Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
whoknew

The Russia Investigation: Mueller - "Over the course of my career, I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy.The Russian govt's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious."

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:
1 hour ago, Bucky86 said:

Bannon confirms Stone was the intermediary to Wikileaks and Assange.

Quote

 

Andrew Prokop‏Verified account @awprokop

Bannon: Over that weekend, when I became aware that those emails were released, I also believed I heard that Roger Stone was involved in the release of those emails. ...

12:02 PM - 8 Nov 2019

NO WAY??!!!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

On the first day of his trial, onetime Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone fell ill. Another person collapsed in the courtroom, and people tangentially related to the case squabbled in the hallway. On day two, an ex-FBI agent read aloud lewd, profanity-laced text messages Stone sent an associate. Later, the judge scolded Stone’s lawyer for being too boring.

Then Randy Credico took the stand, and the circus finally began.

...Prosecutors the early days of the trial presenting evidence they say proves that Stone attempted to coerce Credico to impede efforts by congressional and federal investigators. ...

ABC

- As I understand it one thing that has come out of this is that Stone basically put forth to investigators that Credico was his mediator with Assange and Wikileaks, when in fact it was Stone just acting directly.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:
Quote

On the first day of his trial, onetime Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone fell ill. Another person collapsed in the courtroom, and people tangentially related to the case squabbled in the hallway. On day two, an ex-FBI agent read aloud lewd, profanity-laced text messages Stone sent an associate. Later, the judge scolded Stone’s lawyer for being too boring.

Then Randy Credico took the stand, and the circus finally began.

...Prosecutors the early days of the trial presenting evidence they say proves that Stone attempted to coerce Credico to impede efforts by congressional and federal investigators. ...

ABC

- As I understand it one thing that has come out of this is that Stone basically put forth to investigators that Credico was his mediator with Assange and Wikileaks, when in fact it was Stone just acting directly.

I didn't realize stand up comedy was part of law school.  I think I missed my calling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steele first appeared in connection with the Trump story as a “well-placed Western intelligence source” in a 2016 Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff. The piece claimed a Trump aide named Carter Page was discussing the lifting of sanctions with Igor Sechin, chief of the major Russian oil company Rosneft.

Steele, in fact, was a private opposition researcher hired by the “premium research” firm Fusion-GPS, on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Yahoo story came out on September 23th, 2016; it would be more than a year before Steele’s status as a paid Clinton researcher would be made public.

After Isikoff’s piece came out, the Clinton campaign released a statement about how it was “chilling” to learn that “U.S. intelligence officials” were “conducting a probe into suspected meetings between Trump’s foreign policy adviser Carter Page and members of Putin’s inner circle.”

If the merry-go-round trick of commenting gravely about a story you yourself planted sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the tactic used by Vice President Dick Cheney in the early 2000s, when he went on Meet the Press to comment about “a story in The New York Times this morning” regarding Saddam Hussein’s aluminum tubes. Press figures denounced such chicanery then.

Steele’s report came out in full during the transition, in a sleazy series of maneuvers by outgoing intelligence officials, who presented the incoming president with a synopsis of Steele’s work.

When details of this meeting leaked, news outlets that previously had been sitting on Steele’s report because it was unverifiable suddenly had a “hook” to release news about the briefing: Intelligence chiefs relayed “allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.”

The resulting viral furor spurred Buzzfeed to publish the entire dossier, so Americans could “make up their own minds.”

In this way, the dossier was published without ever going through a vetting process. For all the talk of hacking, this was a true Trojan-horse penetration of the American news media system (not that most media companies minded, of course).

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/christopher-steele-britain-insanity-909539/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ren hoek said:

Steele first appeared in connection with the Trump story as a “well-placed Western intelligence source” in a 2016 Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff. The piece claimed a Trump aide named Carter Page was discussing the lifting of sanctions with Igor Sechin, chief of the major Russian oil company Rosneft.

Steele, in fact, was a private opposition researcher hired by the “premium research” firm Fusion-GPS, on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Yahoo story came out on September 23th, 2016; it would be more than a year before Steele’s status as a paid Clinton researcher would be made public.

After Isikoff’s piece came out, the Clinton campaign released a statement about how it was “chilling” to learn that “U.S. intelligence officials” were “conducting a probe into suspected meetings between Trump’s foreign policy adviser Carter Page and members of Putin’s inner circle.”

If the merry-go-round trick of commenting gravely about a story you yourself planted sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the tactic used by Vice President Dick Cheney in the early 2000s, when he went on Meet the Press to comment about “a story in The New York Times this morning” regarding Saddam Hussein’s aluminum tubes. Press figures denounced such chicanery then.

Steele’s report came out in full during the transition, in a sleazy series of maneuvers by outgoing intelligence officials, who presented the incoming president with a synopsis of Steele’s work.

When details of this meeting leaked, news outlets that previously had been sitting on Steele’s report because it was unverifiable suddenly had a “hook” to release news about the briefing: Intelligence chiefs relayed “allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.”

The resulting viral furor spurred Buzzfeed to publish the entire dossier, so Americans could “make up their own minds.”

In this way, the dossier was published without ever going through a vetting process. For all the talk of hacking, this was a true Trojan-horse penetration of the American news media system (not that most media companies minded, of course).

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/christopher-steele-britain-insanity-909539/

Do you consider it a positive or a negative that I know who wrote this without having to click the link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sheriff Bart said:

I didn't realize stand up comedy was part of law school.  I think I missed my calling.

He’s possibly being scolded for using it as a tactic.  Bury the jury in tangentially relevant statements for hours and put them to sleep.  His best bet is for jurors to go into the room and say “who cares? They’ve wasted a week of my life. Let’s just go home fast.”

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Do you consider it a positive or a negative that I know who wrote this without having to click the link?

Don't really have an opinion on it to be honest.  I'm ok being the Taibbi reblogger guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Henry Ford said:

He’s possibly being scolded for using it as a tactic.  Bury the jury in tangentially relevant statements for hours and put them to sleep.  His best bet is for jurors to go into the room and say “who cares? They’ve wasted a week of my life. Let’s just go home fast.”

Ah, thanks GB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Michael Isikoff @Isikoff

Yes, with the caveat that the evidence is now clear that Stone actually knew nothing : a case of hucksters conning hucksters

The collusion hoax has died yet another death 

That is an interesting interpretation of the legal ramifications of Bannon’s testimony. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

ABC

- As I understand it one thing that has come out of this is that Stone basically put forth to investigators that Credico was his mediator with Assange and Wikileaks, when in fact it was Stone just acting directly.

Too boring? wat

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

He’s possibly being scolded for using it as a tactic.  Bury the jury in tangentially relevant statements for hours and put them to sleep.  His best bet is for jurors to go into the room and say “who cares? They’ve wasted a week of my life. Let’s just go home fast.”

I usually just let a prosecutor do that for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anthony DeRosa

@Anthony

Former deputy Trump campaign chairman, Rick Gates said in open court today at the Roger Stone trial that Trump directly informed by Stone about upcoming Wikileaks releases. The campaign also coordinated and planned their efforts around Wikileaks releases.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Slapdash said:

Anthony DeRosa

@Anthony

Former deputy Trump campaign chairman, Rick Gates said in open court today at the Roger Stone trial that Trump directly informed by Stone about upcoming Wikileaks releases. The campaign also coordinated and planned their efforts around Wikileaks releases.

WOW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

WOW

I don't think this is surprising at all and was alluded to in Mueller's report. The campaign was welcoming the "help" and IIRC mentions coordinating their campaign efforts around Wikileaks and some of the disinformation campaigns. They just weren't directly participating in the illegal actions - i.e. the hacking, troll farms, identity theft, etc and therefore couldn't be charged with criminal conspiracy. Actually apparently Mueller determined Trump couldn't be charged even if he did participate in criminal conspiracy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheMagus said:

I don't think this is surprising at all and was alluded to in Mueller's report. The campaign was welcoming the "help" and IIRC mentions coordinating their campaign efforts around Wikileaks and some of the disinformation campaigns. They just weren't directly participating in the illegal actions - i.e. the hacking, troll farms, identity theft, etc and therefore couldn't be charged with criminal conspiracy. Actually apparently Mueller determined Trump couldn't be charged even if he did participate in criminal conspiracy.

I agree. What's surprising is he admitted it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so Wikileaks goes to Stone and Stone goes to Trump directly about the hacked e-mails. We all assumed this, but now it's there, written in stone (no pun intended).

An ethical candidate goes to the FBI.  An unethical candidate considers how he can profit from a crime.  No comment on those that cheer an unethical candidate doing unethical things.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, moleculo said:

so Wikileaks goes to Stone and Stone goes to Trump directly about the hacked e-mails. We all assumed this, but now it's there, written in stone (no pun intended).

An ethical candidate goes to the FBI.  An unethical candidate considers how he can profit from a crime.  No comment on those that cheer an unethical candidate doing unethical things.

Can we put the "Russia Hoax" thing to bed now?  Turmp campaign had direct knowledge of criminal activity that benefited their campaign.  While they did not aid in the criminal enterprise, they did not alert the authorities to that criminal enterprise, thereby reaping the benefits.

If someone loots a store and leaves the goods on the sidewalk, can I be charged with theft if I pick them up and take them home?  What if I know that the exact time and place the original thief would be putting the goods on the sidewalk?

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moleculo said:

so Wikileaks goes to Stone and Stone goes to Trump directly about the hacked e-mails. We all assumed this, but now it's there, written in stone (no pun intended).

An ethical candidate goes to the FBI.  An unethical candidate considers how he can profit from a crime.  No comment on those that cheer an unethical candidate doing unethical things.

Quote

54 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

This is not related to Ukraine - but it seems like it could be important:

 

 

 

Bradley P. Moss@BradMossEsq ·1h

 

Trump denied in writing and under oath to Mueller any recollection of ever discussing WikiLeaks with Stone or being aware of Stone discussing WikiLeaks with the campaign.

 

Gates testified he was in the car with Trump when he Trump talked to Stone about it.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Slapdash said:

Anthony DeRosa

@Anthony

Former deputy Trump campaign chairman, Rick Gates said in open court today at the Roger Stone trial that Trump directly informed by Stone about upcoming Wikileaks releases. The campaign also coordinated and planned their efforts around Wikileaks releases.

NO COLLUSION!

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Z Machine said:

Can we put the "Russia Hoax" thing to bed now?  Turmp campaign had direct knowledge of criminal activity that benefited their campaign.  While they did not aid in the criminal enterprise, they did not alert the authorities to that criminal enterprise, thereby reaping the benefits.

I wish.  And I don't agree with the assertion in bold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update, Stone defense has rested. Big Bad Rog did not take the stand in his own defense. Jury should be getting the case tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2019 at 10:15 AM, Slapdash said:

Anthony DeRosa

@Anthony

Former deputy Trump campaign chairman, Rick Gates said in open court today at the Roger Stone trial that Trump directly informed by Stone about upcoming Wikileaks releases. The campaign also coordinated and planned their efforts around Wikileaks releases.

The Mueller report Sec. I and its timing get weirder in retrospect. There are a few references to the campaign "and associates" in the conspiracy section, but usually it's just "the campaign." I mention that because really Stone falls under "associates" of the campaign and it seems like this piece is really left out. Same is true for the Russian government vs actors for it, such as Assange and Wikileaks. It's really as if the report and the investigation were cut short because it's obvious this Tinker to Evers to Chance with data and broadcasting of it is a pretty significant epilogue. Hard to believe that if left to their own devices that the Mueller team would not have wanted to finish this important piece, and maybe the Prigozhin/Concord trial, before finishing a truly final report.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

The Mueller report Sec. I and its timing get weirder in retrospect. There are a few references to the campaign "and associates" in the conspiracy section, but usually it's just "the campaign." I mention that because really Stone falls under "associates" of the campaign and it seems like this piece is really left out. Same is true for the Russian government vs actors for it, such as Assange and Wikileaks. It's really as if the report and the investigation were cut short because it's obvious this Tinkers to Evers to Chance with data and broadcasting of it is a pretty significant epilogue. Hard to believe that if left to their own devices that the Mueller team would not have wanted to finish this important piece, and maybe the Prigozhin/Concord trial, before finishing a truly final report.

The report, and especially its summary, was rushed by Barr.  This has been very clear for a while IMO.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

The Mueller report Sec. I and its timing get weirder in retrospect. There are a few references to the campaign "and associates" in the conspiracy section, but usually it's just "the campaign." I mention that because really Stone falls under "associates" of the campaign and it seems like this piece is really left out. Same is true for the Russian government vs actors for it, such as Assange and Wikileaks. It's really as if the report and the investigation were cut short because it's obvious this Tinkers to Evers to Chance with data and broadcasting of it is a pretty significant epilogue. Hard to believe that if left to their own devices that the Mueller team would not have wanted to finish this important piece, and maybe the Prigozhin/Concord trial, before finishing a truly final report.

I “liked” this for the Tinkers to Evers to Chance reference.  Well played (so to speak).

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, krista4 said:

I “liked” this for the Tinkers to Evers to Chance reference.  Well played (so to speak).

The rest is still likeworthy.  You could upgrade to a love for the reference :lol: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pop in here from time to time looking for something tangible.

All I discover is that there are new names and characters introduced to this saga every week with no clear end in sight.  It reminds me of reading War and Peace.

 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

The Mueller report Sec. I and its timing get weirder in retrospect. There are a few references to the campaign "and associates" in the conspiracy section, but usually it's just "the campaign." I mention that because really Stone falls under "associates" of the campaign and it seems like this piece is really left out. Same is true for the Russian government vs actors for it, such as Assange and Wikileaks. It's really as if the report and the investigation were cut short because it's obvious this Tinkers to Evers to Chance with data and broadcasting of it is a pretty significant epilogue. Hard to believe that if left to their own devices that the Mueller team would not have wanted to finish this important piece, and maybe the Prigozhin/Concord trial, before finishing a truly final report.

I could be wrong but weren’t both Stone and Assange redacted because they were ongoing investigations?

Mueller’s report was always going to be flawed because he is too by the book. Even the obstruction section where he clearly found wrongdoing, he couldn’t come out and directly say it. The section on conspiracy had a lot damning information but not clear cut enough that he was sure they could win the case.

For example Gates revelation today could be viewed as proof that Trump lied under oath, but how he worded his answer makes the case less of a slam dunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, krista4 said:

I “liked” this for the Tinkers to Evers to Chance reference.  Well played (so to speak).

Agreed. 
 

 

 

 

*The Cubs fan in me requires this nitpick:

Tinkers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Jacqueline Thomsen‏ @jacq_thomsen

He lists the "effects on proceeding," that House Intel never - saw docs from Stone on this - heard from Corsi - heard from Credico - heard about Stone's contacts w/ campaign - had a chance to get Stone's missing texts from 2017 & its report is inaccurate about Stone

11:14 AM - 13 Nov 2019

- Apparently Stone destroyed a year's worth of phone data.

Good summary of closing here.

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

*The Cubs fan in me requires this nitpick:

Tinkers

I used to go watch Cubs games at the Home Plate Inn on Tulane with my friend and his dad back in the day. Being NO we weren't old enough to be there but damnit the game was on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin Sink

@justinsink

·

1m

*ROGER STONE IS GUILTY IN U.S. TRIAL OVER LIES ABOUT 2016 LEAKS *VERDICT MAKES STONE LATEST TRUMP AIDE TO FACE PRISON

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Natasha Bertrand

@NatashaBertrand

BREAKING: ROGER STONE FOUND GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS.

  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guilty on all seven counts.

Not sure what his potential sentencing is. Though I reckon Trump will pardon him.

  • Thanks 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of those awesome shirts Stone sold.

Edited by Osaurus
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, whoknew said:

Guilty on all seven counts.

Not sure what his potential sentencing is. Though I reckon Trump will pardon him.

Although the most serious charge against Mr. Stone carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, his sentence will almost certainly be much lighter. Working against him could be his multiple run-ins earlier this year with Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who is overseeing the case and will preside over any sentencing.

-per NYT

  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Natasha Bertrand

@NatashaBertrand

BREAKING: ROGER STONE FOUND GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS.

 

36 minutes ago, whoknew said:

Guilty on all seven counts.

Not sure what his potential sentencing is. Though I reckon Trump will pardon him.

He's facing decades in prison yet is allowed to leave the court room to get his affairs in order.  That's BS. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lmao:

 

Corey R. Lewandowski @CLewandowski_

Reunited and it feels so go. Stone and Manafort to re-open new “consulting” firm behind bars.

 

 

It seems not all Trump-land is sad to see Stone and Manafort behind bars...

Kyle Cheney@kyledcheney

This is ... wow... Manafort and Stone helpd sideline Lewandowski during the 2016 campaign. Someone in Trump-land isn't too upset about Stone's fate, even if Trump is.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Corey R. Lewandowski @CLewandowski_

Reunited and it feels so go. Stone and Manafort to re-open new “consulting” firm behind bars.

Lol, I think I found a way to like a tiny whisp of Corey Lewandowski.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sinn Fein said:

:lmao:

 

Corey R. Lewandowski @CLewandowski_

Reunited and it feels so go. Stone and Manafort to re-open new “consulting” firm behind bars.

 

 

It seems not all Trump-land is sad to see Stone and Manafort behind bars...

Kyle Cheney@kyledcheney

This is ... wow... Manafort and Stone helpd sideline Lewandowski during the 2016 campaign. Someone in Trump-land isn't too upset about Stone's fate, even if Trump is.

Cohen can help with the business license. 

Edited by Sheriff Bart
  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in a surprise twist, one of the prosecutor’s chief witnesses in the case — former radio talk show host and comedian Randy Credico — told Yahoo News Friday that he was in tears upon learning of the verdict and did not want to see Stone, who is facing up to 20 years in prison, go to jail because of his testimony. 

“I hate to see the guy go to jail because of me,” Credico said in a phone interview minutes after the verdict. “I feel horrible that this happened. This is not a day to rejoice.” 

One of the counts on which Stone was convicted, witness tampering, was based on a series of emails and texts he sent to Credico pressuring him to back up his story that the comedian was his back-channel to WikiLeaks. In one of those emails, Stone wrote: “You are a rat. A stoolie…Prepare to die...” Stone then appeared to threaten Credico’s service dog, Bianca, saying he would “take that dog away from you.”

But Credico said Friday he never took the threat to Bianca literally, saying he tried to make that clear on the witness stand when he told the jury he believed that Stone was a dog lover. 

“Those threats about my dog were not anything I took seriously,” Credico said. “I only put [the emails and texts] out there as a brushback pitch….This was a fender bender that spun into a 21 pile up. All he had to do was tell the truth and this would not have spun out of control.” //

But Credico testified during the trial that he actually knew nothing about WikiLeaks was about to release — and prosecutors never presented any evidence he or Stone ever did. Instead, prosecutors suggested that when Stone identified Credico as his back channel he was actually trying to protect his communications with another figure, conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi. On July 25 Stone had emailed Corsi, asking him to find out what information was being held by WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, who was then hiding from the police in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Corsi responded on Aug. 2: “Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps. One shortly after I’m back. 2ndin Oct. Impact planned to be very damaging.”  

But Corsi was never called as a witness in the trial or presented any evidence that he was in communication with WikiLeaks, leaving open the question of whether Stone or anybody else had advance knowledge about the group’s emails or were instead engaging in misleading puffery. 

After Roger Stone conviction, star witness against him feels 'horrible'

Isikoff left out that Jerome Corsi made a series of tweets from Oct. 2-Oct. 4th of 2016 indicating he had no idea what he was talking about wrt forthcoming Wikileaks publications. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's honesty was on trial in the Roger Stone case. The verdict was harsh.

Quote

 

Analysis: If prosecutors at Roger Stone's trial believed Trump was telling the truth about hacked emails and WikiLeaks, it wasn't evident in the courtroom.

Prosecutors argued that Stone, charged with obstructing a Congressional investigation, lied to Congress because the truth was "terrible" for Trump. They presented evidence painting a picture of a candidate who was actively involved in his campaign's effort to benefit from hacked emails obtained by WikiLeaks that were the fruits of a Russian intelligence operation. And they presented phone records and testimony suggesting that Trump didn't tell the truth in written answers to special counsel Robert Mueller, when Trump said he didn't remember ever discussing WikiLeaks with Stone.

"Trump was in the conspiratorial loop," said Glenn Kirschner, a former federal prosecutor and NBC News legal analyst who watched the trial. "He was in the hard collusion loop by virtue of him having phone calls in real time with Roger Stone while these email dumps were in progress."

...

Phone records introduced as evidence in the trial show Stone called Trump on the very day in June 2016 that the world learned that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked by the Russians. The records show that Trump spoke to Stone at key moments during the summer of 2016 as Stone was single-mindedly seeking access to the stolen emails from Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder. Steve Bannon, who led the Trump campaign, testified that Stone was considered the "access point" to WikiLeaks.

Trump mentioned WikiLeaks 145 times in the last month of the campaign alone, according to an NBC News analysis.

"This WikiLeaks is like a treasure trove," Trump said a few days before the election at an appearance in Michigan.

..."I spoke by telephone with Roger Stone from time to time during the campaign. I have no recollection of the specifics of any conversations I had with Mr. Stone between June 1, 2016 and November 8, 2016," Trump wrote in his statements to Mueller. "I do not recall discussing WikiLeaks with him, nor do I recall being aware of Mr. Stone having discussed WikiLeaks with individuals associated with my campaign, although I was aware that WikiLeaks was the subject of media reporting and campaign-related discussion at the time."

...If prosecutors believe Trump was telling the truth, it wasn't evident from their comments at the trial. They called former Trump deputy campaign chairman Richard Gates, who testified he overheard Stone calling Trump about WikiLeaks, which was leaking embarrassing Democratic emails. After the call, Gates said Trump told him that more disclosures were coming.

"Roger Stone knew that if this came out it would look really bad for his longtime associate, Donald Trump," prosecutor Jonathan Kravis said. "So he lied to the committee."

Prosecutors didn't expressly accuse Trump of acting improperly by ordering Stone to pursue the emails hacked by the Russians. They noted that the government didn't know what was said in the Trump-Stone phone calls — the FBI wasn't wiretapping either man.

But "those are the only reasonable inferences you can draw from the evidence," Kirschner said. "Everybody who watched the trial couldn't help but draw those reasonable inferences."

Details about the Trump campaign's efforts to pursue hacked Democratic emails appear to have been covered in Volume I of the Mueller report, but the section is almost entirely blacked out, because the Stone case was still pending when the report was released.

In that sense, the Stone trial served as a sort of final chapter of the Mueller report. It unfolded as much of the country and the news media was focused on the Ukraine impeachment drama, which at its heart is about whether Trump abused his office to pressure a foreign government to help his 2020 election campaign.

If the Stone trial revealed anything, it showed that Donald Trump and the people around him had no problem making use of hacked emails that were the fruits of foreign election interference.

Or, as prosecutor Kravis put it, "trying to fish for information from WikiLeaks, knowing it had been hacked by a foreign government."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The Z Machine said:

Why was he allowed to return to his home? Should go directly to jail.

White collar, white skin. If you look at the stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.