Roger Stone's Time in the Barrel

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My spouse, ex-FBI, said, IRT the way the arrest went down....."This is an embarrassment for the FBI."
There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest. He/She should have told CNN to get the F&*k out of there. But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted them to film it.

Didn’t you post this verbatim above? And like DC FBI or the NYFO ex-FBI? Like Giuliani NYFO leakers?

Why yes, yes this poster did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My spouse, ex-FBI, said, IRT the way the arrest went down....."This is an embarrassment for the FBI."
There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest. He/She should have told CNN to get the F&*k out of there. But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted them to film it.

There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest.

There was a minimum dick present for the arrest. It was Rog "I Like to Swing" Stone!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CNN has video of the pre-dawn raid of Roger Stone’s house. It’s like they are taking down El Chapo!

https://twitter.com/cnnpolitics/status/1088769400994480128?s=21

Why all the agents, long guns, etc?
Is Stone a flight risk? Did they expect him to resist?

This was a show. The SC overdid this one.

(1) risk of destroying evidence if given heads up on arrest, (2) risk of Stone being armed and shooting agents

You are reaching, Seriously.

Destroying evidence? He has been saying for months that he expected to be indicted. The FBI has been looking at his text messages, phone calls, and emails for 2 years. If he was going to destroy evidence - he would have done it long ago. The only risk of being alerted is if CNN said something.
And, Stone shooting someone? He doesn't own a gun. Somehow, I think the FBI knows this.

It was a show. Even reasonable liberals admit it was over the top. Intimidation? Probably. But, it isn't a good look for the FBI.

I think people who commit treason should be arrested. I am a reasonable person. Over the top? HA! Good one.

Why don't you worry about why he was arrested and not how he was arrested? I mean, is that really your priority???

Lying to congress: nbd.
Treason: nbd.
They brought armed agents to arrest him: THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END!!!

+1
The “law and order” party is really showing themselves for the hypocrites they are. Oh my god! The FBI arrested him? Oh my god, a traitor to his country fully capable of lying and deception and they thought he’d stoop to destroying evidence? Excuse me as I clutch my pearls!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My spouse, ex-FBI, said, IRT the way the arrest went down....."This is an embarrassment for the FBI."
There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest. He/She should have told CNN to get the F&*k out of there. But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted them to film it.

Yes they did.

Oops.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My spouse, ex-FBI, said, IRT the way the arrest went down....."This is an embarrassment for the FBI."
There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest. He/She should have told CNN to get the F&*k out of there. But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted them to film it.

Sorry the ADIC was deemed non-essential and A Team was busy covering other people's work, so Stone got the flunkies. That's what happens when you are friends with the guy who doesn't pay you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even the Nixon Library is disassociating itself from Stone.

That is low.

Link?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/nixon-foundation-disowns-roger-stone-calling-him-a-nixon-campaign-aide-or-adviser-is-a-gross-misstatement

according to FBI files he WAS involved in the nixon scandal. Poor Nixon foundation....

https://twitter.com/altNOAA/status/1088956644048936961

also NY Times article
https://www.nytimes.com/1973/07/22/archives/dirty-tricks.html

Well the coffee boy excuse worked so for Papadopoulos they thought it was worth a shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My spouse, ex-FBI, said, IRT the way the arrest went down....."This is an embarrassment for the FBI."
There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest. He/She should have told CNN to get the F&*k out of there. But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted them to film it.

Didn’t you post this verbatim above? And like DC FBI or the NYFO ex-FBI? Like Giuliani NYFO leakers?

Why yes, yes this poster did.

Nope. That wasn't me.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone else posted it... because it is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My spouse, ex-FBI, said, IRT the way the arrest went down....."This is an embarrassment for the FBI."
There should have been an ADIC, minimum, present for the arrest. He/She should have told CNN to get the F&*k out of there. But they didn't. Why? Because they wanted them to film it.

There is no ADIC in Florida. I'm sure SAC was there. And it looks like they were filming from a legal distance away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK. If there is evidence he should be charged. Fair enough. But please tell me -- Why get him at 6 am, why put a chain around his waist in addition to handcuffs, why take him out in his pajamas without giving him a chance to change clothes? I feel like calling the FBI to complain.

And CNN's camera is rolling ...

This is how Soviet Union or North Korea deal with their political dissidents. Shameful.

I agree. He is such a dangerous criminal that he was released with a $250,000 signature bond - meaning he had to pay no money.
I thought liberals did not like the militarization of police. I guess it's ok when it is a 66 YO white man who is no flight risk and doesn't own a handgun.

Oh yeah, it's terrible they woke him up at 6 AM. He didn't even have a chance to eat breakfast and put on a suit.

Cry me a river.

[Anonymous]

So the longtime personal and professional associate of our president is arrested for various crimes related to the presidential campaign and all day long, the conversation has focused on whether the arrest was overly aggressive.

Y'all are absurd. SMH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK. If there is evidence he should be charged. Fair enough. But please tell me -- Why get him at 6 am, why put a chain around his waist in addition to handcuffs, why take him out in his pajamas without giving him a chance to change clothes? I feel like calling the FBI to complain.

And CNN's camera is rolling ...

This is how Soviet Union or North Korea deal with their political dissidents. Shameful.

I agree. He is such a dangerous criminal that he was released with a $250,000 signature bond - meaning he had to pay no money.
I thought liberals did not like the militarization of police. I guess it's ok when it is a 66 YO white man who is no flight risk and doesn't own a handgun.

[Anonymous]

I hate overly aggressive arrests by law enforcement. Universally. But it seems like no one pays attention to it when a toddler gets their lung collapsed by a flash grenade or people die when cops issue no knock warrants.

If non violent but aggressive arrests of rich white Republican men are bringing attention to this endemic problem with law enforcement I'm all about it. I hope this concern about Roger leads you all to consistently advocate for changes in laws that prevent police from doing this to non violent offenders. That's what you're all going to do right?? Now that your eyes have been opened to this blight on our society?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate overly aggressive arrests by law enforcement. Universally. But it seems like no one pays attention to it when a toddler gets their lung collapsed by a flash grenade or people die when cops issue no knock warrants.

If non violent but aggressive arrests of rich white Republican men are bringing attention to this endemic problem with law enforcement I'm all about it. I hope this concern about Roger leads you all to consistently advocate for changes in laws that prevent police from doing this to non violent offenders. That's what you're all going to do right?? Now that your eyes have been opened to this blight on our society?

It won't. This is a talking point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the longtime personal and professional associate of our president is arrested for various crimes related to the presidential campaign and all day long, the conversation has focused on whether the arrest was overly aggressive.

Y'all are absurd. SMH

Peak Snowflake

[Anonymous]

Even Shep Smith says Hannity/Carlson/Ingraham aren’t reporting news:
http://time.com/longform/shepard-smith-fox-news/

“Smith says he’s unbothered by the divergence between his reporting and Fox’s opinion slate. “We serve different masters. We work for different reporting chains, we have different rules. They don’t really have rules on the opinion side. They can say whatever they want. If it’s their opinion. ”

“some of our opinion programming is there strictly to be entertaining.”

“It depends on what you’re looking for,” he says. “Are you looking for news and information so that you can make decisions about your life and your family? Or are you looking for your worldview to be confirmed? For that second kind of viewer, when the facts fly in the face of your worldview, that can be unsettling.”