by Karl Denninger, Market Ticker:

As I say, meh:

The prison sentence of more than three years imposed Thursday by a federal judge on Trump associate Roger Stone demonstrates that Attorney General William Barr was correct in his assessment that trial prosecutors were seeking an unduly punitive sentence.

Stone was found guilty in November by a Washington jury of making false statements, obstruction and witness tampering in a case that arose from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. The four prosecutors, two of whom worked for Mueller, requested an absurd seven-to-nine-year prison sentence for Stone.

The judge, Amy Berman Jackson, imposed a 40 month sentence.  In doing so she clowned the more than 2,000 “former prosecutors” who have demanded that AG Barr resign.  In fact her sentence, which she demonstrated from the bench was still motivated by personal and political animus, stands as proof that all 2,000 of those signatories deserve worse than imprisonment themselves.

But the real problem is that the judge demonstrated her personal animus in the rant she delivered from the bench as part of the sentencing.  Accusing Stone of “covering up for the President” is utterly bereft of both logic and connection to the case at hand.

Political operatives by definition are doing work for a given candidate or office-holder.  Stone has a long history of being exactly that; Hell, the dude has a tattoo of Nixon on his shoulder!  But doing such work, while often sleazy (and Stone is definitely that) isn’t a crime.

The problem that Jackson displayed in her rant is that she is also the one hearing the motion for a new trial alleging a biased (and possibly intentionally so) jury.  The allegation is not that the jury formed an opinion during the trial that was adverse — but rather that the foreperson, specifically, came into the trial having called Trump “klanpresident” among other things and lied on her jury selection form — and during voir dire.

There is also the issue that said foreperson, it appears, was ineligible to be seated in the first place as her apparent residence is in Tennessee, which is not part of the DC district.  Federal court procedure requires that members of the jury pool be residents of and in physical residence within the district for the majority of the previous 12 months prior to selection.  This leads to the obvious question: HOW DID SHE GET IN THE POOL AND ON THE TRIAL?

She could not have done that alone and the odds of her being selected for this specific trial by random chance as an ineligible person who didn’t live there are about as probable as my winning the Powerball this weekend without buying a ticket.

That needs to be run to ground along with every other juror who served on that jury.  The fact that she appears to have been facially ineligible to be selected for the pool say much less for the trial itself implicates a very strong possibility of organized tampering with the federal jury system in that district.

If that is the case then every case heard in same during the time that was occurring, including this case, must be thrown out or every single officer of said court from Judges on down must be dragged out of their offices, if necessary by their hair, ejected, asset-stripped to their underwear with every penny distributed to those convicted during that period of time and then every single one of them must be tried for kidnapping and false imprisonment as every single case so-heard was done so illegitimately and in fact those people were kidnapped and falsely imprisoned.

ALL OF THEM.

This, in fact, if it took place is so outrageous as to define the complete destruction of the Rule of Law and our Constitution within that district.  If it occurred it is an act of open seditious conspiracy at the highest levels of our federal judiciary and yet not one word has come out of Barr’s mouth nor any element of the mainslime media has been willing to go anywhere near it.

Read More @ Market-Ticker.org