╌>

Lead Juror In Roger Stone Case Ran For Congress As A Democrat In 2012

  
Via:  Vic Eldred  •  5 years ago  •  142 comments

By:   Chuck Ross

Lead Juror In Roger Stone Case Ran For Congress As A Democrat In 2012
Her Twitter feed shows dozens of references to Trump, many of them links to negative stories about the Republican. In a Twitter post on Aug. 19, 2017, Hart quoted a tweet referring to Trump as the “#KlanPresident,” in an apparent reference to the KKK.

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



The foreperson on Roger Stone’s jury ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2012, it was revealed Wednesday. 

Tomeka Hart revealed her role on the jury in a Facebook post defending four prosecutors who quit the Stone case in protest over a revision to the Trump confidante’s recommended prison sentence. 

Hart’s social media activity shows she closely followed the special counsel’s Russia investigation, and frequently posted negative stories about President Donald Trump.


A former Democratic congressional candidate whose social media accounts are replete with criticism of President Donald Trump came forward Wednesday as the foreperson on the jury that convicted longtime GOP operative Roger Stone at a trial in November 2019.

According to multiple news reports, Tomeka Hart revealed her role on the jury in a Facebook post supporting the  four prosecutors who withdrew from the Stone case  Tuesday in protest over a revision in a sentencing recommendation for the GOP operative.

“I have kept my silence for months. Initially, it was for my safety. Then, I decided to remain silent out of fear of politicizing the matter,” Hart wrote on Facebook, adding: “But I can’t keep quiet any longer.”

CNN first  reported  Hart’s post but did not note that she was a Democrat. Commercial Appeal, a news outlet affiliated with USA Today that spoke to Hart,  reported  details of her professional background. Those details match up with the same person who ran for Congress in 2012. A Politico reporter who covered Stone’s trial  identified  Hart as a former congressional candidate.

Hart, who did not respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment, lost to incumbent Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen in the 2012 primary.

Hart’s social media accounts show she kept a close eye on developments in the special counsel’s investigation.
Her Twitter feed shows  dozens of references  to Trump, many of them links to negative stories about the Republican. In a Twitter post on Aug. 19, 2017, Hart quoted a  tweet  referring to Trump as the “#KlanPresident,” in an apparent reference to the KKK.

She also retweeted a post  from CNN analyst Bakari Sellers criticizing Stone defenders who were upset over the circumstances of his arrest on Jan. 25, 2019. More than a dozen FBI agents raided Stone’s home in South Florida.


Screen-Shot-2020-02-13-at-8.02.06-AM-620

Screen shot of Tomeka Hart’s Twitter feed


Stone, who was indicted Jan. 24, 2019, argued in the lead up to his trial that he would be unable to receive a fair trial in Washington, D.C., due to its left-leaning populace. He was convicted Nov. 15, 2019, on five counts of making false statements to Congress, one obstruction charge, and a witness tampering charge.
“I want to stand up for Aaron Zelinsky, Adam Jed, Michael Marando, and Jonathan Kravis — the prosecutors on the Roger Stone trial,” Hart wrote in her post, referring to the four prosecutors who resigned from the Stone case.

The government lawyers  quit the Stone case after the Justice Department ordered a revision to the U.S. attorney’s office’s recommendation that Stone serve between 87 months and 108 months in prison on false statements and obstruction charges related to the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia investigation.

Trump weighed in Tuesday, and said the recommendation was “disgraceful” and a “miscarriage of justice.”

Soon after, a senior Justice Department official told reporters that  leaders at the agency were “shocked” by the hefty prison recommendation .

Later on Tuesday, after the four prosecutors resigned, the U.S. attorney’s office recommended that Stone receive a prison sentence, but one “far less” than the 87-108 months that was initially proposed.

Prosecutors said in their revised filing that the initial recommendation was “excessive.”

“It pains me to see the DOJ now interfere with the hard work of the prosecutors,” Hart wrote on Facebook. “They acted with the utmost intelligence, integrity, and respect for our system of justice,”

She said the prosecutors did a “masterful job” presenting their case.

“As foreperson, I made sure we went through every element, of every charge, matching the evidence presented in the case that led us to return a conviction of guilty on all 7 counts,” she wrote.


Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

We have often talked about biased jurors and the current state of the jury pool in DC. This is the case of the Weissmann team prosecuting Roger Stone with attitude!

Tucker Carlson summed it up best last night; Brennan & Clapper as well as other high ranking intelligence officials have all lied. None have been indicted and they never will. Roger Stone ended up with a (hidden) recommended sentence of 9 years for one reason only - he was a supporter of Donald Trump


Rules of civility apply

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2  seeder  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

24683382-7998815-image-m-7_1581578177538.jpg
Tomeka Hart revealed on Wednesday that she was foreperson on the Roger Stone jury

Stone supporters were shocked when a review of Hart's social media posts showed that she posted on Twitter mocking Stone's dramatic arrest prior to being seated on the jury, and frequently denounced Trump, including calling the president and his supporters racists. 


 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
2.2  SteevieGee  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    5 years ago

We've all seen what passes for justice when you have too many Republicans on a jury.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.2.1  bugsy  replied to  SteevieGee @2.2    5 years ago

Such as, and how would you know the politics?

This woman came out and told the world who she is and posted anti Trump rants DURING the trial.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6  seeder  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

Just in:

How on earth did the judge—who gagged Roger Stone himself during his trial—allow a Russian collusion hoaxer who ran for Congress as a Democrat, was a practicing attorney, and was posting about Trump during the trial to sit on the jury as its foreman?.....Sean Davis

 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Quiet
6.1  lady in black  replied to  Vic Eldred @6    5 years ago

Blame it on the defense, they didn't object to her being on the jury, you know that legal thing called voir dire where they can challenge a potential juror.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7  seeder  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

And this:

Judge Napolitano: Roger Stone should get new trial in light of juror's anti-Trump tweets

Judge Andrew Napolitano said on Thursday that former Trump adviser Roger Stone  deserves a new trial in light of resurfaced  tweets  that indicate partisanship and “inherent bias” from a jury member against Stone.

Former Memphis City Schools Board President Tomeka Hart revealed Wednesday that she was the foreperson of the jury that convicted Stone on obstruction charges last year -- and soon afterward, her history of Democratic activism and a string of her anti-Trump, left-wing social media posts came to light.

“[Stone is] absolutely entitled to a new trial with a member of a jury making these types of revelations about the politics involved in the decisions to prosecute him,” Napolitano told “ Fox & Friends .”


 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Quiet
7.1  lady in black  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    5 years ago

Nope, just because you don't like the outcome, doesn't mean any laws were broken.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  lady in black @7.1    5 years ago

I think we have a mistrial

mis·tri·al

/ˈmisˌtrī(ə)l/

noun

  • 1.a trial rendered invalid through an error in the proceedings:"the judge dismissed the charge and declared a mistrial"
 
 
 
lady in black
Professor Quiet
7.1.2  lady in black  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.1    5 years ago

Won't happen, you can cry all you want

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
8  evilone    5 years ago

Stone is allowed to appeal on anything his lawyers thing are relevant. Of course it won't make any difference when The Teflon Don pardons his little butt buddy. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
9  seeder  Vic Eldred    5 years ago

Stone, who was indicted Jan. 24, 2019, argued in the lead up to his trial that he would be unable to receive a fair trial in Washington, D.C., due to its left-leaning populace. 


And it looks like he was right!

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
11  Tacos!    5 years ago
I have kept my silence for months. Initially, it was for my safety.

Her safety? I just eye-rolled so hard, I saw my own brain. Talk about a drama queen. She would have been perfect for Congress.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
11.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tacos! @11    5 years ago

Yep, I spit my coffee out when I read that myself!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
11.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Tacos! @11    5 years ago

I hear "The Squad" is looking for a 5th member...

 
 
 
Dragon
Freshman Silent
13  Dragon    5 years ago

I haven't read through the 100+ comments so don't know if anyone else stated this. Maybe, just maybe, the defense wanted the woman on the jury so Trump could declare is unfair, he is already whining about the conviction and sentencing, and pardon his partner in crime. 

 
 

Who is online

freepress
Ed-NavDoc


81 visitors