order
              Democratic pundits predicted that Trump would be found guilty of Russian collusion.

              Trump is President and so far none of the indictments implicate Trump.

        1. I regret to inform you, sir, that past results are no guarantee of future performance. But if relying on polls from three years ago helps you sleep at night, by all means keep cuttin’ and pastin.’

          this is to “but it’s all hannity issued last night” allen / allen

          1. If you could read the English language you would see that I don’t depend on the polls, but I think that is asking too much of you.

            1. Marky Mark has words “this is to” saved in a Word document for cutting and pasting to his responses to this blog. His weird infatuation/man-crush on Hannity seems to still going strong. Not that there is anything wrong with that, though I myself prefer Martha MacCallum and Shannon Bream.

        1. What if the wall was built and undocumenteds kept coming by way visa overstays? Should we close down our airports then?

          1. I’ve travelled over much of the world and my passport was always taken and those countries made sure I left their country. You really need to get out of your one bedroom apartment more.

        2. “Of course we will pay for it.”

          Actually just the reduction of the costs caused by the reduction of the drug traffic will more than cover the price. ~72,000 deaths from overdoses last year.

          1. Haha. As if the doctors who write the scripts for opioids swim across the border.

            this is to “dammit, hannity didn’t mention that” allen / allen

            1. Ignorant Mark M. who thinks the entire drug problem is based on physician scripts. He is wrong and doesn’t know it. In fact as the death rate climbs (I think `72,000) and Mark twidles his toes we have seen new groups of drugs enterring the market. What does Mark care about 72,000 dead, many young. Absolutely nothing. He cares only about his ability to make himself feel important when he knows squat about what he talks about.

      1. “strong Russian steel.”

        Actually Fishwings, Trump was considering the use of American steel to make the barrier. The Chinese are the one’s producing the most cheap steel. Your lack of knowledge is astounding.

          1. “Your lack of humor and understanding of anything is astounding.”

            Fishwings, along with a lack of intellect you don’t have any imagination.

      2. FishWings said, “. . . they will never be happy until that wall is built with good strong Russian steel.”

        But, but, but . . . Deripaska makes aluminum wire. And Trump delisted Deripaska’s aluminum wire company from the sanctions to offset the tariffs Trump imposed on Canadian aluminum.

        Ergo, Canada will pay for the wall. Shazam!

  5. Headline: Roger Stone Gets Indicted!

    Roger Stone: Finally!

    He’s been trying to get arrested for 2 years. He’s probably been wearing silk pajamas to bed for 6 weeks.

    One, it’s ridiculous to make such political theatre as a night raid on someone’s house charged with a process crime. Mueller’s investigation is nothing more than the weaponization of the government against conservatives, because he has not investigated the one person already proven to have coordinated with Russian spies in order to defraud voters: Hillary Clinton.

    Mueller is not fairly investigating Russian activities in our election, which would be ironic considering we have our finger in everyone else’s political pot. Rather, he is harassing Donald Trump for political purposes.

    Trump did not work with the Russians to hack into voting machines, or spread false information about his opponent just before the Election. Hillary did the latter. Guccifer spread true information about the Democratic Party and its candidates. Guess Democrats think it is so unfair that they cannot get over it, years later, that the public learned the truth about their nefarious activities. It’s not like it mattered, anyway. The public has already forgotten about Uranium One, Bernie, and all the lies and working with foreign agents.

    1. Karen, you’re coming out in favor of foreign hackers. Like Grucifer is really a hero. I’d like to see Trump make that argument. That would be fun.

      1. Truthful information was released.

        Hacking is a crime. Making your password “password” is enough negligence to get you fired and probably sued in the private sector, where people are held accountable. The DNC claimed its servers were hacked, but it refused to hand over the servers to the FBI. Without such evidence, I cannot say what damage occurred.

        The information released is a separate issue from how it was obtained.

        There is no getting around the fact that:
        1. Hillary Clinton took control of the DNC before the primaries, in exchange for taking on their debt, and defrauded her opponent Bernie Sanders.
        2. Hillary Clinton used a private server to avoid laws requiring the storage and archival of records. She kept top secret information on those servers. People with zero security clearance cleaned those servers and backed them up. She lied about it. Obama lied about not knowing about it. He used to email her under an alias, indicating culpability. While under subpoena, she used Bleach Bit to delete government property and evidence from her illegal servers, breaking multiple laws while at it.
        3. Comey ignored federal law governing the handling of not only classified information, but all correspondence while in office.
        4. Hillary Clinton paid a British spy to pay Russian spies to get fraudulent information on her political opponent, to be released just prior to the election, in order to defraud the American public. Emails among her team confirm that this deceitful document was also to be used as a Plan B to undermine Trump’s legitimacy should he be elected. She lied about that, too.

        Far from coming out in favor of foreign hackers, I have actually written multiple times that China is an existential threat to American businesses, due to their theft of intellectual property and violation of patent laws.

        Countries spy on each other. We spy on Russia and they spy on us. I am all in favor of shoring up our computer cyber security. However, nothing changes the fact that our government has harassed Trump, investigating him for what we already know Clinton actually did.

        I would also add that the Democrats seem more concerned that the damning information about them was released, rather than what was in it. One would think that they would be ashamed and appalled at what was uncovered.

    2. It is only a matter of time, Karen, when Americans throw their elected politicians into the river and celebrate being rid of such craven opportunists both Dims and Reps.

      At home we shun social media, TV, most “news” sites and have started to read books again….and get to know people in our immediate environs.
      What sealed it for us was Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and the smear campaign by holier than thou hypocrites out to slime the boys from Covington Catholic. Then again we are pro-life at home and our politicians are clearly prodeath….

      See you at church! 😇👍🏽

    3. Night raids such as occurred with Stone are regularly conducted where there’s a reasonable belief that evidence or fruits of the crime may be destroyed unless the warrant is served as a “no-knock” raid. A federal judge usually has to sign off on the no-knock aspect, also. Obviously, the feds wanted Stone’s hard-drives, phones, tablets, etc., or the warrant would not have been executed in such a manner. Just imagine the cornucopia of co-conspirator information likely made available to the American Patriots in the Special Counsel’s Office who are charged with exacting justice.

      this is to “but hannity said it was just to be meanies” karen

      1. It might be useful if Stone kept communications evidence showing that both he and Assange knew that Guccifer 2.0 was the GRU and that the emails Wikileaks released had been hacked by the GRU and disseminated through Wikileaks. Of course, Mueller might already have that information from almost any number of other sources. Still, wouldn’t it be something if Roger Stone of all people furnished Mueller with the keystone in the conspiracy case? Ha-ha!

        Also: What about all of that dark money?

      2. Right Mark. God forbid he go ahead and use Bleachbit on his hard drives, destroy subpoenaed documents, and then pound his cell phones and blackberries with hammers and burn his State Dept schedules in burn bags instead of preserving them according to record retention laws. Oh and don’t forget the possibility that Stone had strapped some dynomite to his leg, hence the reasons for 27 SWAT team members in full SWAT gear to surround his house at dawn. Despite the nonstop surveillance and wiretapping they’ve had on Stone for at least 2 years, they had to be careful, right? Right.

Leave a Reply to Bill Martin Cancel reply