Roger Stone arrested

I don’t see the bail question as so much about the seriousness of the crime as more to do with the seriousness of the Eliot Ness like arrest. Here’s this guy who has to be taken down with heavy weapons and flak jackets before he gets to some serious weaponage or flys the scene in a getaway car. They’re after him like machine gun Kelly. As soon as he hits jail…enh…let him go.
It just shows what a melodrama was put on for political reasons
This is supposed to be an investigation, not opposition research.

Poor baby! I feel so bad for Roger Stone, he didn’t deserve that. /sarcasm

Apparently some of you haven’t heard how loud they knocked.

1 Like

The seriousness of the charges matches the professionalism of the arrest.

Guaranteed the FBI taped the entire thing. Roger Stone won’t want us to hear that, we’ll hear how gentle and polite they were to him.

Which is exactly what it was. The FBI didn’t just take him and leave.

They took him with heavy guns, flak jackets and in the middle of the night. The judge let him out and will tell his lawyer when to bring him into court.
You don’t see anything ridiculous about that?

No. Did you want them to hold him indefinitely or on a torture rack?

So, you just don’t like the way they did it?

If he lied he lied. And no, you don’t go in like that because someone lied to Congress. Mostly, historically, you just note that they lied and let them change the record.

“let them change the record?” What does that mean?

L.A. Times article from 2016 with this quote:

“There were no expenditures that weren’t approved by Mr. Trump himself,” said Stone, who started working for Trump in the 1980s. “He saw the ads, television ads, which he would see on a video machine, radio ads, you play on a tape recorder, or newspaper ads, which he would see the artwork for.”

Six am is not “the middle of the night”.

The FBI is always going to be armed when they arrest someone.

FBI is always armed, period. Handguns.

And a simple letter to his lawyer telling him to have Stone show up in court on such and such a date would have sufficed.

Nope. The seriousness of the crime matched the professionalism of the arrest.

Yeah. Right. Lying to congress. And the threat of violence should be the criteria. There was none.

They had a search warrant. Asking him to show up in court doesn’t help that.

Maybe they could have given him the benefit of the doubt and just subpoenaed him for records. You know who doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt? People indicted for obstruction, witness tampering and making false statements. The reason should be obvious.

You said earlier in this thread that a search warrant was involved. Do you think search warrants are typically mailed as “a simple letter” to one’s attorney?

He had stated publicly for months that he was going to be arrested for exactly what he was arrested. He wasn’t going to make a mad dash to destroy documents. If he had any that he thought needed destroying, they were already gone.

So, what, don’t even try?

That sounds like pretty poor investigative technique Doug. There was nothing inappropriate or unusual about the FBI’s actions.

1 Like

I said that because some other poster had said that and I assume they were correct. Again…its kind of late to think he wouldn’t already have gotten rid of anything.