SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 8:01:49 AM
From: Mongo21161 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577147
 
john Kelly Finally Lets Loose on Trump
The former chief of staff explained, in the clearest terms yet, his misgivings about Trump’s behavior regarding North Korea, immigration, and Ukraine.

PETER NICHOLAS1:05 AM ET

EVAN VUCCI / APMORRISTOWN, N.J.—Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the former National Security Council aide and impeachment witness President Donald Trump fired Friday, was just doing his job, former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly told students and guests at a Drew University event here Wednesday night.

Over a 75-minute speech and Q&A session, Kelly laid out, in the clearest terms yet, his misgivings about Trump’s words and actions regarding North Korea, illegal immigration, military discipline, Ukraine, and the news media

Thanks for signinKelly, a retired Marine Corps general, said that Vindman is blameless and was simply following the training he’d received as a soldier; migrants are “overwhelmingly good people” and “not all rapists”; and Trump’s decision to condition military aid to Ukraine on an investigation into his political rival Joe Biden upended long-standing U.S. policy.

Vindman was rightly disturbed by Trump’s phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in July, Kelly suggested: Having seen something “questionable,” Vindman properly notified his superiors, Kelly said. Vindman, who specialized in Ukraine policy at the National Security Council at the time, was among multiple U.S. officials who listened in on the call. When subpoenaed by Congress in the House impeachment hearings, Vindman complied and told the truth, Kelly said.



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 8:11:05 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577147
 
Fact checking the false claims LIAR tRump made in defending Roger Stone.
cnn.com
Fact-checking the false claims Trump made in defending Roger Stone
By Daniel Dale and Marshall Cohen, CNN
Updated 12:15 AM ET, Thu February 13, 2020

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump made a series of false and misleading claims in tweets and public remarks Tuesday and Wednesday related to the government's handling of the legal case involving Roger Stone, his longtime adviser, who was convicted in November of lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstructing a congressional investigation.

Trump's comments followed a controversial decision by the Department of Justice to ask a court to sentence Stone to "far less" time in prison than the seven to nine years department prosecutors had recommended to the court just a day prior. All four prosecutors resigned from the case after they were overruled.

The prosecutors and Mueller
Trump tweeted Tuesday: "Who are the four prosecutors (Mueller people?) who cut and ran after being exposed for recommending a ridiculous 9 year prison sentence to a man that got caught up in an investigation that was illegal, the Mueller Scam, and shouldn't ever even have started?"

Speaking to reporters Wednesday about the prosecutors who withdrew, Trump said, "Perhaps they were Mueller people."

Facts First: Only two of the four prosecutors who withdrew from the case worked on the team led by special counsel Robert Mueller that investigated ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. The claim that the prosecutors were "exposed" is misleading -- they made their sentencing recommendation in a public court filing, not in secret. And the Mueller investigation was not illegal.
Multiple federal courts have upheld the legality of Mueller's appointment and endorsed actions he took, such as subpoenaing witnesses to testify before a grand jury and bringing criminal charges against some senior Trump aides.

The inspector general for the Department of Justice conducted an exhaustive review and determined in a report released in December that the FBI had a legitimate basis for opening the Russia investigation in July 2016, though his report also criticized some FBI officials for how they had handled other aspects of the investigation.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson
Trump responded Tuesday to a tweet about Amy Berman Jackson, a federal judge in Washington who's overseeing the Stone trial and who presided over other cases resulting from the Mueller investigation. Trump tweeted: "Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure? How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking!"
Facts First: Jackson did not "put Paul Manafort in solitary confinement." She sent Manafort to jail because he broke the law while out on bail, but she didn't pick the jail and didn't order him to be held in a cell by himself. And he was not subjected to the harsh conditions experienced by prisoners who are sent to solitary confinement for disciplinary reasons.

Here's what happened.
Jackson revoked Manafort's bail in 2018 after he was accused by prosecutors of trying to tamper with witnesses who might testify against him at trial. (He later pleaded guilty to witness tampering.)
Jackson did not dictate where Manafort would be jailed or the conditions of his incarceration. He was sent to the Northern Neck Regional Jail in rural Virginia, where he had a large private room, bathroom, shower, workspace, phone and laptop. He even said during a monitored phone call that he was being treated like a VIP, according to a court filing by prosecutors.

But Manafort complained about being at Northern Neck, saying it was too far from his lawyers and that he was being held in solitary. These complaints were lodged with T.S. Ellis, the federal judge overseeing Manafort's other criminal case in Virginia. Ellis then transferred Manafort to the city jail in Alexandria, Virginia, much closer to the courthouse where he went on trial in 2018.

By that point, Manafort's lawyers realized that this might make his conditions worse, and they unsuccessfully tried to backtrack. Upon Manafort's arrival at the Alexandria jail, Sheriff Dana Lawhorne said, "Because he is a high-profile inmate, Mr. Manafort will be placed in protective custody, which limits his interactions with other inmates."

When sentencing Manafort in 2019, Jackson sharply criticized his defense team for repeatedly claiming that their client had been in "solitary confinement" at Northern Neck, saying it was "disingenuousness" and "an attempt to garner public sympathy."

Jackson noted that the private cells where Manafort was held in protective custody in Alexandria were different from the Special Housing Units, or SHUs, that are used to discipline prisoners with "solitary confinement."

Jackson said of Manafort's situation: "The defendant was not in the SHU. I understand now that he is in protective confinement. It is true that his cell is not shared, it has a single bunk, it has a window, radio, newspapers, and view of the television. It is true that he's released for only a few of his waking hours every day out of that confinement to walk around and be with other people."

Stone and the Trump campaign
Trump tweeted Wednesday that the original sentencing recommendation for Stone was unfair -- and added that Stone "was not even working for the Trump Campaign."
Facts First: Stone officially worked for Trump's campaign for two months in 2015, then became an informal adviser after his formal role ended. During Stone's trial, multiple witnesses testified that he had been in regular contact with Trump and senior campaign officials in 2016 to discuss strategy.
Trump announced his candidacy in June 2015. Two months later, Stone either resigned or was fired; there is a dispute about what happened. At trial, prosecutors introduced as evidence phone records that suggested Stone and Trump had spoken in 2016, after Stone's official role with the campaign had ended. Stone's crimes occurred in 2017, during Trump's presidency.

Comparing the Stone and Wolfe cases
Trump repeatedly said Stone was getting unfair treatment by comparing him to James Wolfe, a longtime senior Senate staffer who served two months in prison for lying to the FBI.
On Wednesday morning, Trump tweeted, "Two months in jail for a Swamp Creature, yet 9 years recommended for Roger Stone." The President suggested that the disparity came from "rogue prosecutors." Trump made a similar claim in a tweet on Tuesday, when he said that "a swamp creature with 'pull' was just sentenced to two months in jail for a similar thing that they want Stone to serve 9 years for."
Trump repeated these claims to reporters Wednesday afternoon.
Facts First: The Stone and Wolfe cases have some similarities but also key differences. They were both about national security matters and involved lies to federal investigators. But Stone is in much more legal jeopardy after being convicted of seven felonies, including witness tampering. Wolfe pleaded guilty to just one count of lying to the FBI.

Perhaps the most important difference is how the two defendants handled their criminal cases.
Wolfe reached a plea bargain with prosecutors that resulted in two of the three charges against him being dropped, shaving years from his potential prison sentence. Conversely, Stone fought the charges and was convicted at trial of all seven counts against him, which included lying to Congress, obstructing a congressional investigation and witness tampering.

Prosecutors calculate sentencing recommendations from a framework of regulations, guidelines and laws. In the Stone case, the prosecutors said their seven- to nine-year recommendation was based on the fact that Stone had engaged in a "multi-year scheme" of deception that involved deliberate false statements, a "relentless and elaborate" campaign to silence a witness and the obstruction of an election-interference investigation that was critically important to the country.

Trump blamed prosecutors for Wolfe's two-month sentence. But that ignores the facts of the case. The typical range for his crime, lying to the FBI, is zero to six months in prison. But prosecutors asked the judge to throw the book at Wolfe and send him to prison for two years, a weighty sentence for one count of lying to the FBI. (For comparison, Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to the same charge in 2017 and received 30 days in prison.)

Neither the Wolfe case nor the Stone case appears to have involved any "rogue" actions by prosecutors, like recommending a prison term that goes beyond what is legally permissible.
The President is right to note that Wolfe was well-connected in Washington. Many prominent officials asked the judge for leniency, including Republican Sen. Richard Burr and Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, who lead the Senate Intelligence Committee, where Wolfe worked for years.

Mueller and Congress
Trump tweeted Wednesday: "Even Bob Mueller lied to Congress!"
Facts First: There is no evidence Mueller lied to Congress, which is a federal crime. There is, however, ample evidence that Stone did. He was found guilty of five counts of doing so.
Trump did not say what lie he was alleging Mueller had told to Congress. But he has previously argued that Mueller wasn't telling the truth when he testified to Congress in July that he was not pursuing another stint as FBI director when he spoke with Trump about the job in May 2017, shortly before he was named special counsel.

Mueller, who served as FBI director between 2001 and 2013, testified that he was not acting "as a candidate" for the job during the May 2017 conversation with Trump. He said that "my understanding (was) I was not applying for that job. I was asked to give my input on what it would take to do the job."

The President's claim was undermined by Trump's former top adviser Steve Bannon, who told Mueller's team that the White House had invited Mueller "to offer a perspective on the institution of the FBI." The Mueller report also said: "Bannon said that, although the White House thought about beseeching Mueller to become Director again, he did not come in looking for the job."
Bannon made similar comments in a 2018 interview with MSNBC, FactCheck.org noted.



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 8:14:12 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577147
 
LAWLESS tRump & Barr DOES AWAY WITH JURY TRIALS, JURY VERDICTS & THE RULE OF LAW...



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 8:15:02 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577147
 
OOPS! Judge denies CONVICTED LYING CRIMINAL Stone's request for a new trial.
cnn.com
By Katelyn Polantz, CNN
Updated 4:33 PM ET, Wed February 12, 2020

(CNN)A federal judge has denied Donald Trump confidant Roger Stone a new trial after he made a request for one under seal, according to a notice from the court.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson made her ruling known on Wednesday, her first public response following the withdrawals of all the prosecutors on the case the day before. She has not yet acknowledged the prosecutor withdrawals.
The denial was decided last week, before the eruption over the Justice Department's revised sentencing recommendation in the last few days.

Stone argued that his trial should be reheard because one juror should not have been allowed to be on the panel, according to the partially redacted order. He claimed he deserved a new trial "because the Court failed" to strike a juror from the jury pool "for bias because (the person) is employed in a division of the Internal Revenue Service" that worked with the Justice Department on criminal tax cases, and because the juror said he or she had read the news about Stone's arrest and about the case. The judge had asked if that had given the juror any opinions about the case, and the juror responded, "No." The juror's name was not disclosed.


Republicans see no reason to investigate Stone sentencing

"The fact that the juror was just one of these approximately 1,400 lawyers (at the IRS) does not begin to establish the sort of inherent bias that should have prompted the Court to strike (the person) in its discretion," Jackson wrote last week.

Because of the juror's "testimony and demeanor" and the process the court used to select jurors at Stone's trial, "the Court finds in its discretion that it was not necessary to strike the juror for alleged bias or for failure to follow the Court's instructions. The defense has not presented grounds for a new trial ... or any reason to believe there has been 'a serious miscarriage of justice.' "

News of Stone's denied request comes just one day after the four federal prosecutors who had successfully taken his case to trial withdrew their involvement after top Justice Department officials intervened by reducing the government's recommended sentence.

The mass withdrawal punctuated a stunning cascade of developments set into motion on Monday when prosecutors from the DC US Attorney's Office, who are Justice Department employees, wrote in a filing that a judge should issue Stone a seven-to-nine-year sentence.
Trump weighed in on Twitter overnight on Tuesday, calling that recommendation a "horrible and very unfair situation."

And by midday Tuesday, a senior Justice Department official said that the original sentencing recommendation from the prosecutors, transmitted to a judge and signed off on by the office's top prosecutor, had not been communicated to leadership at the Justice Department.
"The Department was shocked to see the sentencing recommendation," the official told CNN. "The Department believes the recommendation is extreme and excessive and is grossly disproportionate to Stone's offenses."

In the revised sentencing recommendation, filed Tuesday afternoon, federal prosecutors still asked for Stone to be sentenced to prison but said it should be "far less" than the office had asked for a day earlier. The prosecutors declined to say how much time in prison Stone should serve.
The rapid-fire developments in the case raised questions about the Justice Department's independence from political pressure and prompted congressional Democrats to call for the Justice Department inspector general to investigate.

Stone was found guilty in November of five counts of lying to Congress, one of witness tampering and one of obstructing a congressional committee proceeding. Among other things, he had misled Congress about his communications with Trump campaign officials in 2016, the jury unanimously decided.

According to prosecutors, Stone lied during testimony and failed to turn over documents to Congress in 2017 showing he had sought to reach WikiLeaks the previous year. He lied about five facts, obscuring his attempt to use intermediaries to get information that could help then-candidate Trump in the election against Hillary Clinton.



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 8:18:41 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577147
 
OH NO! American Bar Association Goes After Trump Over Roger Stone Sentencing
huffpost.com
02/12/2020 07:55 pm ET
American Bar Association Goes After Trump For Blasting Roger Stone Sentencing On Twitter
The organization put out a pointed statement about “public officials who personally attack judges or prosecutors” after the president did just that.
By Sanjana Karanth

The American Bar Association indirectly denounced President Donald Trump on Wednesday for publicly criticizing the sentencing recommendation for his friend Roger Stone as well as the judge presiding over Stone’s case.

“The American Bar Association steadfastly supports judicial independence and the sound exercise of prosecutorial discretion,” ABA President Judy Perry Martinez said in a statement on Wednesday. “Public officials who personally attack judges or prosecutors can create a perception that the system is serving a political or other purpose rather than the fair administration of justice.”

The message from the organization of lawyers follows Trump’s tweet early Tuesday morning calling the seven- to nine-year sentencing recommendation for Stone a “miscarriage of justice.” The Trump adviser had been convicted of witness tampering and lying to Congress.

All four federal prosecutors who ran Stone’s trial abruptly withdrew from the case after Justice Department leadership intervened to alter the sentencing recommendation later on Tuesday.

Trump also tweeted attacks at Amy Berman Jackson, the judge presiding over Stone’s case. Berman Jackson also presided over former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s case.

“Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure?” Trump tweeted about Berman Jackson. “How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking!”

The ABA message also appeared to refer to Attorney General William Barr, a Trump appointee and ally who has politicized the Justice Department in the president’s favor. Barr appears to have led the effort to reduce Stone’s sentencing recommendation, and Trump seemed to confirm Barr’s intervention in a series of tweets that praised the attorney general for “taking charge” of the case.

“It is incumbent upon public officials and members of the legal profession, whose sworn duty it is to uphold the law, to do everything in their power to preserve the integrity of the justice system,” Perry Martinez said in the ABA statement.

Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Wednesday that he does not “want to say yet” whether he would pardon Stone, who has served as Trump’s adviser since the 1980s.

“I want to thank the Justice Department,” the president said. “They saw the horribleness of a nine-year sentence for doing nothing. You have murderers and drug addicts ? they don’t get nine years.”

Democratic leaders have demanded an explanation for the Justice Department’s decision to walk back the original sentencing recommendation, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) saying Trump “engaged in political interference” by tweeting his criticism of the recommendation. Senate Democrats have demanded Barr either resign or face impeachment for intervening in Stone’s case.



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 8:20:21 AM
From: sylvester801 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Respond to of 1577147
 
Senate Democrats Demand Barr Resign Or Face Impeachment Over Roger Stone Case
huffpost.com



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 11:55:56 AM
From: puborectalis2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Celtictrader
pocotrader

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1577147
 
Trump slams former chief of staff John Kelly for criticizing him and drags Kelly's wife into their feud
  • "When I terminated John Kelly, which I couldn't do fast enough, he knew full well that he was way over his head. Being Chief of Staff just wasn't for him," Trump tweeted on Thursday morning.
  • Trump added that Kelly "went out with a whimper" and "just can't keep his mouth shut," and he called out Kelly's wife for allegedly promising that her husband would "only speak well" of Trump.
  • Kelly, a retired military general, has repeatedly criticized the president in recent weeks. On Wednesday night he defended impeachment witness Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman against Trump's attacks.



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 1:44:33 PM
From: Brumar891 Recommendation

Recommended By
pocotrader

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1577147
 
That was a stupid thing to say. I think Trump sucked Putin off at Helsinki.



To: longnshort who wrote (1201007)2/13/2020 6:30:04 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
locogringo

  Respond to of 1577147
 
Windham Man Accused Of Slapping Teen Trump Supporter At Polls

Patrick Bradley faces assault, disorderly charges after a Windham High School incident Tuesday and was held on a probation violation.


By Tony Schinella, Patch Staff Feb 13, 2020 5:24 pm ET
https://patch.com/new-hampshire/windham/windham-man-accused-slapping-teen-trump-supporter-polls

WINDHAM, NH — A man is facing numerous charges after being accused of assaulting a teen as well as two adults at the polls in Windham on New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation presidential primary Tuesday. Patrick Bradley, 34, of Lisa Road in Windham was arrested Thursday on three counts of simple assault and disorderly conduct charges. He was held on $5,000 cash bail and an administrative hold for a probation violation.