Here's the Question Liberal Talking Heads NEVER Ask their Deep State Guests
Roger Stone exits federal court Washington, Friday, Nov. 15, 2019. Stone, longtime friend of President Donald Trump, has been found guilty at his trial in federal court in Washington. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)
It’s become increasingly clear that the four prosecutors handling the Roger Stone case used their sentencing recommendation as an opportunity to damage AG Barr’s credibility, to strain the relationship between President Trump and AG William Barr, and if they were really lucky, to set the stage for Impeachment 2.0. As the left has gone into overdrive trying to sow mistrust and spread disinformation, there’s one subject that has been studiously avoided. None of the liberal hosts have asked any of their deep state guests the following questions.
Why did the prosecutors recommend the maximum sentence of seven to nine years for Roger Stone? Does anyone honestly believe this is a fair sentence?
Given Roger Stone’s perceived “crimes,” was this a reasonable recommendation? Mention of the appropriateness/inappropriateness of Stone’s sentence has been conspicuously absent from any of the debates/discussions on the liberal networks.
The four prosecutors on the Stone case need to be questioned under oath about it.
The first factor that is normally taken into account when determining a sentence is the defendant’s prior record. Does he or she have a “history of criminal conduct?” For Roger Stone, this was a first offense.
The second question would be, “Do people convicted of the same or similar crimes receive similar sentences?” For Stone’s prosecutors, the answer depends on the political affiliation of the defendant. Not if you are former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, one of the architects of the coup against President Trump and therefore, one of them. McCabe lied to investigators on four occasions (three times under oath), yet he was not charged with a crime. If you happen to be associated with President Trump, however, the calculation changes. Think General Flynn, George Papadopoulos.
Although estimates vary from one study to the next, the average sentence for a convicted rapist is eight years. Do Stone’s prosecutors actually believe he deserves the same sentence?
Can the four prosecutors furnish any precedents where such a lengthy sentence was recommended for a defendant convicted of similar crimes?
Third, what harm was caused by this individual’s action? Was anyone physically hurt? Did anyone suffer economic loss as a result of the crime? The witness that Stone is said to have threatened, Randy Credico, told investigators he did not feel threatened. This is similar to the House Democrats’ insistence that President Trump had pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, yet he repeatedly said he had not felt pressured at all. Nor did Roger Stone cause physical or economic harm to anyone.
Another factor would be the defendant’s behavior when arrested. Need we even address this? Roger Stone and his wife were asleep in their home. In the predawn hours, a CNN cameraman arrived and set up his tripod outside Stone’s Ft. Lauderdale, FL home. An hour later, heavily armed FBI agents arrived.
Tucker Carlson describes the scene:
They’re wearing ballistic armor and carrying assault weapons. 30 round magazines, red-dot sites and tactical flashlights mounted to their barrel shafts. One has his gun hanging by a strap while he carries a battering ram in his left hand…
It looks like a high stakes raid, but CNN’s cameraman is still 40 feet away filming it all. One agent swings his firearm around as he scans and surveys Stone’s front porch.
Behind the home, a third camera captures the agents approaching the back of the house from the sideyard. From behind he property, a boat arrives with at least two agents on board. They shine a floodlight into Stone’s home.
Back in front, an agent pounds on Stone’s door, finger next to the trigger in case something goes wrong. He tries again as he and his colleagues wait in position. Within minutes, Stone exits the home to greet the agents who have their rifles pointed at him. Stone raises his hands and spins around, apparently trying to show that he is unarmed. Another FBI agent approaches Stone from behind and cuffs him. It’s just after 6 am, still dark out. Twenty minutes later, the same camera shows agents leading Stone back into his house. He is barefoot. Stone is wearing a t-shirt that says “Roger Stone did nothing wrong.”
I have no words. (A three minute video of this raid can be viewed here.)
And finally, does the defendant present a danger to society? Clearly, the answer is no.
Roger Stone should never have been arrested, let alone convicted.
A sentence of seven to nine years in his case is excessive, abusive and vindictive.
The left is talking about Trump’s anger and Barr’s intervention in the sentencing recommendation. They’re not asking about the internal DOJ discussions which took place before the four prosecutors presented their recommendation to the court. Barr had been opposed to such a lengthy sentence and the prosecutors had been adamant about the maximum sentence. Barr said they reached a compromise. In an interview with ABC’s Pierre Thomas last week, he said they had agreed to “defer to the discretion of the judge, let the judge make the determination.”
Above all, what they need to be asking is: Do you truly consider seven to nine years to be a just sentence?
