Politics
Trump ally Roger Stone sentenced to over 3 years in prison
Published
6 years agoon
WASHINGTON (AP) — Trump loyalist Roger Stone was sentenced Thursday to more than three years in federal prison, following an extraordinary move by Attorney General William Barr to back off his Justice Department’s original sentencing recommendation.
U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson said Stone’s crimes demanded a significant time behind bars, but she said the seven to nine years originally recommended by the Justice Department were excessive.
Stone’s lawyers had asked for a sentence of probation, citing his age of 67 years, his health and his lack of criminal history. Instead, he drew 40 months. Jackson also sentenced Stone to two years of probation after his prison time and fined him $20,000.
Stone had no immediate reaction in court when Jackson announced his sentence. Later, he emerged from the courthouse to a crowd exchanging back and forth chants of “Lock him up” and “Pardon Roger Stone.” Stone got into a black SUV without speaking to reporters.
His attorney Bruce Rogow said Stone and his team would “have no comment.” The judge delayed execution of his sentence while she considers Stone’s motion for a new trial.
The sentencing set off a parlor game of speculation in Washington, with many wondering when — not if — President Donald Trump would grant Stone a pardon. But Trump, who issued 11 high-profile pardons earlier this week, said he was holding off for now.
“I’m not going to do anything in terms of the great powers bestowed upon a president of the United States,” he said during an appearance in Las Vegas. “I want the process to play out. I think that’s the best thing to do because I would love to see Roger exonerated.”
But even the prospect that Trump might someday pardon Stone prompted a preemptive rebuke Thursday from critics like Democratic House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff of California, who tweeted after the sentencing that, “to pardon Stone when his crimes were committed to protect Trump would be a breathtaking act of corruption.”
But Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a staunch Trump ally, signaled early support for such a move, tweeting that Trump has “all the legal authority in the world” to pardon Stone if he chooses.
Stone was convicted in November on all seven counts of an indictment that accused him of lying to Congress, tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to tip the 2016 election.
The sentence came amid Trump’s unrelenting defense of his longtime confidant that has led to a mini-revolt inside the Justice Department and allegations the president has interfered in the case.
Trump took to Twitter to denounce as a “miscarriage of justice” the initial recommendation by Justice Department prosecutors that Stone receive at least seven years in prison. Attorney General William Barr then backed off that recommendation, prompting four prosecutors to quit Stone’s case.
Jackson angrily denied that Stone was being punished for his politics or his allies. “He was not prosecuted, as some have claimed, for standing up for the president. He was prosecuted for covering up for the president,” she said.
She said Stone’s use of social media to stoke public sentiment against the prosecution and the court was intended to reach a wide audience, including using a photo of Jackson with crosshairs superimposed.
“This is intolerable to the administration of justice,” Jackson said. She also had stern words for the new prosecution team.
“Why are you the one who is standing here today?” Jackson asked federal prosecutor John Crabb, who took over the case after the original trial team quit.
Crabb said there had been a “miscommunication” between Barr and Timothy Shea, the former Barr aide who now serves as the acting U.S. Attorney in the nation’s capital. Crabb asked the judge to impose “a substantial period of incarceration.”
After Stone’s attorney, Seth Ginsberg, repeated the defense team’s plea that Stone get no prison time, Stone declined to address the court.
Stone was the sixth Trump aide or adviser to be convicted of charges brought as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
Any jail sentence seems likely to draw a public rebuke from Trump, who maintains that Stone’s entire case is just an aspect of the ongoing “witch hunt” against him and his allies by bitter Democrats and the “deep state” inside the FBI and the Justice Department.
Overnight Thursday, Trump retweeted a conservative cable host’s comment that what happened to Stone “should never happen again.”
In Stone’s initial sentencing memorandum filed Feb. 10, prosecutors said Stone deserved a prison term lasting seven to nine years, in accordance with federal sentencing guidelines. Such a sentence would send a message to deter others who might consider lying or obstructing a congressional probe or tampering with witnesses, the prosecutors said.
Stone has denied wrongdoing and consistently criticized the case against him as politically motivated. He did not take the stand during his trial and his lawyers did not call any witnesses in his defense.
Prosecutors had charged in the filing that Stone “decided to double- and triple-down on his criminal conduct by tampering with a witness for months in order to make sure his obstruction would be successful.”
“Stone’s actions were not a one-off mistake in judgment. Nor were his false statements made in the heat of the moment. They were nowhere close to that,” prosecutors wrote in the court papers.
But Justice Department officials said they were caught off guard by the recommendation, even though Shea, the acting U.S. Attorney in Washington, D.C., is a former top aide to Barr. The attorney general ordered a new memorandum with a less harsh punishment, though it left provided no specifics and left the details to the judge.
Barr’s decision became public just hours after Trump, in an overnight tweet, called the situation “horrible and very unfair.” He added: “Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!”
Barr later said in an ABC News interview that he had not been asked by Trump to look into the case. In a stunning public rebuke, he said the president’s tweets were making it “impossible” for him to do his job. Meanwhile, Barr’s actions on the sentencing for Stone prompted the entire trial team to quit.
The public debacle also prompted a rare statement from the Chief Judge of the D.C. District Court, Beryl A. Howell, who said “public criticism or pressure is not a factor” in judges’ sentencing decisions.
The evidence presented at Stone’s trial didn’t directly address Mueller’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to tip the outcome of the 2016 presidential election in Trump’s favor. But it provided new insight into the scramble inside the Trump campaign when it was revealed in July 2016 that the anti-secrecy site WikiLeaks was in possession of more than 19,000 emails hacked from the servers of the Democratic National Committee.
Witnesses testified that Trump’s campaign viewed Stone as an “access point” to WikiLeaks and tried to use him to get advance word about hacked emails damaging to Hillary Clinton.
Prosecutors argued that Stone had lied to Congress about his conversations about WikiLeaks with New York radio host and comedian Randy Credico.
During the 2016 campaign, Stone mentioned in interviews and public appearances that he was in contact with founder Julian Assange through a trusted intermediary and hinted at inside knowledge of WikiLeaks’ plans.
Testimony revealed that Stone, while appearing before the House Intelligence Committee, named Credico as his intermediary to Assange and pressured Credico not to contradict him.
After Credico was contacted by Congress, he reached out to Stone, who told him he should “stonewall it” and “plead the fifth,” he testified. Credico also testified during Stone’s trial that Stone repeatedly told him to “do a ‘Frank Pentangeli,’” a reference to a character in “The Godfather: Part II” who lies before Congress.
Prosecutors also charged that Stone had threatened Credico’s therapy dog, Bianca, saying he was “going to take that dog away from you.”
You may like
Central Florida News
City of Orlando Earns Top-Tier ISO Building Code Effectiveness Rating, Reinforcing Commitment to Safety and Resilience
Published
5 days agoon
August 1, 2026ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN) — The City of Orlando has earned a Building Code Effectiveness Grading Scale (BCEGS) rating of 2 from the Insurance Services Office (ISO), marking an improvement from its previous rating of 3 received during the city’s 2023 evaluation.
The improved rating recognizes the city’s continued commitment to enforcing strong building codes that enhance public safety, strengthen disaster resilience and support long-term economic growth.
Orlando Surpasses State Averages
The ISO’s BCEGS program evaluates how effectively local governments adopt and enforce modern building codes for residential and commercial construction. Ratings range from 1 to 10, with 1 representing the highest level of building code effectiveness.
Orlando earned a rating of 2 in both the residential and commercial categories, outperforming Florida’s statewide averages.
According to the city:
- Orlando Residential Rating: 2
- Florida Residential Average: 4
- Orlando Commercial Rating: 2
- Florida Commercial Average: 3
The city’s performance also exceeds national ISO averages, reflecting Orlando’s continued investment in building safety and code enforcement.
Mayor Buddy Dyer Praises Permitting Team
Mayor Buddy Dyer credited the city’s Permitting Services Division for the achievement.
“This achievement reflects our unwavering commitment to protecting our community through strong building safety standards,” Dyer said. “Our Permitting Services team works every day to ensure that homes, businesses and other structures throughout Orlando are built safely and in accordance with the highest standards.”
Benefits for Residents and Businesses
City officials said a stronger ISO BCEGS rating offers several potential benefits for homeowners, businesses and developers, including:
- Potential reductions in property insurance premiums for qualifying residential and commercial properties.
- Improved disaster preparedness and faster recovery following hurricanes and other natural hazards.
- Greater community resilience through safer, more durable construction.
- Enhanced economic competitiveness by attracting new commercial investment and development.
While insurance savings vary by insurer and policy, many companies consider ISO ratings when assessing property risk.
Comprehensive Evaluation Process
Communities participating in the BCEGS program are evaluated across 27 categories, including:
- Building code adoption
- Code enforcement practices
- Inspection procedures
- Staff qualifications and training
- Administrative processes
- Fire prevention coordination
- Permitting operations
The City of Orlando said the improved rating reflects the collaborative efforts of building inspectors, plans examiners, permitting technicians, fire marshals, code officials and administrative staff who work together to ensure new construction complies with current safety standards.
Investing in Long-Term Resilience
City officials noted that strong building codes not only improve life safety but also reduce property damage during hurricanes and other disasters.
More resilient buildings help stabilize neighborhoods, preserve property values and protect the local tax base that funds essential public services, including:
- Police and fire protection
- Transportation infrastructure
- Parks and recreation
- Public works
- Community services
The improved ISO rating underscores Orlando’s ongoing commitment to maintaining high construction standards while supporting sustainable growth throughout the city.
Central Florida News
Orange County Sheriff’s Office: Teen Arrested on Evidence Tampering Charge in Deadly Old Cheney Highway Shooting
Published
5 days agoon
August 1, 2026ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN) — The Orange County Sheriff’s Office announced Friday that a teenager has been arrested on an evidence tampering charge as detectives continue investigating the fatal shooting of a 17-year-old girl in east Orange County.
Authorities identified the suspect as Jehovah Jeremiah Mitchell, 19, who was arrested and charged with Tampering With or Fabricating Physical Evidence. Investigators emphasized that the homicide investigation remains active and that no additional charges or details have been released.
Victim Identified
The Sheriff’s Office previously identified the victim as Skyler Ley’Shea Bradford, 17.
Bradford died after being shot on Wednesday, July 29, in the 5500 block of Old Cheney Highway.
Investigation Timeline
According to investigators, deputies responded to reports of a shooting at approximately 4:55 p.m. on July 29.
When deputies arrived, they found Bradford suffering from a gunshot wound. She was transported to a local hospital, where she later died.
The Sheriff’s Office said all individuals involved remained at the scene when deputies arrived and that there was no ongoing threat to the public.
Arrest Announced
On Friday, investigators announced Mitchell’s arrest on a charge of Tampering With or Fabricating Physical Evidence.
Authorities have not released details explaining what evidence was allegedly tampered with or whether additional arrests or charges are anticipated.
Investigation Continues
Detectives continue to investigate the circumstances surrounding Bradford’s death.
The Orange County Sheriff’s Office has not released information regarding a possible motive, the events leading up to the shooting, or whether the incident may have been accidental or intentional.
Anyone with information about the case is encouraged to contact the Orange County Sheriff’s Office or Crimeline at 800-423-TIPS (8477). Anonymous tips may be eligible for a reward.
What We Know
- Victim: Skyler Ley’Shea Bradford, 17
- Incident Date: July 29, 2026
- Time: Approximately 4:55 p.m.
- Location: 5500 block of Old Cheney Highway, Orange County
- Arrest: Jehovah Jeremiah Mitchell, 19
- Charge: Tampering With or Fabricating Physical Evidence
- Investigation Status: Active and ongoing
- Community Threat: None identified by investigators
Florida
Alex Vindman Calls on Ashley Moody to Support Release of Hope Florida Grand Jury Report
Published
5 days agoon
August 1, 2026TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (FNN) — Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Alex Vindman renewed criticism of U.S. Sen. Ashley Moody this week, calling on her to publicly support the release of the confidential Hope Florida grand jury report as questions surrounding the state’s controversial Medicaid settlement continue to draw statewide attention.
Vindman made the remarks during a Thursday news conference at the Florida Capitol alongside supporters, including a registered Republican, arguing that Florida voters deserve greater transparency regarding the Hope Florida investigation.
Vindman Launches New Campaign Website
The Vindman campaign also unveiled a new campaign website, MoodyCorruption.com, highlighting Moody’s role in the Hope Florida controversy and encouraging voters to contact public officials in support of releasing the grand jury report.
The campaign said the website was launched following recent reporting by the Miami Herald examining additional connections between Moody’s Senate campaign and the Hope Florida controversy.
Focus on Attorney General’s Role
Vindman criticized Moody’s actions while she served as Florida attorney general, pointing to the Attorney General’s Office’s approval of a $10 million Medicaid settlement transfer that later became the focus of legislative and criminal scrutiny.
According to public reporting, the settlement funds originated from a Medicaid agreement involving Centene Corp. before money was later directed through the Hope Florida Foundation and subsequently distributed to nonprofit organizations that later contributed to political committees. Investigations into the transactions have generated legislative hearings, public records litigation and criminal inquiries.
Vindman argued that the public deserves to know what conclusions, if any, a statewide grand jury reached during its investigation.
“If she has nothing to hide, she should go ahead and call for this release,” Vindman told reporters.
Grand Jury Report Remains Sealed
A central issue in the controversy is whether the final statewide grand jury report should remain confidential.
Court records indicate objections have been filed seeking to prevent or delay public release of the report. The identities of those objecting have not been publicly confirmed through court filings.
A judge is expected to determine whether the report, or portions of it, should become public.
Media Coverage Highlights
Vindman’s news conference received statewide media coverage.
WFSU reported that Vindman focused on CBS News reporting concerning Moody’s role in approving the original settlement agreement while serving as attorney general.
WUSF reported Vindman argued voters should consider the controversy as they evaluate candidates in Florida’s 2026 U.S. Senate race.
CBS Miami highlighted Vindman’s challenge for Moody to publicly support releasing the grand jury findings.
WFLA News Channel 8 reported Moody had been scheduled for an interview but that her campaign later requested to reschedule.
ABC 20 reported ongoing litigation surrounding the confidential grand jury report while covering Vindman’s criticism of Moody.
Spectrum News noted Democrats continue pressing for disclosure of the report, citing public records showing the Attorney General’s Office approved the initial transfer that later became the subject of controversy.
Moody Has Not Publicly Called for Release
As of Friday, Moody had not publicly announced support for releasing the confidential grand jury report.
The report remains under court review, and no final judicial decision has been issued regarding whether it will be released.
Why the Report Matters
Supporters of disclosure argue the public has a right to understand how taxpayer-related Medicaid settlement funds were handled and whether investigators identified misconduct or recommended reforms.
Those opposing disclosure contend grand jury secrecy protects ongoing legal interests and confidential proceedings until a court determines what may legally be released.
The court’s decision could significantly shape public understanding of one of Florida’s highest-profile political controversies as the 2026 U.S. Senate campaign continues.