On Friday July 10, 2020 in an extraordinary act of courage and in the name of both justice and mercy President Donald J Trump commuted the sentence I received in a deeply corrupted Soviet-style show trial in Washington D.C. back in January.
The President’s courageous decision in an election year was more than just a political act. Despite all current legal precedent in the D.C. Circuit and all other Circuits, despite current Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Prisons policy, despite my age and current medical condition and despite the now indisputable presence of more than 100 cases of Covid-19 virus in the correctional facility to which I was designated, Judge Amy Berman Jackson and the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld her wrongly-decided verdict, were determined to send me to my death at a squalid, fetid Hell-hole in rural Georgia to insure that the appeal I have filed of my conviction never sees the light of day lest all of the corruption surrounding my trial be exposed. President Donald Trump literally saved my life.
Those who have followed this epic saga understand that Mueller’s dirty cops testified to several federal judges and magistrates that they had probable cause to charge me with treason, conspiracy against the United States, laundering millions of rubles in violation of the Foreign Contribution Ban, fraud and related activities in connection with computers, wire fraud, aiding and abetting a conspiracy, unauthorized access of a protected computer, receipt and dissemination of stolen data, and being an accessory after the fact to the commission of a felony. After using these baseless claims to obtain multiple search warrants, they were able to find no evidence whatsoever of any of these crimes after which the de facto leader of the Mueller investigation, Andrew Weissman, patched together an extraordinarily flimsy set of charges centered around alleged lying to Congress.
We now know that Mueller’s dirtiest cop Aaron Zelinsky, a former State Department Aide to Hillary Clinton who now tries to masquerade as a “non-political, career, line-prosecutor” illegally shared the fruits of his search warrant powered surveillance, in particular my emails with Congressman Adam Schiff. He then fashioned a series of “gotcha” questions for my voluntary testimony in front of the House Intelligence Committee. It is not coincidental that every question I was charged with falsely answering was asked by Adam Schiff! Then in violation of both the law and House rules, Schiff shared a transcript of my testimony with Mueller’s Cabal but was so giddy about his perjury trap that he then violated House rules by declaring 24 hours after my testimony that I would soon be charged by Mueller with perjury. In fact, he could not possibly know if it hadn’t gone down exactly the way I have outlined it here.
I like to think that the details regarding the unfairness of my trial are widely understood but due largely to a mainstream media blackout during my actual trial most Americans are still unaware of the manifest prejudice and unfairness of the trail itself. Judge Amy Berman Jackson unconstitutionally gagged me to prevent me from exposing her misconduct in my trial, using the entirely false claim that I had posted an image on Instagram threatening her by depicting her with “a crosshair over her image.”
Jackson then systematically prohibited me from arguing that I was being selectively prosecuted. After all, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Rosenstein and even Mueller all lied to Congress under oath but were not prosecuted. The judge denied me the opportunity to disprove the entire underlying premise of my indictment that the Russians hacked the DNC and gave the stolen data to WikiLeaks through the introduction of forensic evidence.Expert testimony to the contrary, and most stunningly, prohibited me from raising the question of misconduct by the special counsel, the FBI, DOJ or any member of Congress (Adam Schiff). This ruling is specifically unconstitutional under the Supreme Court standard under the Kyles v. Whitley decision. Why would the prosecutors want to suppress evidence unless they knew of corruption by themselves or others?
The makeup of the jury was also extraordinarily problematic after Judge Jackson ruled that freely expressed hated for Donald Trump, a record of democrat party activism, or being a political appointee in the administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton or Barack Obama were not grounds for the dismissal of a juror.
Indeed, my jury included not a single republican, independent, military veteran, union member or anyone with less than a college education, but did include at least 3 attorneys with direct ties to the FBI or the DOJ, individuals that worked at liberal think tanks, people who worked at left wing political action committees, and multiple donors to Donald Trump’s 2020 democratic opponents.
Additionally, we learned after the trial that the jury forewoman, starting on the day of my arrest and subsequently had posted attacks on me on Twitter and Facebook as well as attacks on the president in 2019. These posts were kept on a private setting during jury selection and the trial and were deleted when the trial was over. Astonishingly Judge Amy Berman Jackson said that these posts were not sufficient evidence of bias to earn me a new trial.
There is little chance that my conviction would not be vacated by the appeals court, but even a new trial would, by law, have to be held before judge Amy Berman Jackson. This is something I have to think seriously about. Their ruling on her order to send me to a correctional facility, which in the two weeks prior to my proposed surrender, released one violent sex criminal who was both a pedophile and child pornographer, a sex offender who was a serial rapist and a bank robber all to protect them from the dangers of infection by Covid-19 virus. It has to give one pause.
Blessings from Reaffirming My Faith
When I said publicly that I had been reborn and reaffirmed my faith in Jesus Christ back in January when I had occasion to meet Reverend Franklin Graham, I was openly mocked in the mainstream media. Socialists hate God.
Former Newsweek reporter Howard Fineman openly mocked me for my public devotion to God and his only begotten son Jesus Christ. I don’t question whether Fineman is a devout Jew, why does he question if I am a devout Christian? I recognize my critics will scoff at my public claims of being saved but it doesn’t matter. God knows what’s in my heart and I doubt that without his divine guidance which He provides to the president every day, I would still be alive to ponder whether my appeal should still go forward in front of a corrupt judge.
It is almost impossible to thank all of those who publicly and privately urged the president to take this extraordinary act of compassion and justice. First and foremost is my wife Nydia Bertran Stone who saw me through this entire ordeal with grace and patience and had to sit through my humiliation in the DC courtroom where she saw the railroading of an innocent man. My daughter Adria Stone was a fierce warrior for my freedom. My son Scott, a police officer and therefore a courtroom veteran gave sound advice. My grandchildren Katelyn, Danielle and Nick defended their grandfather. My wife’s cousins Rolando and Jeannie Conesa raised money for my legal defense fund and lent bold support in Jeannie’s social media. My sister-in-law Diana Bertran, a Buddhist, chanted for me day and night. My old colleague, John Aycoth was always there for me.
Stone is convicted and sentenced even though the jury is shown to be biased and the government could not make its case without lying. Gen. Flynn’s case, in which ALL the evidence used against him is proven to be false and exculpatory evidence suppressed, can’t be dropped. But the death sentence of a CONFESSED murdering terrorist is overturned.
Could it be we have too many liberal, revisionist, activist judges in our “justice” system?
Maybe he’ll get a tattoo of Trump on his front side to go with the tattoo of Nixon on his back side—assuming he hasn’t done so already.
Roger Stone was convicted of seven separate felony counts by the unanimous decision of a jury that was selected in accordance with federal jury selection procedure—which means that Stone’s defense team was allowed to question and remove any number of potential jurors from consideration for reason of actual or implied bias, as well as another 10 through peremptory challenges, which means for any reason whatsoever.
If they couldn’t get a fair and unbiased jury after all of that, Stone must have engaged defense attorneys who are complete idiots. They didn’t call a single witness in Stone’s defense. Their defense pretty much came down to So what if he did?
UNDERSTANDING THE FEDERAL JURY SELECTION PROCESS
@Greg: If the process was “normal” it needs to be reformed.
None of the jurists were Stones peers.
@Greg: In any other trial, such jurors would have been rejected. In a high-profile trial like this, when any suspicion of political bias should be erased, such jurors would most definitely be rejected. But nowadays, the left doesn’t care about perceptions or fairness; they want to destroy the opposition and hurt Trump. So, having biased, prejudiced jurors is EXACTLY what they want to assure they get the judicial outcome they need to promote their narrative.
Hell, just gagging Stone while everyone else is allowed to continue their propaganda would be enough to throw the case out. There was no doubt the court had it in for Stone simply because he was a Trump associate.
Further, once the prejudice that has been exposed becomes known, a mistrial would normally be declared and the case re-tried. But the left doesn’t want to risk giving up their victory or a fair trial, which they would lose.
Isn’t that pretty much the ultimate mindset of the Trump cultists in exonerating him of anything and everything he does?
@Ronald J. Ward: Provide a quote of someone … ANYONE that has said that. We’ll wait.
@Ronald J. Ward: We wait for Comey and Clappers trials.
@kitt: True. Time for Justice to go after the REAL criminals instead of Obama’s political enemies.
@Ronald J. Ward: ?
You said you’d wait.
@Ronald J. Ward: He lied, now back up what you posted or just STFU.
Maybe you could ask the nice doctor to check your meds.
@kitt: Is it that difficult to find? Since you cited it, one would think you would have any such statement at the ready. I guess it is simply another case of you lying.
@Deplorable Me: oops
@Ronald J. Ward:
Says the rabid Left-wing Cultist.
@Ronald J. Ward: Still waiting, sh*t-stain.
@Nathan Blue: The stain wants guilty until proven innocent, just make the accusation and that is enough, very communist of him.
Only for Republicans. Democrats that commit perjury on video or brag about extorting a foreign government to protect his son’s job with a corrupt company are perpetually “innocent”. In other words, laws only apply to Republicans; Democrats are welcome to violate any laws they want to promote the leftist agenda. That would include violating rights, laws and due process in order to put any Republican in jail if they obstruct the leftist agenda.
That’s a complete load of horse manure. The federal jury selection protocol that applied in Roger Stone’s case was the same that applies in every federal court case. His defense team had every opportunity to remove potentially biased jurors—in addition to another 10 if they simply didn’t like their looks. Stone’s problem is that he was guilty as hell of every one of the seven counts that the selected jury unanimously convicted him on.
Why do you suppose Trump didn’t even wait for Stone’s conviction to go through the first stage of the appeals process before getting out his big SO WHAT? rubber stamp and granting his minion clemency? Why do you suppose Stone’s attorneys have now advised him to drop the appeal, rather than overturning the conviction?
It certainly isn’t because there’s not enough money behind him to defray all related legal costs. Donations to his initial GoFundMe campaign alone had exceeded the stated goal of $100,000 by March 2019, and that was only one such pitch to the general public. Add that to the dark money from countless undisclosed sources pouring uncounted dollars into everything pro-Trump, which is all about favors granted and favors returned.
This was another case of Trump’s cynical disregard for the federal justice system on full display, and of Trump’s followers successfully gaslighted into the absurd notion that their Leader had somehow dispensed a higher justice of his own.
@Greg: The bias and prejudice of members of the jury is indisputable. The gag order on Stone, but not the prosecution, was despicable. This, like the Gen. Flynn case or the impeachment of Trump, bears no resemblance to US justice or due process. It is police state, totalitarian bullshit.
I just disputed it, didn’t I? Because there’s a clearly defined procedural mechanism that allows the defense in a federal trial to prevent the selection of biased jurors. That mechanism might misfire once or twice, but not 12 times in the same trial.
The jury in the Roger Stone Trial was comprised of 12 defense team-vetted jurors. The guilty decision was unanimous on all 7 felony counts.
What you’re asserting is that there wasn’t a single unbiased person selected in the entire jury of 12.
That such a thing could happen is improbable in the extreme. It would have required Roger Stone’s own defense lawyers to have been part of the conspiracy against him.
@Greg: But you don’t care about facts. The fact that it was a rigged and politically motivated kangaroo court is still indisputable.
As was just explained, that statement is a load of horse manure. No matter how many times it’s claimed that the horse manure is a tempting bowl of strawberries and cream, it will still smell like horse manure and be surrounded by buzzing flies. No amount of attempted gaslighting will get an observant person to shovel it down the hatch with a spoon.
And in order to substantiate and prove that claim, please provide the vuoi dire from the jurors in the Stone case. You do have them, right?
The addition of Latin or Old French words to the menu description is still an insufficient enticement to get me to swallow your bowl of steaming horse manure.
Roger Stone’s defense team was sure as hell following the jury selection process each and every step of the way. They know the procedure inside out, and were paid to utilize it to their client’s maximum advantage. That would include the presentation of any problems with jury selection as the basis for an appeal. Apparently they’ve advised their client not to go there, now that he’s been handed one of Trump’s Get Out of Jail Free cards.
@Greg: There was no “Trump defense team”. You don’t seem to have a grasp of facts. You nor anyone else on the left cares about how much you disregard the law or fair trial practices. It’s fun to trample due process and the Constitution and get away with it.
For instance, what was the purpose of the SWAT raid on Stone’s home and letting CNN know in advance so it could be broadcast? Was Stone a violent threat? You want manure? THERE it is, by the truck load.
Thank you. Roger Stone’s defense team. I corrected the error.
The threat was the possible destruction or removal of evidence. It’s unknown who, if anyone, tipped off reporters. Reporters do have inside contacts in lots of places. Receiving hot news tips is part of their world.
In other words, Cowardly Comrade Greggie, you can’t back up your claims, once again.
No surprise since the only steaming horse manure here at FA is your cut and paste comments.
You also proved, once again, that you let your mouth overload your ass.
@Greg: I correct all your errors.
There was no “threat”. It was theater. If not, why give CNN the heads up?
You need to work up a new act. This one has been seen many times before.
I made no claims. I stated facts about how the federal jury selection process works and provided a link to a source that summarizes it. In light of that procedure, the claim that all 12 jurors were biased—which is what it would have taken to get unanimous guilty decisions on all 7 of Stone’s felony counts—makes no sense whatsoever.
I suggest you eat your own bowl of steaming horse manure, and then smile and tell us how tasty it is. Maybe you can get someone else to sample it by setting an example.
Because there’s a clearly defined procedural mechanism that allows the defense in a federal trial to prevent the selection of biased jurors.
Here’s the problem, Comrade Greggie; once a juror is shown to be biased, either for or against the defendant, or to have a vested interest in the trial, that juror should be dismissed. Stone’s defense attorneys requested the dismissal of a perspective juror based on the fact that the perspective juror worked for OMB under Obama and her husband was currently working for the DOJ in the National Security Division which was involved in the Stone investigation (which in themselves, was enough to strike that juror) but when asked by the Judge, stated that she had no opinion in the Stone case.
Then there is this:
The only steaming pile of manure here is the one you continually dump.