Below is my column in USA Today on the Roger Stone indictment. I have been frankly astonished by the coverage, which has focused on simply the fact that he was charged as opposed to what he was charged with. Once again, the indictment’s significance has been uniformly over-played with little objective analysis of the specific counts themselves. From any objective perspective it is underwhelming in both the underlying conduct and the scope of the allegations.
Here is the column:
The arrest of Roger Stone by Special Counsel Robert Mueller could not have been more dramatically presented. The pre-dawn raid of Stone’s house by a contingent of heavily armed, body-armored agents could easily have fit the arrest of El Chapo rather than an elderly crank with a Nixon fetish.
Despite the breathless media accounts, the actual indictment of Stone is most notable for what it does not include. This was supposed to be the long-rumored linchpin to Russian collusion: The Russians fed information to Wikileaks which fed the information to Stone who fed the information to the Trump campaign.
The raid on Stone’s home clearly made for great television, but the Stone indictment hardly makes for a great collusion case. Let’s be honest. After more than a year of investigation, Mueller nailed a gadfly on false statements, witness tampering and obstruction rather than illegal collusion with Russia.
That’s what has been happening all along. Mueller has almost exclusively charged non-Russian defendants with either false statements or other process crimes.
Maybe Mueller has more evidence
This does not mean that Mueller cannot reveal a wealth of evidence of collusion in the final scene like some Agatha Christie novel. Yet, coverage has been saturated with speculation on possible collusion angles without observing that little evidence has been raised in numerous and lengthy indictments since July 2017.
This is not to say that Mueller was wrong to pursue and ultimately indict Stone. There was ample reason why Mueller targeted Stone initially. After all, 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 hacks.
Mueller had every reason to pursue Stone, but it quickly became evident that Stone is a clown-like figure who reveled in the attention of scandal. He was someone who publicly admitted to being a trickster and still admires Richard Nixon (whose image in tattooed on his back).
Moreover, some of these charges are obviously well-founded. Stone said that he did not write to key individuals. He did. He allegedly spoke directly to a potential witness and pressured him to change his account. Like Paul Manafort’s contacting potential witnesses through his monitored phone (while under house arrest), stupidity alone might justify a prison stint.
Mueller however seems to have a strikingly inconsistent approach to these targets. With some targets, Mueller followed the common practice of allowing them to surrender. For Manafort and and Stone, Mueller carried out heavy-handed raids. With Michael Cohen, Mueller matter-of-factly in a footnote noted that he made various false statements but was allowed to simply correct them.With Stonethe allegedly false statements were all related to part of his congressional testimony regarding the meaning of prior public statements and past written communications with Wikileaks.
Sensational style, not criminal intent
In some ways, the Stone prosecution could highlight an element of the defense that could used by Trump himself. Many of the most sinister statements by Stone are consistent with this sensational style of speech and there is a question of intent.
Stone for example told one witness to “Stonewall it. Plead the fifth. Anything to save the plan’ . . . Richard Nixon.” The Special Counsel also recounts how Stone told a “You are a rat. A stoolie. You backstab your friends-run your mouth my lawyers are dying Rip you to shreds.” He also allegedly threatened the man’s dog and said that he would “take that dog away from you.” Hardly nice, but Stone is likely to point out that he spoke publicly in the same fashion and he is known for such colorful language.
In the end, however, Stone could have talked himself into an indictment just as Trump could well tweet himself into an impeachment.
The main issue however remains the lack of objectivity of the coverage of the indictment. Stone has featured prominently in theories seeking “smoking gun” evidence of collusion. There is nothing smoking in this indictment. There is no suggestion of involvement or knowledge by Stone in the hacking. Stone has suggested that he was a 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 does not contradict that later account.
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.
The important thing is that, even if Stone and the campaign did seek the email information, it would not be a crime. The crime is the conspiracy to hack the email system. Campaigns often seek confidential information obtained by journalists, leakers, whistleblowers and others. Indeed, the Clinton campaign (while denying its role before the election) funded the Steele dossier investigation to dig up dirt on Trump, including dirt from Russian intelligence figures. Even if Stone implicated Trump in seeking the information, it would merely establish the type of dirty politics that Stone expressly embraced as his curious calling and talent.
Nailing Roger Stone on false statements was hardly a challenge. Stone could not give an interview without contradicting himself on national television. The question is, without Stone, what is left of the hack-and-attack conspiracy between the Russians and the Trump campaign? Like the Trump Tower meeting, the Stone angle seems to have fizzled out. On closer examination, there clearly appears to be dirty politics but nothing that can be fairly described as a criminal conspiracy.
Mueller has been unrelenting in pursuing Stone. Now he has him. For whatever it is worth.
Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors, is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley.
Some of you need to read Sydney Powell’s “License to Lie.” It doesn’t mention Trump, Clinton, Russia or any other of the current usual suspects but it is one of the scariest books you will ever read.
BTW, if you believe that CNN just happened to be outside of Stone’s house at 5am, you are dumber than dirt.
Unless CNN has been outside Stone’s house week after week, waiting for his eventual arrest. (Which they have). Even a broken clock is right twice a day. And if they follow around Corsi and Donald Trump, Jr they’ll be right again. There are more perp walks to come, and some of them are commonly known (except by Turley).
Oh! Enigma! You may end up becoming the only one left sane enough to save us all from ourselves and from one another.
You’re under no obligation to do so. Let’s call it a prayer, instead.
I’m not worried about you Late4Dinner, theres a few people here that can let their beliefs cloud their vision, and their minds.
Robert Mueller has been scrupulously reserved in public statements. In fact, the entire Mueller team has been famous for ‘lack’ of leaking. The idea that Mueller would tell his people to tip-off CNN seems to fly in the face of everything we’ve seen so far from Mueller.
Coming from Enigma and being addressed to Late4Dinner, the comment about “a few people here that can let their beliefs cloud their vision and their minds” takes the top prize today in the category of Most Humorous Remark.😉😀😂
A top runnerup in that category was L4B’s previous comments about sanity and saving us all.
This is better than a good performance at The Comedy Club.😀😊😁😂
Glad you’re entertained, we seem to agree about the truth of the statement, maybe not who it applies to?
I’m too far gone. Save yourselves.
Wow, the drama is deafening. What simply astounds me is how both sides continue to rant and rave as if they had all the information and knew exactly what the actors did and said and the truth of it all. It’s like eating raw meat or an unbaked loaf of bread. It’s not done yet. It isn’t done cooking. If it turns out there was malfeasance on Muellers part…well, I doubt that man would continue in this particular kitchen knowing he could be next on the menu unless he knew the recipe had the necessary ingredients to go on. Ok, it’s true, there are some kitchens that are full of cockroaches, rats and other vermin….but if I had to choose my restaurant, it would not be the one where the cook has spent their whole life being coddled and catered to aND was as full of offal as Mr. Trump. Pepto-Dismal is the the whole of this Presidency regardless….
Yet, coverage has been saturated with speculation on possible collusion angles without observing that little evidence has been raised in numerous and lengthy indictments since July 2017.
They won’t ever observe what they aren’t prepared to see. They have their radar screen slewed to President Trump with a display setting so narrow that they won’t ever see anything outside of his orbit. Reality can be a scary thing and these intellectual cowards bubble wrap themselves in their myopia. If they dialed out the range on their political radar, they’d be forced to see they have been ignoring the real threats all along.
Where’s the Russia, Russia, Russia.
Off topic. Now senator Warren is proposing asset forfeiture. Stay tuned.
As Lin Wood, the libel attorney Nick Sandmann’s family hired to sue the pants off some in the media, put it:
“From Kavanaugh to Covington, there is disturbing pattern of bias & libel against conservatives.”
No kidding. I hope the ‘MAGA hat teens’ sue them all into oblivion.
While in blackface to demonstrate their “school spirit.”
Oh my god, enigma! It’s all about you, isn’t it. It’s disgusting the way you and black liberals are so needy and self absorbed! Y’all own black paint, now and the right to use it? Really? Nobody can do anything without you’re approval. You’re such a needy, ignorant sycophant!
Oh, and I still love the fact that you went to a PRIVATE high school. Such a liberal hypocrite!
Thank God for the conservative blacks who are such a welcomed and refreshing answer to you and your band of buffoons.
Cindy – It had nothing to do with me. It was a reminder that the students who are being retconned as heroes, regularly mock and verbally abuse black students at athletic events. They are what the were presumed to be at first, despite what their PR firm and Fox News claims.
https://thegrio.com/2019/01/24/covington-catholic-students-defend-racist-school-culture-and-blackface-taunting-of-players/
All one has to look at is the white Catholic school child that was abused by a group of black leftist protesters and an Indian who has been playing games for years. Even the news media went after those children and due to threats the school had to be closed. Then an interview of the child led to a child that acted like a composed adult shocking the interviewer. The threats haven’t stopped, but that is the world Enigma seeks. To him color is of major importance and MLK may as well never had existed.
Enigma……..when you are just as offended that those white kids were called the vile racist term “cracker” by those black adult men at the Lincoln Memorial, then we’ll talk.
https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/school-changes-blackout-themed-football-game-after-racial-implication-concerns/613335948
There would seem to be an epidemic of similar “racially motivated” incidents related to the blackout themes.
If the assumption is that it “has to be” racism and could be nothing else, then how much time and effort should be spent pointing out that there is another possible explanation?
Tom………the liberal blacks today know they can say and do anything against whites without fear of any public condemnations. Must be nice to be able to be racist bullies against whites. They must be so proud.
Dr. King would throw up if he had to spentd 5 minutes with them.
Cindy – Let me see, where does “cracker” rate on the scale of “vile racist tems?”
For 62 years there existed a minor league baseball team, “The Atlanta Crackers.” They had corporate sponsors like Coca Cola, they were a farm team for Major League teams. In their history they had a single black player. White people used to be proud of the term. You may not understand or appreciate that the wearing of a MAGA hat is considered offensive to some? That they got a response was predictable, it wasn’t right, but it was predictable. That their own racist behavior (which their school has publicly engaged in for years) is being defended is predictable as well.
“You may not understand or appreciate that the wearing of a MAGA hat is considered offensive to some?”
The term Make America Great Again is racist to Enigma though he points the finger to others in his cowardly attempt to make that point. America is great whether Enigma likes it or not and it would be wonderful to make America even greater. Enigma is part of the hate America crowd and attempts to tear America down by promoting tribalism.
Make America Great Again means that all Americans, Black White, Latino, Asian etc. all be better off. We don’t need the Enigma’s of the world placing one group against another. It’s disgusting.
Enigma……I stand by what I said.
The Atlanta Crackers were around during the same time vile racists terms for blacks were acceptable. The “Crackers” team ended in 1965. Those days are gone. Blacks, whites, asians, hispanics et al, deserve our respect. now that cracker, n—–er, etc are no longer socially and morally acceptable terms.
They never were the same thing Cindy. And when you say racist tems fo blacks were acceptable, I beg you to consider, acceptable to whom? I’m sure black people never felt that way. Many white people feel they have the ight to detemine what is acceptable and what isn’t. It used to be acceptable to lynch black people as well, but I bet black people never agreed with it.
I could agree with you the behavior of the black men was wrong, I won’t accept that the Covington Cathloc kids were right no matter how much spin people put on it. “School spirit” my ass.
god enigma……are you really trying to be an idiot? YES THEY ARE THE SAME THING. .”acceptable to whom”? Well, most of society. over 60 years ago…..and now they are not. See? People change…..societies change. That’s what you can’t accept……
Is “cracker” referred to as “the C word” because the mere mention is unfit in polite society? I can go online right now and but Atlanta Cracker merchandise. Your “most of society” doesn’t mean all of society does it, because some parts of society never accepted it. They had to tolerate it because of what might happen if they didn’t.
enigma…..Cracker is NOT acceptable ! Liberals have decided that It’s not offensive because they are babying al of you black liberal snowflakes. You don’t deserve what this society has done for you. Whites let you cut in line based on race, not merit. Black privilege! And loo k hou how bitter you are towards whites. You deserve no more than anyone else. What a bunch of spoiled, soiled brats . You have soiled your own nests……South Chicago is unlivable Aren’t you proud? Conservative blacks are such wonderful people. You could learn a lot from them, but that would take smarts.
I didn’t say cracker was acceptable, I’m saying it’s nowhere near the same thing. When you say, “Whites let you cut in line based on race, not merit, Black privilege.” Do you mean they have taken down some of the barriers they set up in the first place? Please give me an example?
Cindy, most of my black friends find Enigma’s attitude as despicable as do we. They feel that he promotes racism and is dangerous to their families as well as everyone else’s. Enigma has received all the benefits but he is unwilling to give back. He likes to spit in everyone’s face. That is a sign of a small man.
Yes enigma, they’ve taken down the barriers that were put up in the first place. It was in all the newspapers. of course, my generation didn’t put up the barriers……they were there years earlier….See, whites don’t live to be 200 years old, so whites today didn’t own slaves. Get it? But because your life long dream to be a rich white person has not come to pass, you are still bitter, blaming all of your unhappiness on whites you don’t even know.
There are no barriers except in liberal democrats’ minds. Scary places, by the way
” I won’t accept that the Covington Cathloc kids were right no matter …”
That is Enigma’s truth. He doesn’t accept anything that helps to dispel the myths he purveys.
Cindy, Enigma lives in the time of slavery. He forgets slavery was the norm in ancient times and it was the English speaking people that did the most to end slavery. He also forgets the more than have a million young lives lost in this nation over that issue in the Civil War. He forgets the racism on his side of the coin.
Allan….I totally agree. Thanks…..good to hear from you.
Cracker: a racial slur for white people, used especially for poor rural whites in the Southern United States. – Wikipedia
Anonymous……is that you. Paul C. Schulte?
I have been reading your crap all night and it’s getting tiresome. Grow up, get over the past. Yes, blacks were discriminated against, but that’s not what we’re discussing here, is it? So were the Irish, so were the Italians, so was nearly everyone. So stop trying to make this all about your racially oriented butthurt. What’s in the past should remain in the past.
The big issue here isn’t the racism of any sort – it’s that the media completely and deliberately lied and deceived the public about this story, They admit they got the facts wrong, yet within 24 hours of that admission, are trying to make these kids the villains.
You know that’s wrong, and yet you try to make this about your issues. Well, sorry, but that’s not what’s important. What happened here has much greater ramifications, but the left continues to ignore the damage this sort of false reportage does to the country.
Enigma said the Covington boys “regularly mock and verbally abuse black students at athletic events.”
The word “regularly” begs the need to provide further evidence. Got any?
They said they did black out, blue out, white out, or whatever “themes” etc.
Did you know that some kids operate on the belief that ‘colors are for everyone’ and there’s nothing more to it than that? Is that a possible explanation in your mind? That’s a rhetorical Q, of course. I know you don’t accept any other explanation than the Catholic white boys are vile racists. As you said, “They are what the were presumed to be…” Period.
Did you know that Cov Catholic has a black coach for its basketball team? I don’t know if he was around 5 or 7 years ago, but come on, Enigma, do you really believe a black coach is going to go along with that kind of sh*t? Of course not.
TBob……..enigma believes whatever felon Al Sharpton tells him.
Reverand Al. Now there’s a vile race-baiting fraud if there ever was one.
Enigma, I assume you regularly read opinion articles like this one, that IMO is almost unreadable with its many falsehoods and outright lies written therein. For one, the boys did not “block” the Native American drummer’s access to the Lincoln Memorial. That is a complete lie. If you believe sh*t like this, then its no wonder you come to the conclusions you do.
https://www.thenation.com/article/black-children-nick-sandmann-savannah-guthrie/
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=67oHmXBLzII
I think MLK would have been about 90 this year.He died at, or just after, the peak of the civil rights movement.
Most of the numerous key figures in that movement are now long gone.
Had King lived a long life, would the movement have advanced to the point where the face painting issue could have been met head-on?
After they got the easy stuff out of the way, like the landmark civil rights legislation, could they have tackled the vital face painting issue?
Yeah, see, even Seinfeld’s Kramer character says “it’s cool to paint your face cuz ya gotta support your team.”
So as Enigma says, “they are what they were presumed to be.”
Enigma presumed them to be vile ignorant racists.
I presumed them to be kids having fun and supporting their team.
There are all kinds interesting questions that surfaced after the intial wave of hysterical headlines.
E.G., did the Indian guy serve along side of Sen. Blumenthal in Vietnam?
Enigma, if you want to read another perspective on the same event, read this article by Andrew Sullivan. I doubt it will change your mind about “what you already know” happened, but hope springs eternal.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/andrew-sullivan-the-abyss-of-hate-versus-hate.html
” They were 16-year-olds subjected to verbal racist assault by grown men; and then the kids were accused of being bigots.”
Two things ae capable of being true at the same time. They were subjected to abusive behavior and also doled it out. The difference is, they have a PR firm and the right wing media to spin their behavior and make them victims. Flip Wilson used to say, “The Devil Made Me Do It!” Explain what made the Covington Catholic kids taunt the Native Americans, what made them dress in blackface at a school event and get in the faces of black players from other teams? They say it was “school spirit.” I can’t give that excuse any credibility. There are people that went too far in attacking the kids in the media. That would make three things true at the same time.
You dumbass. We’re talking 16 year old kids here. So they got a PR firm – would you be stupid enough (whoa, we’re talking enigma here, what am I saying?) to let your teenager take on the entire lying left wing media without help?
So don’t hold that against them, it was the smart move. The fact is, Mr. Drummer Man lied about a lot of things, thinking he’d get a pass from the media, which he did. Sadly, there was evidence of his lies, although the left chooses to not believe it.
Wally M.,
Without the European corruption of the American Indian, we would never see these phonies out there conning people.
Prior to the corruption of the New World, con men like this guy, or Rudy James, did not even exist.
It is the European colonialist corruption that is responsible for all of this.
https://www.nytimes.com/1994/08/31/us/indian-boys-exile-turns-out-to-be-hoax.html
The Rudy James story; more evidence of the continuing, corrupting evidence from the time of Columbus, and ever since.
I’ll skip the details of the story about an argument that arose before this story confirmed what others already suspected.
I admit to being a party to that argument, and I may have even unintentionally insulted the morons I was arguing with.
But I’m pretty sure it was intentional.
Oh Enigma. Are you kidding me? Your confirmation bias is extreme. After reading the entire article, you pulled out that one sentence, completely out of context, to prove your point? Come on.
TBob…..enigma fancies himself as the Freddy Mercury of a sassy black liberal bully band.
He can strut the stage all he wants, but the stadium is empty.
This is the one chosen sentence that Enigma pulled from the article, taken completely out of context:
“They were 16-year-olds subjected to verbal racist assault by grown men; and then the kids were accused of being bigots.”
Got that? Okay now, for anyone else who cares to see that sentence Enigma singled out in its complete context, here it is from the article:
“They aren’t angels; they’re teenage boys. But they were also subjected for quite a while to a racist, anti-Catholic, homophobic tirade on a loudspeaker, which would be more than most of us urbanites could bear — and they’re adolescents literally off the bus from Kentucky. I heard no slurs back. They stayed there because they were waiting for a bus, not to intimidate anyone.
To put it bluntly: They were 16-year-olds subjected to verbal racist assault by grown men; and then the kids were accused of being bigots. It just beggars belief that the same liberals who fret about “micro-aggressions” for 20-somethings were able to see 16-year-olds absorbing the worst racist garbage from religious bigots … and then express the desire to punch the kids in the face.”
Do you see what Enigma did there? THAT is confirmation bias in action.
Last comment….what the writer was saying in the sentence that Enigma singled out was the exact opposite of what Enigma was trying to make it mean. Here is the sentence again, with my added emphasis:
“To put it bluntly: They were 16-year-olds subjected to verbal racist assault by grown men; AND THEN THE KIDS WERE ACCUSED OF BEING BIGOTS!!!! It just beggars belief…”
TBob…….it DOES beggar description.
As I said above, Enigma, “I doubt it will change your mind about “what you already know” happened…”
You proved me right.
What is it you would like me to believe? That the kids, some of whom were doing a tomahawk chop and chanting, “Build The Wall,” were not being racist. That they don’t have a history at the school of participating in organized racist activities. That because someone verbally abused them first they were justified in taking it out on someone else? That it was merely “school spirit” like some of them said? Which would you like me to believe?
I might believe they thought they could wear their MAGA hats and have no one say a thing to them. Those same hats were very popular in Charlottesville as well.
Enigma, you believe whatever you want to believe, obviously. But facts are facts. Context matters.
You said, “I might believe they thought they could wear their MAGA hats and have no one say a thing to them.”
Really? Are you saying that you think they should have just known were asking for it, what with being dressed in a hat like that, and just standing there waiting for a bus and all? How is that suggestion any different from saying a woman being dressed like a slut who gets sexually assaulted should have known better? She should expect it because of what she was wearing?
This is America last time I checked. Can a teenager no longer buy a souvenir hat on the street in Washington DC and wear it on the way back to meet their bus without the expectation of being assaulted? Is that what you are saying?
Can someone in American expect to wear their Che Guevara tee shirt and have no one say a thing to them? How about a red hat with a hammer and sickle on it? How about the vile and offensive “I’m With Her” tee shirt or bumper sticker? Can I put that on my car and actually believe no one would want ram into my rear end?
Where do I go to get the approved head gear list before I venture out into the world?
Yes there are shirts and slogans that wearing them in public may get a negative reaction. It’s why many schools don’t allow wearing versions of the Confederate flag, or Swastika’s, and soon enough WPWW shirts, I just learned the term the other day when some spirited non-regular signed off that way to me the other day.
PS Show me the evidence that the kids were chanting ‘build the wall’….from all I’ve seen and read, it didn’t happen.
I’ve read two eyewitness accounts, Mr. Phillips the native American involved and a white young woman who says she and her friends were harrassed before the incident with the former Marine with the drum. How exactly is it you someone proved a negative? I thought that was supposed to be hard.
Enigma makes things up all the time. This is nothing more than a story of well mannered kids being abused by leftists.
Enigma says “I’ve read two eyewitness accounts…”
One: Nathan Philips is a liar and a fraud.
Two: Show me a video where YOU can actually hear the kids “chanting build the wall” ….there’s a lot of video footage out there.
Three: Reading comprehension is the ability to read text, process it and understand its meaning.
You’ve demonstrated (see above example) that your own deeply ingrained bias and prejudice severely interferes with even a basic ability to correctly comprehend the intended meaning of the words you’ve just read.
Four: You would be a nightmare to deal with in a jury deliberation.
Turley pointed out: “The main issue however remains the lack of objectivity of the coverage of the indictment.”
Does anyone in the media have any interest in the fact that it was the Hillary campaign that actually PAID for Russian intelligence in its attempts to procure oppo research on Trump? And then laundered those payments through their law firm, Perkins Coie, and then handed it off to the FBI to use that salacious, unverified, paid-for disinformation, to spy on the opposing political campaign?
Oh that’s right. Half of those government “players” –who had a hand in all the questionable actions, are now paid analysts on CNN and MSNBC. Brennan, Clapper, Josh Campbell (Comey’s former assistant), etc. And these folks were given a cable news platform for opining -and being paid – for their “analysis” about went on? Oh but there’s no conflict or bias problem in the media? Please.
No. Because if they lie long and hard enough to get a Dem elected in 2020 ALL OF IT will DISAPPEAR!
(music to the tune of Sam Stone, by Randy Newman)
Rog Stone.. came home…
To his wife and fam il lee….
After serving Trump and other gooffeees.
And Roger took to squeeling…
When he got that empty feeling.
An overdose was hovering in the air!
Well life has lost it’s fun…there is nothing to be done..
But trade his house that he bought on the GI Bill…
etc
Nothing to see here might be a good slogan, but the question must be asked, why are there so many people connected with Trump’s campaign, transition and administration that lied about the Russian question when there has been times they did not have to lie? The top people around Trump have been caught lying and have pled guilty about the lies, that means something has to be covered up. It all can’t be tied to the Moscow Towers. I’ll wait for the answer from the special prosecutor on why so many have lied on behalf of Trump.
Fishwings: It’s like Turley is always talking to someone with no previous knowledge of the Mueller Probe.
In all fairness, most of the commenters here act as though they have no previous knowledge.
Most but not all. Some of us know how to check everything with The Constiution and US Titles. Known when intent is or is not an element, know when there is no statute of limitations, know when strong arming a witness or suspect into a forced confession is ‘misprision of office. and no that collusion is not a crime.
So now the score is 35 million worth of essentialy ‘nothing’ except leaving some juicy realities for the next go round with real invetigators and real prosecutors.
The dumb keep getting dumber; I wonder if there is such a thing as terminal stupidity, if so, Michael, you have arrived.
Well, that’s a real specific observation. I can see why you use the name “Shill”.
We all look forward to you demonstrating all of your “previous knowledge”.
Because they didn’t lie about “the Russian question.”
Maybe a better question ought to be, why are F.B.I. agents asking questions about perfectly legal acts having nothing to do with a legitimate investigation, but might nonetheless be embarrassing to the people they’re interviewing? Then having a Prosecutor charge them with, allegedly, making false statements over nothing of consequence. It’s no way to build a rapport with the public.
“Why are F.B.I. agents asking questions about perfectly legal acts having nothing to do with a legitimate investigation?” asks Steve and the crew at FOX in an effort to misrepresent reality.
They’re still upset about Flynn. They haven’t considered the possibility that lying about legal behavior is so inherently suspicious that the FBI just can’t help themselves but to dig deeper into it to see whether there might be some other illegal behavior behind the unnecessary lie about the legal behavior. So they claim, instead, that the FBI ought not to ask questions about legal behavior to begin with. Well . . . If you want to gauge someone’s credibility, asking questions about legal behavior and getting unnecessary lies in return would seem to be a fine “metric” for credibility.
“asking questions about legal behavior”
This is hilarious. You’re defending asking questions about legal behavior.
In that case, if the F.B.I. thinks that’s the way to do business, and that seems to be the case, the next time they show up at my door, I won’t cooperate.
There’s no question that you have a right to remain silent–even about legal behavior. There’s no question that you have a right not to incriminate yourself with respect to illegal behavior. There’s only a question as to whether or not you have a right to lie. I can imagine all sorts of hypothetical scenarios in which the right to protect your privacy or the duty to protect the innocent might be felt with sufficient intensity as to feel like a right to lie. Flynn was not in any such predicament. And everybody knows it. Why would anyone pretend otherwise?
No, there is a question as to whether an investigator can ask you about perfectly legal, although possibly embarrassing matters. Not to mention whether it is a good use of tax payer dollars to clog up the judicial system with such silliness.
SteveJ, there were investigators who asked Bill Clinton questions about perfectly legal behavior that was also an embarrassing matter. Now, if those questions were permissible because they were posed in the context of a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by an accuser other than the woman about whom those questions were posed, then I’m pretty sure that the behaviors about which Flynn was questioned can be shoe-horned into the context of the vital national security interests of the United States without too much damage to the laws of the United States that required posing questions to Bill Clinton about perfectly legal but embarrassing behavior.
The only pertinent question Bill Clinton should have been required to answer regarding Monica Lewinsky was: “Did you sexually harass Monica Lewinsky?” That’s what the deposition was about — unwanted sexual advances.
Instead he was asked about consensual sexual relations.
The Judge seemed aghast that Bill Clinton answered this question truthfully given the definition of sexual relations that everyone had agreed to.
But seemed perfectly content with the fishing expedition allowed during the questioning having nothing to do with the nature of the deposition.
Republicans made fools out of themselves pretending that this was grounds for impeachment. And the judicial system came out of it with black eye.
Ah-ha! I appear to have have misread you, SteveJ. I’m tempted to apologize for that. Provided that we can agree that there is no right to lie except, maybe, to protect one’s own or another’s privacy, or to protect the innocent from harm.
I’m not sure how either of those exception would apply to Flynn or Stone, for that matter. I am, however, reasonably certain that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had no genuine basis for objecting to questions about their extramarital affair just because its was legal, private and embarrassing.
The behavior alleged by Juanita Broderick was probably not “perfectly legal”.
When the Governor of a state drops his pants and asks a state employee to “kiss it”, that may be legal, but it still seems like a bad idea.
The $850,000 paid out to settle a civil suit did not involve criminal allegations, so in that sense it can be viewed as all “perfectly legal”.
Then there is the question of “the vast, right-wing conspiracy” repeatedly targeting and harassing the Clintons.
Not surprisingly, that “conspiracy” was, and is, the major concern, and “the real issue” for fair-minded feminists and other Clinton stooges.
There is not now, never was, nor ever will there be any scintilla of doubt that Bill Clinton was, and probably still is, a sexist pig.
Guess who else fits that bill to a tee.
Well Broderick wasn’t the grounds for impeachment. There were no grounds for impeachment. I’m sorry. There just weren’t. I don’t know what you want me to do about it.
“Guess who else fits that bill to a tee”.
More and more progress in the special case of L4D, with her stunning admission that she is, among other things, “a sexist pig”.
Once again Turley is providing cover for Mueller by providing very faint criticism of Mueller instead of addressing Mueller’s collusion with those elements who are attempting a coup to overturn the election. Why is Turley NOT going after Mueller for destroying the 19,000 Page/ Strock emails?
You must be referring to the fantasy 19,000 Page/ Strock emails. Big Lies bear repeating…
The debate is not over whether the texts existed. The Justice Department admitted five months’ worth of texts (12/2016 to 5/2017) between Strozk and Page were missing. The debate is over whether they were purposely deleted.
So far the sum total of Muellers “investigation” looks like a multi year procurement of the Marx Brothers stateroom scene in A Night At The Opera, chaneled over and over and over again through the propaganda ministry’s many outlets and venues across the Motherland.
I think Turley says it all: “”Once again, the indictment’s significance has been uniformly over-played with little objective analysis of the specific counts themselves. From any objective perspective it is underwhelming in both the underlying conduct and the scope of the allegations…The main issue however remains the lack of objectivity of the coverage of the indictment.”
Now the crazies can continue with their excuses and their rationalizations.
Dr. Turley – Even in jest, it is inappropriate to state that “stupidity alone might justify a prison stint”. Why? First, because if that was the case our prisons would be full. Secondly,because the evidence that Mueller is unjustly targeting people is becoming overwhelmingly obvious. We are seeing behavior Mueller similar to the cultural purges in Communist China. Arrest people on thought crimes … threaten their lives, livelihood and families… urge them to falsely testify against others to save their lives, livelihoods and families … embarrass and smear them so they can’t return to their communities and continue their lives. Stone is just another example proving that the Mueller team has abused their power and operated in a selectively punitive fashion against conservatives associated with President Trump. Where are the night time, militarized raids on the Podestas, Bruce and Nelly Ohr, Marc Elias, Jack Shafer, Christopher Steele, Bill & Hillary for taking hundreds of millions from Russians while SOS, and so much of the press for lieing multiple times about Trump related figures. Mueller and his team of Democrats have abused the office of special counsel and continue to do so. We need people like you Dr Turley, to expose this behavior consistantly and vehemently, not logically as all of the “stupid” people in America don’t understand that.
As someone mentioned below, having a “backchannel” to WikiLeaks is not illegal. But this interview with Stone’s “backchannel” suggests Stone didn’t even have that.
And now, a Public Service Announcement from Nancy Pelosi
CNN’s televised raid of Stones home served two very important purposes.
1. It notified every American Citizen that the Constitutional Era in the United States is over and there is no going back.
2. The raid officially presented to Amercan Citizens their new fate under The 21st Century National Socialist American Workers’ Party aka The Democrat Fourth Reich.
I look foward to CNN’s 2 part 4 hour special documenting the end of America as we know it. Knowing how talented CNN is with such things, the documentry should give Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will a run for it’s money. I just hope since Pelosi and Schumer are celebrating their new offices as Co-Presidents of The United States and the fact they have taught Americans everywhere “a lesson,” there will be some footage showing Mueller accepting accolades and receiving a medal and plastic plaque for his accomplishment of taking the Justice System over the tipping point. I mean really, since the Constitution is dead, why be coy? Just say it like it is CNN. Besides since the round ups are beginning in earnest and the Democrat sanctioned brownshirting of Citizens like the Coventington School Boys has gone Full Frontal Stormtrooping, complete with death threats and attempts to murder children based on their race, religion and political affiliation, it’s important to give American Citizens a tutorial filled with concise information and precise directions so they can choose which boxcar they want to jump on when their time comes. No better choice than CNN to write, produce and direct this and no better example to glorify than
SS-Oberst-Gruppenführer Robert Muller.
Can’t wait for the Official Reich sanctioned app for my phone that outlines which Constitutional Rights I used to have are now VERBOTEN! and what death camp I will be assigned to if I slip up and accidently exercise One of Them.
Apoplexy, thy name is Dawn.
Thanks for the feedback Late. It lets me know the leaflets are being dropped on the right roaches.
Sometimes, it is SqueKKKy, FFS, etc.
Me savvy. OMG. What if Dawn is PCS?
“What if” it is actually all of the
members of L4B’s entire coven writing these comments, but each of them only post under the L4D username?
The combined force of every one in her coven would help explain the eerie psychic powers, accurate prophesies😏, etc.
I have not the faintest idea where the blazes Paul C. Schulte is. And neither do any of my sisters in the coven. And, even more to the point, neither does Tom Nash know what the devil is going on with Don Pablo Eschoolbus.
Maybe there needs to be some sort of . . . living will . . . that specifies that Res Ipsa Loquitur shall be duly notified in the event that . . . Where the hell is Isaac Basonkavich? We all know what happened to Dr. David B, Benson–bit bucket blockade. There was no indication whatsoever that the comments of Paul C. Schulte were being sent to the bit bucket blockade. None whatsoever. Can you imagine what Don Pablo would have to say about the current topic on this thread?
Yes Dawn, at best the left is a bunch of fascists or NAZI’s reincarnate. While they find a freedom in posting what they want on this blog what they don’t recognize is in their world that freedom disappears under their type of rule.
Sorry. The “constitutional era” is not over. America is burdened with a failed and treasonous Subordinate Court and is overrun by parasites, traitors and communists; all of which merely serves to immutably justify the full implementation of the 2nd Amendment and corrective action as force by the U.S. military.
It is long past time.
The communist parasites will be extremely irate when they lose their “free stuff” and artificial status in society and relating to citizenship.
Muler pre-dawn SWAT team arrest of 66 year old court jester on frivolous non-Russia collusion charges gives lefty media and lefty loons like Late4Yoga, Marky Mark, and PH little to work with. There seems to be a direct correlation between dearth of Russia collusion material produced by Muler and excessive puffery pushed by left media and lefty loons. Left media and lefty loons deep down probably now hanging their hats on winning perception game vs. impeachment/removal heading into 2020 election …”Russia, Russia, Russia!”
FBI LEAK…
The next 5am FBI raid with guns drawn SWAT team ready kick in front door handcuffed and shackled will be at the homes of
Clinton
Brennan
Clapper
Comey
I hope I hope you had some tissues at hand for that wet dream.
NOT as long as the Mueller investigation continues…and it WILL continue forever…UNTIL Trump is removed form office an d a Deep Stater makes everything GO AWAY!
By “deep stater,” do you mean communist?
Turley wrote, “Stone has suggested that . . . he had no direct knowledge that Russians were responsible for the Democratic hackings. The indictment does not contradict that later account . . . even if Stone and the campaign did seek the email information, it would not be a crime. The crime is the conspiracy to hack the email system.”
It is true that the Stone indictment does not allege that Stone knew that the Russians had disseminated the emails that Russia had hacked through Wikileaks. However, the indictment shows that Stone’s lies and witness tampering were intended to bolster a flimsy cover-story for the fact that, on August 1st, 2016, Stone stopped attributing the Wikileaks email release to Russian hacking and started claiming that Wikileaks had not gotten the emails from Russian hackers. That change in the claims that Stone had been making occurred as soon as Stone had received information about the emails that Wikileaks possessed and intended to release at a later date.
Stone’s cover story for changing his claims about the Russian hacking is no longer viable. And Stone has not yet provided an alternative explanation for changing his claims about the Russian hacking. Given that Mueller had emails and text messages to prove each of the lies that Stone told to Congress to sustain his flimsy cover story, and considering that even more communications evidence was likely seized in the raid on Stone’s house, one might reasonably expect Turley to be slower to dismiss the possibility that Mueller might produce evidence that Stone did have direct knowledge that the Russians were responsible for the hacking and that the Russians disseminated those hacked emails through Wikileaks.
As for the notion that the crime has to be conspiracy to commit computer theft (i.e. hacking) and nothing else but conspiracy to hack, Turley is just plain flat out wrong. The crime can, and almost certainly will be, Conspiracy to Defraud the United States. And the Trump campaign’s knowledge of the relationship between the Russian hackers and Wikileaks is the critical item of evidence that Mueller needs to allege ConFraudUS against the Trump campaign. Mueller’s remaining task is to show that member of the Trump campaign knew enough about the Russian hack and disseminate through Wikileaks operation to enter into an agreement amongst themselves to conceal from the government by deceptive or dishonest means the illegal foreign campaign contribution that the Russian hack and disseminate through Wikileaks operation furnished the Trump campaign.
BTW, it’s coming. Get ready. Get ready.
Uh huh. Good to know your incredibly incisive legal mind is on this, and you have thought past all the evidence known and outlined to convict Trump. Give it up already. You loons have been consistently wrong for over two years now, and nothing about that is changing.
Wally M.,
L4B’s daily columns and reviews are reliably consistent in pointing out when “Turley is just plain flat out wrong”.
Nonetheless, she still allows JT to post comments on her site here.
Had someone told me three months ago that Trump was negotiating a Trump Tower Moscow deal with the Russians while running for president all the way up to November 8th, 2016, or until January 20th, 2017, or even through August 2nd, 2017, even I would’ve balked at it as much as you would’ve.
At some point along the way, you Trump Troupers are going to have to recognize and acknowledge just how supremely arrogant and selectively ignorant Trump is.
International developers like Trump always have pipeline of prospective projects. No cash ever changed hands with this project and no movement on project following election. Just the facts Ma’am.
You can’t handle the facts. But here are two of them, anyway.
The only way that the Trump Tower Moscow deal was ever going to go through was if the sanctions on Russia were lifted or eased. And the only way that the sanctions on Russia were going to be lifted or eased was if Trump was elected president.
If Trump knew those two facts, then Trump was running a con on Vladimir Putin. If Trump did not know those two facts, then Trump is both selectively ignorant and supremely arrogant. Either Trump knew those two facts. Or Trump did not now those two facts. Either Trump was running a con on Vladimir Putin. Or Trump is both selectively ignorant and supremely arrogant.
No cash changed hands, ground not broken on Trump Moscow Tower, not happening. End of story.
Putin still wants his sanctions lifted or eased. Trump as to prove to Putin’s satisfaction that Trump was not running a con on Putin. The story continues.
Trump Tower Moscow is not going to happen, however Trump still needs “to prove to Putin’s satisfaction that Trump was not running a con on Putin.” I am sorry but I am unable to follow. This is example of lefty loon excessive puffery I referred to earlier – “Russia, Russia, Russia!”.
Trump conned Putin into giving Trump illegal foreign campaign assistance in exchange for sanctions relief that Trump could not have provided Putin without being impeached and removed from office for Bribery. And had that happened, then the sanctions would have been immediately re-imposed on Russia.
Try to keep up. It’s not so hard that caveman couldn’t do it.
Ms. Late4Yoga, You remind me of the words spoken by a wise man regarding a person such as yourself: “If you can’t impress them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullShiite”. Good day Ma’am.
I’m not the one who is impressed with Trump’s supposed brilliance. You are. As far as I’m concerned Trump has been nothing morer than a confidence artist totally full of B. S. from the start.
In reference to the statement below, posted by L4D:
” Trump conned Putin into giving Trump illegal foreign campaign assistance in exchange for sanctions relief ” etc., blah blah blah.
Has L Fool D passed this vital information on to the Special Counsel?
Is Mueller even aware of this slueth that can wrap this thing up for him?
Now before some jackass weighs in about “Trump Troupers”, or “Trumpsters”, there is something called “evidence” that is missing to back up the idiotic claim that is quoted above.
In the absence of understanding the meaning of that word, “evidence”, continue spouting pet slogans like Trump Troopers as your brilliant responses…..those kinds of debating “skills” never fail to impress.😒
And you know this how? So gullible.
So? Is that significant somehow? He was hired by many of us in the largest voting block of 40% legal, vallid votes cast to both expose and destroy the left..
Looks like two years of non stop success to me.
greetings from the Constitutional Centrist and anti Clintonista’s to the Mensheviks. Now bark at the moon
Pointing out, in an effort to help Michael, that there’s nothing like 38% approval and 58% disapproval to induce a sense of reality.
Why would there even be a need for someone to tell her about future developments?
Given her accuracy and track record as this site’s Super-Seer, she already knows those things in advance.
I had no idea whatsoever that Trump continued to pursue the Trump Tower Moscow deal while running for president all the way through November 8th, 2016, or January 20th, 2017, or August 2nd, 2017, or whenever else it might have been that Trump finally pulled the plug on the Trump Tower Moscow deal.
Honest. I swear. It came as a completely and totally flabbergasted surprise to me. I never would’ve predicted it. Never. And here’s why not: The thing itself is outrageously nincompooperish. There was no way in hell that Trump could ever get away with that one. It simply must be some sort of elaborate ruse for something else far less bat guano insane.
Thank you late4dinner.
You’re welcome. BTW, they still don’t seem to know anything about “mystery appellant.” Or maybe they just don’t want to talk about it. And there’s really not a whole lot to talk about yet.
Mueller subpoenaed a foreign-owned bank for records relevant to the special counsel’s investigation. The foreign-owned bank filed a motion to quash Mueller’s subpoena under seal. The Supreme Court of the United States declined to grant an expedited hearing to the foreign-owned bank. Most likely that means that Mueller has already demonstrated that the actions taken by that foreign-owned bank outside of the jurisdiction of the United States have already had a demonstrable effect inside the jurisdiction of the United States. At least one thing is for sure, though: whoever the mystery appellant is the mystery appellant not a nothing-burger. It’s a something-burger, for sure.
Would that be the Sorista Bank of Curacao per chance?
Technically speaking, your guess is as good as mine, Michael. However . . . all of the cool kids are placing their wagers on either Qatar or the United Arab Emirates. And that probably means that Jared Kushner, George Nader and Erik Prince have some ‘splainin’ to do. Or not. Just don’t be too surprised when you read about it sometime in March, I would imagine.
Again, your default to professional courtesy is increasingly revolting. Establishing justice requires first recognizing how corrupt and abusive are the Department of Justice and its components and how the federal courts function as enablers of that (when they’re not issuing ukases on public policy). That’s something you won’t do.
Awesome. None of you wackjobs ever peeped anything but “we luvs us some cops” about the FBI until you gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make discovered you’d elected a criminogenic, incompetent, pathologically-lying buffoon who’s such a dimwit he had no idea that conspiring with Russia to win an election was treason. So, dry those tears, it’ll be over soon; so sorry for your loss.
this is to “ya, I’ve figured out what that ticking sound is” absurdity
Leftist gone wild, old man = DANGER, be sure to get it on the news, need more propaganda for leftist to drool over, total insanity. Oh, the head of Google lied to congress, indictment coming soon? Don’t hold your breath.