╌>

Alice Johnson Thanks Jesus Christ and President Trump for Sentence Commutation

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  heartland-american  •  8 years ago  •  260 comments

Alice Johnson Thanks Jesus Christ and President Trump for Sentence Commutation

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



After Johnson’s case was brought to his attention by reality TV superstar Kim Kardashian West, Trump commuted her sentence.

This was the scene Wednesday as Johnson was released.  

“First of all, I want to thank my Lord and Savior, thank Jesus Christ. Without him, I can do nothing. With him, I can do everything,” she said. “I want to thank President Donald John Trump. Hallelujah!,” she added, as the crowd around her cheered at the sound of the president’s name. “Thank you for giving me another chance at life and restoring me to my family.’

Speaking of Kardashian West, Johnson added, “Bless Kim, our little angel. Thank you, thank you.”

Johnson, who is now 63, had been serving a life sentence in a federal prison in Aliceville, Alabama, since 1996.

According to Mic, the outlet that first publicized Johnson’s story, which in turn got the attention of Kardashian West, “Johnson was convicted for her role facilitating communications in a cocaine trafficking operation in Memphis, Tennessee.” She was then handed a sentence of life with no chance of parole, plus another 25 years.

This was Johnson’s first offense.

Once incarcerated, Johnson became a model prisoner, a playwright and minister to the other female prisoners.

There is no record of her ever having been involved in any kind of violence.

Kardashian West told the Mic that while meeting with Trump, he “really spent the time to listen to our case that we were making for Alice. He really understood, and I am very hopeful that this will turn out really positively.”

Johnson again thanked Kardashian West and Trump Thursday morning on ABC’s Good Morning America.

When asked if she felt she had paid her debt to society, Johnson said she felt she had “overpaid,” but did not deny committing the crimes that resulted in her 22-year imprisonment, which were quite serious:  

 

Minutes after her GMA appearance Trump tweeted, “Good luck to Alice Johnson. Have a wonderful life.”


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Quiet
2  Paula Bartholomew    8 years ago

The last thing I thought I would ever say is "Wtg Kim and Trump."

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
Professor Quiet
3  Larry Hampton    8 years ago

Thank you Jesus and Rump for releasing the LEADER (not merely one playing a " role facilitating communications in a cocaine trafficking operation" as dishonestly being rendered in this article) and thank you as well to the TV whore and perfectly ridiculous role model for little ones, who got on her knees in front of the Prez to facilitate the jail-break.

I'm sure Jesus is so thankful as well, to all who share this idiocy for political purposes.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Expert
3.1  Ender  replied to  Larry Hampton @3    8 years ago

Funny some act like she was just a casual user. There was money laundering involved, among other things.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Expert
3.1.6  Ender  replied to    8 years ago

I just think that it's kind of funny. I have heard conservative people say things like, think about the children, think about all the lives she ruined, think about all the addicts she made, etc.

Now all of the sudden, because trump did it, it's ok, she deserves to get out, it was a minor offence...

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Expert
3.1.8  Ender  replied to    8 years ago

Then you seem to be in a minority within your brethren. I have heard some say that pot smokers shouldn't get out early.

A man that was convicted with her also got a life sentence. Why does she get out and he is still behind bars? They were working together.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
3.1.9  Raven Wing   replied to  Ender @3.1.8    8 years ago
Why does she get out and he is still behind bars? They were working together.

Obvious 'collusion' between Trump and Kanye West and his Kardashian eye candy. LOL

 
 
 
TruettCollins
Freshman Silent
3.1.14  TruettCollins  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.4    8 years ago

It was simply the first time she got caught.....in the time before how many families did she destroy, how many lives did she ruin?

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
3.1.16  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.15    8 years ago
So, are liberals going to abandon sentencing reform now that they know Trump is for it?

Jeeezus! You should do a little reading before you write.

There is nothing in his reform language that addresses Sentence Reform.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.17  JBB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.15    8 years ago
are liberals going to abandon sentencing reform now that they know Trump is for it?

When did Trump embrace sentencing reform? He issued a pardon in a vain attempt to curry favor...

 
 
 
TruettCollins
Freshman Silent
3.1.19  TruettCollins  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.15    8 years ago
There have been murderers who served less time and got out.

Which is not right either.....how many people died because of the poison she was pushing?

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
3.1.21  Studiusbagus  replied to    8 years ago
now that they know Trump is for it?

Trump never said he was for sentencing reforms....My point.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
3.2  Split Personality  replied to  Larry Hampton @3    8 years ago

In March of this year the same POTUS was advocating for the death penalty for the LEADERS of these drug pushing rings citing "thousands of deaths and lives ruined".

Now he's pandering to Kim and Kanye to commute this woman's sentence?

SMDH

 
 
 
Skrekk
Sophomore Quiet
3.2.1  Skrekk  replied to  Split Personality @3.2    8 years ago

Trump has even endorsed Duterte's death squads against drug dealers.

 
 
 
sixpick
Professor Quiet
3.3  sixpick  replied to  Larry Hampton @3    8 years ago
Thank you Jesus and Rump for releasing the LEADER (not merely one playing a "role facilitating communications in a cocaine trafficking operation" as dishonestly being rendered in this article) and thank you as well to the TV whore and perfectly ridiculous

I don't recall you being so upset when this information was revealed a few years ago, Larry.

U.S. misinformed Congress, public on immigrant release

by Brad Heath of USA Today

New records contradict the Obama administration's assurances to Congress and the public that the 2,200 people it freed from immigration jails last year to save money had only minor criminal records.

New records contradict the Obama administration's assurances to Congress and the public that the 2,200 people it freed from immigration jails last year to save money had only minor criminal records.

The records, obtained by USA TODAY, show immigration officials released some undocumented immigrants who had faced far more serious criminal charges, including people charged with kidnapping, sexual assault, drug trafficking and homicide.

The release sparked a furor in Congress. Republican lawmakers accused the Obama administration of setting dangerous criminals free. In response, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said it had released " low-risk offenders who do not have serious criminal records ," a claim the administration repeated to the public and to members of Congress.

The new records, including spreadsheets and hundreds of pages of e-mails, offer the most detailed information yet about the people ICE freed as it prepared for steep, across-the-government spending cuts in February 2013. They show that although two-thirds of the people who were freed had no criminal records, several had been arrested or convicted on charges more severe than the administration had disclosed.

ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen acknowledged the discrepancy. She said "discretionary releases made by ICE were of low-level offenders. However, the releases involving individuals with more significant criminal histories were, by and large, dictated by special circumstances outside of the agency's control."

Lawmakers expressed concern. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said it is "deeply troubling that ICE would knowingly release thousands of undocumented immigrant detainees many with prior criminal records into our streets, while publicly downplaying the danger they posed."

Immigration authorities detain an average of about 34,000 people a day. Although the agency regularly releases immigrants who have been charged with serious crimes, it typically does so because their legal status has changed or because they cannot be deported not as a way to save money. That distinction, combined with the fact that last year's release happened abruptly and with no advance notice, fed the partisan firestorm that followed.

ICE pays an average of $122 a day for each immigrant it keeps in detention.

The detainees were awaiting deportation or hearings in immigration court. The release did not stop those proceedings; instead, most were released with electronic monitors or other forms of supervision.

In hearings last year, Republican lawmakers pressed then-ICE Director John Morton for specifics on the criminal records of the people the agency had freed. At one, Rep. J. Randy Forbes, R-Va., asked Morton directly, "No one on that list has been charged or convicted with murder, rape or sexual abuse of a minor, were they?"

Morton answered, "They were not."

He told lawmakers that, to his knowledge, none had faced child pornography charges.

White House spokesman Jay Carney similarly described them as "low-risk, non-criminal detainees."

A spreadsheet ICE officials prepared listing the detainees includes one person in Texas charged with aggravated kidnapping and sexually assaulting a child, as well as others charged with armed assaults or assaulting police officers. Another immigrant released from Miami had been charged with conspiracy to commit homicide. Two detainees from Boston had been charged with aggravated assault using a weapon. One in Denver had a sexual assault charge. The agency released the spreadsheet to USA TODAY under the Freedom of Information Act.

ICE's records do not indicate whether the detainees were convicted of those crimes or merely charged with them. The agency said it would not release information identifying any of the detainees because doing so would invade their privacy, so it was impossible to examine the details of their cases.

Morton, who resigned last year, told Congress that the more than 2,200 immigrants ICE released included 629 people with criminal records, all of them people who had been charged with misdemeanors "or other criminals whose prior conviction did not pose a violent threat to public safety."

That accounting did not include 144 other detainees whose release ICE records attribute to "special issues." Most often, that meant the detainees were let go because the agency had little chance of deporting them in the near future. The Supreme Court has said the government generally cannot hold immigrants for more than six months if it has no prospect of deporting them. To save money, ICE freed some detainees before the six-month clock ran out.

Homeland Security officials have acknowledged that ICE handled the detainee release badly. The department's inspector general concluded in August that the cost-cutting efforts were so rushed and mismanaged that top officials never informed the White House or then-Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. Nonetheless, its audit concluded that officials acted "appropriately" in selecting which undocumented immigrants should be released.

The former head of ICE's detention operation, Gary Mead, said that if officials provided incorrect information to the public, they did not do so deliberately. Rather, he said, the release happened so quickly that ICE managers in Washington did not know precisely who had been released until after the episode had been reported by the news media.

"We had been asking for some time whether we would have enough money to sustain the level of detention we had, and we didn't get an answer," Mead said. "When we did get an answer, it was that we had to start releasing people today."

Sadly, most people (especially many of the self-proclaimed "human rights advocates") don't really give a hoot about human suffering. They only bring these things up when it suits their own political agenda. - Anonymous Left Leaning NT Member (2012)

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Expert
4  Kavika     8 years ago

Kanye West supports Trump, Kim (Kanye wife) gets an audience with Trump. Trump pardons a convicted drug dealer to show that he supports blacks...OMG, how transparent is that. 

Perhaps Trump should actually acknowledge the Central Park Five and their innocence instead of carrying on a 30 year war against wrongly convicted minorities... 

 
 
 
sixpick
Professor Quiet
4.1  sixpick  replied to  Kavika @4    8 years ago

Well, Obama lit the White House up in rainbow colors to get those votes, but refused to light it up in blue for the people who have to go out each day and night to deal with lawlessness.  Good political move, wouldn't you say?  Looking good, don't you think?

https://reclaimourrepublic.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/trump-gop-red-wave.jpg?w=640&h=470

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Expert
4.1.1  Kavika   replied to  sixpick @4.1    8 years ago

Good to see you six. Seems that you haven't changed much, still posting incoherent off topic babble. 

 

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
4.1.4  arkpdx  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.2    8 years ago

Are you Pot or Kettle? 

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
Sophomore Silent
4.1.5  Phoenyx13  replied to    8 years ago
If you don't understand Obama lit up the White House in support of gays but refused to do so in support of Law Enforcement then it's obviously not Six who's incoherent.

what was the reason that Obama lit up the White house in support of "gays" again ?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Expert
4.1.6  Kavika   replied to    8 years ago

Welcome OSM, thanks for more babble....Exactly what did his or your comment have to do with the content of my comment...NOTHING.

Tell your leader Trump to admit that he was wrong about the Central Park Five, or do you support his stand on it..

Cheers.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
4.1.13  Raven Wing   replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.11    8 years ago
Bring on that red wave this November!

What?  Are the Republicans going to let communists vote this November. How many do they have running for office? I'm sure Putin will be interested to see who many will win before he runs here with Trump as well.

 

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.14  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.12    8 years ago
Bring on that red wave this November!

Hmmm, sorry to bust your bubble but even Fox news reports that Dems have a 9 point lead....and others are saying that gap is growing.

Just think, this time next year we may be witnessing the impeachment AND indictment of Trump.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.16  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.15    8 years ago
All you could get is a house party line vote to impeach.

That's what happens before an indictment...read up. Once he's impeached, he can be charged.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
4.1.17  bugsy  replied to  Studiusbagus @4.1.16    8 years ago
Once he's impeached, he can be charged.

For what, exactly?

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
4.1.20  MrFrost  replied to  bugsy @4.1.17    8 years ago

Crimes. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Quiet
4.1.22  pat wilson  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.15    8 years ago

All that would be needed would be for 20 repubs to vote for it. Not likely but certainly possible.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
4.1.23  MrFrost  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.21    8 years ago
Such as....be specific.

Mueller will let ya know... Patience...Patience... LOL

Let's be honest... Your kind has been calling Hillary a criminal for over 20 years, but never so much as a charge of a crime... Now you want specifics when it comes to trump? That's a joke right? LOL

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.24  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.18    8 years ago

He doesn't have to be removed from office, just impeached.

Since you are the brain child...show us the rules that says he must be removed from office....

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.25  Studiusbagus  replied to  bugsy @4.1.17    8 years ago
For what, exactly?

Not like you don't already know but...Obstruction of justice, violation of the emoluments clause, then of course there's his announcement that he would be announcing dirt on Hillary...that was before his son went to the meeting with the Russians, only to be canceled after the meeting didn't produce the dirt.....obvious collusion with the Russians involving the election. To where they had to admit Trump dictated the bogus adoption memo.  We can add corruption to the impeachment list.

His playtime with Cohen is tightening around his neck also. The Courts have already spanked him trying to hide documents under Att/client privvy. This has only just begun while he's being sued by Summer Zervos.

 "Good question"......Sure C4P....again, ignorance applauding ignorance.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.26  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.15    8 years ago
There can be no indictment of a sitting president.

Try again....

     Faced with federal indictments, Agnew’s criminal defense attorneys initially fought the allegations by arguing that the charges were false, that a sitting vice president could not be indicted, and that the only way he could be removed from office was by impeachment. After the prosecutor released a convincing legal brief asserting that sitting vice presidents could be indicted , Agnew launched a political attack on the Nixon administration and vowed not to resign. With Nixon in danger of impeachment for his role in the Watergate scandal, the administration sought to remove Agnew from the presidential line of succession, and secret plea-bargaining took place between Agnew's criminal defense lawyers, the prosecutors and the presiding federal judge. A plea bargain was struck that provided that Agnew could plead no contest to one felony and be sentenced to probation, provided he resigned as vice president of the United States On October 10, 1973 Agnew resigned the vice presidency, appeared in United States District Court in Baltimore and plead nolo contendere to a single federal count of failing to report on his income-tax return $29,500 in income that he had received in 1967, while governor of Maryland.

Agnew was already indicted while he was in office.....wait until Mueller does his final dance, Trump is going to be swimming neck deep in criminal misconduct. Looks like his pussy might be getting grabbed in the pokey.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.1.28  devangelical  replied to    8 years ago

What does that have to do with the topic of this seed? Bwah ha ha

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.29  Studiusbagus  replied to    8 years ago
You need more?

From RT and the Washington times? No.

And Duh...casualties did go up...30,000 troops were added.

So, Obama is to blame for the suicide bombers? Did he tell the troops to get close before making sure there was no bomb? Who's to blame for that snafu?

Did you ever disarm a prisoner that had his hands hidden? I didn't without seeing what he had first.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.30  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.15    8 years ago
The senate would need 67 votes for removal from office before an indictment can happen.

Anybody tell Spiro Agnew that? He was indicted as he was sitting.

You fail.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Expert
4.1.32  Kavika   replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.31    8 years ago
Yep, we’re going to allow Bernie Sanders and all his commie/socialist friends who are American citizens to vote in November.  

Of course we are, they are American citizens. 

Your allowed to vote so what is the big deal.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.1.37  devangelical  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.33    8 years ago

Flynn is taking Pence down with him. Buh-bye thumper.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.1.38  devangelical  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.34    8 years ago

Running out of comments to flag? Bwah ha ha

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
4.1.39  livefreeordie  replied to  devangelical @4.1.37    8 years ago

Nonsense. General Flynn will likely never be sentence and if so, President Trump should immediately pardon him from this criminal attack by the FBI

Flynn did not lie-the only thing he is guilty of is not having unlimited funds to defend himself and falling on his sword to protect his son from an FBI threat.

The FBI and DOJ are criminal enterprises for the Stalinist US government, seeking how many Americans they can put in prison

“Recent reporting raised questions about the circumstances surrounding Michael Flynn’s guilty plea for making “false statements.”

Apparently, Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who conducted Flynn’s January 2017 interview, believed Flynn had been truthful. Reportedly, the FBI decided to take no action. On March 2, then-FBI director James Comey confirmed this to the House Intelligence Committee.”

As a former FBI agent, I believe the answers lie in an examination of the FBI’s disciplinary system under Mueller. In fact, this obscure Mueller process may well hold the key to understanding why Flynn’s guilty plea may be less a reflection of Flynn’s level of candor than a product of Mueller’s aggressive tactics — particularly, the tactic of using disingenuous allegations of lying to decide judicial matters.”

The Mystery of Michael Flynn’s Guilty Plea

He pleaded guilty to a crime FBI agents said he didn’t commit.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.40  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.35    8 years ago

Funny how you do not link these documents...

And what does the constitution say? Oh yeah, it says nothing about whether a sitting president can be charged.

Hmmm, let's see what the favorite judge of the right has to say....Mr. Napolitano, do you have anything to add?

Napolitano: The Department of Justice Says Trump Can Be Indicted

Napolitano interjected to clarify Doocy’s attempt. He said, “Correct. Correct that it is a political decision by the House. Right now the House is controlled by Republicans. That may stay the same after November or it may change. But there is another DOJ memo–as I mentioned to you. They’re both circa Clinton, they’re both late nineties. Which says, the president can be indicted but not prosecuted until after he leaves office. You might have to indict him to stop the running of the statute of limitations.”

Napolitano...citing the DOJ....now where is your link ??

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.41  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.33    8 years ago
And make Pence President for the rest of the term and eligible to run for two more terms..

Nope, he's going down with Trump...Flynn will make that happen.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.42  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.35    8 years ago
The rules for VP are not the same.

Bullshit....show where they are not the same rules.

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
4.1.43  livefreeordie  replied to  Studiusbagus @4.1.41    8 years ago

Delusional

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.46  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.44    8 years ago

No, you didn't. I asked you to link the documents...you didn't because you can't.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.49  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.48    8 years ago

But I did and you have nothing to say now.

Gee, yeah, excuse me for being out of town for a few days....I did it just to avoid this discussion//S

I read the links....you should have too when you thought you had something, here's an excerpt that shows how wrong you are....Remember, it's YOUR link.

The OLC memorandum began by considering whether the plain terms of the
Impeachment Judgment Clause prohibit the institution of criminal proceedings
against any officer subject to that Clause prior to that officer’s conviction upon
impeachment. OLC Memo at 2. The memorandum concluded that the plain terms
of the Clause do not impose such a general bar to indictment or criminal trial
prior to impeachment and therefore do not, by themselves, preclude the criminal
prosecution of a sitting President.
 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
4.1.51  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.50    8 years ago

Again, you ignore your own links.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
5  Studiusbagus    8 years ago

Yay!  Another confessed convicted felon has joined the already crowded house of perverts and criminals in the halls of the Republicans!

"Hallelujah!"

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
5.3  arkpdx  replied to  Studiusbagus @5    8 years ago

If it was Obama or Clinton  that commuted her  sentence , you would be shoutingfrim the rooftops how kind and compassionate he was for freeing this great grandmother and what a sweetheart she is and how cruel her incarceration was. Since it was Trumps that did I,  she has become the female equivalent of Pablo escobar. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
5.3.1  Sunshine  replied to  arkpdx @5.3    8 years ago

no doubt 

 
 
 
Explorerdog
Freshman Silent
5.3.2  Explorerdog  replied to  arkpdx @5.3    8 years ago

Trump wanted to execute drug traffickers and he freed this one, I guess when he found out that Oliver North and Ronnie Raygun shipped cocaine into the country by the ton his base wouldn't be happy.

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
5.3.3  livefreeordie  replied to  Explorerdog @5.3.2    8 years ago

Gary Webb’s lie continues to be repeated by the left even it has been thoroughly debunked

“ Did CIA have any relationship or dealings with Ross, Blandon or Meneses? No information has been found to indicate that any past or present employee of CIA, or anyone acting on behalf of CIA, had any direct or indirect dealing with Ricky Ross, Oscar Danilo Blandon or Juan Norwin Meneses. Additionally, no information has been found to indicate that CIA had any relationship or contact with Ronald J. Lister or David Scott Weekly, the person Lister allegedly claimed was his CIA contact. No information has been found to indicate that any of these individuals was ever employed by CIA, or met by CIA employees or anyone acting on CIA's behalf.

Was the drug trafficking of Ross, Blandon or Meneses linked to CIA or Contra activities? No information has been found to indicate that Ross provided any money to any Contra group at any time, or that he had any contact or connection to the Contras or CIA.

No information has been found to indicate that the drug trafficking activities of Blandon and Meneses were motivated by any commitment to support the Contra cause or Contra activities undertaken by CIA.

Blandon and Meneses claim that they each donated between $3,000 and $40,000 to Contra sympathizers in Los Angeles. No information has been found to substantiate these claims. Moreover, no information has been found to indicate that Meneses or Blandon received any CIA or Contra support for their drug trafficking activities.

Blandon did have a personal relationship with Eden Pastora and provided him with financial assistance in the form of rent-free housing and two vehicles. Much of this assistance was provided to Pastora after he left the Contra movement.”

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
5.3.4  Studiusbagus  replied to  arkpdx @5.3    8 years ago
you would be shoutingfrim the rooftops how kind and compassionate he was for freeing this great grandmother and what a sweetheart she is and how cruel her incarceration was

No, she's still a confessed convicted felon, I would have actually wondered what the fuck he was thinking. Having spent considerable time with Major traffickers, pedophiles, mass murderers and terrorists I think I have a rational opinion and without the need for a wannabe psychic with a hard on for people they don't agree with.

 
 
 
Explorerdog
Freshman Silent
5.3.5  Explorerdog  replied to  livefreeordie @5.3.3    8 years ago

I don't think I mentioned the CIA although they appear to have been involved with the heroin trade out of Viet Nam the cocaine movements sure have some people that are on record as pilots moving the material, into the states and dealers that maintained an enormous supply of cheaper coke admitting on the record the chain of delivery. What other financing vehicle was available at the level needed without any Congressional approval. Makes me wonder if old Ollie is helping finance the NRA in a similar fashion after all he is the expert.

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
5.3.6  livefreeordie  replied to  Explorerdog @5.3.5    8 years ago

Your accusation stemmed from Webb’s false claim that North was using the CIA to fund the Contras

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
5.3.7  Studiusbagus  replied to  livefreeordie @5.3.6    8 years ago
Your accusation stemmed from Webb’s false claim that North was using the CIA to fund the Contras

And you have no fucking clue...The CIA was hip deep in funding the contra gang and Ollie was the point man. They used Noriega as the middle man contact and scheduler, the cargo ships would arrive in Panama with the weapons and money, then carry on to Cartegena and pick up loads of cocaine bound for Miami and Los Angeles.

Reagan, Bush, Ollie and the CIA gave birth to the murderous cartels we know today by making them filthy rich, while Reagan got funding for the "War on Drugs" that he was bringing in to the country.

When Noriega became a liability by saying he would spill the beans on Bush, Ollie and the CIA we invaded Panama and snatched him. That's how Bill Clinton became such good friends with the Bush's because Clinton saved his ass.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
5.3.9  Studiusbagus  replied to    8 years ago
In what capacity if I might ask?

Retired Corrections officer and Trainer of police officers.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
5.3.10  Studiusbagus  replied to  arkpdx @5.3    8 years ago
she has become the female equivalent of Pablo escobar.

Nope, just another convicted "Thug" (as the right call black people that aren't in line with the right) that has joined the ranks of the criminals and sexual perverts in the Republican party.

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
5.3.11  arkpdx  replied to  Studiusbagus @5.3.10    8 years ago
Nope, just another convicted thug

The only reason you are taking that view is because Trump commuted her sentence. If it would have been your "dear leader" and "lord and master, Obama, she would just be a poor pitiful black woman who deserved compassion. 

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
5.3.12  Studiusbagus  replied to  arkpdx @5.3.11    8 years ago
The only reason you are taking that view is because Trump commuted her sentence

Trying to be a psychic again? Her crimes were inexcusable, we're not talking about a dealer sitting on a corner and selling dime bags. She moved tons of cocaine and had no problem with where they went as long as the money was flowing.

You don't get in to bed with the Colombians and nobody gets hurt.

 But keep trying to put words in my mouth...you look really stupid(er) while you're doing it.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
8  Raven Wing     8 years ago

What I don't understand....I find it rather curious as to where her deep Christian faith was when she was destroying lives for her own monetary gain while criminally dealing drugs all that time? Did she 'see the light' while in prison while associating there with others just like her who are long time hardened criminals? Or was it a sudden play for good publicity to somehow justify her early release by pardon? 

Inquiring minds want to know. thinking

 
 
 
user image
Freshman Silent
8.1    replied to  Raven Wing @8    8 years ago
Did she 'see the light' while in prison while associating there with others just like her who are long time hardened criminals? Or was it a sudden play for good publicity to somehow justify her early release by pardon?

Some people do change for the better.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
8.1.1  Studiusbagus  replied to  @8.1    8 years ago
Some people do change for the better.

Some do, the overwhelming majority do not. I would not be surprised if she gets re-arrested before his first term ends.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Studiusbagus @8.1.1    8 years ago

Trump is banking on that fact.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
8.1.3  Raven Wing   replied to  @8.1    8 years ago

"Some people do change for the better."

Some do.....but, druggies don't. Not ever. I know....I have two of them in my own extended family and they have been in prison on and off for dealing drugs for most of their teen and adult life, dealing both inside and outside of prison.

So chances are that she will be back at it before the ink dries good on her pardon.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
8.1.5  Studiusbagus  replied to  XXJefferson51 @8.1.4    8 years ago

Which shows you read headlines and get duped easily.

 You have zero idea what these ministries do or don't do.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
8.3  Studiusbagus  replied to  Raven Wing @8    8 years ago
Did she 'see the light' while in prison while associating there with others just like her who are long time hardened criminals?

If I had a nickle for every time I saw that bullshit...preaching all day and then hanging in the cell trading sex and stories about the little boys they fucked. Fake Muslims of all cultures that would force the ramadan rules on the system and then dive on a ham sandwich. When their sentence was done, they'd be right back at what they were doing before they came in...I've seen so many repeats it used to make me sick to my stomach.

I actually had one that within a week of being conditionally released went and contacted his victim because his victim was now over 18 and he wanted to hook up.

 Just like outside, they use religion for control, so was she.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
8.3.1  Raven Wing   replied to  Studiusbagus @8.3    8 years ago
Just like outside, they use religion for control, so was she.

I am willing to bet that if she has a nickle she'll be trying to buy to sell for three times that much.

 
 
 
user image
Freshman Silent
8.3.2    replied to  Raven Wing @8.3.1    8 years ago

Deleted CoC,  {SP}

Address issues and arguments, not individual members.

 
 
 
Studiusbagus
Sophomore Silent
8.3.3  Studiusbagus  replied to  Raven Wing @8.3.1    8 years ago

I'm willing to bet if she gets busted again it will be buried because it will reflect on "Orange Glo"

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
8.3.4  Raven Wing   replied to  Studiusbagus @8.3.3    8 years ago

"I'm willing to bet if she gets busted again it will be buried because it will reflect on "Orange Glo"

Yep. Indeed she served 22 years. But, I wonder how many of those she sold drugs to never lived to make it to 22 years old? And if she had that big of an organization before, she knows all the contacts and the ins and outs of starting up again. All she needs is some startup money, and that would be easy enough to get when you know all the insiders. In the world of being behind bars does not mean being out of business. It just means doing it from a different venue with a different clientele. And there are always ready buyers.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
10  bbl-1    8 years ago

Uh gee Alice Johnson, it was the conservative bible beaters that 'legislated' your life term.

As for Trump, he's just playing a game, he doesn't know you, doesn't want to know you and most certainly could care less about you.

Gawd saved you huh? 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
11  MrFrost    8 years ago

Nuf said...CrT4XZU0AAQSvb.jpg

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
11.1  devangelical  replied to  MrFrost @11    8 years ago

She promised trump she wouldn't release their porn video until after he was dead.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Guide
12  Krishna    8 years ago

Alice Johnson Thanks Jesus Christ And President Trump For Sentence Commutation

Two questions:  What did Jesus Christ (Peace Be Upon Him) have to do with it?

 
 

Who is online



142 visitors