Roger Stone Threatens Federal Judge

1. 82

   crankaliciousposted 6 years ago

   So Roger Stone doesn't like the accusations against him. He posted a picture on his Instagram account that shows judge Amy Berman Jackson and has what looks to be crosshairs in the upper left corner.
   
   Is this the approved right-wing way of dealing with the federal judiciary now?
   
   Given Trump's politicizing of the judiciary, does he approve of this? Will he speak out against it? As in "it is wrong to threaten federal judges?"
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 83

      GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Come on Crankalicious, do you really think that was the message of Right-wing protagonists?
      
      Oops, dumb question, of course you do.
      
      But, what if it was considered that the crosshairs were a part of a background document, (that does seem the case), and the crosshairs represented Mueller's actions, ie. Muller has Pres. Trump in his "crosshairs."
      
      Stone's accompanying statement: "... deep state hitman Robert Mueller.." could be seen as validation of that thought. "The crosshairs was part of a document pertaining to Mueller's investigation, not the image of the judge."
      
      Is that at all plausible?
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 82

         crankaliciousposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         I wonder how it would be interpreted if some left-winger posted a picture of President Trump with some crosshairs on it.
         
         GA, it sounds like you are really going through some machinations to come up with your explanation. Did you hurt yourself? I suppose it's plausible. Anything is.

         replyreport
         1. 83

            GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Nope Crankalicious, didn't sprain a thing.
            
            But to clear up any misinterpretations, I think it was a purposeful post. I think the crosshairs were purposely considered, (just as I think the context of the document that is the background was considered - think "plausible deniability").
            
            I think it was an extremely dumb post. And I also think it was not Roger Stone that created the post.
            
            Does that clear up any of your doubts about my contortions?
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 68

               IslandBitesposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               If you think it wasn't him, you haven't read his social media... (Or watched any of his interviews!)

               replyreport
               1. 83

                  GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  You are right. I haven't done any of what you said. So, it seems obvious I was giving him more slack than he deserved.
                  
                  Don't get carried away with this admission because it is a brief lapse into the petty, but, Roger Stone looks like a pinhead, and holding that thought embarrasses me - to the point of giving him more benefit of the doubt than he probably deserves.
                  
                  My bad. I will try to be more tolerant in the future. But, with somebody else. Stone just looks like he is what he is portrayed to be. I will do penance for holding that thought.
                  
                  I should add that I recently found out he is an Alex Jones contributor ... My gawwddd... how could I be so naive. ;-)
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
2. 69

   Live to Learnposted 6 years ago

   Definitely not ok. I would think it was indicative of the fact the guy is a putz. Which would line up with everything else I've heard of him.

   replyreport
3. 75

   wildernessposted 6 years ago

   "Is this the approved right-wing way of dealing with the federal judiciary now?"
   
   Probably not.  But it is surely the left-wing way of dealing with opponents; find anything they possible can to denigrate whatever is said.
   
   Wonder what the rest of that background really is?  Would bet anything it is not a crosshairs.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      IslandBitesposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Wonder what the rest of that background really is?  Would bet anything it is not a crosshairs.
      
      You should ask Roger, he decided to post it just like that.
      And he gave all kind of excuses when he asked for forgiveness yesterday at court. LOL

      replyreport
      1. 83

         GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Didn't he also claim it was a staffer, and not him, that posted the Instagram message?
         
         If true, does that make a difference in your opinion?
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 68

            IslandBitesposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            "Roger said the image had been selected by a volunteer who was working for him, though he couldn't say who picked the photo or list the five or six volunteers who have been working for him when he was asked by prosecutors.
            
            He said he had several photos to choose from and posted the image himself to his profile."
            
            Then he said it was a mistake, he's sorry, he let the court down, it was a lapse in judgment...
            
            But then said it is not crosshairs, that is is a celtic cross... Then said he's not sure because he's not into the occult.'
            
            He the said he's under pressure and have no money.
            
            Oh, but he also said he admits it was a screwup, that he wasn't thinking and it his fault.
            
            He said perhaps he talks too much.
            
            (You think?)

            replyreport
   2. 82

      crankaliciousposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      "But it is surely the left-wing way of dealing with opponents; find anything they possible can to denigrate whatever is said."
      
      Interesting assessment because everything I read from right-wing forum posters involves taking an example of some bad behavior, like the Jessie Smollett case, and applying it to all left-wingers, so I'm really just being hyperbolic and doing the same.
      
      That said, I would think it would concern everyone that Trump won't condemn this type of behavior just because Stone is his ally. I guess it's okay to threaten a federal judge if you're from the right political party.

      replyreport