Roger Stone asks for a new trial

[JGalt]

Next time give the pos the chair and have trump sit on his lap

Still mad because Hillawy wost.

No. Bro be mad 'cause the next Democrap is going to lose too.

and you care not that with Trump the pig America loses too?

America loses in every election, but with Trump we lose a lot less than with some Democrat criminal like Hillary.

If you believe Hillary was a better alternative than Trump, then you're nothing but a brain damaged douchebag.

Personally, I don't care what he believes. He'll always be a brain-damaged douchebag, no matter what.

 

[Lysistrata]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

 

[beautress]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

 

[Lysistrata]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

 

[beautress]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.

 

[Dragonlady]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

Arpaio was convicted of violating the civil rights of the people he incarerated - many of whom were US citizens who had no proof on citizenship in their wallets. He brazenly defied court orders which the County obtained to prevent their Sheriff;s office from enforcing immigration laws which is a federal jurisdiction ane which had cost Maricopa County more than $20 million dollars in law suit settlements, forcing City Council to raise taxes on county residents to pay the settlements. The county's insurance refused to pay the suits because of the willfully illegal actions of the Arpaio. Residents voted him out of office, but he still continued to defy court orders and was arrested. And while he was doing this, he was allowing child rapists to go free, as long as they only preyed on Mexican children. He refused to arrest any child rapist or preditor who hurt immigrants of any age, or to prosecute them, increasing predatory crimes in the country and even though ordered to by the County.

This is your hero. If my taxes went up to pay for this dipshit's asshatedness, I'd vote him out of office too.

 

[Lysistrata]

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.

President Obama did not issue the order that was the subject of arpaio's conviction. A federal district judge did. How familiar are you with the U.S. legal system? You sound very much like the guy on USMB who supposedly was an expert on the U.S. Constitution, but ranted about "unelected judges," when Article III of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that federal judges are nominated by the POTUS and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Are you a graduate of the same school?

 

[bripat9643]

What was good for Bill is good enough for republican pigs BTW how many lies is rump up to now?? Last count I saw was 17000

What the fuck does Bill Clinton have to do with this? Except for being another liar Dim who skated. Trump in reality isn’t close to your bogus number. Barry is the biggest liar in history. Using the same methods these media morons use,Barry is around 65,000.

Trump should kiss Obama's ass for leaving him a great economy and great employment numbers

You should remove your head from Obozo’s sphincter and kiss your teacher’s ass for advancing you through school out of pity. By your standards, Obozo better kiss Bush’s ass because anything he did must have been because of Bush’s policies. See how that Works?

Oh yeah I see You're as bonkers as Trump only you didn't go bankrupt 6 times and lose a fortune your dad gave you

His dad gave him $413 million dollars. He's worth $3.13 billion today.

Plus, he's the President of the United States.

Do I need to explain to you the difference between a million and a billion, or can you figure that your yourself?

Furthermore, he was a billionaire before his father died. He didn't get 1/100th of that before then.

 

[bripat9643]

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.

President Obama did not issue the order that was the subject of arpaio's conviction. A federal district judge did. How familiar are you with the U.S. legal system? You sound very much like the guy on USMB who supposedly was an expert on the U.S. Constitution, but ranted about "unelected judges," when Article III of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that federal judges are nominated by the POTUS and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Are you a graduate of the same school?

People who complain about unelected judges are perfectly aware of how people become judges, dumbass. They object to the fact that people who aren't elected are making laws rather than just enforcing the laws.

You have to be a certified bonehead not to understand that.

 

[bripat9643]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

Arpaio was convicted of violating the civil rights of the people he incarerated - many of whom were US citizens who had no proof on citizenship in their wallets. He brazenly defied court orders which the County obtained to prevent their Sheriff;s office from enforcing immigration laws which is a federal jurisdiction ane which had cost Maricopa County more than $20 million dollars in law suit settlements, forcing City Council to raise taxes on county residents to pay the settlements. The county's insurance refused to pay the suits because of the willfully illegal actions of the Arpaio. Residents voted him out of office, but he still continued to defy court orders and was arrested. And while he was doing this, he was allowing child rapists to go free, as long as they only preyed on Mexican children. He refused to arrest any child rapist or preditor who hurt immigrants of any age, or to prosecute them, increasing predatory crimes in the country and even though ordered to by the County.

This is your hero. If my taxes went up to pay for this dipshit's asshatedness, I'd vote him out of office too.

The people who objected to Arpaio enforcing immigration laws are the same ones who preside over sanctuary zones. They are the world's biggest hypocrites.

The rest of your post is, as always, pure horseshit, of course.

 

[Polishprince]

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.

President Obama did not issue the order that was the subject of arpaio's conviction. A federal district judge did. How familiar are you with the U.S. legal system? You sound very much like the guy on USMB who supposedly was an expert on the U.S. Constitution, but ranted about "unelected judges," when Article III of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that federal judges are nominated by the POTUS and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Are you a graduate of the same school?

It was the Obama/Holder Dept. of Justice that attacked Arpaio and the people of Maricopa County with the lawsuits that the federal judge ruled upon.

Federal District Courts only issue orders when a suit is brought.

The peoples of Maricopa were pleased with the son-of-immigrants and decorated veteran, it was the Big O who had the problem and launched the lawsuits against one of America's most distinguished sheriffs.

 

[bripat9643]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

Doesn't work that way sunshine.

If Stone's lawyers make a motion for a new trial, and the Trump DOJ doesn't object, there will be a new trial.

Or alternatively, President Trump can just give Stone a Pardon, no questions asked. Like he did with the tremendous veteran, Joe Arpaio, who was wrongfully convicted a few years ago. BTW, that worked out fine, Arpaio has not re-offended since his pardon

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

It's founded in the Constitution, dumbass.

 

[Dragonlady]

What the fuck does Bill Clinton have to do with this? Except for being another liar Dim who skated. Trump in reality isn’t close to your bogus number. Barry is the biggest liar in history. Using the same methods these media morons use,Barry is around 65,000.

Trump should kiss Obama's ass for leaving him a great economy and great employment numbers

You should remove your head from Obozo’s sphincter and kiss your teacher’s ass for advancing you through school out of pity. By your standards, Obozo better kiss Bush’s ass because anything he did must have been because of Bush’s policies. See how that Works?

Oh yeah I see You're as bonkers as Trump only you didn't go bankrupt 6 times and lose a fortune your dad gave you

His dad gave him $413 million dollars. He's worth $3.13 billion today.

Plus, he's the President of the United States.

Do I need to explain to you the difference between a million and a billion, or can you figure that your yourself?

Furthermore, he was a billionaire before his father died. He didn't get 1/100th of that before then.

What the fuck does Bill Clinton have to do with this? Except for being another liar Dim who skated. Trump in reality isn’t close to your bogus number. Barry is the biggest liar in history. Using the same methods these media morons use,Barry is around 65,000.

Trump should kiss Obama's ass for leaving him a great economy and great employment numbers

You should remove your head from Obozo’s sphincter and kiss your teacher’s ass for advancing you through school out of pity. By your standards, Obozo better kiss Bush’s ass because anything he did must have been because of Bush’s policies. See how that Works?

Oh yeah I see You're as bonkers as Trump only you didn't go bankrupt 6 times and lose a fortune your dad gave you

His dad gave him $413 million dollars. He's worth $3.13 billion today.

Plus, he's the President of the United States.

Do I need to explain to you the difference between a million and a billion, or can you figure that your yourself?

Furthermore, he was a billionaire before his father died. He didn't get 1/100th of that before then.

Trump lost $1 billion dollars in the 1980's which his father covered. His father helped keep his casinos afloat for a while but when Daddy stopped bailing him out, he bankrupted the casinos four times. By the time Fred died, American banks wouldn't give his some a dime. The Family Trust still owns Fred's properties, Donnie wanted to liquidate but his sister refused to allow it. He's still getting income from Fred, while all of his businesses continue to lose money.

Trump's bank says he's worth $350 million dollars on a good day. Trump says he's a billionaire and lies about his net worth to push himself up the Forbes list be nobody has real idea of the number.

 

[Lysistrata]

Motions for a new trial are not automatically granted. The appeals court would have to find that procedural mistakes were made during stone's trial, including the presiding judge's instructions to the jury on the law to be applied, which all must be pointed out in cites from the trial transcript. The role of a juror is fact-finder, not judge or lawyer. Actually, when jurors are selected, anyone who has a legal background is usually not selected to sit on a jury.

trumpt's pardon of arpaio was not founded in any law. There was never any finding that arpaio was wrongfully convicted of a crime of which he was actually innocent.

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.

President Obama did not issue the order that was the subject of arpaio's conviction. A federal district judge did. How familiar are you with the U.S. legal system? You sound very much like the guy on USMB who supposedly was an expert on the U.S. Constitution, but ranted about "unelected judges," when Article III of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that federal judges are nominated by the POTUS and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Are you a graduate of the same school?

People who complain about unelected judges are perfectly aware of how people become judges, dumbass. They object to the fact that people who aren't elected are making laws rather than just enforcing the laws.

You have to be a certified bonehead not to understand that.

Why call me all kinds of names when judges don't make laws. Legislators do. Legislators are elected. You simply don't understand the operation of government. Go back to school.

 

[bluzman61]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

He DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.

 

[Lysistrata]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

He DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.

What errors were made at his trial that would warrant a new trial?

 

[bluzman61]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

He DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.

What errors were made at his trial that would warrant a new trial?

The WHOLE trial was an error, there should've never BEEN a trial in the first place. Now go away, you lame laughable loser liberal lunatic.

 

[the other mike]

The DNC hack was an inside job, not Russians.

 

[bripat9643]

Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.

He was convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order. This had absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. Arpaio cost Arizona taxpayers' millions in civil lawsuits stemming from his antics, which resulted in verdicts in the plaintiffs' favor.

Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.

President Obama did not issue the order that was the subject of arpaio's conviction. A federal district judge did. How familiar are you with the U.S. legal system? You sound very much like the guy on USMB who supposedly was an expert on the U.S. Constitution, but ranted about "unelected judges," when Article III of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that federal judges are nominated by the POTUS and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Are you a graduate of the same school?

People who complain about unelected judges are perfectly aware of how people become judges, dumbass. They object to the fact that people who aren't elected are making laws rather than just enforcing the laws.

You have to be a certified bonehead not to understand that.

Why call me all kinds of names when judges don't make laws. Legislators do. Legislators are elected. You simply don't understand the operation of government. Go back to school.

Leftwing judges do make laws. For instance, they tried to make a law that says the president has no authority over immigration.

 

[bripat9643]

He was convicted by an Obama judge, the Obama prosecutors, and an Obama-loving lead juror. It's time to straighten out this mess or even dismissed the with prejudice and bias.

"Attorneys for Roger Stone on Friday requested a new trial, just a day after saying they were looking at potential bias by a juror who voted to convict the longtime Trump aide of lying to Congress and witness tampering..."

Roger Stone asks for new trial

He DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.

What errors were made at his trial that would warrant a new trial?

It appears that the jury in the Roger Stone trial was tainted