Roger Stone Indicted


Months ago, I wrote about how Special Counsel Robert Mueller was clearly gunning for Stone with an increasing intensity (here and here and here). Stone was arrested early Friday morning in another signature raid on his home by the FBI. Once again, as with the treatment of Paul Manafort, it is unclear why prosecutors wanted to have a night raid on his home (captured by awaiting media) for non-violent crimes. It was entirely unnecessary in my view. The criminal counts themselves are additional counts of false statements and witness tampering. These type of process crimes are the majority of charged conduct against non-Russians in the investigation other than the unrelated crimes against figures like Manafort.

Mr. Stone was charged with seven counts.

The indictment contained the vintage language of Stone with other witnesses, attacking those deemed weak while encouraging others to stonewall.

On or about November 19, 2017, in a text message to STONE, Person 2 said that his lawyer wanted to see him (Person 2). STONE responded, “‘Stonewall it. Plead the fifth. Anything to save the plan’ . . . Richard Nixon.”

It is a weird comment even for a guy with a tattoo of Richard Nixon since Nixon was destroyed by precisely such conduct.

Notably, there are no charges in the indictment that accuse Stone of colluding with the Russians or the hacking of the email systems. Stone suggested to others that he was the conduit of hacked information from Wikileaks but he later insisted that he was not actually speaking to Julian Assange and that he had no direct knowledge that Russians were responsible for the Democratic hackings.

The indictment is largely on false statements but those statements seem to overlap and confirm the occurrence of communications. :

STONE testified falsely that he did not have
emails with third parties about the head of
Organization 1, and that he did not have any
documents, emails, or text messages that refer
to the head of Organization 1.

STONE testified falsely that his August 2016
references to being in contact with the head of
Organization 1 were references to
communications with a single “go-between,”
“mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” who
STONE identified as Person 2.

STONE testified falsely that he did not ask the
person he referred to as his “go-between,”
“mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” to
communicate anything to the head of
Organization 1 and did not ask the
intermediary to do anything on STONE’s

STONE testified falsely that he and the person
he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual
friend,” and “intermediary” did not
communicate via text message or email about
Organization 1.

STONE testified falsely that he had never
discussed his conversations with the person he
referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual
friend,” and “intermediary” with anyone
involved in the Trump Campaign.

The Special Counsel likely knows about those communications and does not allege anything criminal in the communications themselves.

The indictment does reference a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone about possible Wikileaks information. The indictment clearly states that Stone told multiple campaign officials that he had such information and the question is who “directed” campaign officials to reach out to Stone. Obviously, many will want to know if that person was President Trump or his close aides. On the other hand, it also references people like Steve Bannon as not even returning his calls.

Nothing in this indictment contradicts that latter account. This conduct involves false statements, obstruction, and witness tampering. Unlike Cohen who was allowed to correct false statements, Mueller charged every possible alleged crime. This will make for an interesting defense as Stone cites his public reputation for spinning and conning the media.

Some of the language is so over-the-top that it may appear less than credible to a jury as an actual threat as opposed to Stone’s signature vernacular. In one communication, the indictment recounts the following:

On or about April 9, 2018, STONE wrote in an email to Person 2, “You are a rat. A stoolie. You backstab your friends-run your mouth my lawyers are dying Rip you to shreds.” STONE also said he would “take that dog away from you,” referring to Person 2’s dog. On or about the same day, STONE wrote to Person 2, “I am so ready. Let’s get it on. Prepare to die [expletive].”

The defense can call Person 2 and ask how that statement was taken or understood while also pointing to similarly outlandish statements in public. Like much else in Stone’s world, this will make for a fascinating trial.

Here is the indictment: Stone Indictment

348 thoughts on “Roger Stone Indicted”

  1. It was an early morning raid, NOT a nighttime raid (or arrest). That’s how the Feds do things. You’re a freakin lawyer, Turley! Don’t play dumb.

    What kompromat do the Ruskies have on you, Jono?

    maybe something from the old craigslist D.C. Days?

    1. Idiot Anon on January 25, 2019 at 12:21 PM

      “What kompromat do the Ruskies have on you, Jono?

      “maybe something from the old craigslist D.C. Days?”

      You’re an idiot.

  2. I just keep comparing the treatment of HRC and all of her minions, all of which were guilty of obvious substantive crimes as well as process crimes.
    Instead of nighttime swat raids in the middle of the night, they got immunity deals with no testimony or cooperation, agreements to destroy evidence and computers, euphemizing of criminal statutory language (grossly negligent vs extremely careless) and investigations (or was that a “matter”?), caught in officially submitted lie after lie, caught violating subpoenas, friends/witnesses allowed present while being FBI interviewed, given a pass for so many citable offenses, the list goes on and on.
    Yet, Trump’s associates get eviscerated for the tiniest of misstatements, reamed for ambiguous emails, prosecuted for bad memories, every daily move micro-analyzed for months/years by criminal investigators, made socially/business toxic to all their friends and business associates, and made destitute by the relentless investigatory presence and the need to hire lawyers at every turn.

    Yet, it is all legal, and allowed discretionary bias of politically motivated prosecutors, with no recompense or legal protective measures available.
    This is on par with far more repressive regimes, and in fact peels the cover back on our own system to show it really is that way, they just don’t do it that often.

    1. Gee, Professor Turley has a separate thread for “What About Hillary?” comments. Said comments go there so they don’t clutter up the topical issue at hand.


      1. Thank you PH, I would not want to clutter up a comments section with comments that are not specific enough.
        Could you provide a link to the other thread?

    2. Gee,
      I would not take the reply to you by PH too seriously; sanctimonious pukes like him have no clue of the concept of equal treatment under the law.
      The “What about Hillary” dodge is as old as the hills and as lame as ruptured duck.
      I must admit that his HHHNN does provide a good deal of comic relief here.
      His parody of a mindless propagandist is hilarious, rivaled perhaps only by his early AM counterpart.

      1. Right, Tom, only Trump supporters are serious commenters here. No matter how incoherent or paranoid their comments might be. No matter how outraged they sound. Only Trump supporters have the ‘moral fiber’ to weigh in on the issues.

          1. Marco,
            You might want to read and understand comments posted in exchanges about various issue.
            Your sole gig here seems to be reciting “In Mueller I Trust”.
            Since you ignore most of other comments; e.g., debates about tax policy, budget issues, search and seizure issues, demographic changes and the impact of those changes, etc., then of course you will remain unaware of serious comments and exchanges.
            Also, when you robotically repeat the same, identical mantra, you are not in the best position to evaluate “serious commentators”.

              1. I have yet to see you comment in any detailed policy debates that frequently occur in these threads.
                There is absolutely no evidence from your comments that you even read those tyoes of exchanges (or have them read to you, if you are illiterate).
                Your act consists entirely of petty bitching and sniping.
                As a mitigating factor, I recognize that you are incapable of anything else.
                There was a recommendation earlier for someone “to use the brain God gave you”; in your case, YNOT/SNOT, the brain God gave you IS the problem.

      2. Thank you Tom, I did ask PH to provide a link as to where he thought I should post my comment(s), and to date he has not deemed it important enough to answer, so I won’t take him seriously and just consider his ‘advice’ to be petty sniping.

  3. “It was entirely unnecessary in my view. The criminal counts themselves are additional counts of false statements and witness tampering. These type of process crimes are the majority of charged conduct against non-Russians in the investigation other than the unrelated crimes against figures like Manafort.”
    Like the cops always say, “if we don’t have enough criminals to keep us working, we’ll make some.”

    1. I think process crimes are fairly unusual charges in the places I’ve lived. In New York law, charging someone with perjury or a related offense requires hitting discrete tripwires that none of these people charged with ‘lying’ got near. A misdemeanor false-statements charge in New York requires you sign a written instrument and requires that the instrument be of a sort to which a jurat is customarily affixed. Felony charges require a formal oath of office, at least, and, IIRC, you be giving oral testimony in court, in the legislature, or in front of a commission of inquiry.

    In scanning these comments, I’m sensing a level of disagreement.😬
    Maybe even polarization?😉
    While these threads aren’t an exact microcosm of attitudes nationwide, I think they are fairly representative of a national split, a polarization and maybe balkanization, that is fed by a protracted, extremely aggressive, an non-communicative set of FBI and Special Counsel investigations.
    I won’t try to review or summarize what I’ve posted here in the past, except to repeat that this crap has been building to a crescendo for a long time.
    If that’s the objective of the OSC in the method of handling the investigations, it’s been very successful.
    I didn’t say much about Mueller and co. until last fall, but it reaches a point where enough is enough.
    There are people who lost patience with Mueller within weeks of his appointment, just as there are people who will keep spouting “in Mueller I trust” indefinitely.
    So I’m not claiming that last fall was “the right time” or the “average time” to start getting fed up with the way this is being (mis) handled.
    But when it comes to absolute political tone deafness, and provocation, people like Strzok, Page, Ohr, Comey, Rosenstein, Mueller and his sidekicks, and others have put on a classic demonstration.

  5. ” Once again, as with the treatment of Paul Manafort, it is unclear why prosecutors wanted to have a night raid on his home (captured by awaiting media) for non-violent crimes.”

    Maybe they know something you don’t…….

    1. The indictment is for process crimes, Becka. You, b*tch, don’t know anything at all.

      1. I know you have an ugly mouth and that when the law deviates so deeply away from it’s purpose idiots like you hurt people with it.


            Lately it appears that Tabby, (AKA Insufferable, Spastic and Absurd) is falling apart on these threads. Historically his comments ranged from smarmy put-downs to snooty dismissals. But increasingly Tabby is lashing out with generic angry terms. No longer is there the pretense of any creativity.

            Tabby’s breakdown is significant for it represents the state of loyal Trump supporters amid the longest government shutdown in history. It seems said supporters are distraught that public opinion polls show no encouragement for Trump’s position.

            Therefore Trumpers have taken to simply ‘lashing out’ on comment threads. No longer are they capable of calculated-but-disingenuous responses. This trend reflects the now utterly chaotic state of Trump’s presidency.

              1. Thanks, Mr. Kurtz. He deleted that tweet. Here’s the latest:


                CNN says they weren’t tipped off by the FBI, but noticed unusual Grand Jury activity on their own and thus went to Stone’s house, so I deleted tweet discussing with @Greta possible coordination with CNN …Glenn Greenwald added,

                Greta Van Susteren
                Verified account


                CNN cameras were at the raid of Roger Stone…so FBI obviously tipped off CNN…even if you don’t like Stone, it is curious why Mueller’s office tipped off CNN instead of trying to quietly arrest Stone;quiet arrests are more likely to be safe to the FBI and the person arrested

                11:41 AM – 25 Jan 2019

                1. CNN had been staked out at Stone’s house since November. It’s possible that the indictment and raid on Stone was originally planned for November. So it’s still possible that the FBI tipped off CNN way back in November. Or CNN figured it out for themselves.

      2. This is absurd, take a break, and when you are thinking clearer, you owe an apology to Becka G.

        1. Your conduct here from day to day is such, young man, that you will never be in a position to make such admonishments to anyone.

          1. Again, like Allen, you two think that you are superior to others and your words matter more than others. It does seem that you guys think you are always right and everybody is wrong. What should bother anyone is that you think it’s all true. I know the Trumpers are having a bad day, but don’t make it worse by proving my point.

            1. you two think that you are superior to others a

              No, I think you and YNOT are exceptionally inferior, because all of your commentary is puerile. Sam / Chris P. Bacon isn’t much different. He just laces it with accusations drawn from his imagination. If you want to graduate from the kids’ table, you have to compose substantive remarks on the post.

            2. Fishwings it is not a matter of right or wrong. It is a matter of reason something that you have not yet developed or lost with the aging process. Either way you sound like a child.

            3. Thufferin’ Thuccotath thaid, “. . . you will never be in a position to make such admonishments to anyone.”

              That’s no true. FishWings is perfectly positioned to admonish L4D whenever FishWings thinks it’s called for. Moreover, L4D promises not to reply to any future admonition from FishWings in anything like the manner in which L4D replies to the piddling puckishness of Thufferin’ Thuccotath and his ukase cohorts.

    2. Becka,

      TIA’s bullying and nastiness aside, you might want to read about Thomas Drake, Bill Binney and Diane Roark.

      You could start here:

      So take me to July 22. Just tell me as it happened what happened, what your thoughts were, and what happened.

      Well, the first I knew the FBI was in my house was the guy pointing a gun at me when I was coming out of the shower. That’s the first I knew. My son let them in, and they pushed him out of the way at gunpoint, and then they came up into the bedroom and pointed guns at my wife and me, so that’s the first I knew they were there.

      And it surprised me. I said: “Well, what are you doing here? I’ve been cooperating with you, telling you everything I know about this, everybody involved in this program, so why are you doing this?” Basically they wanted me to tell them something that would implicate someone in a crime, OK?

      That point was they were after Diane Roark because they didn’t like her, and also Tom Drake because they didn’t like him. So they wanted me to implicate them in some sort of crime, but I couldn’t think of a crime that I knew about there. Then they told me they thought I was lying to them, and so at that point I said: “Well, I’m not. I’m not doing that. If I am lying to you, I’m not doing it consciously.” I couldn’t think of why they would say I was lying.

      So then I started to get mad. I said: “OK, you want to know what the crime is? Bush, Cheney, Hayden and Tenet were the central conspirators to subvert the Constitution and the laws of the United States, and here is how they did it.” So I told them all about Stellar Wind on my back porch, explained all the data they were taking in, what they were doing with it and how it was violating the rights of everybody in the country. …

      What happens after that? …

      Yeah, the raid took about seven hours, I think seven or eight hours. They were there from 9:00 in the morning to the middle of the afternoon, and they took my computer, all the electronic hardware, discs and things that go with that, any kind of electronic storage device, and they also took some of my magazines, technical magazines and papers and things like that, and anything having to do with our business that we were trying to work on, so they took that, too. They put us out of business basically. …

      One of the things that Drake did … was he had mentioned that he had gone to The Baltimore Sun. How did that complicate things? I don’t know if you talked to The Baltimore Sun as well.


      So it was just Drake.


      Did that come up? How was that a complicating factor?

      I think that’s what the FBI guys thought we knew, but at the time we didn’t know that Tom Drake had gone to The Baltimore Sun, and we certainly didn’t go to anybody in the press or the news. We were still trying to work inside the government to get it to straighten itself out.

      1. It is way more than I can process in 1 sitting….but I will work on it cuz I am still wondering why we still have so little respect for meta-data and such willingness to employ profiling in our attempts at understanding current socially accepted structures. We allow marketers and banks free reign and still want to claim some moral obligation to act in political matters….which this may not be! Just because we see the World through filters of politics doesn’t mean that is what is happening. Maybe it has more to do with money than politics…or mens corruption married to competition and aggression, maybe the current over saturation of data is a poor excuse for misapplying and/or not applying existing laws….and maybe there are those that are so skilled in painting pictures that the truth is too obscured to apply law fairly anymore….

        1. Well, maybe “we have so little respect” for those concerns raised in your post because all of these things can be justified.
          All you have to do is think ” Maybe they know something you don’t….” to whitewash any of your particular concerns.
          It seems to work well for you when you’re dismissing the concerns of others.

          1. Alright. That does it Here’s what the FBI knows that none of you brain-damaged cracked-pots will ever admit:

            Guys like Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen etcetera gather and keep incriminating information about their co-conspirators that can be used as leverage to intimidate those co-conspirators. Those guys do not destroy that incriminating evidence until the very last possible moment before they are arrested. Therefore the early morning raid on Stone, or Manafort, or even the raid on Cohen’s office, was all about seizing incriminating information about the co-conspirators before it could be destroyed.

            Think about that for a second or two. Then ask yourself, “How much incriminating evidence did the FBI seize from Roger Stone’s house in that early morning raid?” Remember: The early morning raid on Manafort seized communications evidence that led to, amongst other people, Roger Stone. Also remember that Roger Stone has extensive connections the world of dark money. Now go back and re-ask yourself the previous question in the context of Stone’s dark money connections, “How much incriminating evidence did the FBI seize from Roger Stone’s house in the early morning raid?”

            Next question: Who’s next after Stone, based on the incriminating evidence that Stone gathered and kept on Stone’s co-conspirators?

            1. I don’t know what I was thinking; I completely forgot about L4B’s vast store of insider knowledge regarding the workings of the FBI and the OSC team.
              She has exhibited astounding revelations of that knowledge in the past.
              She does not tire of being repeatedly wrong, but I still give her credit for being arrogant and presumptuousenough to continue offering her bogus analysis and forecasts.

              1. Your persistent vegetative state of denial does not constitute anybody else’s supposed arrogance, you self-pitying wallower, you. Listen up.

                Roger Stone kept each and every last one of the emails and text messages that Mueller and crew cited in the Stone indictment to prove the lies that Stone told to HPSCI, the intimidation of Randy Credico, the contacts with and between Corsi, Malloch and Assange and the numerous contacts with senior advisers to the Trump campaign. Stone kept that incriminating evidence on himself because it was also evidence that incriminated his co-conspirators. And Stone needs to retain the ability to incriminate his co-conspirators so that Stone can pay his lawyers with dark money extorted from his co-conspirators. Manafort did the same damned thing, as did Michael Cohen and Rick Gates. And that’s how Mueller obtained warrants for the emails and text messages that Stone kept.

                It is highly probable that Mueller and crew hit The Mother Lode of kompromat when they raided Stone’s house in the early morning yesterday. So don’t be surprised if Stone’s dark money connections start doing to Stone what Stone has been doing to other people for Stone’s entire adult life. Frankly, I think Stone has probably been doing the dirty trickster routine since the age five or thereabouts. It may be an innate behavioral trait that grows and develops through interactions with the environment in keeping with a programmed learning routine of the type that compels Huey, Dewey and Louis to fall in line behind their Uncle Donald. Either way, it’s officially Stone’s time in the barrel, now.

                1. #1. If someone that I respect commands me to “listen up” I might comply
                  #2. If someone I do not respect issues that command,
                  I respectfully and politely tell that person to shove it
                  #3. If someone who have I a great deal of contempt for issues that command, I use words that could never clear the filter here
                  #4. Given that #3 is applies in L4B’s case, I’ll let her finishing her daily column’s here with a minimum of distraction to her important work as a propagandist
                  #5 Presumably, that important work will include identifying and cataloguing what Stone had stored in the way of retained emails, files, etc., that Mueller already had duplicates for.

  6. This indictment is to appease the left media and celebrities since they all have egg on their faces after slandering an all-American high school boy. It will change the news narrative which Mueller is infamous for like when Rosenstein made a special announcement of indicting some Russians who placed ads on Facebook. Big whoop.

    Trump once jokingly said at a rally, “You gotta love Wikileaks.” And the crowd roared. Mueller is trying to equate Trump’s joke with the hacking of Podesta’s emails which was clearly an inside job. Someone who was angered at the way the DNC handled Sanders. Hmmm? I wonder who that could be? Gosh darn, such a hard crime to solve. Call Nancy Drew. Maybe if the FBI had checked the DNC computers, they could have solved this two years ago but someone told them to stand down. Hmm? I’ve heard that mantra before.

    Why is it, that not one Democrat has been indicted in two years since the Mueller investigation began? That’s curious. Surely he has found crimes committed by them, yet, they walk free. And the press calls Mueller and his team unbiased and nonpartisan? Please.

    This early morning raid is nothing more than another smokescreen to get the negative news off of Pelosi, the caravans coming our way, the illegal immigrant serial killer in Nevada, and an innocent high school boy who supports Trump and wears a slogan hat.

    Let’s get the new AG in, end the shutdown, and fund the wall. The truth will always prevail. Everyone that once knew Trump is apparently getting indicted.

    1. Why didn’t the Clinton special prosecutor investigate the war crimes of George HW bush and Newt Gingrich’s moral bankruptcy and profound corruption?

      1. Because there were no war crimes and Newt Gingrich’s marital problems are neither a crime nor manifestations of ‘profound corruption’. Public officials have no obligation to pay attention to your fantasy life.

  7. Dr. Turley – As a conservative, I appreciate reasoned conversation without the signature emotional intensity that liberals have used to exploit the population. But it is time to stop the gentle statements like “it is unclear why prosecutors wanted to have a night raid …”. Why must we stop cleansing the language? Because it is entirely clear to any reasoned and logical person why this was done! Special Counsel RM and his 15 biased investigators/lawyers are eager to create slanderous and smear-heavy headlines (check out the WaPo, NYT front pages). They are searching desperately for “thought-crimes”, “speech-crimes” and “face crimes” (a la Orwell) to justify their existence and because they are politically motivated against Conservatives and certainly the President. I am tired of reasoned discussion by Conservatives being met with emotional smear tactics by Liberals. It ruins lives (Kavanaugh, Flynn and now a bunch of well-behaved, turn their cheek Catholic boys!) Let’s stop pretending that Liberals (and yes the Special Counsel’s) smears/slander/unjust actions are permissable and start calling them what they are – smears/slander and injustices.

    1. Are you actually equating ‘conservative’ with Republican? ‘Liberal’ with Democrat? Because that is infantile thinking at best….

    2. Finally, a voice or reason NOT. Bring your A game, everyone is biased but RWNJ like you. That 36% approval rating seems to say you’ve been duped or are a duper.

  8. I’m more than a bit dismayed that simply recommending to a friend or colleague that they take the 5th during testimony is considered witness tampering. I suppose I shouldn’t be since practically anything is illegal these days if a prosecutor wants it to be.

    1. A lot of younger people probably never heard of Lavrentiy Beria and perhaps some older folks haven’t either. You never wanted to be on the opposite table of him because when you were (until he met his own demise) you ended up in a gulag or dead.

      His great quote never to be forgotten by those that believe in Liberty and due process is something the left seems to have altogether forgotten for they are repeating his abomination today in the form of the Mueller investigation. There isn’t much differnence in Mueller’s view of the law and Beria’s. Liberty can be lost by an armies defeat or can be lost by the people’s disregard for the law in step by step fashion.

      “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.”

  9. (music)
    Roger Stone… Came home…to his wife and fam il eee.
    After serving in the White House overseas.
    And Roger took to stealing.. when he got that empty feeling…
    With a hundred dollar habit…without over time!

    And the Trumpster caused his pain…
    Like a thousand railroad trains…
    And gave him all the confidence he lacked…
    With a purple fart and a monkey on his back!

    There’s a hole in Roger’s brain…
    Where all the money goes…
    Jesus Christ… died for something…
    I suppose…

      1. He’s a bon vivant. he is or used to be a swinger. he is for pot legalization. He is a friend of famous sex workers. Stone is a character. Do you revile him for that? I respect him for his openness.

            1. Just because YNOT’s condition brings happiness to YNOT, it does not follow that others would be content functioning at YNOT’s brain-dead level.
              Most aren’t, but YNOT is “special”.

  10. “ it is unclear why prosecutors wanted to have a night raid on his home”

    The prosecutors are acting like Nazi’s and other types of fascists with their night raids and ending up prosecuting people for crimes that didn’t exist before the arrest, process crimes. Not good for the nation but brings joy to some of the posters on this list. It shows the types of people they are and the depths to which their ideologies have fallen.

    “Notably, there are no charges in the indictment that accuse Stone of colluding with the Russians or the hacking of the email systems. “

    Apparently Mueller realizes the Russia collusion story was a hoax, but he is cleaning up the misdeeds that went on prior to the election of Trump. Does our Republic still exist? A few members of the legislature are challenging him, but the bulk are letting the basis of our legal system be destroyed. We have seen that happen before in other countries with horrid results.

    With all the charges mentioned and the fact that this has been going on for a long time, what was the purpose of the night raid? Intimidation and fear! Those are two words that shouldn’t be associated with our legal system being more appropriate for the likes of Stalin.

      1. Olly, while a lot of fools on this blog wish to destroy our legal system, our economy and our justice system we face international problems that could eventually lead us into a world war. A nation as divided as ours over issues that provide strength and security appears as a weak nation to our enemies. The left has done a good job of making us appear weak. There are many that believe WW2 never would have occurred if the western nations had shown strength rather than weakness and division.

        Gordon Chang had a scary article at . I thought you might be interested. People like Peter Shill and Enigma don’t have the intellect to understand the dangers and as the good fascists they are they probably feel they will be welcomed by the open arms of our fascist enemies.

        1. “The left has done a good job of making us appear weak.”
          And the right has done a good job demonstrating their profound and utter insanity in so many, many varied domains, not the least of which is desperate devotion to a pathological liar.

          1. Acromion are you unable to address the problems we face? The answer seems to be no. The easy thing is to pick a team and root for them as you do for your political team. I root for America and at this point in time the left is destroying the nation. The right hasn’t acted appropriately either and that is how we got Trump. But you can go ahead and ‘root, root, root For the home team’ so that when you die your brain will be in an unused condition?

        2. good article!

          “Moreover, the Chinese state has, for several decades, been organizing — and paying for — Chinese students to engage in demonstrations on U.S. soil outside campuses, thereby impermissibly interfering in the American political process.

          So, what should be done about all this?

          Let us start with what should not be done. America should not, as President Trump’s senior advisor Stephen Miller proposed this year, ban all Chinese students. The U.S. is an open society, and Americans should keep it open. That is why their country is so strong. Americans do not need to create a climate of intimidation and fear against a racial group.

          Americans also should not vilify Chinese students as a group or forget that Chinese students and faculty members of Chinese descent are often the targets of Beijing’s influence and interference operations. In short, let us not punish victims.

          So what should America do?

          First, universities can take over many of the functions of CSSA chapters. In addition to their malign activities, CSSA chapters provide important support services, such as helping Chinese students adjust when they first arrive on campus. The Communist Party should not be the only institution providing those services. U.S. colleges and universities benefit from the tuition of about 340,000 students from China, and these institutions can certainly offer services to support their stay.

          Second, Washington should rely on existing norms, rules, and laws. American institutions certainly can deal with whatever Beijing throws at them. So, for instance, any CSSA chapter that hides funding from Beijing — a violation of college and university rules — should be disbanded.

          Most of all, let us get the FBI to round up Ministry of State Security agents who, up to now, have been given free rein to operate in America. Putting these agents behind bars or even just revoking their visas will end many of the activities that endanger American campuses. The Chinese kill CIA agents in China. The least Washington can do is declare China’s agents personae non gratae.

          The Chinese feel emboldened to violate American sovereignty and break laws because American administrations have let them do these things — sometimes openly — since at least the early 1990s. This is as much a Washington problem as a Beijing one.”


          1. OH I forgot to add something.

            What is the fastest growing Chinese community in the USA?

            Flushing New York. That’s in.,.. Queens….. which is….

            Represented by freshman Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio Cortez

            FBI. as a counterintelligence operation, should take a look at her staff and fundraising activities and see if it leads back to Chicom fronts in the neighborhood. Have they been attempting to influence our elections?

            Better yet: watch the casinos. Money laundering Macau style? Pocketfulls of thousand dollar yellow chips?

            I have no information about this, just purely speculative.

            I’m absolutely inspired by the FBI’s years long counterintelligence probe of President Trump. AOC nees this kind of scrutiny too! Brainstorming here.

            And nothing against the many find folks from Fa-la-shing, many of whom are refugees of communist oppression in China!

    1. People, such as Roger Stone, who have been charged with witness intimidation and conspiracy to obstruct a legal proceeding are routinely deprived of the opportunity to tip-off their co-conspirators so that those co-conspirators can destroy evidence before the indicted conspirator surrenders himself into the custody of law-enforcement officials.

      1. Dear Ms. Late4Yoga: This was about another Eliot Ness moment for Muler more so than concern about destroying evidence in this digital age.

      2. Diane, your comments reflect a static ignorance and seem to apply only to the few seconds during which your comment is posted. A lot of history has passed and Stone has known that he would be arrested for months and has said so publicly. Anything he wanted to do to destroy ,evidence etc., could have been destroyed during these months

        An arrest during the day would not have jeopardized evidence any more than the arrest at night. An arrest by notifying him or his attorney would not have jeopardized evidence either. That leaves the motive or the nighttime arrest very clear, intimidation and fear. That however, is probably not objectionable to a Stalinist.

        1. Given an “acceptable” target, and an acceptable set of political goals, a lot of self-proclaimed civil libertarians are pretty easy to turn around.
          Anyone waiting for the ACLU to get involved in these matters will grow very old during that wait.

          1. Allan,
            I take issue with your use of the words “static ignorance”.
            After reading thousands of her comments over a period of months, this is clearly progressive ignorance.

          2. See Nat Hentoff’s articles a generation ago on local ACLU chapters’ non-reaction to the use of numchukas on anti-abortion protestors. The organization has long been shot through with intellectual and moral frauds.

            1. “See Nat Hentoff’s articles a generation ago on local ACLU chapters”

              DSS, a point of information. I think Nat Hentoff resigned from his board position at the ACLU because of their actions on a multiplicity of things. He was a leftist but he believed in the law and is probably rolling in his grave over the Mueller investigation.

      3. nonsense prosecution of stone for exercising free speech and doing investigative journalism. that’s all. this is a persecution. however we will take the precedent and use it against your side in the future if the chance arises. that’s how this will work. it will slide on down to civil war if you want to go that far

          1. The first amendment does not protect computer theft (i.e. hacking).

            However . . . If Stone had no knowledge that the GRU hackers disseminated the stolen emails through Wikileaks, then Stone’s first amendment defense might fly. Here’s the problem, though: Stone abruptly changed his tune from the Russians did it to the Russians didn’t do it on August 1st, 2016. How much would you care to bet that Mueller already knows exactly what caused Stone to change his tune from the Russians di it to the Russians didn’t do it on August 1st, 2016?

            Here’s a hint: July 31st, 2016, is when Stone found out for sure that the Russians were disseminating the hacked emails through Wikileaks.

    2. Allan, Prediction: the Muler pajama/panty raid on Stone residence is going to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back in terms of public sentiment clearly turning against Muler witch hunt. Disgusting behavior on the part of persecutors. What were they looking for – drugs, weapons, betting slips? Years ago Left would have been appalled by such over-zealous behavior and now they are complicit when it aligns with their politics.

      1. ” Prediction: the Muler pajama/panty raid on Stone residence is going to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back in terms of public sentiment…”

        I don’t think so. Listen to the comments made on this list. Intellect is lacking and your prediction requires a minimum of intellect. The days are boring to many people so they like the flash bang of the raid.

        “Years ago Left would have been appalled by such over-zealous behavior”

        The left has turned more and more fascistic.

      2. Bill Martin,…
        A pre-dawn, SWAT style raid on Hillary’s New York residence, as well on the residence and offices of her Chief-of-Staff ( then, magically, her attorney) might have yielded valuable evidence that was instead destroyed.
        I’m sure that the public would have been understanding had those tactics been employed against a different target.😒
        After umpteen explanations of the different treatment meted out in one case v. another, and why that difference is significant, I know all about the moronic and knee-jerk ” whataboutism” dodge.
        If an explanation of those differences is required, those requiring it are either extremely stupid or willfully ignorant.
        I think you are correct about the increasing level of disgust and mistrust of this protracted fishing expedition.
        If the OSC is trying to give Trump more ammunition for his witch hunt tweets, they are succeeding.
        Now, sit back, relax, and wait for and observe the “decorated Marine” and “In Mueller I Trust” groupies do their thing.

        1. Tom, Left and Right should unite in disgust over this type of law enforcement behavior. Unchecked selective/over-zealous law enforcement tactics = deterioration of our society. Back in the day, American Civil Liberties Union would have weighed in heavily on such tactics, but now ACLU sits idly by and ironically employs selective defenses of civil liberties along political lines.

    3. Allen, all law enforcement likes a nite time raid for the element of surprise. They use it for anything from child support to drugs and anything in between. Is it right for all circumstances probably no, but it is used for the safety of law officers.

      1. How many nighttime raids did the FBI conduct to secure physical evidence in Clinton’s email scandal? You know, the one where actual national security was put at a severe risk due to the nature of the communications being exchanged?

      2. Dear Fish: First of all child support is typically dealt with as a civil matter so that is bad example – drugs yes. No safety issue relating to Stone. Muler/FBI arrest tactics relating to Stone are indefensible – your comments point the reader to the same conclusion.

        1. Stone was prevented from tipping off co-conspirators so that they could destroy evidence.

          1. Late4Yoga, In this digital age do you really think co-conspirators are going to bleach their hard drives and smash their cell phones with hammers? Oh wait, this did happen during the HRC email investigation – so you do bring up a valid point – thanks.

              1. They all have kompromat on one another. If they destroy the kompromat, then they have no leverage against one another. They each have to keep the kompromat on one another intact in order to keep their co-conspirators in the cover-up of the conspiracy. All of the their laywers are being paid with dark money. All of them. And, yes, that means that Trump’s lawyers are being paid withdark money, too. Ha-ha!

                1. “All of the their laywers are being paid with dark money. All of them. And, yes, that means that Trump’s lawyers are being paid withdark money, too.”

                  Diane, they got lawyer Cohen’s records, tapes and testimony. Did they find dark money? Was he paid with dark money? Apparently not or that information would have ended up in the indictments.

                  You are just being silly Diane and not making any sense. You should put all your comments together, change the names. places etc., and find a good title. Then see if you can’t sell your work as a piece of spy fiction. I think it will bomb, but it is worth the try.

          2. After months knowing he was going to be arrested soon along with likely wire taps and other information obtaining methods do you really thing that “Stone was prevented from tipping off co-conspirators”?

            If that is your claim then your brains have been fried.

            1. The Man In A Persistent Vegetative State asked, “do you really thing that “Stone was prevented from tipping off co-conspirators”?”

              Amongst other things, yes. Stone has extensive connections to the world of dark money. Those dark money connections are now at risk of being uncovered. Because guys like Stone gather and keep incriminating information about their co-conspirators so that they can blackmail their partners in crime. The incriminating information that Manafort kept on Stone led the SCO to Stone. The incriminating information that Stone kept on his dark money connections will lead the SCO to Stone’s dark money connections and to other co-conspirators besides.

              Had Stone preemptively destroyed his cache of incriminating evidence against his co-conspirators, he would not have been able to leverage more dark money from his connections in that world. Somebody has to pay Stone’s legal bills, you know. No kompromat on the dark money men means no dark money to pay Stone’s lawyers. How the blazes do you think Manafort has been managing to pay his lawyers, you person in a persistent vegetative state you?

              1. “Stone has extensive connections to the world of dark money. Those dark money connections are now at risk of being uncovered… Because guys like Stone gather and keep incriminating information about their co-conspirators so that they can blackmail their partners in crime..”

                The delusions persist. Diane makes almost everything up. What did the FBI find? Nothing. If Stone kept incriminating evidence do you think he would keep it under his pillow or in his pajamas? How stupid can your delusions be? If one chooses to believe that Stone has a cache of information it is still out there because Stone has known and said so for months that he was going to be arrested by Mueller. Stone was raising money for his defense while waiting for the arrest giving speeches and selling his book.

                Keep playing the fool Diane. It keeps the list’s numbers up.

            2. Allan,..
              – Had it not been for L4B’s nearby reply, I would have missed your reference to small fry cooking in that last paragraph.

              1. Stone’s co-conspirators need to know exactly which items of incriminating evidence to destroy so that they can keep the remainder of their mutually incriminating kompromat intact for future use as leverage against one another. If they just haul off and destroy the whole kit and caboodle, then they lose far too many valuable sources of future access to more dark money by means of which to continue ongoing cover-ups or to conduct future operations in dirty tricks. You would not believe the kind of pressure and stress that these rat-stuppers work under. And they’re addicted to it. The Juice, that is. It’s a sport with them.

        2. If anybody gets to deep in child support they will come at night, day, or work. Depends on the judge if she or he is done chasing deadbeats.

          1. Fish: Extreme example re child support – you really want to win that argument when we are talking about zero safety / zero flight risk Stone? C’mon Man!

            1. Bill Martin, so because Stone was no risk as you say, he deserves special treatment? Show me a case where FBI or US Marshals serving a warrant do not come armed and ready at all times of day or night.

          2. See, you are there and obviously avoiding answering a very easy question. I’ll make it even easier for you. How many raids, day, night, whatever did the FBI conduct to secure physical evidence in Clinton’s email scandal?

            1. Olly, a test of intelligence can include the comparison of images and see if the subject can tell the differences between the images.

              Place a picture of a man with his eyes open and one with his eyes shut. Fishwings will likely miss the difference because to him there is no difference between shut eyes or open eyes.

              Put a picture of Stone’s raid against Clinton’s raid.

              In the former Stone is sleeping and caught snoring.

              In the latter Hillary is busy using Chlorox on her hard drives along with a hammer while the raid consists of asking her to come in for questions sometime in the next month or so while loaning her a hammer and selling her the Chlorox.

              Don’t expect Fishwings to note any difference between the two images.

              1. Allen, you can do better than…BUT…BUT…BUT…Hillary. I know you don’t like what you read today, but maybe you can tell me all the indictments, guilty pleas, and convictions they served on Hillary and her aides.

                1. Fishwings, It’s not “BUT…BUT…BUT… Hillary” rather it is your lack of ability to use your brain that God provided you. Comparison is a way to learn and evaluate but those that hate to use their brains prefer ‘contol copy and paste’. You don’t even get that far.

                2. <maybe you can tell me all the indictments, guilty pleas, and convictions they served on Hillary and her aides.

                  That is precisely the point. On one side of the criminal justice ledger, a theory of crimes committed by President Trump without evidence has led to Mueller, which has led to indictments and/or convictions of multiple process crimes of subordinates unrelated to the original theory. On the other side of the ledger we have actual crimes committed by Hillary Clinton, with actual evidence, with destruction of evidence, with lying to investigators by herself and her subordinates. With actual evidence of connections to Russia. Withholding evidence from FISC to secure spying on an American citizen and political opponent of the campaign that paid for the information to secure the warrant from FISC.

                  If you cannot see how out-of-balance this criminal justice ledger is then you are either being willfully ignorant or woefully subservient to a criminal political order that is undermining our national security.

          3. what jurisdiction is that? i hear they usually just issue a bench warrant and never bother to collect unless it’s for anther charge. but maybe you live in a very special place where there are hardly any deadbeats.

      3. FishWings, try thinking before posting. Stone has known of a pending arrest for months. Surprise no longer adds anything. When one is doing a drug bust the hope is surprise so the police can catch the criminals in the act and grab the drugs right from their hands. How did the Stone raid surprise anyone so that Stone could be caught in the act? Is the accusation that Stone snores?

        There is no difference in safety for the officers between a night raid and the alternatives. If anything the night raid might be more dangerous if someone sleeps with a gun under their pillow.

        1. Allen, it never surprises me on your posts, you think you are superior to others and your word counts more than others, your ego will not allow you to admit that maybe you could be wrong. What should bother anybody is that you believe it. So a man that the federal government thinks worked with or on the behalf of a foreign government should have been allow to just turn himself in when he wanted. Of course he is rich and white so he should have had special treatment. The FBI announced their presence and called they had search warrants. But in your mind, they broke in and acted like fascists. And it was not nighttime, it was early morning. Just because it might have been still dark, the clock was past 11:59pm. I wrote that cause I know how you like to pick apart anything someone said or wrote.

          1. Fish. And you don’t think you are superior to others and that your word counts more than others? You admit sometimes that you could be wrong? I haven’t seen you do that, ever. So perhaps a little mirror-gazing could help you.

          2. “you think you are superior to others ”

            Fishwings, I don’t think I am superior to anyone rather I think everyone is superior to you. I can’t help it that you make so many stupid statements. I do have to give you credit though, for maintaining the same alias despite the humiliation you must feel if you are smart enough to know what humiliation is and recognize what you act like.

            Think of how stupid this most recent comment of yours is. Look at the description of the “raid”. Recognize how long Stone has been waiting to be arrested.

              1. FUBARAllan, the man in a persistent vegetative state of denial, is completely and totally ignorant of the fact that Roger Stone has been gathering and keeping compromising and incriminating evidence about all of his fellow dirty tricksters, co-conspirators and dark money sources for Stone’s entire adult life. All of those people are now at risk of significant legal jeopardy because of the early morning raid on Stone’s house by something like forty Chevy Suburbans with something like at least eighty FBI agents and who knows how many evidence technicians to carry enough cardboard boxes to fill those forty or so Chevy Suburbans with Roger Stone’s lifetime collection of kompromat against his fellow dirty-trickster, co-conspirators and dark money sources.

                I swear. Mueller hit The Mother Lode with the Stone raid.

                1. Diane, you like to make things up. Read the indictment of a man so desperate to convict Trump that he stretches the truth but he is smart enough not to completely break with it. Mueller says nothing that indicts Trump for criminal activity. Once again you are telling us your delusions, not anything useful.

    4. This is a very good comment. Night raid? People need guns in their homes. Shoot the pigs when they come raiding in.

      1. I’m afraid at this point it would have been somewhat amusing if a federal agent had taken a dose of lead. Then maybe the Marshal Service might start telling the FBI that our people aren’t going to be part of your shenanigans anymore.

        1. It’s Stone they would have shot. Stone is no fool, he would give them no excuse to murder him.

      2. There have been occasions where these types of raids have hit the wrong house….when a homeowner is awakened by a group breaking in and yelling indecipherable commands, he goes for a gun.
        These are, fortunately, rare . Even so, it’s probably a good idea to get the address right in order to raid the right house.

    5. The “reasoning” seems to be the “possibility” that important evidence “might” otherwise be destroyed.
      It’s unlikely that whoever is signing off on these types of raids for alleged non-violent/ white collar will ever be called to account for or justify these tactics.
      Or if they got evidence that could have been otherwise obtained via normal methods.
      A person that knows he is likely to be indicted in the grand fishing expedition will have had months to destroy evidence.
      So it’s difficult to believe that the few hours/ minutes “saved” in these SWAT-style attacks can be justified by the claim of “preserving evidence”.
      There are clearly other motivations involved in stretching the limits of methods ostensibly used to “preserve evidence”.
      I think this ties in with a decades-long erosion of 4th Amendment protection. There are issues of pretext traffic stops, invention of “probable cause”, civil asset forfeiture, etc. that can be freely exploited by those agencies and jurisdictions prone to going overboard.
      Since there is commonly evidence that might theoretically be destroyed without a SWAT- style raid, will those methods become more and more common in cases (other than those with the potential for violent resistance or consumption or flushing of drugs).
      Once the way has been paved by a new standard of “legal” and extreme methods of search and seizure, you’re likely to see certain jurisdictions and LEOs push that relaxed standard to the max.

      1. I heard that that the police numbered some 19 or more persons heavily armed and armoured surrounded Stone’s house and with tremendous fanfare arrested him. One might think the armour was for protection but I also heard the media was all over the place during this colleseum like arrest. I’ve met Stone and he isn’t any Arnold Schwarzenegger. I think two retirees using walkers could have arrested him.

        1. The presence of peanut vendors and carnival barkers on the premises was even worse than all of the alleged fanfare.

          1. Mr. Aporia opined, “It’s unlikely that whoever is signing off on these types of raids for alleged non-violent/ white collar will ever be called to account for or justify these tactics.”

            The man’s name is Mathew Whitaker–not Mr. Whoever-Signed-Off-On-The-Stone-Raid-And-Stone-Indictment. Trump knows that. Why don’t you, Mr.Aporia?

            1. #1.–I didn’t know that AG Whitaker was a judge
              #2.–I never claimed, implied, or pretended that I had an inside track to the inner workings of the Trump White House.
              Unlike L4D’s confident declarations about the inner workings and future plans of the FBI and the OSC.

              1. #1.–The grand jury does not need a judge’s approval to return a true bill against a defendant. But the special counsel needs the Acting Attorney General’s permission to ask the grand jury to return an indictment.

                #2.)–You can’t handle the inner workings of the Trump White House. Nobody can. Least of all Trump, himself.

                P. S. The national emergency at the US/Mexico border has been put on hold listening to Musak for 21 days while congressional Republicans attempt to make up Trump’s mind about the national emergency at the US/Mexico border.

                BTW, the Muzak sounds like:

                I can’t sing without you.
                Can’t dance without you.
                I can’t sleep. And I can’t think.
                I’m finding it hard to do anything.

                (Note: Actual lyrics may vary from elevator to elevator.)

    6. So if someone destroys someone elses life with lies, dirty tricks, smears…it’s not a crime if you follow the correct ‘process’ ?

      1. “So if someone destroys someone elses life with lies, dirty tricks, smears…it’s not a crime if you follow the correct ‘process’ ?

        Becka, I’m not sure what you are referring to but don’t confuse the law with ethics or morality.

        Mueller seems to be doing exactly what you are talking about. I disagree with Mueller’s ethics and morality no matter who or what side is being attacked.

      2. I don’t think that allegations of “dirty tricks”, “smears”, or “destroying someone else’s life” were listed in indictments against Stone.
        But if those allegations are to be considered justification for SWAT-style raids, those raids would become regular features in divorce battles.😉

        1. Well Tom you see, after Trump has demonized the FBI. So they’re more than happy to raid the home of a Trump dirty trickster. And by all accounts that ‘is’ Roger Stone; a dirty trickster from the Nixon White House.

          By all accounts Roger Stone lives for intrigue. He and Paul Manafort were partners in a lobbying firm where greed was everything. But even then Roger Stone was chronically neurotic. So much so that Manafort eventually moved on.

          Donald Trump befriended Stone 40 years ago. So when Trump decided to run for president, old buddy Roger was full of ideas. Schemes that sounded cool to Donald Trump. That is where we are in the Mueller Probe.

          1. I would rate people like Manafort, Stone, Strzok, and Cohen as being among the most slimy in this cast of characters.
            Normally, that hasn’t been justification for the ridiculous overkill involved in raids like those of the Stone or Manafort homes.
            There are a few more that might “make the cut” for being the sleaziest, if and when investigators ever get to the bottom of certain issues.
            As for demonizing the FBI, I think people like Comey, Strzok, Page were pretty much asking for it.
            Maybe if you’ve become one of the apologists for those people you disagree.
            I haven’t seen him go after Chris Wray or any current, top-level FBI officials; it’s another story with Mueller and his Merry Me.
            They have given Trump multiple openings wide enough to drive a truck through.

            1. I thought that ” where we are in the Mueller probe” re Stone was the investigation of allegations related to the 2016 election.
              If “we’re at” the Trump-Stone friendship Peter says was formed 40 years ago, I’d say the investigation is badly lagging behind.

            2. And Strzok is included because he recognized tRump’s toxicity? Where do you fall in the slime bucket hierarchy?

          2. Well Tom you see, after Trump has demonized the FBI. S

            No, grotesque misconduct by senior officials of the FBI has done that, including the long running game of hide the ball.

          3. “Well Tom you see, after Trump has demonized the FBI. So they’re more than happy to raid the home of a Trump dirty trickster.”

            Peter, your comment is totally wrong, but it seems you can’t separate your politics from right and wrong. You sound amoral. I guess if a man spit at a police officer you would be quite undisturbed if that police officer beat the man to death to get even.

            In this case some of the leaders of the FBI broke the FBI’s rules along with FISA and other rules. Trump called them out on this and some of the FBI members may be prosecuted.

  11. The FBI clearly takes a dimmer view of Manafort’s and Stone’s honor than Mr. Turley does. If Turley is so offended by the ignominious treatment of these two crooks, let him be a character witness for them.

    1. What a dumb “anonymous” comment. Turley criticizes the process and your “anonymous” irrelevant response is to blab about character witness for a man that Turley probably does not know personally.

    2. These issues aren’t about being “a character witness”, any more than the Miranda and Escobedo cases were about vouching for those guys’ characters.

  12. Another middle of the night pajama/panty raid by Muler (if she were alive I am sure his mother would be proud). Muler forgot to include Stone’s unpaid parking tickets in indictment. If this is focus of Muler “probe” at this point in time, unlikely he has anything material relating to Russian collusion mandate of his witch hunt. Trial will be a circus and no way jury will go hard on playful court jester Stone. #MulerHasJumpedTheShark(again).

  13. Typical corrupt tactics by the Mueller gang. Probably learned while he was working with Whitey Bulger in Boston. Mueller needs to be indicted for all his past crimes including being a bagman for Hillary in Urranium One deal with Putin. Talk about a criminal hiding his own crimes by projecting them on others.

    1. Oh Gary is that the best you can do? BUT…BUT….BUT….HRC. And thank you for proving my point in less than 3 min. Don’t worry you won’t be the only one.

      1. Obviously Fishwings is a cowardly bot. who refuses to use a real name. Working for the DNC?

        Is there a statute of limitations hiring hitmen to commit murder. IE Mueller/ Bulger link.

        Oh let’s not forget the crime of destroying evidence IE the 19000 emails between Page and her FBI/CIA boyfriend. No probative value before the IG could examine them.

  14. It is just a link between organization 1 and individual 1. Right-wingers circling the wagons in 3…2…1.

    1. The link is a stepping Stone to future indictments. Mueller knows who Stone’s contact with the Trump campaign was. But Mueller wants Stone to say who it was. Stone might not say who it was. Once Andrew Miller loses his appeal on his motion to quash Mueller’s subpoena, Miller will testify to Stone’s dark money connections. And that will be the leverage to get Stone to rat on his contact with the Trump campaign. Or not. Either way. Mueller already knows who it is.

        1. Mueller has emails and text messages proving each lie that Stone told HPSCI about Stone’s contacts with a senior adviser to the Trump campaign.

          The fact that we don’t know does not mean that Mueller does not know. It never did. Remember: Cohen said “Mueller knows everything.”

  15. p.s. I like the way Turley always links his previous pieces, unlike others who CLAIM to have made prior opinions/taken prior positions that somehow never are found….

  16. Prior legal and other commentary by ex-FBI and DOJ officials repeatedly referenced Mueller using well-known tactics of starting on the periphery with small charges, then working toward the target (in this case, Trump). Curious, then, that no one from Wikileaks was charged thus far, prior to moving in on Stone….I realize that Assange is not a U.S. citizen, but that did not stop FBI/DOJ from charging 12 “Russians” (with conveniently-sounding Russian names, like Sergei) and associated entities, even though they would never face charges…

    1. Prior legal and other commentary by ex-FBI and DOJ officials repeatedly referenced Mueller using well-known tactics of starting on the periphery with small charges,

      Again, none of these indictments have made reference to any conspiracies involving the Trump campaign or any official of the Trump campaign. You’re going to use these ‘small charges’ to nab ‘big fish’, the small fish have to admit to having done something. What they admit to (because they haven’t the resources to fight the charges) is a mickey-mouse process crime.

      And, no, none of the notable special prosecutor investigations began on the periphery.

      1. and pressuring liars and snitches to testify. which ended in dismal failure long ago in the Hells angels rico case he improperly handled. Sad and pathetic Meuller!

  17. So what if Meuller never finds evidence of a Russian conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. So-called “process crimes” are crimes nonetheless. What are you insinuating? That they are not prosecution-worthy?

    1. The dates listed in the Stone indictment for Stone’s contacts with a senior adviser to the Trump campaign line up fairly well with a charge of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States by agreeing to conceal from the FEC information about an illegal foreign campaign contribution. There may be more besides just that.

    2. So-called “process crimes” are crimes nonetheless. What are you insinuating? That they are not prosecution-worthy?

      NEWSFLASH! It’s called selective prosecution, not justice. I prefer the term lawfare. If it was actually about justice, then you wouldn’t have criminals, you know, those with clear evidence they violated the law, walking free because some lawfarist decided the criminal had no intent to commit the crime.

      1. Olly, your logic and adherence to law seems to require more intellect than many on this blog will ever have.

    3. Exactly what I am saying if you want. Yes process crimes are usually in the context of a more serious thing that deserved investigation in the first place. Not a political witch hunt premised on a needless counterintelligence op staged by Democrat leave behind team in DOJ/ FBI. Exactly what I’m saying!

    4. In most cases, they probably are “prosecution-worthy”.
      And those process crimes were deemed even more “worthy” of prosecution after Trump was elected.
      That’s one of the problems. A bigger problem is that we’re 30 months into this circus, and Mueller has not advanced a case for a Trump-Russia conspiracy.
      That was supposed to be the main purpose of the OSC investigation and the 10 month FBI investigation that preceded Mueller’s appointment.
      A major, and justified complaint, is that a protracted state of investigative limbo and unanswered questions is unacceptable.

  18. The phrase “process crime” is used to suggest the crime is less than serious. Bill Clinton was impeached because of a process crime. The right-wingers weren’t calling it that, though. They acted as if it was the most reprehensible crime imaginable. Mr. Turley, is a “process crime” any less a crime than others?

    1. Bill Clinton committed perjury in an underlying case in which he was a defendant (Paula Jones). I don’t see these folks being charged with any underlying crime yet.

      1. You don’t see the underlying crime because you’ve got your eyes closed tightly. The underlying crime was alleged against the 12 GRU officers who hacked the DNC, DCCC and Podesta emails. Roger Stone communicated with 6 of those 12 GRU officers who were posing as the online persona Guccifer 2.0. Guccifer 2.0 communicated with Julian Assange of Wikileaks. Roger Stone had Dr. Jerome Corsi contact Ted Malloch to visit Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and report back to Corsi who reported back to Stone who reported back to senior advisers to the Trump campaign.

        Time to remove the bandages from your eyes and see the Trump campaign for what it was based upon what the Trump campaign did and what Mueller can prove that the Trump campaign did.

          1. There’s a link to the Stone indictment at the bottom of Turley’s original post for this thread. The link is on the words in red, Stone Indictment, preceded by the invitation, “Here’s the indictment.” If you click your mouse button on that link the webulenettles will whisk you away to the Stone Indictment. If you read it, then you will receive what you command. If you don’t read it, your command turns back into a pumpkin at midnight.

            BTW, how are your siblings Dewey and Louis, doing, Huey?

        1. I can’t find where Stone (or any other American) was charged with those things in the indictment.

          1. S. Smith, Diane likes to make things up. She is the IF girl. IF, or probably or any terms similar lead her to a fictional account of what is happening that she records on this blog. Later she quotes her opinions as fact. If you hear something from her that you think is true, recheck your facts.

            1. S.Smith and Allan,…
              Anyone “creative” enough to invent Congressional testimony that never was given deserves proper recognition.
              It’s “highly probable” that she will continue with her same stunts.

          2. L4D said, “The underlying crime was alleged against the 12 GRU officers who hacked the DNC, DCCC and Podesta emails.”

            S Smith said, “I can’t find where Stone (or any other American) was charged with those things in the indictment.”

            That’s because Stone was described in the hacking indictment against the 12 GRU officers. Assange and Wikileaks were also described in that same indictment. The absence of a charge against Stone or Assange in the hacking indictment does not preclude either Stone or Assange or anyone else from being named and charged in a subsequent indictment for Conspiracy to Defraud the United States. BTW, the 12 GRU officers were charged with Conspiracy against the United States under both the offense and the defraud clauses of 18 USC 371. Think of the descriptions of Stone and Assange as place holders like the acronym TBA. There are several TBA descriptions in the Stone Indictment and Assange just so happens to be one of them. Corsi, Credico, Malloch and Bannon are four more. But there are others besides that could be any of a handful of people, including even Rick Gates.

Comments are closed.