Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
America loses in every election, but with Trump we lose a lot less than with some Democrat criminal like Hillary.and you care not that with Trump the pig America loses too?Still mad because Hillawy wost.Next time give the pos the chair and have trump sit on his lap
No. Bro be mad 'cause the next Democrap is going to lose too.
If you believe Hillary was a better alternative than Trump, then you're nothing but a brain damaged douchebag.
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
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 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 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.
Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.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 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.
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.
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 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.
Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.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.
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.
Furthermore, he was a billionaire before his father died. He didn't get 1/100th of that before then.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 youTrump should kiss Obama's ass for leaving him a great economy and great employment numbersWhat 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.
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?
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?
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.Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.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.
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.
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?
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.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 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.
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.
Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.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.
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.
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's founded in the Constitution, dumbass.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.
Furthermore, he was a billionaire before his father died. He didn't get 1/100th of that before then.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 youTrump should kiss Obama's ass for leaving him a great economy and great employment numbersWhat 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.
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?
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.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 youTrump should kiss Obama's ass for leaving him a great economy and great employment numbersWhat 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.
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?
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?
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.Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.Durr. Arpaio was convicted of pissing off Barack Obama. Now why wasn't that less important than no law that he broke.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.
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.
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?
You have to be a certified bonehead not to understand that.
He DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.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.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
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.He DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.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
What errors were made at his trial that would warrant a new trial?
Leftwing judges do make laws. For instance, they tried to make a law that says the president has no authority over immigration.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.Nothing to do with Barack Obama? You must have arrived here recently from a planet far, far away.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.
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?
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.
It appears that the jury in the Roger Stone trial was taintedHe DESERVES a new trial. The previous one was a total sham.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
What errors were made at his trial that would warrant a new trial?
